BIT Tournament Rules & Discussion POLL: PM Scheduling Info?

Users who are viewing this thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
KissMyAxe said:
Okay, let's see if you guys are trolling :smile:
...
...
...
How about we allow Khergits? Seems innovative enough. And I'm not trolling. Dead serious

Hmm.. not sure why you'd think we're trolling, but to answer your question:

Aren't Khergits "broken" at the moment?  Testing is up for Patch v1.155 wherein;

Rebalanced Khergit multiplayer troops and added 'Khergit Infantry' class.

Based off of this, I say we keep Khergits out, unless that patch comes in before the tournament starts, to which I say - why not?

EDIT: I'm also on the side of keeping random plains... I don't really understand why you would take out such a popular map choice.  Ideally you could change the rule to allow 0 re-rolls, and only re-roll cliff texture.  This way you'd take out a chunk of the re-rolls and still be innovative with both the rules, and forcing teams to play a map that isn't controlled by the team that picks RP.
 
5 minutes, might as well try it. It's too bad MOTF will still be about the same length from the start time. I'd like to reduce that slightly instead.

It would be really fun if it were slightly random, and we get some "Oh ****, master spawned already." Oh, well.
 
Pertaining to the use of the ENL maps:  Thanks for clarifying, Maynd.  I mentioned them because I feel that the addition of new maps has the highest potential for refreshing the competitive game.  Looking back on CJTT, some of my favorite matches utilized picks like Desert Town, Frosty Battle, and Reveran Village--maps that haven't received a lot of attention historically.

If new maps do not exist, I doubt we all really want to wait around for someone to create them.  PIMP's already in-process, but I suppose the rest of the "new map" conversation is just food for thought.
 
Monday 12/2/12: How long should round times be?
Vote A: 6 minutes (incumbent)
Vote B: 5 minutes (proposed change)

Tuesday 12/3/12: How many rounds should be played before a swap?
Vote A: 4 rounds total (incumbent)
Vote B: 5 rounds total (proposed change)

Wednesday 12/4/12: Should wins be based on total maps or rounds?
Vote A: Maps (incumbent)
Vote B: Rounds (proposed change)

Thursday 12/5/12: Should all of the teams be allowed in the finals (see CJTT) or just the top 8?
Vote A: All. (incumbent)
Vote B: Top 8. (proposed change)

Friday 12/6/12: Should all scheduling information be forced to be PM'd to me?
Vote A: No. (incumbent)
Vote B: Yes. (proposed change)
 
KissMyAxe said:
How about we allow Khergits?

Once they get a war spear, I would love it. Though I wish they were tested a bit more.

Another thing would be to change how maps and factions are picked. Then again, people might cry foul if they don't get to play on the maps they're good at, than get gud.
 
Tuesday 12/3/12: How many rounds should be played before a swap?
Vote A: 4 rounds total (incumbent)
Vote B: 5 rounds total (proposed change)

Wednesday 12/4/12: Should wins be based on total maps or rounds?
Vote A: Maps (incumbent)
Vote B: Rounds (proposed change)

Thursday 12/5/12: Should all of the teams be allowed in the finals (see CJTT) or just the top 8?
Vote A: All. (incumbent)
Vote B: Top 8. (proposed change)

Friday 12/6/12: Should all scheduling information be forced to be PM'd to me?
Vote A: No. (incumbent)
Vote B: Yes. (proposed change)

Also for FFS, Put a poll on the ban on random plains, I dont think you should ban it. Just dont have rerolls. let it be "random".
 
Eternal said:
Monday 12/2/12: How long should round times be?
Vote A: 6 minutes (incumbent)
Reducing the round times to 5 minutes only wins us 30 seconds if the teams are waiting for MoTF, while greatly increasing chances that rounds will be drawn (thus increasing the overall match length significantly) on larger maps. I'm not convinced that is an acceptable trade-off, thus my vote.

On another note, here's a clarification regarding seed assignment in the tournament. It has been brought to our attention (thanks Calamity!) that Challonge sucks at fairly assigning "top" and "bottom" seeds: some teams get way more "tops" (choice of attacker or defender) than others, conversely some teams may get almost all "bottoms". We needed to find a better way to assign seeds so it's fair. The way it was solved in CJTT (random roll at the beginning of each round) is only fair if there is a large number of teams. A better way is to generate the seeds before the tournament starts and make sure the seeds are fair, which is only possible if there is an odd number of teams in the tourney. If there is an even number of teams, some teams will have 1 more "bottom" seed than they have "tops", and other teams will have 1 more "top" seed. That's the best you could possibly do.
Fair seed assignments are, of course, not unique and can be randomized: as soon as we know the number of teams registered, I'll generate the seed assignments for abstract [Team 1, ... Team n] (and if I'm not too lazy I'll write a JavaScript program for use in all the future tournaments here you go: http://jsfiddle.net/9gg78/3/) . Then we'll have someone (preferably a tournament admin who is not on any of the teams) randomly assign every team a number that will link them to the corresponding seed assignments. That way it would be as fair as possible in both the number of "top" and "bottom" seeds and in who gets "top" or "bottom" in any specific match.

Finally, following WilySly's suggestion I'll try to bring in more new maps into the tournament: in addition to the maps in the Plains Map Pack, I might include some of the ready-made maps in the "mixed" and "closed" categories. I have a few solid maps on my mind, but we still need to playtest them. So, I'll make sure they are deployed on at least one North American server (either USA_Event or Balion_WarRoom) so that you could playtest them. The information about the maps ready for playtest and their location is going to be on the same page as the same info regarding the Plains Map Pack: https://github.com/KissMyAxe/pimp/wiki/TestReady . Once again, teams/clans are free to arrange playtests on their own, but if you are unable to do so just send me a PM and I'll pair you with another clan or team. Just make sure to post detailed feedback about the maps you've played.
 
Monday 12/2/12: How long should round times be?
Vote A: 6 minutes (incumbent)
Vote B: 5 minutes (proposed change)

Tuesday 12/3/12: How many rounds should be played before a swap?
Vote A: 4 rounds total (incumbent)
Vote B: 5 rounds total (proposed change)

Wednesday 12/4/12: Should wins be based on total maps or rounds?
Vote A: Maps (incumbent)
Vote B: Rounds (proposed change)

Thursday 12/5/12: Should all of the teams be allowed in the finals (see CJTT) or just the top 8?
Vote A: All. (incumbent)
Vote B: Top 8. (proposed change)

Friday 12/6/12: Should all scheduling information be forced to be PM'd to me?
Vote A: No. (incumbent)
Vote B: Yes. (proposed change)

My decisions are made primarily on wanting the tournament to go quicker as it is sort of a "test" tournament. The only exception of making things shorter is the round time because the few rounds that are played should at least be played correctly, more time allows more time for action and strategies within that round.
 
Don't really know if this goes here, but playing on the map "swamp" was one of the most bizarre experiences I've had in almost three years of playing Warband. Why that map is a thing I do not know.
 
Tuesday 12/3/12: How many rounds should be played before a swap?
Vote A: 4 rounds total (incumbent)
I'm not convinced that 5-rounds-then-swap has any advantage other then making the map go longer (which I don't really think is an advantage to start with).
 
KissMyAxe said:
I'm not convinced that 5-rounds-then-swap has any advantage other then making the map go longer (which I don't really think is an advantage to start with).

Also avoids ties.
 
Mr.X said:
KissMyAxe said:
I'm not convinced that 5-rounds-then-swap has any advantage other then making the map go longer (which I don't really think is an advantage to start with).
Also avoids ties.
Nope. If it's 5 rounds, then swap, then 5 more -- it's 10 rounds in total, which is an even number. And with an even number of rounds a tie is always possible. Basically, a tie is always possible in any n-rounds-then-swap set up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom