unvoidable tournaments for teams, brainstorming phase

pier4r
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 3390

unvoidable tournaments for teams, brainstorming phase

Post#1 » 22 Feb 2017, 11:53

So I was thinking, after 6 unavoidable tournaments, that we can extend those to teams. But how?
I mean players do not need to accept the tournament or not, it is unavoidable, the point is to make balanced teams otherwise the result is obvious.

An idea is to pair the top player (e.g. t800) with the lower player of the spectrum (let's say the one that has 1400+ points that is closer to 1400) but it is not really, how can I say, interesting.

In the unavoidable tournaments the assumption is that each player tries to win as much as possible, and it seems quite likely, with a team it is the same for the single players but then there are problems of activity, interested and so on that may be different for the elements of the team.

In terms of team vs team fights it is realtively easy: one considers only the direct fights between players of the two teams, so we have , for teams of size 2, players A1 and A2 and players B1 and B2.
The direct fights are considered like in the unavoidable tournament, for every map, between A1 vs B1, A1 vs B2, A2 vs B1, A2 vs B2.

Then the total tournament score (remember that the score assigns 3 points for each map) on each map between two players is added. So for example A1 vs B1, we have A1 wins 3-0 circle of death, A1 wins 3-0 barred spiral, A1 draws on meeting point 1.5 - 1.5 , B1 wins on set your priority (3-0), B1 wins on seven wonders (3-0) . So the total match A1 vs B1 is 7.5 - 7.5 , or, assigning 1 point for victory, 0.5 for draw and 0 for defeat (so normalizing). A1 vs B1 0.5 - 0.5

So in practice every fight "player team A vs player team B" assigns 1 point. So a fight between teams can end up maximum 4-0 with teams of size 2.

But how do we decide a team? I'm not settled on this.

We can even say "every top10 players pick 2 other players" but in this case (a) the order of selection counts and (b) not all the top10 players are active on the forum.


link attempt2: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=627
Last edited by pier4r on 22 Apr 2017, 23:07, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Gladiabots/wiki/players/pier4r_nvidia_shield_k1 -> Gladiabots CHAT, stats, insights and more ;

User avatar
PEW
Script
Script
Posts: 35
Contact:

Re: unvaoidable tournaments for teams, brainstorming phase

Post#2 » 22 Apr 2017, 22:19

How about there is a limit of combined elo points. E.g. 4000. So every team has to pick any players to fit most closely into this limit. Winning team is the one with most combined elo points after some time. Players that don't submit as a team will be assigned randomly. This would be a total different tournament where not the same few top players have a chance to win, but the most evolving ones.

pier4r
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 3390

Re: unvaoidable tournaments for teams, brainstorming phase

Post#3 » 22 Apr 2017, 23:03

Hmm, interesting idea. So let's start it.

- Everyone can claim himself a team leader and pick other players to form a team with a limit of 5500 score or 3 players, the players gets included in the teams unless they say "no, I don't want to be part of that or this team". A team leader has to pick players that are at least 5 rank positions apart and he has to provide a screenshot at the moment of the choice about the elo of the players. This means no way that the top3 makes a team.
- A player selected by two "team leaders" is assigned to the team leader that mentioned the player first (again, unless the player refuses to join a team).
- Second accounts are not valid of course. I mean one player has to decide which account is valid and the others gets ignored.

After one week, I will check the sum of elo once again for every player that played at least 70 games in the week. (this means, if a player played less than 70 games, it counts as half of the lowest score in the tournament done by a player playing at least 70 games, to avoid idlers).

In this way we have teams that can improve tactics, and moreover people will watch out to pick promising players.

For random teams, maybe we can do it later. Let's start small and limited and then we will see.

Even having 5-8 teams for the first edition would be great.
Last edited by pier4r on 23 Apr 2017, 17:07, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Gladiabots/wiki/players/pier4r_nvidia_shield_k1 -> Gladiabots CHAT, stats, insights and more ;

User avatar
PEW
Script
Script
Posts: 35
Contact:

Re: unvoidable tournaments for teams, brainstorming phase

Post#4 » 23 Apr 2017, 03:33

Great, but I have a few further suggestions:

A score of 6000 points is not a limitation when only 3 players are allowed so a 1500 would have to find two 2250 players to be competitive (good luck finding those). I think 3 players and a limit of 5000 points would make more sense. This way you can decide if you prefer putting 3 strong players around 1670 or 2 stable 1900 with less chances of improvement and one promising 1200.

Also I think it would be better if if there is one team leader and at least one team member that has to join the team by saying so. Only the third player might be chosen without some kind of agreement (unless he/she disagrees) so it would be a better community thing and there would be still 5-8 teams, I guess.

If you picked someone that doesn't play 70 games, getting 0 points for him sounds a bit too hard. I'd be probably better if you just get his start elo points minus 200 which would also be the minimum amount of points a player can get so that he doesn't get blamed too much if he loses a lot.

To participate, there is a forum thread where the team leader would have to post three screenshots of the members with their current elo points (at the same moment) at the first 3 days of the tournament.
Also the second team member has to confirm his participation shortly.
Last but not least, a team name is obligatory.

After 7 days the team with the highest elo points sum wins.

pier4r
Skynet
Skynet
Posts: 3390

Re: unvoidable tournaments for teams, brainstorming phase

Post#5 » 23 Apr 2017, 17:06

PEW wrote:Great, but I have a few further suggestions:

A score of 6000 points is not a limitation when only 3 players are allowed so a 1500 would have to find two 2250 players to be competitive (good luck finding those).


Hmm no because likely those will have close ranks, and the rule of "5" ranks apart avoids this. Moreover the 6000 is a limit, one can have a team of 3200 total for example. Just because if by chance one has a lot of 2000+ and 1900+ (not the actual case) one can have a team of 1800, 1900, 2000 being within the limit.

I think 3 players and a limit of 5000 points would make more sense. This way you can decide if you prefer putting 3 strong players around 1670 or 2 stable 1900 with less chances of improvement and one promising 1200.


Hmmm. 5500?. So one has to pick from Master league or from the middle of grand master, since master league is not so full. I would like to make teams within GM, so one can evaluate the players directly when picking them.

Also I think it would be better if if there is one team leader and at least one team member that has to join the team by saying so. Only the third player might be chosen without some kind of agreement (unless he/she disagrees) so it would be a better community thing and there would be still 5-8 teams, I guess.

I thought about this but the number of players active here on the forum is pretty low, so already getting 5 single captains in time would be pretty great. For this at the start I would avoid to wait for a team player to say yes. This can still happen or the player can say "no" and then declare himself a team leader..

If you picked someone that doesn't play 70 games, getting 0 points for him sounds a bit too hard. I'd be probably better if you just get his start elo points minus 200 which would also be the minimum amount of points a player can get so that he doesn't get blamed too much if he loses a lot.

Why blame? I mean, the team leader choose, so at most the team leader is to be blamed and 70 days a week is nothing. We should also promote activity here. Under 70 games one is an idler or he is too busy.

So editing the previous post to implement the changes.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Gladiabots/wiki/players/pier4r_nvidia_shield_k1 -> Gladiabots CHAT, stats, insights and more ;

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests