Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8  All

Author Topic: [Discussion] DominionStrategy Qualifier for 2012 US National Championships  (Read 49346 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
0

Quote
Of course, my preferred 4p point system would be something along the lines of 6/3/1/0.

Of course, if you do just wins, this gives an even huger advantage to any 3p guys....
If we're doing
Isn't this a contradiction?

The reason this isn't a contradiction is because I posted no 3p points system. I really don't think you can make a sufficiently fair one of those - pretty sure the one last night is very unfair, but on the other hand, I can't think of one and have yet to see one that isn't.

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +234
    • View Profile
0

I still think 3p is a massive advantage over 4p, I think the established math bears that out, and would even moreso in a more generalized case, though I guess there are some who disagree with that - and I don't think anyone's going to actually go do all that math.
Completely untrue. I have shown you enough math how you should do it and you just ignore it. Especially if you are talking about equal player skills.

@frisk: if you've read my previous posts, yes, it is 3 times easier to score 1-1-1-1 in 3p game assuming equal player skills. But that is still above the threshold we have for the two days.

Quote
On the other hand, I think a much bigger effect will be in place when you take into account the different skill levels of the players. It is much easier for a highly skilled player to demonstrate superiority in a small series of 3p matches than in a small series of 4p matches. You have a lot more control over what happens in every individual game, and the games also last longer. I think this is further compounded by the seating order effect being a good bit larger in 4p than in 3p. Overall, it is not clear to me that it is easier to 1-1-1-2 in a 4p than to 1-1-1-1 in a 3p (in fact, I suspect the opposite is true), or even to 1-1-1-1 in a 3p than to 1-1-2-2 in a 4p (which seem close to me; of course this is subjective, as it's extremely difficult to measure this - impossible on the data we have).
So I would try to avoid different pod sizes as much as possible.
Well, I think your reasons are fine and sound, but still, the estimation seems a bit off to me. If you really think so, I think you can request yourself to be in a 3p pod but forfeit the chance to qualify unless you score 1-1-1-1. IMHO saying it is easier than 1-1-2-2 in 4p is somewhat crazy. I would say it is just a lucky day for 3p pod winners last night. Or to put another way: think about a 2p game. Must be easier to score a 4-0 record right? Still not that easy, even against random opponents!

Quote
I like points in general, and apparently this is what's happening at nationals/worlds? I'd suggest that format, if possible, because this qualifies for that. Of course, my preferred 4p point system would be something along the lines of 6/3/1/0.
This is absurd. In most cases this is the same as only counting wins. And I thought you don't like that? (1-1-2-2  now scores the same as 1-1-1-4. And you know, if you can get 3 wins in a 4p game usually you can avoid that 4. That makes 3 wins strictly better than 2 wins. It's ok, but I think it will be more luck dependent.)
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +234
    • View Profile
0

Quote
Of course, my preferred 4p point system would be something along the lines of 6/3/1/0.

Of course, if you do just wins, this gives an even huger advantage to any 3p guys....
If we're doing
Isn't this a contradiction?

The reason this isn't a contradiction is because I posted no 3p points system. I really don't think you can make a sufficiently fair one of those - pretty sure the one last night is very unfair, but on the other hand, I can't think of one and have yet to see one that isn't.
Your opinion is that 3p games and 4p games cannot be compared. But I figure you are not really thinking about it.

 
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +234
    • View Profile
0

Here is my concern about how we're addressing the 3p-4p unfairness: are we trying to make it "fair" not by removing advantage/disadvantage, but by giving a 50/50 chance of a big advantage and a 50/50 chance of a big disadvantage? 
I don't think in a 3p pod the good player has 50% chance to score 1-1-1-1. All in all I think if you score 1-1-1-1 you are worthy of being qualified. And you cannot change that with any scoring system. (like, if with some scale even 1-1-1-1 cannot qualify it is just outright unfair.)

So the inherit advantage of 3p vs. 4p game at the very top is something that cannot be changed by any point scale. Fortunately we are not there yet: the threshold is 1-1-1-2 for 3p and 1-1-2-2 for 4p. This means while the chance of scoring 1-1-1-1 is 3 times higher in 3p games it does not translate into a real world advantage (compensated by the chances at 4p to score 1-1-1-3 and 1-1-2-2.)

Then the question becomes whether it is too harsh to throw away 1-1-1-3. But here I am with WW. (What a rare thing to see recently! lol) I think under current format good players in 3p are favored. If you score a last place there, well, bad luck. But worse things can happen in 4p.
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
+1

One thing to note about my games that I think does add to the conversation was that it was 3 players with one of them really low-ranked. I think after we got frustrated and assigned pods randomly, we made it a lot more likely for something like this to happen.

benji, our lvl 3 third player, was pretty much out of contention for 3 games (so it was just me and Mic Qsenoch, or in one game just me after connecting tournament-province first). In the other game, he makes a stupid end-game error, buying the last province with an estate when he could have gone duchy-duchy and played for the win.

My point is, when you have one low-ranked player in a 4p group, the effect is a lot smaller than it is in a 3p group, and I think that made it much easier in my group.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

ednever

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 650
  • Respect: +722
    • View Profile
0

Two random ideas:

1- two pools. Divide total group in 2. Then round up/down to ensure one group divisible by 4 and one by 3. Two people move on from each group (or divide the group into 4. And only one moves on from the 1/4 group

2- theory and/or rr play to round numbers up to 4 per pod. I'm even fine if they end up qualifying. But if that makes people uncomfortable then, if they win the spot goes to the next highest

Ed
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3603
  • Respect: +6121
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
0

Yesterday our cutoff was 20 points.  That means that if you are in 3p, you have to score 1-1-1-1 or 1-1-1-2; 1-1-1-3 will DQ you (as poor dghunter found out).

In 4p, you must score 1-1-1-1, 1-1-1-2, 1-1-2-2.  So the most unfair outcome is that a 4p 1-1-2-3 or 4p 1-2-2-2 will lose out to 3p 1-1-1-2.

I think I'm OK with that.
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
0

Semifinals will likely be seeded in some form, though we will probably rotate the games.

I think we'll do something similar: everyone plays 4 games.  Can be persuaded otherwise though.

Finally, it must finish between June 30 and July 2.  No exceptions.

Let's also discuss 3p v 4p.  On the one hand, we had two 24pt qualifiers from 3p pods.  On the other, what more can you ask of them than winning all their games?  Also, dghunter went 1-1-1-3 but couldn't advance because he was in a 3p pod.

Finally, let's discuss the points system.  Do we keep it in place for Day 3 - Day 4 or revert back to wins?

I worry about being able to get all sixteen players to agree on a two-hour time slot within 2-3 days. :/ I think it would probably be best to avoid rotating those games (as much as I was in favor of it for the prelims), so only four people have to schedule games.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

rrenaud

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 991
  • Uncivilized Barbarian of Statistics
  • Respect: +1197
    • View Profile
    • CouncilRoom
0

The real problem was that I can't operate a spreadsheet, especially under time pressure.  Open .csv, edit, save (in spreadsheet format rather than csv), run script consuming CSV, don't see diff, freak out.  That was approximately my behavior last night, with a couple of loops. 

We should be able to just have 0 3p games.  See a hard problem, find ways to avoid solving it.  It's the engineering way.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +234
    • View Profile
0

One thing to note about my games that I think does add to the conversation was that it was 3 players with one of them really low-ranked. I think after we got frustrated and assigned pods randomly, we made it a lot more likely for something like this to happen.

benji, our lvl 3 third player, was pretty much out of contention for 3 games (so it was just me and Mic Qsenoch, or in one game just me after connecting tournament-province first). In the other game, he makes a stupid end-game error, buying the last province with an estate when he could have gone duchy-duchy and played for the win.

My point is, when you have one low-ranked player in a 4p group, the effect is a lot smaller than it is in a 3p group, and I think that made it much easier in my group.
Yeah, seeing this reminds me a thing.

How did the seeding work yesterday?
If we put players closer to average to 3p pools it can work a lot better. And this doesn't seem to hurt anyone's chance.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3603
  • Respect: +6121
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
0

I worry about being able to get all sixteen players to agree on a two-hour time slot within 2-3 days. :/ I think it would probably be best to avoid rotating those games (as much as I was in favor of it for the prelims), so only four people have to schedule games.


Is it unequivocally awful if we just make the four players that advance each day play their games with each other?
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
0

I worry about being able to get all sixteen players to agree on a two-hour time slot within 2-3 days. :/ I think it would probably be best to avoid rotating those games (as much as I was in favor of it for the prelims), so only four people have to schedule games.


Is it unequivocally awful if we just make the four players that advance each day play their games with each other?

I mean, the people who win on the first couple of days are more likely to be better players than the last couple of days, theoretically. I personally don't think it's a bad idea, though.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +234
    • View Profile
0

I would prefer some rotation. 16 players, one afternoon in the weekends should be enough time.
Logged

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1263
    • View Profile
+2

I mean, the people who win on the first couple of days are more likely to be better players than the last couple of days, theoretically. I personally don't think it's a bad idea, though.

Unless more and more people keep showing up. 
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

Captain_Frisk

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1257
  • Respect: +1263
    • View Profile
0

I would prefer some rotation. 16 players, one afternoon in the weekends should be enough time.

I would prefer to not play allfail or WW.
Logged
I support funsockets.... taking as much time as they need to get it right.

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
+3

I worry about being able to get all sixteen players to agree on a two-hour time slot within 2-3 days. :/ I think it would probably be best to avoid rotating those games (as much as I was in favor of it for the prelims), so only four people have to schedule games.


Is it unequivocally awful if we just make the four players that advance each day play their games with each other?
You could just have the 16 work out their availabilities, then group them thusly. I think the biggest concern is getting the games in here.
Fixed pods in the semis are way less bothersome to me than in the prelims, because essentially it's just whoever does best in your group makes it through, as opposed to 'random I have to outperform people which I have NO control over'.

yuma

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 695
  • Respect: +609
    • View Profile
+1

Is it such a bad idea to limit the pods to 4-player only? This of course means cutting out 1-3 people who were the last to register. But that is a penalty for waiting until the last minute. Or advertise that one more--or two or three--last minute registrant is needed at a first come first serve basis.

I would advocate for completely removing 3P as an option and then we get rid of the whole controversy. Yes, we are left with the "should we be able to include everyone" question. But to that the answer shouldn't always be yes. Real life games have caps and limits, so can this. If players really want to compete in this tourny--they should register early. If they don't... well register early next time.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +234
    • View Profile
+1

The problem is that there will be no shows. And if you cut it off in the order of registration live so that people may wait and then realize that they cannot play... that doesn't look too good.
Logged

zxcvbn2

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 193
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
0

So I have an idea for doing semis-finals after seeing how WW-IP played their match. What if the four players play until a player falls X points behind the leader. This reduces the chances of any player who has zero chance of winning the group deciding who moves on, because if you don't stand a chance you aren't playing. It would take more games to decide, but games would get shorter as we go from 4p-3p-2p.

I'm just throwing that out there.
Logged
One Day Cup II Champion: qmech III: Rabid IV: Qvist

nopawnsintended

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +186
    • View Profile
    • My Website
0

So I have an idea for doing semis-finals after seeing how WW-IP played their match. What if the four players play until a player falls X points behind the leader. This reduces the chances of any player who has zero chance of winning the group deciding who moves on, because if you don't stand a chance you aren't playing. It would take more games to decide, but games would get shorter as we go from 4p-3p-2p.

I'm just throwing that out there.

It would match more closely to the WW-IP match scoring if the four players played a set number of games (say 6 games, as in WW v. IP), and if the winner doesn't win by more than X points (predetermined by the "fairness math"), then the players within X points of the leader continue playing (either in 2, 3 or 4 P format).  The match ends when the leader wins by more than X points, or after a longer number of matches (say 12 games), the player in the lead wins the war of attrition.

I am up for something like this, but I think the idea needs the fixed number of games (to nix eliminations based on bad/good initial draws).
Logged

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
+3

So I have an idea for doing semis-finals after seeing how WW-IP played their match. What if the four players play until a player falls X points behind the leader. This reduces the chances of any player who has zero chance of winning the group deciding who moves on, because if you don't stand a chance you aren't playing. It would take more games to decide, but games would get shorter as we go from 4p-3p-2p.

I'm just throwing that out there.
I think eliminations are a very bad idea. First and most importantly, you're changing the format, which is not something that is good. Now, instead of needing to be a good 4p player, you have to be good at all of them. Which isn't necessarily bad, but that wasn't laid out from the start, and this is qualifying for a pure 4p event. Also, there's fewer points up for grabs after an elimination, which means you're giving extra advantage to people who get the early wins.

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3603
  • Respect: +6121
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
0

Semifinalists will compete against each other.  The Day 1 semifinalists will play 4 games against each other, and so on. 

I have contacted the Day 1 and Day 2 semifinalists.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +234
    • View Profile
+2

Oh no... I have to play WW...
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3603
  • Respect: +6121
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
0

Sorry :)  You will settle your math arguments with Dominion!

More seriously, I spoke to some of the semifinalists.  It is just too hard to try to coordinate 16 people to narrow down into 1 in 4-5 days.
Logged

toaster

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 133
  • Respect: +46
    • View Profile
0

Semifinalists will compete against each other.  The Day 1 semifinalists will play 4 games against each other, and so on. 

I have contacted the Day 1 and Day 2 semifinalists.

Did you contact everyone?  I didn't receive anything from you.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8  All
 

Page created in 0.092 seconds with 21 queries.