Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kirian]

So, we are nearing the end of the fourth IsoDom tournament, which should be completed by the end of May or thereabouts.  It's probably time to take a look at the future of the tournaments, as that future is... murky at best.

Let's start with a few things about this past round.  Pooled play exists for two reasons:  (1) To allow players to be "in" for more than just one or two rounds; (2) To allow for more games for spectators.  This last one only matters for things like the World Cup but, let's face it, that's the main reason pooled play exists there.  I'm going to go out on what I think is a pretty sturdy limb and suggest that the structured pool play we had here has been interesting but not good for the tournament as a whole.

First, despite the longer play, it encourages dropouts.  After losing the first three matches, your chances of placing at all in your pool is slim to none; even if we took the top three or four players from each pool, this would be the case.  And when someone drops out at that point, you have to reconsider all the standings.  Is it truly fair to the winners of those matches?  Let's say one player is particularly good an Intrigue.  S/he now loses the points from that round.

Second, the flip side of the first, it makes substitution hard.  Sure, if someone drops out in Week 1 or even 2, it's not a big deal.  After that, though... well, a sub has to catch up several matches, and some players have to replay matches.

Third... and I hate to mention this, but in some pools the result is already decided.

And last... wow is this a lot of games!  If every game match had been played with no drops or subs, this was over 3000 games of Dominion.  Despite part of the idea being that there would be a lot to "watch," no one was going to read all those game logs.

So... round robin pooled play is probably not all that great.  If the idea is to make sure that more than half the players see a second round, I'm going to recommend going to a double- or triple-elimination tournament.  This way, everyone gets two (or three) matches, but if someone loses their first two/three, there's no longer a problem of that person's dropping causing tons of chaos later on.  And, with triple-elimination, hey, you can lose your first two matches and still have the chance of coming out on top!

The main problem with triple elimination is a lack of support on Challonge, but the third bracket can be tracked elsewhere relatively easily.

Comments appreciated.

----

This leaves two other problems.  First, we technically have lost our original organizer.  I'm willing to step up so long as someone else is willing to help with data entry, especially if we continue having 60+ people interested.

Second, well... it's only going to be IsoDom for so long.  Supposedly there will be demos of the new system at Origins, which suggests it's likely to be up and running by GenCon if not earlier.  This means starting a multi-week tournament at the beginning of June is, perhaps, not the greatest idea.

Thoughts appreciated on both of these.

Kirian

[yuma]

I for one enjoyed the Round Robin--my group was great--as it was competitive throughout and had no drop outs.

I think one of the biggest items of note is to make sure that people dropping out are excluded from future tournaments. (Unless a great reason is provided as to why.)

I was really surprised at how many people dropped. And from what I can tell only one dropped with a notice.  A possible idea is using a mini-round robin as a way to seed. Place into groups of four (either random or evenly distributed with CouncilRoom rank) have each player play 3 times and then use the results to seed for an elimination bracket?

I have not played a double elimination game and would be interested in seeing how that works, but have a bad taste in my mouth from little league soccer in regard to double elimination.

[Robz888]

I was shocked that so many people disappeared, especially the organizer. But anyway, I thought playing with mostly cards from one set at a time was a lot of fun, thought not necessarily something to repeat.

I like the idea for doing triple elimination. Really, I'm up for any tournament format (except the one that was at 8:00 AM Saturday morning!).

[RisingJaguar]

I was pretty surprised at the drop outs considering the huge interest in the series, but I suppose things occur in people's real lives.  I was also surprised how much of a 'grind' this was considering this is one of my favourite games to play.   Setting up the times, going through all the motions, I was not as excited to play each match as lets say DominionStrategy.  Although that's more on pool play format anyways. 

I would hope this does continue, maybe in smaller numbers. I thought Rabid's tournament was great in terms of its format.  Probably much easier to get to like top 4 or top 8 on saturday then play the rest on sunday.  Either way smaller tournaments will just help speed things up which appears to be also part of the problem. 

If I do have time to help out, I would love to, but I have a feeling I'll be relatively busy in the near future. 

[Robz888]

Oh, I should mention that I would be happy to help out in the future, though I am only competent enough to do the most mindless web tasks. English major, over here!

[O]

Oh, I should mention that I would be happy to help out in the future, though I am only competent enough to do the most mindless web tasks. English major, over here!

I didn't know English majors even played dominion.. 

[PerdHapley]

I was sad to miss Rabid's tournament, but I did think it was a great idea, and I would love to see that become a regular thing, like maybe once a month or so?. I don't think it should be a replacement for Isodom, but rather its own kind of thing that runs on the side.

It's a bummer that this Isodom didn't go quite as smoothly as it should have, since I personally loved the format. Yuma and I were in the same bracket, and as he said every single person in it was fully committed - if all the brackets had functioned as smoothly as ours I would be in full favor of having another go at it with the same format. Probably not worth the headache to try it this way again right away, but I hope there's interest in returning to it sometime in the future.

My personal vote for the future of these tournaments would be to revert to the old format for the next Isodom and probably cap entrants at 32 players, with priority given to entrants based on previous stable Isodom participation/forum activity/leaderboard status/whatever everyone seems to agree on. I would also suggest having a handful of preset alternates in the wings just in case they're needed. I think one thing that should definitely stick around is the weekly theme, like the set-specific conditions this time around or the weekly mandatory first set in the previous Isodom. When we're ready for it, a thread to announce the tournament and registration window and poll for theme ideas would be the best way to kick everything off.

I personally don't think the forthcoming app should prevent us from jumping in to another tournament. I expect we'll have at least enough notice on that front to regroup and carry on with the tournament using the official version. A notification in the registration post that participants unable to make the switch within a set window of time will be obligated to give their spot to an alternate seems like it would be an easy way to deal with that issue.

All just suggestions though, like Robz I will happily play these tournaments in any format imaginable. I am also a worthless English major without a ton of technology or math expertise, but I would be happy to help in any capacity needed, whether that be assisting with the organization aspect or even just punching numbers into Challonge. Whatever is needed.

Thanks to you again, Kirian, for doing such a great job keeping things flowing as smoothly as possible in the absence of MMM.

[Kirian]

I think one of the biggest items of note is to make sure that people dropping out are excluded from future tournaments. (Unless a great reason is provided as to why.)

I was really surprised at how many people dropped. And from what I can tell only one dropped with a notice.

Two people dropped with notice; one actually dropped by PM without having played a game, and one dropped publicly in the thread after either zero or one game, I don't remember which.  I would be loath to exclude those two people from future tournaments as they gave notice.

[paddyodoors]

Oh, I should mention that I would be happy to help out in the future, though I am only competent enough to do the most mindless web tasks. English major, over here!

I didn't know English majors even played dominion.. 

I didn't know English majors even played anything...
Thought it was just us Math folks and our minions. 

[paddyodoors]

What about a King-of-the-Hill ladder?

It simplifies record-keeping.
It is a straightforward format that is easy to understand.
It deals with dropouts well.
It doesn't have a set beginning and end time that might be interrupted by the end of Isotropic.

Honestly, though, this is an entirely different thing.  Not a tournament really, more like an ongoing organized matchup system.

I've been playing on a KOTH ladder for one of my favorite games for years, and it has worked out really really well.  I have enjoyed it.  I think a similar thing should work just fine for online Dominion.

Thoughts?

[greatexpectations]

What about a King-of-the-Hill ladder?

It simplifies record-keeping.
It is a straightforward format that is easy to understand.
It deals with dropouts well.
It doesn't have a set beginning and end time that might be interrupted by the end of Isotropic.

Honestly, though, this is an entirely different thing.  Not a tournament really, more like an ongoing organized matchup system.

I've been playing on a KOTH ladder for one of my favorite games for years, and it has worked out really really well.  I have enjoyed it.  I think a similar thing should work just fine for online Dominion.

Thoughts?

i say go for it.  i would just start a thread and gather interest there.  it should be easy enough to implement, and i would be willing to help you organize.  like you said, this format should make it easy to handle dropouts and new faces.
a few quick suggestions:
- if you do sets, keep it at best of 5 max so the sets don't take too long.
- set up separate ladders for europe and usa to easily accommodate time zones.  (not trying to exclude other areas, i just dont think we have enough forum posters from other areas)
- establish rules for inactivity, dropouts, and newcomers early

[DG]

I would suggest staying with the knockout format as per the original isodom competitions. If you want to make sure that players get at least two games, you could let the losers from the first round play an elimination match to stay in the competition.

[Jorbles]

I will definitely be playing in the future and would be interested in a double or triple elimination format. I can also help with data inputting/organizing if it's needed.

[Kirian]

I would suggest staying with the knockout format as per the original isodom competitions. If you want to make sure that players get at least two games, you could let the losers from the first round play an elimination match to stay in the competition.

That is indeed what double-elimination means, to a first approximation.  Is double-elimination not commonly used outside the US?

[lespeutere]

We're using it, too, for a dominion tourney over here (Germany)

[Fabian]

I would suggest staying with the knockout format as per the original isodom competitions. If you want to make sure that players get at least two games, you could let the losers from the first round play an elimination match to stay in the competition.

That is indeed what double-elimination means, to a first approximation.  Is double-elimination not commonly used outside the US?

Unless I'm much mistaken, in a double elimination, you'd go to the loser's bracket after losing rounds 2 or 3 or 4 or etc too, not just after losing round 1 like DG suggests?

Anyway, personally I like single elimination tournaments where you play a reasonable set of games (best of 7 or 9 or so, minimum). This tournament went way too long and had a predictably high number of dropouts/people losing interest, which is unfortunate.

[Insomniac]

I can help out if need be. I think double elimination sounds good, and to be honest if isotropic goes away in the middle of a tournament the games just have to move to the new system. Hopefully it will at least have logs. And if it doesn't allow point tracker or whatever else the tournament may require then the tournament requirements would just have to change from that week on.

[Kirian]

A note on double-elimination tournaments:  Because the losers' bracket takes significantly more rounds to coalesce to a winner, players dropped into that bracket would need to play two rounds per week.  For a tournament with 2^N players:

Upper bracket requires N rounds
Lower bracket requires 2N-2 rounds -- but all of those players also played in round 1.
New losers are entered into the lower bracket on that bracket's first round (round 2) and every even round in that bracket (odd round overall).

For 32 players, We would end up scheduling:

Week 1:  Round 1
Week 2:  Upper bracket Round 2, Lower bracket Round 1
Week 3:  Upper bracket Round 3, Lower bracket Rounds 2 and 3
Week 4:  Upper bracket Round 4, Lower bracket Rounds 4 and 5
Week 5:  Upper bracket Round 5, Lower bracket Rounds 6 and 7
Week 6:  Lower bracket Final, then Final matches

[DG]

Strictly though you only need an elimination series for the first round losers. Perhaps it could be called a repechage instead. I don't see any value added to the tournament by asking the beaten semi-finalists to play again, for example. This will just delay and devalue the importance of everything.

[O]

...Is there any major problem with a Swiss? It handles dropouts, allows people to play multiple rounds even if they don't win, matches players by ranking pretty decently pretty quickly (round 3), allows for people to skip rounds if needed (byes).. and allows for people to get recognition for winning a rating section (Open, U40, U30 or something).

[ugasoft]

I vote for a double elimitation with 64 players...

here is the tournament table
http://img.docstoccdn.com/thumb/orig/36507019.png

[yuma]

...Is there any major problem with a Swiss? It handles dropouts, allows people to play multiple rounds even if they don't win, matches players by ranking pretty decently pretty quickly (round 3), allows for people to skip rounds if needed (byes).. and allows for people to get recognition for winning a rating section (Open, U40, U30 or something).

What is this system. I don't think I have heard of it. If you don't want to describe in detail do you know of a comprehensive link?

[O]

...Is there any major problem with a Swiss? It handles dropouts, allows people to play multiple rounds even if they don't win, matches players by ranking pretty decently pretty quickly (round 3), allows for people to skip rounds if needed (byes).. and allows for people to get recognition for winning a rating section (Open, U40, U30 or something).

What is this system. I don't think I have heard of it. If you don't want to describe in detail do you know of a comprehensive link?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=swiss+tournament+system

[yuma]

...Is there any major problem with a Swiss? It handles dropouts, allows people to play multiple rounds even if they don't win, matches players by ranking pretty decently pretty quickly (round 3), allows for people to skip rounds if needed (byes).. and allows for people to get recognition for winning a rating section (Open, U40, U30 or something).

What is this system. I don't think I have heard of it. If you don't want to describe in detail do you know of a comprehensive link?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=swiss+tournament+system

Ha Ha... for people lazy like me... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss-system_tournament and I asked because I didn't want to wiki it, wondering if there was a better site

[O]

Touche...

In short, people are paired first by how many wins they have, and secondly by rating (take the top half of a bracket listed by rating, and move it next to the bottom half: the #1 player in any range will play the person just below the halfway mark). People with the same number of wins play each other, often setting up a dramatic match-up between top players in the final rounds.

[Kirian]

...Is there any major problem with a Swiss? It handles dropouts, allows people to play multiple rounds even if they don't win, matches players by ranking pretty decently pretty quickly (round 3), allows for people to skip rounds if needed (byes).. and allows for people to get recognition for winning a rating section (Open, U40, U30 or something).

The main problem is that Swiss pairing is a lot more calculation intensive, and, frankly, if there's no online tool to make it work and make it easy for people to see their next round opponent.

In fact, I can't find a free program at all that will do that.  If anyone can, then maybe we could run a Swiss tournament.

[O]

...Is there any major problem with a Swiss? It handles dropouts, allows people to play multiple rounds even if they don't win, matches players by ranking pretty decently pretty quickly (round 3), allows for people to skip rounds if needed (byes).. and allows for people to get recognition for winning a rating section (Open, U40, U30 or something).

The main problem is that Swiss pairing is a lot more calculation intensive, and, frankly, if there's no online tool to make it work and make it easy for people to see their next round opponent.

In fact, I can't find a free program at all that will do that.  If anyone can, then maybe we could run a Swiss tournament.

It's pretty hard. Certainly there are no generic, free, and polished ones. http://www.twinfeats.com/tf/twinfeats/Java/pairings/index.tfs this may help, but has some of the bells and whistles needed for a Chess tournament that obviously might not apply to dominion.

On the other hand, Swiss tournaments are comparatively easy to just do in an Excel sheet or something, not really that much harder than a round robin. Divide into brackets by #gameswon, split and pair, improvising when there is an odd number in a certain group (Lowest rated in group 5 wins plays highest rated in 4wins, etc.)

[Geronimoo]

There's a Mtg tool that has an in-built swiss tournament organizer. Not online though, but it could be a nice way to do one-day tournaments:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/mtgbrowser/

[zxcvbn2]

Actually, I'm pretty sure challonge supports a Swiss tournament. I set up a sample one just now: http://challonge.com/testswisssystem

[Kirian]

Actually, I'm pretty sure challonge supports a Swiss tournament. I set up a sample one just now: http://challonge.com/testswisssystem

Huh... I was apparently looking in the wrong place.  That helps at least.

There is another factor, that people cannot easily "play ahead" if their next partner is finished with the round.  But it is cerainly something to consider.