Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: GokoDom II: Alternate elimination discussion  (Read 5115 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

-Stef-

  • 2012 & 2016 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1574
  • Respect: +4419
    • View Profile
GokoDom II: Alternate elimination discussion
« on: July 23, 2013, 06:01:53 am »
0

Quote
suggestion - Once you get to 8 players for a top 8, I'd prefer it if #1 is allowed to select an opponent from the other 7 players. Then the highest unselected player (probably #2) chooses someone, and then once more. This system prevents players to ever want to lose/draw a round to positively affect their schedule in the playoffs.
(without this suggestion - suppose you know that #2 is much stronger then #1, then you'd rather end up #8 then #7, or something weird like that. You could also rather be #2 then #1)
I'm not sure what you mean here; you're suggesting that this would happen after the top 8 were determined?

Yes. Quite exactly that.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2013, 05:47:19 pm by Kirian »
Logged
Join the Dominion League!

shark_bait

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1103
  • Shuffle iT Username: shark_bait
  • Luckyfin and Land of Hinter for iso aliases
  • Respect: +1868
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #1 on: July 23, 2013, 10:38:27 am »
+3

I'll second stef's idea.

First, it prevents gaming of the system to set up a match with a player who may be in your opinion, weaker.

Second, it adds a bit of flair.  Imagine you were the person chosen by the 1st or 2nd rated player, wouldn't that just make you want to prove that they were wrong even more?

Logged
Hello.  Name's Bruce.  It's all right.  I understand.  Why trust a shark, right?

Is quite curious - Who is the mystical "Celestial Chameleon"?

yed

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 620
  • Shuffle iT Username: yed
  • Respect: +571
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #2 on: July 24, 2013, 02:35:28 am »
+2

I don't think Stef's idea is fair. It gives #1 right to move #2 to #8 based on results not in this tournament. It also gives the right to pick opponent which bests suits #1 and if he picks #2 then #3 is in better position than #2.
Logged

-Stef-

  • 2012 & 2016 DS Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1574
  • Respect: +4419
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #3 on: July 24, 2013, 04:01:14 am »
+2

I don't think Stef's idea is fair. It gives #1 right to move #2 to #8 based on results not in this tournament. It also gives the right to pick opponent which bests suits #1 and if he picks #2 then #3 is in better position than #2.

Why on earth would #1 pick #2 when #8 is still available? This system assumes everybody makes the choice best for himself, but that sounds like a rather safe assumption. In all likelihood #1 will pick #8, #7 or just maybe #6.

With the number of rounds we will play, the spots #5 - #8 will be somewhat random. As a result, ending up #1 is exactly as good as #2 or #3. If you're safe for making top8, you might even willingly lose/draw the last round. I don't like systems that enable and/or encourage this kind of tricks at all. And for the players ending up #5-#8: It would also be very dissatisfying if you're kicked out of the tournament because you ended up #6, while #8 has an easy quarterfinal.

With this system, ending higher in the swiss is always better. Either because you get to pick your opponent, or because you scare of strong opponents from picking you.


That said, I'm totally fine with whatever system we choose. This already spins into more discussion then I'd consider the subject worthy of.
Logged
Join the Dominion League!

yed

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 620
  • Shuffle iT Username: yed
  • Respect: +571
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #4 on: July 24, 2013, 05:25:05 am »
0

Why on earth would #1 pick #2 when #8 is still available? This system assumes everybody makes the choice best for himself, but that sounds like a rather safe assumption. In all likelihood #1 will pick #8, #7 or just maybe #6.
I know he would most likely not. But he could for example because he feels he has better chance of beating #2 because only #2 has bigger problems playing against him. While #2 is stronger against anyone else.

Quote
With the number of rounds we will play, the spots #5 - #8 will be somewhat random. As a result, ending up #1 is exactly as good as #2 or #3. If you're safe for making top8, you might even willingly lose/draw the last round. I don't like systems that enable and/or encourage this kind of tricks at all. And for the players ending up #5-#8: It would also be very dissatisfying if you're kicked out of the tournament because you ended up #6, while #8 has an easy quarterfinal.
I get that problem. I would be ok if #1,#2, #3 could pick only from #5 to #8. I don't like that possibility of denying a choice for #2 or #3.
Logged

Kirian

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #5 on: July 24, 2013, 09:37:43 am »
+2

Quote
With the number of rounds we will play, the spots #5 - #8 will be somewhat random. As a result, ending up #1 is exactly as good as #2 or #3. If you're safe for making top8, you might even willingly lose/draw the last round. I don't like systems that enable and/or encourage this kind of tricks at all. And for the players ending up #5-#8: It would also be very dissatisfying if you're kicked out of the tournament because you ended up #6, while #8 has an easy quarterfinal.
I get that problem. I would be ok if #1,#2, #3 could pick only from #5 to #8. I don't like that possibility of denying a choice for #2 or #3.

I think that if I do this, there would be a requirement to pick from someone in 4-8... obviously #4 would not get a choice either way, the only picks will be by 1, 2, and 3.

At the same time, I'm unsure there's (1) any evidence that people are gaming the system and (2) any reason to believe you can game the system.  Intentionally drawing the last match is very likely to drop you from, say, the #1 spot to a #3/#4 spot, and at the opposite end from #5 to out of the top 8.  Intentionally throwing the last match is likely to drop you out of the top 8 unless you're in the top 4 going into the last round, and doing so then moves you out of the area where you could pick into the area where you can't pick, which would be the less desirable choice.  And let's not even start with the problem where you can't predict whether #13 or #14 is going to be the winner of their match, so trying to get #8 instead of #7 may be a futile exercise.

OK, sure, there could be a ton of collusion by, say, the top 8 players (going into the last round) to all draw their matches with one another... but then if #9 or #10 from the previous round wins, #7 or #8 will lose their spots, which means they won't collude, which means the collusion just falls apart.  We're talking about a prisoner's dilemma involving more than 2 people now, and I think that pretty much always gets "won" by a single defector, not to mention two or more.

Try to guess who will defect?  Now we're just playing Mafia.  We have an entire forum for that.

----

The more I write, the less I think this is actually needed.  But I may conduct a test at the end of the next-to-last round, which would be this:

Before the final round begins, I'll ask everyone in, say, the top 16--those with a realistic chance of getting into the top 8--to look at the standings and decide: would they consider throwing or intentionally drawing a match in the belief that it would help them?  I would do this by PM, and keep the results anonymous except for numbers--in fact, I'd be willing to ask someone not involved in the tournament at all to do the data collection and then present me nothing but numbers after the round was complete, for the sake of fairness.  It would be an interesting social experiment!
« Last Edit: July 24, 2013, 09:41:24 am by Kirian »
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

SCSN

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2227
  • Respect: +7140
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #6 on: July 24, 2013, 10:37:09 am »
+1

I don't really get this discussion. I want to win by beating great players, not by avoiding them and getting lucky in the finals. Since this tournament is only about honor anyway, by attempting to cheat you already deprive yourself of whatever is out there to win. If combining this with the eternal contempt of any honest sportsman is not enough to dissuade potential cheaters, I'm satisfied with the knowledge that karma will be on my side whenever we do finally meet, and that they're in for a beautiful beating.

Speaking of which, two days ago I played Astrosity for the first time in my life. While his quitting percentage was still an impressive 22, he seems to have made a recent discovery: the resign button.

Before the final round begins, I'll ask everyone in, say, the top 16--those with a realistic chance of getting into the top 8--to look at the standings and decide: would they consider throwing or intentionally drawing a match in the belief that it would help them?

I can quite imagine that those willing to cheat will be equally glad to misrepresent their intentions.
Logged

philosophyguy

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 575
  • Respect: +299
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #7 on: July 24, 2013, 10:50:36 am »
+3

I've seen elimination rounds conducted in the way Stef proposes--it's been called a challenge tournament in debate circles. It's a ton of fun and makes for some interesting drama, especially when people propose grudge matches. On the other hand, I don't see the need to do so in order to make the elimination rounds more fair. No bracketing system is perfect, but Kirian's is pretty good and a player seeded below their natural rank is just part of the fun (see: March Madness in NCAA men's basketball).

So, if Kirian wants to do a challenge in the future, I'd enjoy seeing it. But it's not the solution to a problem, because I don't see the problem as being significant enough to be worth "solving."
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1788
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #8 on: July 24, 2013, 01:53:00 pm »
0

So, if Kirian wants to do a challenge in the future, I'd enjoy seeing it. But it's not the solution to a problem, because I don't see the problem as being significant enough to be worth "solving."

I agree with this. I am surprised that an objection was raised to the elimination round seeding and not the initial Swiss round random seeding (which worked well last time and am fine with, but am a little surprised Kirian didn't want to use the Goko pro leaderboard for the initial seed this time around since the leaderboard's settled down).
Logged

Grujah

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2237
  • Respect: +1177
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #9 on: July 24, 2013, 03:06:52 pm »
0

Tthe final round begins, I'll ask everyone in, say, the top 16--those with a realistic chance of getting into the top 8--to look at the standings and decide: would they consider throwing or intentionally drawing a match in the belief that it would help them?  I would do this by PM, and keep the results anonymous except for numbers--in fact, I'd be willing to ask someone not involved in the tournament at all to do the data collection and then present me nothing but numbers after the round was complete, for the sake of fairness.  It would be an interesting social experiment!

As I do a lot of tournament Magic, I find this quite the usual behavior. If you can intentionally draw a round a two and still get into top X, why not? In order to do so, you had to have near perfect record to do so, so you deserve it. Why would you be forced to risk your standings?One could say "everybody else risked their standings", but not everybody else had perfect record. You are not "cheating" or "avoiding good players", you are already one of the best in tournament,  so if you are satisfied with getting a #5 seed instead of fighting for #1, you should be given the opportunity to do so.
On the other hand, in Magic, it is usually much better to be a top seed (#1 or #2) than lower seed (#7 and #8) because if you were better seed after Swiss, you get to choose whether you go first or second (play/draw) in the final rounds. So, many people choose not to draw in order to get better seeds and advantage in top X. This can also be done in Dominion.
Logged

Grujah

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2237
  • Respect: +1177
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #10 on: July 24, 2013, 03:08:59 pm »
0

That being said, I'd rather have #1 going against #8, #2 against #7, and so on, and than higher seeds goes first in the first round instead.
Logged

ragingduckd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
  • Respect: +3527
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #11 on: July 24, 2013, 05:44:43 pm »
0

Playoffs are a terrible way to rank players by skill. A Swiss tourney is a sorta-okay way.

Letting the results of the Swiss bleed into the playoffs via seeding gives better rankings overall. Letting players play the last Swiss round strategically is better still. What Stef proposes is probably the best way to build a tolerable ranking system out of a tourney structure that's designed more for drama than for accuracy.

Incidentally, is the Swiss going to be seeded?
Logged
Salvager Extension | Isotropish Leaderboard | Game Data | Log Search & other toys | Salvager Bug Reports

Salvager not working for me at all today. ... Please help! I can't go back to playing without it like an animal!

WanderingWinder

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5275
  • ...doesn't really matter to me
  • Respect: +4381
    • View Profile
    • WanderingWinder YouTube Page
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #12 on: July 24, 2013, 05:57:27 pm »
0

Playoffs are a terrible way to rank players by skill. A Swiss tourney is a sorta-okay way.

Letting the results of the Swiss bleed into the playoffs via seeding gives better rankings overall. Letting players play the last Swiss round strategically is better still. What Stef proposes is probably the best way to build a tolerable ranking system out of a tourney structure that's designed more for drama than for accuracy.

Incidentally, is the Swiss going to be seeded?
If you read it, I am pretty sure no seeding on the Swiss (read where it says random).

But the point of a tournament isn't really about finding 'the best' guy or girl out there - if it were, you would just have some rating system and take every game, or have zillion-game matches at least...

jaybeez

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 335
  • Shuffle iT Username: jaybeez
  • Respect: +395
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #13 on: July 24, 2013, 07:07:35 pm »
+1

What WW said.  Upsets are what make tournaments fun, I think.  If the tournament results exactly mirrored the players' rankings based on Trueskill or whatever metric you choose, how fun would that tournament really be for the players?  Not very, I'd argue.  In fact, variance and unlikely outcomes is one of the things that makes Dominion itself so fun, no?

I'm not arguing for doing like a single-elimination bracket with one-game matches or anything.  I'm just saying, striving for "accurate" results for tournament kind of misses the point.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2013, 07:09:28 pm by jaybeez »
Logged

ragingduckd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
  • Respect: +3527
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #14 on: July 24, 2013, 09:35:35 pm »
0

What WW said.  Upsets are what make tournaments fun, I think.  If the tournament results exactly mirrored the players' rankings based on Trueskill or whatever metric you choose, how fun would that tournament really be for the players?  Not very, I'd argue.  In fact, variance and unlikely outcomes is one of the things that makes Dominion itself so fun, no?

I'm not arguing for doing like a single-elimination bracket with one-game matches or anything.  I'm just saying, striving for "accurate" results for tournament kind of misses the point.

It's not missing the point. It's just one of several points. Tournament structure is a compromise between accuracy, excitement, and length. Stef's suggestion would make the tournament both more accurate and more exciting: more accurate because you'd have better seeding for the finals, more exciting because strategic losses and draws are boring.

I also disagree that randomness in itself makes tournaments or Dominion more fun. When I win an upset, I don't want it to be because tourney pairings or the opening split gave me an edge. I want it to be because at least in that particular tournament or game I actually outplayed the champ. The luck induced by the finite nature of the contest is enough for me.
Logged
Salvager Extension | Isotropish Leaderboard | Game Data | Log Search & other toys | Salvager Bug Reports

Salvager not working for me at all today. ... Please help! I can't go back to playing without it like an animal!

jaybeez

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 335
  • Shuffle iT Username: jaybeez
  • Respect: +395
    • View Profile
Re: Re: GokoDom II: Suntastic Summerish Season Signups Sthread
« Reply #15 on: July 25, 2013, 01:04:27 am »
+1

What WW said.  Upsets are what make tournaments fun, I think.  If the tournament results exactly mirrored the players' rankings based on Trueskill or whatever metric you choose, how fun would that tournament really be for the players?  Not very, I'd argue.  In fact, variance and unlikely outcomes is one of the things that makes Dominion itself so fun, no?

I'm not arguing for doing like a single-elimination bracket with one-game matches or anything.  I'm just saying, striving for "accurate" results for tournament kind of misses the point.

It's not missing the point. It's just one of several points. Tournament structure is a compromise between accuracy, excitement, and length. Stef's suggestion would make the tournament both more accurate and more exciting: more accurate because you'd have better seeding for the finals, more exciting because strategic losses and draws are boring.

I also disagree that randomness in itself makes tournaments or Dominion more fun. When I win an upset, I don't want it to be because tourney pairings or the opening split gave me an edge. I want it to be because at least in that particular tournament or game I actually outplayed the champ. The luck induced by the finite nature of the contest is enough for me.
All fair points. I guess what I was trying to say was that accuracy should not be the primary goal of a tournament structure.  The goal should be the compromise you described, maintaining a balance between those three things.  I might re-write my last sentence as "In tournaments, striving for 'accurate' results, above all else, is missing the forest for the trees."

As for randomness hey it affects every game of Dominion we play, sometimes little, sometimes quite a lot.  You may not want to win because of luck, but no matter how you structure the tournament, it is possible.  And the question is how far do you go to minimize that and hey look I'm repeating myself.  Striking a balance, like you said.
Logged
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 1.283 seconds with 21 queries.