Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  All

Author Topic: Upsets  (Read 43077 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2858
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #75 on: December 17, 2012, 06:34:06 pm »
+1

I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.

I doubt that will be a popular opinion.
Logged

Dsell

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1290
  • He/Him
  • Respect: +931
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #76 on: December 17, 2012, 06:53:46 pm »
+2

I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.

I doubt that will be a popular opinion.

This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.
Logged
"Quiet you, you'll lynch Dsell when I'm good and ready" - Insomniac


Winner of Forum Survivor Season 2!

GigaKnight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #77 on: December 17, 2012, 06:58:36 pm »
+1

I was thinking it's combination of two main factors:
  • Iso levels decay really quickly.
  • There are fewer frequent Isotropic players as Goko waxes and Iso wanes.
I think we've got people who are pretty good at Dominion but their skill isn't represented in their Iso level, so the seeding is all over the place.  Not that there's a clearly-better way to do it, given the circumstances.
Logged

() | (_) ^/

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 632
  • Shuffle iT Username: p4ddy0d00rs
  • Nemo dat quod non habet.
  • Respect: +526
    • View Profile
    • BGG profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #78 on: December 17, 2012, 07:01:59 pm »
+1

I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.

I doubt that will be a popular opinion.

This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.

Agreed.  I think the introduction of Dark Ages play en masse into this currently iso-centric community will significantly Altar the perceived skill ceiling, spreading many of us out again.
                                                                                                                                                                8)
« Last Edit: December 17, 2012, 07:03:06 pm by () | (_) ^/ »
Logged

Beyond Awesome

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2941
  • Shuffle iT Username: Beyond Awesome
  • Respect: +2464
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #79 on: December 17, 2012, 07:12:22 pm »
0

I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.

I doubt that will be a popular opinion.

This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.


Agreed.  I think the introduction of Dark Ages play en masse into this currently iso-centric community will significantly Altar the perceived skill ceiling, spreading many of us out again.
                                                                                                                                                                8)


I can say having played already over 500 games on Goko that there are still many DA cards that I don't fully understand, and one that I really struggle with even though I know it is a very powerful card. I'm looking at you Rebuild.
Logged

() | (_) ^/

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 632
  • Shuffle iT Username: p4ddy0d00rs
  • Nemo dat quod non habet.
  • Respect: +526
    • View Profile
    • BGG profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #80 on: December 17, 2012, 07:21:23 pm »
0

.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2013, 12:08:13 pm by () | (_) ^/ »
Logged

clb

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 424
  • Respect: +182
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #81 on: December 17, 2012, 07:32:07 pm »
+1

I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.

I doubt that will be a popular opinion.

This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.

Agreed.  I think the introduction of Dark Ages play en masse into this currently iso-centric community will significantly Altar the perceived skill ceiling, spreading many of us out again.
                                                                                                                                                                8)
So, what $5 are you gaining for trashing that ceiling?
Logged

mith

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 771
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +776
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: Upsets
« Reply #82 on: December 17, 2012, 07:53:01 pm »
0

I was thinking it's combination of two main factors:
  • Iso levels decay really quickly.
  • There are fewer frequent Isotropic players as Goko waxes and Iso wanes.
I think we've got people who are pretty good at Dominion but their skill isn't represented in their Iso level, so the seeding is all over the place.  Not that there's a clearly-better way to do it, given the circumstances.

This (though I can't say how goko plays into it exactly - are any of the Cinderellas high in the rankings there?).

What pops says sounds reasonable, except that the ratings are what the ratings are - regardless of the knowledge difference, some players are winning almost all their games and reaching the top of the leaderboard, and some players aren't. Could be a matter of variance about the "mean skill" - low level player is rated where he is because he lacks consistency, but if he's playing well on a particular day he's outperforming his level considerably.
Logged

() | (_) ^/

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 632
  • Shuffle iT Username: p4ddy0d00rs
  • Nemo dat quod non habet.
  • Respect: +526
    • View Profile
    • BGG profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #83 on: December 17, 2012, 08:00:55 pm »
+2

I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.

I doubt that will be a popular opinion.

This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.

Agreed.  I think the introduction of Dark Ages play en masse into this currently iso-centric community will significantly Altar the perceived skill ceiling, spreading many of us out again.
                                                                                                                                                                8)
So, what $5 are you gaining for trashing that ceiling?

Ummm, hello!  Rebuild.  What else from Dark Ages would I be gaining if I'm trashing my ceiling?  ;)
Logged

clb

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 424
  • Respect: +182
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #84 on: December 17, 2012, 08:07:41 pm »
+1

I think the community as a whole is approaching the skill ceiling of Dominion, and as that happens it becomes harder for players to find things they know that not everyone knows that allows them to win.

I doubt that will be a popular opinion.

This is all well and good until the community moves over to Goko and we have Dark Ages to deal with.

Agreed.  I think the introduction of Dark Ages play en masse into this currently iso-centric community will significantly Altar the perceived skill ceiling, spreading many of us out again.
                                                                                                                                                                8)
So, what $5 are you gaining for trashing that ceiling?

Ummm, hello!  Rebuild.  What else from Dark Ages would I be gaining if I'm trashing my ceiling?  ;)
I suppose you cannot gain a Hovel.  :( A fortress sounds like fun. Maybe some Rats?  ???
Or, since things don't have to make sense, trash your ceiling and gain a Count! or a Duchy.  ;)
Logged

olneyce

  • 2011 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #85 on: December 17, 2012, 08:11:26 pm »
+5

Small-sample size.  In several ways.  First, Dominion has a lot of luck in it.  Seven games isn't enough to wash that out, so you'll always see some 'upsets' that are more about card distribution than anything else.  Second (and more importantly), it's a small tournament. A couple big upsets (Me, RJ, Marin) will make things seem really wacky, but don't ultimately mean a whole lot.  We are primed to look for interesting results, so we ascribe more significance to the upsets.  Have there really been a bunch more upsets this year compared to last?

I bet once it's all done, the number of upsets won't seem ALL that far out of line with expected results.

Oh, and I bet that a fair number of lower-ranked players could be 5-10 levels better if they really focused.  Tournament games inspire that focus. 
Logged

GigaKnight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #86 on: December 17, 2012, 08:39:21 pm »
0

Small-sample size.  In several ways.  First, Dominion has a lot of luck in it.  Seven games isn't enough to wash that out, so you'll always see some 'upsets' that are more about card distribution than anything else.  Second (and more importantly), it's a small tournament. A couple big upsets (Me, RJ, Marin) will make things seem really wacky, but don't ultimately mean a whole lot.  We are primed to look for interesting results, so we ascribe more significance to the upsets.  Have there really been a bunch more upsets this year compared to last?

I bet once it's all done, the number of upsets won't seem ALL that far out of line with expected results.

Oh, and I bet that a fair number of lower-ranked players could be 5-10 levels better if they really focused.  Tournament games inspire that focus.

First, are we actually seeing more upsets than last year?  I'm a little guilty of jumping on the bandwagon since people were making a big deal about the upsets.  I just assumed they were talking about "in comparison to last year" as it's our only other data point.

Second, how many games do you think would wash it out?  To me, seven certainly feels like the better player should win the majority of the time.  I'm curious if people have an opinion about this.

Overall, I don't think these "upsets" aren't really that upset-ful.  I think we assign significance to them because they're unexpected - not because they're truly unlikely.  I think the simplest explanation is that these lower-level players are actually good and would be higher level if they put the time in.
Logged

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +542
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #87 on: December 17, 2012, 08:44:44 pm »
0

Giga, it depends on your winrate for each individual game. Someone with a 60% winrate will win a best of 7 ~71% of the time, someone with a 55% winrate will win a best of 7 ~61% of the time. The same numbers for a best of 51 would be ~92% and ~76.5%.

The number of upsets hasn't raised an eyebrow for me. Dominion is pretty high variance. There's also all the reasons previously mentioned ITT contributing to upsets happening. Some people probably are just really underseeded compared to their true skill relative the field.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2012, 08:45:50 pm by Fabian »
Logged

Beyond Awesome

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2941
  • Shuffle iT Username: Beyond Awesome
  • Respect: +2464
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #88 on: December 17, 2012, 08:53:40 pm »
0

Maybe what would work in the future is to have double eliminations. It is a little extra work, but it is easier to implement than say a Swiss system, and I think the amount of upsets would likely lessen.
Logged

Stealth Tomato

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 507
  • Dorkneel
  • Respect: +480
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #89 on: December 17, 2012, 09:16:53 pm »
0

I was thinking it's combination of two main factors:
  • Iso levels decay really quickly.
  • There are fewer frequent Isotropic players as Goko waxes and Iso wanes.
I think we've got people who are pretty good at Dominion but their skill isn't represented in their Iso level, so the seeding is all over the place.  Not that there's a clearly-better way to do it, given the circumstances.
I think you're also missing (3) 7 games is actually a fairly short series. There's a fair bit of luck in Dominion, especially on weak boards. Even if you outplay your opponent on both of the high-complexity boards in a series, you can lose 4-2 by failing the coinflip on a bunch of BM+X boards.

Remember, Dominion variance is so high that Isotropic calculates TrueSkill by summarizing daily results rather than taking individual games. And the variance is furthermore board-dependent, which screws things up even more.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2012, 09:21:58 pm by Stealth Tomato »
Logged

GigaKnight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 169
  • Respect: +54
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #90 on: December 17, 2012, 09:21:27 pm »
0

Giga, it depends on your winrate for each individual game. Someone with a 60% winrate will win a best of 7 ~71% of the time, someone with a 55% winrate will win a best of 7 ~61% of the time. The same numbers for a best of 51 would be ~92% and ~76.5%.

Well, yeah, I know more games is more accurate. No finite number of games would totally eliminate the luck, but there's a limit to what's feasible for a tournament, of course. :)

My question wasn't intended to be mathematical, though.  I'm curious how many games players want to play per round.  What's the right balances of feasible and satisfying (so that everybody's convinced that the winner consistently played better)?  It may be everybody likes 7, but when olneyce called it out as not being enough to wash out the luck, I was just curious if he actually wanted more (which I guess was an assumption that he'd want to minimize luck...).
Logged

Stealth Tomato

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 507
  • Dorkneel
  • Respect: +480
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #91 on: December 17, 2012, 09:23:05 pm »
0

Giga, it depends on your winrate for each individual game. Someone with a 60% winrate will win a best of 7 ~71% of the time, someone with a 55% winrate will win a best of 7 ~61% of the time. The same numbers for a best of 51 would be ~92% and ~76.5%.

Well, yeah, I know more games is more accurate. No finite number of games would totally eliminate the luck, but there's a limit to what's feasible for a tournament, of course. :)

My question wasn't intended to be mathematical, though.  I'm curious how many games players want to play per round.  What's the right balances of feasible and satisfying (so that everybody's convinced that the winner consistently played better)?  It may be everybody likes 7, but when olneyce called it out as not being enough to wash out the luck, I was just curious if he actually wanted more (which I guess was an assumption that he'd want to minimize luck...).
If you want to wash out luck, I would start at something like first to 10.
Logged

Fabian

  • 2012 Swedish Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 666
  • Respect: +542
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #92 on: December 17, 2012, 09:25:40 pm »
0

When I was playing seriously, I'd have done best of 31 no problem. These days playing 7 games seems like a struggle. I think 9 is probably a decent number balancing what people feel like playing vs the whole skill/luck thing, etc. A year ago I'd have said 13 probably.
Logged

olneyce

  • 2011 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #93 on: December 17, 2012, 09:41:06 pm »
+1

7 games seems fine to me.

If you want to know who is currently the 'best' you can just look at the top of the leaderboard.  We play the tournament because it's fun, not because it tells us the Truth.  Which is to say: there SHOULD be some upsets, so trying to wash them all out is pointless.

In order to win the tournament, you have to be good.  But in order to win, you also have to be lucky.  That's true whether you're really the best, or whether you're merely one of the 15-20 best (like I was last year). 
Logged

mith

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 771
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +776
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: Upsets
« Reply #94 on: December 17, 2012, 09:47:06 pm »
0

Yeah, 7 is a good number. I wouldn't want to go higher than 9. At some point you replace luck with endurance.

In order to win this tournament, you don't have to win one best of 7, you have to win eight.
Logged

jonts26

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2746
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3665
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #95 on: December 17, 2012, 09:51:09 pm »
+1

Yeah, 7 is a good number. I wouldn't want to go higher than 9. At some point you replace luck with endurance.

In order to win this tournament, you don't have to win one best of 7, you have to win eight.

Yeah but you only have to lose one to get eliminated.
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1856
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #96 on: December 17, 2012, 11:48:16 pm »
+1

Yeah, at this point, I figure that advancing in the tournament is more or less a crapshoot. Better hope luck is on my side...
Logged

Axxle

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1664
  • Most Valuable Serial Killer
  • Respect: +1964
    • View Profile
Re: Upsets
« Reply #97 on: December 17, 2012, 11:49:39 pm »
+2

Yeah, 7 is a good number. I wouldn't want to go higher than 9. At some point you replace luck with endurance.

In order to win this tournament, you don't have to win one best of 7, you have to win eight.

Yeah but you only have to lose one to get eliminated.
Thus "single elimination tournament"...
Logged
We might be from all over the world, but "we all talk this one language  : +1 card + 1 action +1 buy , gain , discard, trash... " - RTT

mith

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 771
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +776
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: Upsets
« Reply #98 on: December 20, 2012, 05:23:05 pm »
0

I suspect if you wanted to give your tournament the best chance of selecting the best player for a given number of games, you're better off doing a multiple-elimination or Swiss style tournament with best-of-7 rather than a single elimination with best-of-[morethanthat]. I have absolutely no data to back that up, though. (Personally, I think trying to pick the absolute best player in a tournament for any game with a significant luck factor is futile, and I think the setup as-is does a fine job of selecting "one of the best players, who managed to get the best results over the course of the tournament". Whatever that means.)

Chapel division got awfully chalky this round... still time for some upsets in the bottom quarter, but I think we've lost any claim on being the "upset division".
« Last Edit: December 20, 2012, 05:25:05 pm by mith »
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3603
  • Respect: +6112
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Upsets
« Reply #99 on: December 20, 2012, 05:27:56 pm »
+4

The way I see it, and all sports fans know this secretly in their hearts: it's way more exciting when you don't know if the "better players" will win.  The CL knockout stage is way more exciting than the league title; World Series Game 7 is way more exciting than baseball in June.

In my mind, there are probably 12-16 players that I would consider worthy of winning, with basically no differentiation between them as far as "deservingness".  So long as the finalists (and ideally, division champs) are among those 12-16 I think we will have done enough.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  All
 

Page created in 0.052 seconds with 21 queries.