Next Factions Community Tournament -- Discussion

[Lost Viking]

I think this doesnt sound so simple anymore =) As for randomly generated teams this would likley be an issue for myself certainly. I simply don't have the Manpower to match any character at any pwr lvl nor do I have the renown to do so. It sure sounds fun tho.

As for the leauge setup I might think simply give the winner Points as you do in most sports leauges?

A win gets you 3 Points. A loss if you are underdog gets you 1 Point.
Everyone plays everyone a set number times, alternating between home and away games. Coinflip for who starts home.
At the end of all matches tally up the scoreboard and the top x amount of players go to KO tourney.
In case of someone having the same score the amount of underdog matches won determine who comes out on top.
If still equal just run a KO match.

Pros and cons to this very not thought thru idea...
Simple!
May allow for players who sync up to play all their matches in a row.
Might be next to impossible for some to get on at the same time, dragging the leauge out indefinatley. (give each player a random opponent to play as substitute?)
Not really sure how this aims to balance for player skill but with random teams luck should be a bigger factor.
Shouldn't the best player win anyway?

Well it's nothing if not short of perfect but just a more simple train of thought.

[Aleonymous]

Thanks for Loli, hreinn and AP for joining the thread. We have 10-11 fully registered players at the moment, with another 3-4 partly registered, i.e. having some availability issues. I want to wait some time more, maybe after this weekend, to see if there's any more coming in.

Proposed Tournament Structure

In any case, I propose we do two sub-groups/leagues, i.e. two mini round-robin tournaments ("all-play-all"). I propose that each player faces all others exactly twice, in a Home/Away match style like in team-sports, where the player who is "at Home" gets a small privilege. Once the mini-leagues are concluded, the top (4?) players of each group advance to a knockout phase, i.e. a single final elimination tournament. Is everyone OK with the proposed hybrid tournament-structure?

If you're all OK with that, what's left to decide is:

• Scoring system: According to my previous post, I propose either Elo-based (like current in-game tourney/all-time ranking system) or Renown-based (e.g. where loser gets 0 points and winner gets points equal to the number of units left alive). We should also look into tie-braking conditions. Which one do you prefer?
• Home/Away matches: We should decide what the Home-team advantage should be. That can of course be left to the two players to decide, and need not be the same for each group or each matchup! For example: Aleo-vs-stoicmom could have the Home-player choose a build after the Away-player has revealed his own; Aleo-vs-Tirean could have the Home-player take the first turn and/or choose map; Aleo-vs-Yngvar could give the Home-player a +2 team-power advantage. You get the idea....
• Group composition: How to divide the players between the two groups. Maybe per-timezone is the best option here, but there's some mode considerations: Note that the two groups need not have the same number of players, nor use the same scoring system, nor use the same special rules (e.g. random builds, number of matches per-pair, home-player advantages etc). What do you say?
• I/O rules: For removing/inserting players in the group(s) and/or the knockout phase. We should have rules to accommodate situations like: players not being available any longer (or altogether disappearing) and other, new ones, popping up to join in before its too late. The latter is easy, e.g. we can throw them into one of the two groups/league and hook 'em up to the scoring system. The former, i.e. removing a "Lost Viking" from a group, ain't so difficult either: We just remove all the effect his matches had across the board. For example: Assume a Renown-based scoring system, and say the removed player had played only three matches, two wins vs. Aleo and one defeat vs. Tirean; when that player is removed, then Aleo's points stay the same (he didn't win any points from those two fights) and Tirean's points are reduced (e.g. he gets a -2, if Tir won with two units alive). Nothing is demanded from you to implement this, except that you should remember to accurately record each of your matches {date, opponent, builds, map, 1st player, outcome, units left alive, ...?} .

What do you think? Please provide feedback and/or preferences to the above questions. Else, I will assume you're OK with anything.

Disqualifying conditions

Now, this is VERY IMPORTANT, so please make sure you read and understand. Participation in the tourney means you accept the following terms & conditions. OK, "disqualifying" is an umbrella term for when somebody fails to commit to the community tourney. I don't expect that anyone will misbehave (insult, troll, harass etc), but we may have instances of players who delay the tourney, don't show up for matches and/or have an overall "bad" communication. For this reason, I strongly urge you to post your availability status in this here thread (or the forum chat, which is also archived). We're all patient and considerate human beings, but, BE WARNED: you will be removed from the tourney if you're not heard from for more than 10 days (e.g. if you don't update your availability status by a post here, don't respond to forum-PMs nor steam-chat messages etc). Did you read & understand?

---

Updated participants list:
1. Aleonymous
2. stoicmom
3. Tyrael
4. Yngvar
5. Rymdkejsaren
6. Guðmundr (*) -- Not available before Xmas
7. Tirean
8. grumpyoldman
9. Lost Viking (*) -- Generally limited availability
10. netnazgul
11. JackJammer
12. Lolisauce (*) -- Only for Knockout double-elimination
13. hreinbenno
14. Another Persona (*) -- Only in for random build fights

(*) Restricted / Limited availability
(?) Awaiting response: Veringatorix, raven2134,...?

---

Remember: "CnC" -- Communication & Commitment"

[Yngvar]

Structure.

Sounds like our own champions league and that's fair enough for me.

Scoring system.

Elo.

Home & Away.

I don't know what to say and I don't care about advantages and so, but probably the my home, my map thing would be ok.

Group composition.

Timezone sounds good but current Elo ranking could be better.

In & Out.

I don't mind so, whatever.

[stoicmom]

I will make the tourney a priority in the midst of frantic holiday schedule and possible move . . . Aleo, you know my time zone and I will look to you to know when to battle . . . most likely, I will be eliminated early I read the blue and go along with whatever is decided and I read the red and understand the ground rules . . .

[JackJammer]

I'm okay with all of this. Like Yngvar I don't really care what my home advantage would be
I would simply choose the groups random. Even if we manage to get the same time zones in one group, which sure would get things done more nicely, there should be a time and place for every match. also if groups are over, we'll get back to the problem with time-zones. So I don't think it would be that much of a deal to have different time zones in group.
As said conditions sounds good, while i would prefer elo ranking to renown scoring system.

[grumpyoldman]

Structure.

Agreed.

Scoring system.

I'd prefer the Renown system. But I would not insist on it. Meaning: If an equal number of votes occurs, I'll withdraw my voice.

Home & Away.

Since we know each other already in most cases, I'd very much appreciate if the advantage was left to decide for the players. Playing vs. Tirean or AnotherPersona with a Power difference of 2 seems like a waste of time to me...

Group composition.

I do say: One group with random builds, so we got Another Persona in! About the rest I do not care much. (Maybe a group with a build-pool? hopes! ) But I think there should be at least the same amount of players in each group. I don't think the different timezones will be much trouble.

In & Out.

I'd say we treat late-comers with leniency & provide them with a realistic chance to reach the elimination. Even if it should feel some kind of unfair. This involves, that there are not too many late-comers. (not more than 3) If it should be so, they will get their own bracket.
I'm not decided on the "Out-Laws", yet. The participation conditions are reasonable, though.

[Aleonymous]

One small note about the scoring systems:

• The Elo scoring system is most often used when: (a) the playerbase is large, (b) there's not a minimum required number of matches per opponent-pair, (c) there's a fixed time-duration of the tourney, e.g. 1 month, as opposed to a fixed number of total matches. The problem with the Elo system in a tourney with fixed number of matches (and/or match-ups per pair) is this: the player who plays all his matches on the last moment gets more points for each win, especially against the top-ranked players. Practically, this means that it's difficult to gauge your position until all matches have been concluded.

• On the contrary, what I refer to as the "Renown scoring system" (e.g. fixed point gain per win; plus a small bonus if you did well) is more well adapted for a league/tournament where the total number of matches is fixed (as opposed to a fixed duration): For N being the number of players (e.g. N=8) and M being the matches per opponent-pair (e.g. M=2), the total number of matches is T=N*(N-1)/2*M (e.g. 56 total, and 7*2=14 for each player).

So, if we want to fix the number of tourney matches (and match-ups per-pair) we should go for the Renown scoring system. Else, if we fix the tourney duration, and we just wanna leave it up to the players to play as many and as varied matches as they like (maybe with a min/max of 1/3 per opponent-pair) we should use the Elo system.

[netnazgul]

Scoring system
As I've said in chat, it would be difficult to make equal handicaps giving lack of players' skill information, so I'd keep it simple with fixed points per win

Home/Away
I like +1(+2) power diff for home team, but your suggestion on selecting counter build is nice too. Although the latter could sometimes do more harm than advantage for some people. Anyway this handicap should be equal for everyone at least across the group/bracket and picked before the tournament starts. Deciding on such things before every match will take time that can be used elsewhere.

Group composition
a) Random. Just two groups approx. equal size.
b) Timezone or "I can only play european evenings" and "I can only play american or don't care" types.
c) Something like "I'm tough and competitve, bring it on" group (Tirean, me, Aleo, AP probably autoplaced here ) and the rest into other group. Winners from the first group are then seeded into knockout, so that first round will always place people playing group A vs group B (see UEFA clubs qualifications - nation champions and non-champions separated to allow lesser clubs enter group stage).

I/O
Scoring system explained above accomodates to players leaving the tournament. As for entering late - it's rather difficult to introduce player into group without him playing required portion of matches.


As for disqualifications/rules - I shouldn't be unavailable for more than 2 days, for example. I'd say that 48-72 hours per match is enough for everyone to play, with possible extension if both parties agree (bot not twice than default time).
Agreed on 10-days ban.


I'm available to play most evenings european time (around 19:00-23:00 UTC+3), mornings if needed, wider timegap during weekends. Saying it short - I'm mostly available any time.

[Lost Viking]

Well I am sure this all is fine, if the home away advantage is a big deal to have 1 or 2 extra Power maybe just let hometeam pick the stage?
Anyway as I seem to not exactly understand how this will work in practise I will start swinging my axe and hope someone Points me in a direction come match time =)

[Rymdkejsaren]

I agree. I am going to do this *swings axe randomly* and it you get hit, it's your own fault.

[Veringatorix]

I am in, however I have very limited options in terms of units. I only have lvl 1? (power 6 with full team) characters and if i remember only 1 of each type so random builds would be impossible for me.

[AnotherPersona]

So.. I will read the above, I do say, believe me.. I am down for ze random at most times, I am quite flexible with my EST. I really don't function on it, exceeding it's expectations and all. I just want some random fights. I WANNA SEND SOME BIDDICHES TO VALHALLA. ^_^ Hugs & Humps. (Aleo, msg me if something gets started, plz! I would appreciate it)

[netnazgul]

Watching RBT finals I now agree to random builds too (with manually placed ranks and stats, possibly turn order too), hopingly p12.

[Aleonymous]

It seems that the TBS2 trailer didn't cause a sudden inflow of players for Factions Most likely we'll be about 14 players, i.e. two groups of 7, where all-play-all twice, in Home/Away matches. The top players of each group meet in a double-elimination knockout stage.

Extra Players (EPs)
We might need to squeeze-in later-comers or people interested only in knockout (like Lolisauce) into the elimination stage of the tourney; those are the players I refer to as EPs (extra players). So, I propose that the 3 first of each group auto-advance to knockout stage whereas the two 4th-placed will have to battle the EPs for the right to get into the knockout stage. If we have only 1 EP, then the lowest-scoring 4th-placed player will battle that EP. If we get more than 2 EPs, we'll have them fight each-other in a mini knockout to produce exactly two. In case we get 0 EPs (e.g. Loli doesn't want in and no other later-comer joins), both 4th-placed players advance.

Scoring system
According to the general feedback, and my good judgement (), I think we should go with fixed points system (not Elo):

• Defeat: 0 points. Try harder next time!
• Draw: +1 point. I know it's not viking-like, but stalemates do arise...
• Victory: +3 points The victor should also record his ULA (Units Left Alive) at the end of the battle, to be used for tie-breaking.

Groups
Here's where things get complicated. I think the best way is random, but that would mean that all players will have to adhere to the same rules. The other option is to split players in two groups: one where builds will be drawn randomly (more on that later) and one where each player pre-registers ~2 builds and they can use only those (those builds are a subject to veto from the rest of the group-players, to eliminate OP builds). So, if A=Random-Builds, B=Registered-Builds, C="I don't care", what group would you pick? I pick "C". If things don't work out, we'll do it random and be over with it.

Home/Away (+Random Builds)
I really think that should be left for the two players to decide for each match up. Me, I'd propose +2 (or +1) power to home team for p12 (or p6) away team-power. Another idea, to hook up with the random builds, is this: Three random builds are drawn for each match-up and the home-player gets to pick one first, followed by the away-player. A power bonus could also apply.

Randomness
Any ideas on how to incorporate randomness for the the random-group? Should it be per-matchup (see above), or something more "global"? Here's a global idea:

• Draw 2*6=12 builds, separately for each player, at tourney start (2*6 builds because I assumed 7 players in a group)
• The 12 builds are used for one match and then discarded.
• Ranks & Stats can be changed at will, but not the order.
• The away team chooses one out of its remaining builds and reveals it to the home player, who chooses accordingly. Home team could get a power-bonus too, or allowed to rotate his build by one slot to left/right.
• Builds are drawn so that each type of unit appears a fixed number of times: Assuming a standard base-class mix (2R 2A 2Varl), the 2*12=24 Varl units that a player gets to use will have exactly 4x{SM,PK,SRM} and 4x{WH,WM,WL} in them; same applies for Archers and Raiders. To better understand look at this picture representing 12 random builds, 6 for each of the two players; you can see that the total number of same-class units for each player is the same (but two-of-the-same might appear in one build).

Management
Has anyone found (or know of) an online site/platform where we can manage our tourney? If not, I will make a wiki-page where anyone can go in and register a result (and where all changes are of course recorded). I also think we could make a Steam-Community Group, where all players should join, to check things out. What say you?

---

Updated participants list:
1. Aleonymous
2. stoicmom
3. Tyrael
4. Yngvar
5. Rymdkejsaren
6. Gudmundr (*) -- Not available before Xmas
7. Tirean
8. grumpyoldman
9. Lost Viking (*) -- Generally limited availability
10. netnazgul
11. JackJammer
12. Lolisauce (*) -- Only for Knockout double-elimination
13. hreinnbeno
14. Another Persona (*) -- Only in for random build fights
15. Veringatorix (*) -- Limited barracks (only rank-1s)
16. IIpuBeT

(*) Restricted / Limited availability

[Rymdkejsaren]

C has my axe.

[JackJammer]

C has my axe.

...mine too. In my oppinion we should just do the random stuff; why making it complicated with different rules in different groups? I don't really think anybody would back out, just because he/she has to use a random build. on cases like vengatorix we could say that the player can use, what he can offer. but for most players, who are knowing about this, there shouldn't be a problem with creating random builds.
But on the other hand; since my axe goes to c as well, I don't really care as long as there will be blood

the scoring system is good. it's quite simple and i think it'll be fine for us.

as for management; the idea about a steam group sounds good. let's do this.

[mindflare77]

It's been ages since I've played, so I'm probably incredibly rusty... But if there's an open spot still, I'm in. Flexible schedule for the most part. I'm fine with the terms/conditions stated before, and don't much care what the home advantage is. If there isn't space, I look forward to watching!

[Veringatorix]

Yeah, I'm just in for the fun of the matches, so I'm not bothered by builds or anything, I will just field a team of 1 unit type each, always do, so no overpower concerns from my end. I don't care what my opponents choose, as long as it's around p6 . If people are fine with that, then we're all good for my limitation.

[netnazgul]

Let it be C

. I don't care what my opponents choose, as long as it's around p6 .

We can surrender some QMs (RMs) to you so that you get enough renown to get p12 build


Tournament clarifications suggestion - we can have 2 games between players for groups (one "home", one "away") and then in knockout games the same plus a "neutral" game if the score is 1-1. So there could be ties in groups (home win, away loss), but knockout games would always be Bo3

[AnotherPersona]

I can play any rank (1-18) with any build, so I am fine with fighting at whatever level someone has to be at.