BEAST - Bannerlord Early Access Skirmish Tournament

[Metal-Luca]

Erminas said:
Why wasn't RR introduced or even considered for this, current BEAST tourney? It's still mind boggling to me that RR, the only truly fair system (which round robin is), has been traditionally put aside in M&B tourneys in favor of systems that (falsely imo) have been advertising "competitiveness" and "more satisfying player experience". For all these years, these systems only proved to be favoriting randomness and shielding top teams from potential bad match or two.

So I really REALLY hope that RR will become the system that is used all the time in tournaments.

100% Agreed

"These systems only proved to be favoriting randomness and shielding top teams from potential bad match or two."
The system is flawed and promotes skill and luck.
Please all team leaders post your vote.

I respect the admins of Beast 1 and 2.They put a lot of effort and organized great competitions.Without their competitions this community had nothing and most of the already few players that play this game would stop play.So in my opinion they saved this community.It takes a lot of time to organize a tournament and they do it for free and for this community.I'm just asking if is time for change in the next season?

 

[Aprikosenmann]

We would need smaller skill difference => smaller leagues for RR.
DivA 4 Teams DoubleRR
DivB 6 Teams SingleRR
DivC 6 Teams SingleRR
DivD 16 Teams Ladder

 

[Tryerror]

I am not a Team Leader but I want to defend Buchholz to some degree. Personally I think Buchholz wasnt a bad idea for Liga B and C.A Classic omnia contra omnes for Liga A tho seems right.
8 Clans for Liga A seems good to me too. Smaller like 4 sounds borring, its the same over and over and over and over again.Buchholz helps to organise a big leage like C with many Teams - i guess, no admin - no clue. The administration of more then 3 leagues seems like hell to me considering dear IkeaKnight, Aerowen, Nova and TheBard do it for no pay in their little free time. I can imagene more fun things to do.
So if we bash on a Tournement system we also should take a look at how much strain it puts on the admins who keep it running. Complaining is easy. We also cant just look at it from Liga A perspective. We need to keep a look at the big picture.

 

[Aprikosenmann]

sounds borring, its the same over and over again

Yeah RM vs DM was very boring yesterday since we played before. RM vs Unity is what we all wanted! ?

 

[mrArgentum]

What about double elimination?

 

[Tryerror]

Yeah RM vs DM was very boring yesterday since we played before. RM vs Unity is what we all wanted! ?

It would be thrilling to see you on the receiving end of a default win...
----------------------------------
Now, I am not interested in any trash talk neither do i take joy in it. Can we please concentrate on the matter at hand? There is absolutetly no need for such things. You should be old enough to take other peoples opinion without turning those into a laughing stock. Lets focus and work together for a better and even more fun Beast#3. Thank you.

 

[Aprikosenmann]

You should be old enough to take other peoples opinion without turning those into a laughing stock.

Actually true, my passive provocation wasnt really needed. What I wanted to say is that reducing skill differences should be the main focus in my opinion. Even if it is repetitive and sometimes unfair.

 

[Metal-Luca]

Actually true, my passive provocation wasnt really needed. What I wanted to say is that reducing skill differences should be the main focus in my opinion. Even if it is repetitive and sometimes unfair.

So you want to play in a system that is sometimes unfair?
You want to sacrifice the ones that get in a position where is unfair for them to reduce skill differences.
But is not like that only, you also favourite the others that sometimes get unfair advantages because if some situation is unfair for some then for others is an advantage and that doesn't promote the mechanism to reduce skill differences, you just win on one side and you lose on another side.Is just if you don't get to be in a situation that is unfair to you then you don't complain because people follow their interest in general and are biased.
In r-r everything is transparent and fair, is a system that is used by every sport and i wonder why is it........

 

[Aprikosenmann]

But what is wrong with my first suggestion with smaller leagues and RR. It is fair and reduces skill differences right?
I should have said unfair to a certain extend. The fact that RS and DoF will most likely end up at position 5&6 just because KW and DR is getting a free win in the last week is way to unfair I agree. But part of this problem is that Res and DoF have almost no chance against DM and RM.

 

[Rangah]

RR in my opinion is a much better system. It more fairly defines teams final placement once the group stage ends, since everyone fights everyone. Isn't that so? Things might also get more interesting if upsets happen. Due to the current system in BEAST 2, "good" teams keep playing "good'' teams and in some scenarios it might even be beneficial to lose. I fail to see Buchholz system being "more fair" in the tournament so far.

Adding to that, I don't think playing the same team during the group stage more than once is a good concept. The only place where you should meet the same team from your group again is the playoffs.

Please consider having RR for Beast 3 with adjusted league sizes if necessary.

 

[Waljaaa]

RR is by far the most fair but yea the divisions will need a rework.
Something like 4 divisions of 8-ish teams could result in a nice 7 week tournament where everyone faces eachother once.

 

[๖Kern]

RR is by far the most fair but yea the divisions will need a rework.
Something like 4 divisions of 8-ish teams could result in a nice 7 week tournament where everyone faces eachother once.

7 weeks just for 1 match between everyone. Unless we do a group-based tournament or unless we play 2 matches a week, it will be way too long. I believe that has been the main argument why RR wouldn't work in Warband and won't in Bannerlord. No one wants to play a tournament for 2+ months.

 

[Metal-Luca]

7 weeks just for 1 match between everyone. Unless we do a group-based tournament or unless we play 2 matches a week, it will be way too long. I believe that has been the main argument why RR wouldn't work in Warband and won't in Bannerlord. No one wants to play a tournament for 2+ months.

Beast 2 is 5 weeks and for some teams will be 6 weeks.You tell me 1week more makes the difference?

 

[IceNoVa]

RR is by far the most fair but yea the divisions will need a rework.
Something like 4 divisions of 8-ish teams could result in a nice 7 week tournament where everyone faces eachother once.

The idea itself works nicely, but I'd scale down the division size to 5 or 6 teams. Draw the factions and matches for every meet up, set a time of e.g. 1 month for all sets to be played, potentially a minimum of 1 per week so people don't postpone everything until the last week, and add another week for relegation matches, potentially a final between #1 and #2 in Div A.
Alternatively have the top two teams of each division go for a small knockout stage, but that's just random thoughts on my end.

 

[Firunien]

@Aprikosenmann
This system never is totally fair and designed to work in the long run(BHS), concerning Div A Res and DoF also played against Enigma and Unity/freewin(6 of their 7 points), its DRs first time, in total both of them had twice RM/DM and DR once so i guess thats a bit unfair. On small leagues and RRs i agree, but i think 4 Teams in a league is too repetitive, and a drop fatal, i crafted two options myself


League suggestion

Generally i would like to suggest two options for a league ,
a fair one with the problem of length (8 weeks is more prone to drops then 5-6 weeks) and a shorter one which cant be as fair, the 6 week variant has 4 division because as pointed out small divisions are needed for RR, 16 Slots for presorted teams should be sufficient for the size of community i suppose :

8 weeks

Division A 8 teams RR + top 2 playoff / bottom 2 relegation playoff

Division B 8 teams RR + top 2 promotion playoff / bottom 2 relegation playoff

Division C 7 weeks of BHS week to week matching. Like now in BEAST 2. + top 2 promotion playoff

With the length of 7 weeks to work for the matching system civision C should be in good order by week 3-4 so the quality of matches should increase.


6 weeks

Division A 6 teams RR + top 2 playoff / bottom 2 relegation playoff

Division B 6 teams RR + top 2 promotion playoff / bottom 2 relegation playoff

Division C 6 teams RR + top 2 promotion playoff / bottom 2 relegation playoff

Rookie Division all remaining Teams go in there, 5 weeks of BHS week to week matching. Like now in BEAST 2 + top 2 promotion playoff

 

[The_Great_White]

@Aprikosenmann
This system never is totally fair and designed to work in the long run(BHS), concerning Div A Res and DoF also played against Enigma and Unity/freewin(6 of their 7 points), its DRs first time, in total both of them had twice RM/DM and DR once so i guess thats a bit unfair. On small leagues and RRs i agree, but i think 4 Teams in a league is too repetitive, and a drop fatal, i crafted two options myself


League suggestion

Generally i would like to suggest two options for a league ,
a fair one with the problem of length (8 weeks is more prone to drops then 5-6 weeks) and a shorter one which cant be as fair, the 6 week variant has 4 division because as pointed out small divisions are needed for RR, 16 Slots for presorted teams should be sufficient for the size of community i suppose :

8 weeks

Division A 8 teams RR + top 2 playoff / bottom 2 relegation playoff

Division B 8 teams RR + top 2 promotion playoff / bottom 2 relegation playoff

Division C 7 weeks of BHS week to week matching. Like now in BEAST 2. + top 2 promotion playoff

With the length of 7 weeks to work for the matching system civision C should be in good order by week 3-4 so the quality of matches should increase.


6 weeks

Division A 6 teams RR + top 2 playoff / bottom 2 relegation playoff

Division B 6 teams RR + top 2 promotion playoff / bottom 2 relegation playoff

Division C 6 teams RR + top 2 promotion playoff / bottom 2 relegation playoff

Rookie Division all remaining Teams go in there, 5 weeks of BHS week to week matching. Like now in BEAST 2 + top 2 promotion playoff

I really like the second idea, but i want to throw in another idea similar to the "Rookie Divison" Firunien mentioned:
I experienced this tournament format back when i was playing darts on a semi competitive level.
Basically the division system is the same as firunien lined out. The rookie divison will not be a divison itself and there won't be relegation playoffs, instead you have two open slots for Div C which will be played out through a single elimination bracket of the remaining teams.
Negative aspect: For example, with 8 more teams you need 3 weeks before the tournament starts to host this bracket with the usual one official per week

 

[Ikea Knight]

So I just wanted to say two things here:

1. Of course we are open to changing up the format for the next season. I personally like the system we have right now but I can understand the frustration. After all as Admins we do the tourney for the teams and not the other way around.

2. I see that you are discussing a lot about how many divisions we should have or how big the divisions for the next season are going to be.
There are two issues here that I want to point out:
Firstly we can't really decide on the divisions before we know how many teams sign up. I suppose there will be fewer teams signing up for the next season since the same happened in Beast 1 and tbh and it doesn't feel like the Skirmish-Scene is growing right now. The other thing we have to look at is Beast as an ongoing format. IF we change the numbers of divisions with every seasons teams may get robbed of their progress which would be frustrating.
But again. We're open for your input.

 

[Erminas]

Honestly, there is no real progression even with current format, unless you decide to put roster cap on how many players team can add/replace in between seasons to be considered same team as the one from the previous season.
In other words, what if team that gets promoted from division B goes and recruits fully different roster filled with div A quality players for the next season? That is not the same team that played in Div B and earned their progression, that is completely new team playing under the name of the team that did earn promo.

Also there isn't really any progression, unless you put all the new teams in the bottom division and they have to earn their promotions to better divisions.
I assume for Beast 3 you will again ask what division teams want to be in and make divisions based mainly on the their wishes.
Now this is not a bad thing, but like I said there isn't really progress here and every season should be taken as separate one.

 

[Ikea Knight]

Honestly, there is no real progression even with current format, unless you decide to put roster cap on how many players team can add/replace in between seasons to be considered same team as the one from the previous season.
In other words, what if team that gets promoted from division B goes and recruits fully different roster filled with div A quality players for the next season? That is not the same team that played in Div B and earned their progression, that is completely new team playing under the name of the team that did earn promo.

Also there isn't really any progression, unless you put all the new teams in the bottom division and they have to earn their promotions to better divisions.
I assume for Beast 3 you will again ask what division teams want to be in and make divisions based mainly on the their wishes.
Now this is not a bad thing, but like I said there isn't really progress here and every season should be taken as separate one.

Of course we are talking about that stuff. That is needed for progression. But we don't have a decision yet. What you're saying is exatcly my point of view. I think we need to make sure that the team that played mostly stays the team that continous to play. Additionally we not probably not going to ask teams to place themselves for next season. That would defeat the purpose the current season . However we are also looking at our progression system - especially since Unity left div A.

 

[TheBard]

Of course we are talking about that stuff. That is needed for progression. But we don't have a decision yet. What you're saying is exatcly my point of view. I think we need to make sure that the team that played mostly stays the team that continous to play. Additionally we not probably not going to ask teams to place themselves for next season. That would defeat the purpose the current season . However we are also looking at our progression system - especially since Unity left div A.

Especially the latter case I have given some thought with no clear conclusion. The quit of Unity dealt an massive damage blow to Division A and all the following up matches. I'm not going to bash on Unity any further, but they clearly overestimated themselves massively and underestimated the big fishes in the tank of Div A while declining all the scrim offers from the Div A teams.

I don't think something like this is going to happen next season again, we should spend some thought on how to prevent stuff like this.