Mega-Dueling Tournament - Rules, Settings, Check List, and Sign Ups

[AreaOfEffect]

<b>Mega-Dueling Tournament</b>

Starting mid-January, I hope to be starting a tournament of 1-on-1 player duels. The details of the tournament are written below. I will be firm on the rules as I have written them.


<b>Game Rules</b>

<u>Sign-ups</u>

1. Players can apply to be in the tournament by posting to this thread. Players are asked to only state their interest, no other preferences (such as desired nation) are to be announced.

2. The final player count is to be a power of two (2, 4, 8...), with 64 being the maximum number of active participants. Any additional players will be reserved as alternates.

<u>Selecting Nations</u>

1. When it is announced that I am accepting nation picks, I will require that each player submit 1 nation and 1 number from 0 to 99 via PM to me, areaofeffect. Nations can be from any age. Mod nations will not be allowed.

2. Anyone who picks a nation nobody else has picked automatically wins that nation and can add it to their list of nations. Any duplicate picks will be settled with a random die roll of 0 to 99, with the player closest to the roll winning that nation.

3. It will be announced which players and nations are not matched so that the selection process can be repeated amongst them.

4. At the end of every round, the victorious player gets to add the defeated player's list of nations to their own. They may choose to begin the next round with any nation on their newly expanded list.

Note: If you have any questions about this method, please first refer to the "reasoning" section further in the reading.

<u>Match-Ups</u>

1. Players will be matched in the order of their readiness.

a. For the first round we will be distributing nations in a series of rounds as discussed above. Those who have a nation but not a game at the end of each round of picks will be paired up based on the order in which they sign-up for the game. Therefore the first ready player who signed up will fight the second ready player who signed up. The third will fight the forth and so on.

b. For following rounds, players will be pair up with awaiting players who have also finished their previous round and won.

Note: If you have any questions about this method, please first refer to the "reasoning" section further in the reading.

<u>Alternates</u>

1. Players who sign-up beyond the current maximum player count will be used as alternates. The alternates will be selected in the order they joined the game.

2. Defeated players will join the list of alternates and be given a higher priority then all previous alternates.


<b>Game Settings</b>

Game Server: llamaserver.net (http://llamaserver.net/)

Number of Starting Provinces: 1
Strength of Independent: 5
Special Site Frequency: 40
Money Multiple: 100
Resource Multiple: 100
Supply Multiple: 100
Random Events are Common
Score Graphs are Enabled
Hall of Fame Entries: 5
Magic Research is Easy
Standard Victory*
Master Password is Disabled
Renaming is Allowed
Cheat Prevention is Active

Mods: CBM 1.6
Maps: TBA

*Changed from my original choice.

Note: If you have any questions about these settings, please first refer to the "reasoning" section further down in the reading.


<b>Checklist</b>

This is a list of things I will need/want to secure before the game starts in mid-January.

* A minimum of 16 players. 31 players so far. (Ideally I want the full 64.)
- One well balanced land-vs-land 2 player map
- One well balanced land-vs-water 2 player map
- One well balanced water-vs-water 2 player map
* A server willing to host the tournament. Use of the llamasever has been confirmed.
- Additional Admin support #1
- Additional Admin support #2

Note: Anyone willing to help with the maps should post a contribution to this thread.

<b>Reasoning</b>

<u>Initial Nation Picks</u>

In the past I've seen people use a method of distributing nations in mega-games that involves the players submitting five initial picks. I've noticed that this method places a big burden on the organizer to satisfy players with limited information.

Many nations are very popular and some players are unfortunate enough to choose popular nations for all five of their picks. The complexity of the affair often means the organizer has to go back to the players for additional information spite them receiving five initial picks. By going back to players after every round of picks, I avoid the redundancy of secondary picks being the same as nations already chosen.

<u>The Expanding List of Nations</u>

Though it may not be clear within the rules, each player will begin round one with one nation available for selection. When a player wins a round, their options for the next round expands to include the nations available to their defeated opponents. They will still only play one nation per round.

This means that a player will have the option of 2 nations in round 2, 4 in round 3, 8 in round 4, and so forth. The objective is to focus the tournament on the skill of the player rather then the strength of a particular nation.

Those nations that didn't get selected for round one will not be an option for the remainder of the tournament as that adds more complexity to the game then I am willing to deal with.

<u>Match-ups</u>

I've decided to pair player's based on the an order of readiness. The point of this is to reduce the lag time between rounds up until the very late rounds which should be full of our most devoted and invested players. The system also has the quirk of semi-randomizing rounds. (Call it a feature.)

It may have the side effect of pairing the highly popular nations against popular ones and the less popular nations against the other less popular ones, for the initial round at least. I consider this a nice balancing feature. In later rounds the pairing will ideally pit the quick winners against each other. This will likely also diminish the number of rush nations after the second round. Another neat little feature.

This is of course all my hopes within an ideal outcome. The only way to see if works is to practice it. All in all, I think its obvious benefits out ways its obvious flaws and fits the with the amount of focus and time I want to put toward such a game.

<u>The Game Settings</u>

The settings are configured to match the default setting of a middle-age game, with some variations. The middle-age is the intermediary age and isn't too radical for early-age and late-age nations to cope with.

Graphs are on so that game organizers can have some means to monitor the progress of games as it proceeds. It will help an intermediary decide on a victor should a game hold up the entire tournament.

The Hall of Fame is set to 5 as it is only a two player game. 10 would just be excessive.

Research is set to easy as it will help balance the game away from rush tactics. Normally the presence of other players will keep rush nations in check. Yet in a 1-on-1 duel, that check goes away. I wouldn't want the tournament to be reduced to who has the better rush tactic/nation.

Standard victory because its a duel after all and matches shouldn't be that long. So the games will all be to the death (or concession). Plus, it seems to be what many player's prefer so far.

Renaming is on due to popular demand.

CBM 1.6 seems to be the standard of today. Last I knew, QM was the most devoted person at making Dominions 3 a balanced multiplayer game. This devotion goes well above those of the developers, who have many other things to worry about. Therefore I will use his mod for this tournament.


<b>Confirmed Players List</b>

01. Frozen Lama . . . . . . 02. Alpine Joe
03. Baalz . . . . . . . . . 04. WraithLord
05. WingedDog . . . . . . . 06. Nihil
07. Cidi. . . . . . . . . . 08. Meglobob
09. Psycho. . . . . . . . . 10. Stretch
11. Ink . . . . . . . . . . 12. chrispedersen
13. Trom. . . . . . . . . . 14. LDiCesare
15. Squirrelloid. . . . . . 16. llamabeast
17. yandav. . . . . . . . . 18. Bananadine
19. Belac . . . . . . . . . 20. Raiel
21. Aethyr. . . . . . . . . 22. thunderbird
23. KIM . . . . . . . . . . 24. slMagnvox
25. Jarkko. . . . . . . . . 26. Apsophos
27. AdmiralZhao . . . . . . 28. Lingchih
29. Swan. . . . . . . . . . 30. Stagger Lee
31. ghoul31 . . . . . . . . 32. Graeme Dice
33. zlefin. . . . . . . . . 34. Kheldron
35. Xanatos . . . . . . . . 36. shard
37. Sir_Dr_D. . . . . . . . 38. Hadrian_II
39. vfb . . . . . . . . . . 40.

Alternates
01. sansanjuan

[Tollund]

Renaming is off cause I don't foresee many micromanagement issues to arise in a small game.

I will never play in any game that has renaming off, as I refuse to have to check every single mage every time I want to forge or cast something or when I'm scripting spells.

[Frozen Lama]

intrest stated. i assume opponents will be chosen randomly

[rdonj]

2. Anyone who picks a nation nobody else has picked automatically wins that nation and can add it to their list of nations. Any duplicate picks will be settled with a random die roll of 0 to 99, with the player closest to the roll winning that nation.

What if the players pick the same number? I suggest adding a +drn -drn roll onto the numbers given in case this happens :D

[AreaOfEffect]

I will never play in any game that has renaming off, as I refuse to have to check every single mage every time I want to forge or cast something or when I'm scripting spells.

This isn't really the place for me to express this, but players out there really need to be informed about the 'F1' function. Press the damn button and view all of your mages' paths at once. Stop telling the opposition what paths your bringing into battle before the battle starts. [Self censored comments.]

Frozen Lama, thanks for playing. The pairings were going to be in the order people sign on. I could randomize it, but either way some people won't be happy. At least by letting the order be determined by when you signed up, you get some semblance of control, rather then it being pure chance.

rdonj, I planned on rolling an additional roll in situations that led to a tie. Choosing the same number would apply in those circumstances. I will consider the dominions DNR rule.

[Tollund]

[This isn't really the place for me to express this, but players out there really need to be informed about the 'F1' function.

It's incredibly inconvenient, and forces you to switch between modal screens. It's hardly a replacement for renaming, which is only the easiest way to deal with the UI's lack of refinement.

Press the damn button and view all of your mages paths at once. Stop telling the opposition what paths your bringing into battle before the battle starts. [I][Self censored comments.]

Oh come on. It's trivial to take a look at each mage once you're in battle, and it might give information to your opponent on two or three of your commanders at most.

[Alpine Joe]

I am interested

[vfb]

[This isn't really the place for me to express this, but players out there really need to be informed about the 'F1' function.

It's incredibly inconvenient, and forces you to switch between modal screens. It's hardly a replacement for renaming, which is only the easiest way to deal with the UI's lack of refinement.

Press the damn button and view all of your mages paths at once. Stop telling the opposition what paths your bringing into battle before the battle starts. [I][Self censored comments.]

Oh come on. It's trivial to take a look at each mage once you're in battle, and it might give information to your opponent on two or three of your commanders at most.

You just have to get into the habit of renaming your most experienced indy commander "D7BoneGrind" or "S9MasterEnslave". Yay! Your foes will flee in terror, frightened by your awesome name.

[Baalz]

I'll play.

[WingedDog]

Victory By Provinces (70%)

As far as I understand, a duel map has 30-40 provinces, so 70% of territory is 21 - 28 provinces, which is not that big advantage and could be siply gained via mass cloud trapezed thugs in one turn.


It is extremely unlikely that a player owning 70% of the map can be defeated.


It happends and pretty often.

It's a small map, why don't just fight to the death.

Another important game condition is missed:
Is it a blitz or PbEM?

[vfb]

Shameless self-promotion of my Duel map (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=43645).

[Baalz]

Yeah, I agree with WingedDog, play until somebody concedes...or dies. With a 1 on 1 match there's no obligation to keep playing once the end is clear.

[WraithLord]

I agree and would like to join.
However I want to clear one thing: this is not planned to be a blitz, right?- so for example, if I had a busy day at work and need extra time that would be ok, yes?

( Archae, you can join this if you like :) )

[AreaOfEffect]

Since it seems most want a full blood match, I suppose I won't deny people that. The settings will be changed to the standard.

Changes will be noted in the original post soon.

My hope is to use a PbEM. Which in turn would make it alright by me if an individual match was delayed, provided the delays were not excessive enough to hold back the tournament itself.

[WingedDog]

I'd like to participate, but it depends on my free time in the middle of January.

[Nihil]

I would also like to participate, please count me in :D

[Cidi]

I join
Thanks

[Meglobob]

I'll play.:)

[Psycho]

What is the timing for the games? (sorry if that's posted and I missed it)

[AreaOfEffect]

Psycho, haven't worked out the timing yet. I would assume the turns won't go above 48 hours without some exception. I would like to keep as many turns as possible at 24 hour limit.

[Psycho]

I'll play. I'm just worried that January may turn out to be extremely busy for me. Will you be playing?

[AreaOfEffect]

I've written to llamabeast and I've confirmed that we have every right to play the tournament on his beloved server. I'll update to original post to indicate this.

I've considered playing. If I do, then my number pick will be -100 to ensure I lose all toss-up nations. Its the only to avoid issues with me rolling the random digits.

[Stretch]

Assuming PBEM, I'm in. I've only got 3 full MP games and 4-5 subs under my belt, but will give this my best.

What do we do when someone decides to start staling/drops out?

I vote for graphs off. They give too much insight into what an opponent's doing, and we don't have to worry about someone growing out of control against lazy neighbors like we would in a big MP game.

[AreaOfEffect]

Glad to have you join us Stretch.

The original post already accounts for stales and drop outs. We'll hopefully have a pool of replacement players.

The original post also discusses why its very important for graphs to be on for these games. The decision wasn't arbitrary.

[Ink]

count me in.

also, how do you do the monospace font like that in the OP?

[chrispedersen]

Interested.

[Stretch]

Ahhh, so it is. I got more interested in the selection mechanics and forgot to reread the OP when I was done. Thanks.

[Trom]

Hello,

May I play?

Trom
Ç:-)

[LDiCesare]

Expressing interest with a caveat: I won't play against a water nation.
Also, I fon't get your method of choosing a number between 0 and 99. Unless you consider 0 to be closer to 99 than to 98 (i.e. numbers wrap), then 50 has the highest probability of being closer to any random number, and picking anything but 49 or 50 is a losign strategy.

[WraithLord]

Please make it 48h for hosting schedule. 24h can be rather stressing. On a small map there's no real MM of any sort but since it's a tournament turns will require extra deliberation :)

[Squirrelloid]

Also, I fon't get your method of choosing a number between 0 and 99. Unless you consider 0 to be closer to 99 than to 98 (i.e. numbers wrap), then 50 has the highest probability of being closer to any random number, and picking anything but 49 or 50 is a losign strategy.

Not strictly true - if more than 2 players need to compete, the player choosing 50 is likely to get sandwiched between 49 and 51, and thus be virtually guaranteed to not get it.

Honestly, the nation should just be randomly assigned so there isn't some crazy game theory based on n-person number picking where n is a variable going on. (My guess is 40 or 60 is optimal with 3 people, 35 or 75 with 4 people, etc... - but at some point choosing centrally becomes a winning strategy if everyone follows the above strategy, or if everyone else unluckily picks the same side of 50).

Oh, expressing interest.

[llamabeast]

I wonder if it would be a good idea to exclude water nations? Well actually, I think it would. Land v water is no fun at all.

I'm tentatively interested, but I'd rather not commit for certain quite yet as I may have a very busy January.

I assume this will last quite a few months in total? Sounds pretty fun actually, because the time commitment in a 2-player game should never get too heavy.

[sansanjuan]

Alas, mid-Jan is probably too soon for me to start another game. However, I wanted to post so you'd know there is interest in this mega-duel format beyond those who have signed up.
-ssj

[yandav]

Count me in.

[Bananadine]

It's probably too soon for me to start another game, but sign me up anyway. This idea is too cool. :)

[Belac]

I am in. I figure to be eliminated quickly enough that it won't be too much of a timesink.

[Raiel]

I'm in.

I noticed quite a few players mentioning time constraints related to January and ongoing games. Perhaps it would be worth postponing the start to the end of the month or the beginning of Feb. Just an observation - it should all work for me.

[AreaOfEffect]

Ink, first make sure your click on the "Go Advanced" button when making a reply to a thread. Then select the text you want in monotext. Use the 'Fonts' drop down menu and select a monotext font. I'm currently using Courier New. Alternatively, you could just wrap the text with FONT tags if you know how to use them.

LDiCesare and Llamabeast, I agree that water nations can be difficult to tackle. However, it comes down to numbers. As I see it, there are 62 land nations and 7 water nations in total. If we end up with 64 players, then we'll need the full set. I'll agree to a all land duel if we don't reach that mark though.

LDiCesare and Squirrelloid, a wrap around would solve the issues with probability. 0 will equal 100 and 99 will be closer to 2 then 7. As for why, I'm the sort of person who likes a semblance of control over randomness, even if its just an illusion. Besides, its more fun this way.

Wrathlord, a static 48 is fine. Quickhost will of course be active.

sansanjuan, If you would like, I could place you down as an alternate. Perhaps you can step in for someone post-mid-January.

[Baalz]

48 hours is fine because who the hell wants to bend their life around Dominions, but I did want to make sure people do try to keep things moving along as the tournament is going to move at the pace of the slowest player. With 2 players people should really aim to knock out several turns per day for the first several turns...if people really take 2 days per turn then this tournament is going to take 2+ years. It might be good to define a time limit in days, and an official way to determine the winner at that mark so that everyone isn't waiting an excessive time for one or two games.

[Aethyr]

I'm in.

[AreaOfEffect]

We'll make a point of keeping an eye on which games are behind. With graphs on, outsiders will be able to see if a game is close to victory. I'll have to thank Llamabeast for that recent feature. Its true, under the worse circumstances the tournament may go on for over a year. Hopefully people won't drag things out and treat it more like a blitz with emails.

I just want everyone who signs up to understand that this game will require the same commitment that normal mega-games would require.

[Fantomen]

I'm interested.

[sansanjuan]

Ink, first make sure your click on the "Go Advanced" button when making a reply to a thread. Then select the text you want in monotext. Use the 'Fonts' drop down menu and select a monotext font. I'm currently using Courier New. Alternatively, you could just wrap the text with FONT tags if you know how to use them.

LDiCesare and Llamabeast, I agree that water nations can be difficult to tackle. However, it comes down to numbers. As I see it, there are 62 land nations and 7 water nations in total. If we end up with 64 players, then we'll need the full set. I'll agree to a all land duel if we don't reach that mark though.

LDiCesare and Squirrelloid, a wrap around would solve the issues with probability. 0 will equal 100 and 99 will be closer to 2 then 7. As for why, I'm the sort of person who likes a semblance of control over randomness, even if its just an illusion. Besides, its more fun this way.

Wrathlord, a static 48 is fine. Quickhost will of course be active.

sansanjuan, If you would like, I could place you down as an alternate. Perhaps you can step in for someone post-mid-January.


An Alternate sounds fine. Thanks.
-ssj

[thunderbird]

I would like to play as well. Thanks......

[KIM]

I´m in

[slMagnvox]

This sounds very fun. I would like to join.

[Jarkko]

Please do sign me along :)

[slMagnvox]

AreaOfEffect, I assume pretender design, and in later rounds nation selection, will take place before knowing the nation you will be facing in the duel? If nations will be announced prior to pretender design, in later rounds who will announce their nation selection first?

[AreaOfEffect]

slMagnvox, I hadn't got that far in the explanation, but I have a plan.

The plan is to have players submit their choices via PM to me. The picks would then be announced so that the players can adjust their pretenders accordingly. If we end up playing with water nations, I would have to have players confirm what nations they are playing before I set up their game page anyhow.

[Stretch]

If we get 32 players total, why not give both groups of 16 players access to the same nations? By the time we're at the final match, both players will have amassed quite a list of nations. At that point, if they both pick the same nation and send it to you then you will announce that they picked the same nation and that it is no longer an option, and to re-pick nations from the remaining nations available to them. Simple enough and allows us to avoid getting stuck with too many of the crappier nations.

[Apsophos]

I doubt I will be much opposition, but I'd like to play nonetheless.

[AdmiralZhao]

I'd like to sign up too. Does this mean I get to fight Apsophos first? :)

[Lingchih]

It seems like this is the alternate answer to the Megagame. Well, I played all the megagames, so I'll play this one as well.

[Ink]

I'd like to sign up too. Does this mean I get to fight Apsophos first? :)

maybe we should randomize the initial line-up order, so as to prevent meta-strategizing of signing up just after a player one feels confident about beating (not suggesting anything about Apsophos which he [or she] didn't already state of him [or her] self).

[Squirrelloid]

If the goal is to determine a winner tournament style, perhaps we should pre-seed based on people's perceptions of other players. This does tend to lead to the perception that you are a good player causing you to last longer (because you experience weaker opposition early on), but it also increases the likelihood of interesting late games (few weak players survive due to match-up luck, strong players are unlikely to meet early), and upsets can be startling and unpredictable.

[LDiCesare]

I'd favor randomly choosing who meets who if one wants to change the proposed meeting order.
I am against putting (perceived) strong players against (percevied) weak players.

[Swan]

1)in you first post you writed twice 25
2) it's my first mp games but you have to start somewhere, don't you? so count me in.
3)It's a PBEM, right?
4)what map is TBA?

[Stagger Lee]

1)in you first post you writed twice 25
2) it's my first mp games but you have to start somewhere, don't you? so count me in.

He's right. Jarkko should be 26.

I'd like to play. If I've counted right, Swan should be in the previous pairing. Without judging his ability, I don't think I should play another new player in the first round. Later rounds would be unbalanced.

[Jarkko]

what map is TBA?
To Be Announced, ie the map is not decided yet :)

[chrispedersen]

How about all even players play nation x, all odd players play nation y.

Nations x and y could be chosen each round.
Or alternately odd players could chose from x andy and even players could chose map a or b.

[AreaOfEffect]

AdmiralZhao, under the normal rules, that would be true provided that an odd number of people who signed up before you didn't withdraw from the game.


Swan & Stagger Lee, thanks. Though it seems I caught that mistake just before I saw your posts.


Jarkko, thanks for answering Swans question.


Ink & Squirrelloid & chrispedersen, I'm a big fan of "Keep it Simple". I understand your concerns that someone might try to manipulate the odds. I also understand that a seeding would in theory make things more interesting. However, the process of seeding players has to be extremely simple and lacking subjectivity or else it will make players unhappy.

So far I would only be in favor of a complete randomization or perhaps a seeding based on your join date at the forums. The problem is really just too complicated for people not to object to it in some way. If you want a reference as to how hard it would be to rank players without a strong objection, I would like to refer you to the thread about who here is a vet (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=43965).


Everyone, happy New Year.

[Squirrelloid]

So, I meant something like 'ask everyone for an ordered list of players from most to least experienced/skilled'. Of course, someone could just submit a randomly ordered list or whatever if they wanted to. Sum ranks for each player, order players by summed rank (break ties randomly), fold for pairings. (1 plays 32, 2 plays 31, etc...).

Its 'objective' in the sense that no one person's subjective ideas distort the list, and once you have every person's list there is a definitive final ranking.

[Alpine Joe]

That sounds extremely complicated, and could insure the tournament never gets off the ground. I would prefer a slightly more imbalanced first round to all that hassle.

[AreaOfEffect]

The complexity of a machine can be measured by the number of moving parts. In the case of human social events, increasing the number of people involved and their involvement increases the complexity of the social activity. In that respect, people are like moving parts of a machine. Increasing the number of moving parts always increases the chance for the system to break down.

Squirrelloid, your plan calls for an increased workload for all players involved in a mega-game. If this was a small game, your plan would go more smoothly. It is also best if such ambitious rules be clarified before people sign up for the game. My experience in setting up games tells me that its hard to expect players to keep up with rule changes. Rule changes that require the player's participation are therefore the worse.

[ghoul31]

I am interested

[Squirrelloid]

if we keep the current pairings and ordering, and collapse the pairings treelike, i predict a lingchih vs. [baalz, wraithlord] final matchup, where [b,w] is the winner of that match.

The upper-half bracket looks a lot rougher, starting with baalz and wraithlord facing off in round 1 (ouch!), and continuing with a number of pretty decent players, so i'd be more likely to bet on an upset in the upper bracket than the lower bracket.

Of course, I'm extrapolating based on observed MP-skill, which might not translate as well to duels.

Edit: I also predict Ling's first pick will be Nieflheim

[Graeme Dice]

I'll play, though I'd like to be able to rename to keep turn time to a minimum.

[Lingchih]

if we keep the current pairings and ordering, and collapse the pairings treelike, i predict a lingchih vs. [baalz, wraithlord] final matchup, where [b,w] is the winner of that match.

The upper-half bracket looks a lot rougher, starting with baalz and wraithlord facing off in round 1 (ouch!), and continuing with a number of pretty decent players, so i'd be more likely to bet on an upset in the upper bracket than the lower bracket.

Of course, I'm extrapolating based on observed MP-skill, which might not translate as well to duels.

Edit: I also predict Ling's first pick will be Nieflheim

You underestimate me Squirrel. I can beat either Baalz or Wraithlord, though it is nice to see them fighting each other in one of the first matches.

[Meglobob]

Lets just stick to the rules in the OP, this is the first tourny of its type and AreaofEffects rules/setup seem pretty good to me.

Would Nieflheim be a good nation choice? Chances are several others will pick it and your chance of getting the nation may be 1 in 4 or higher, then you will have missed out on the 1st round picks. Same with Ashdod, another obvious nation choice.

Also, those are essentially, 'blitzs' completely different from the usual type of game on this forum, so I think the chances of a surprise winner are considerably increased. Essentially, compare it with snooker, over 19 frames the best/classiest player wins 90% of the time over just 5 frames it goes alot closer to 50-50.

I would for example having played vs both Baalz and Wraithlord suspect Baalz will be alot better at a blitz then a, 'normal' game. Wraithlord's strongest attribute, diplomacy (he really does have the ability to bend other people to his will, I suspect mind control:D) is completely useless in this game format.

[Lingchih]

I second that sentiment Meglo. The OP rules sound fine to me. And yes, of course I would pick Nief, if I thought I had a good chance of getting them. Otherwise, well... I might have to be more creative.

[WraithLord]

What? I'm faced with Baalz on first round? Maybe I'll try to "bend him to my will" so he'll drop at the last round (and use bribe if required) ;)
Damn but one of us will get no learning curve in this tourny.

Since this is prone to be an interesting match I consider posting the major battle videos to my you tube channel (and maybe charge for commercials :) ).
AoE, Baalz, is that ok by you?
(Anyone's familiar with a freeware windows video capture application?)

I agree that the rules should be kept simple and immutable. Simple and straightforward will help ensure that the tourny runs smoothly.

[rdonj]

Hah, I would certainly be interested in seeing some of those battles. I think putting them on youtube is an excellent idea. In fact I encourage everyone who participates in this tourney to do so, and especially for exciting matchups such as WL vs Baalz.

You could try fraps. I never tried it, but it is my impression it's semi-popular. You can only record a certain length of time uninterrupted though without buying the full version, but if you had video editing software I imagine it wouldn't be too difficult to combine several smaller videos into one larger one should the need arise.

[Jarkko]

Lets just stick to the rules in the OP, this is the first tourny of its type and AreaofEffects rules/setup seem pretty good to me.


I agree, although I would ask him to consider the renaming rule one more time :) Even with 10 similar commanders it will take a while to find that one special one, and if I'd have to repeat that every turn, frustration would be the end result, when normally I'd just rename him and wouldn't have to go through the hassle.

[AreaOfEffect]

WraithLord, its alright with me if its alright with your opponents. I think it would be great to transmit the battles over the interwebs for others to see.

Jarkko, I'll reconsider the renaming rule.

[Psycho]

I support renaming on.

[LDiCesare]

(Anyone's familiar with a freeware windows video capture application?)
The only one I'm familiar with is Camtasia, which offers a 30 day free trial. That might be long enough for a blitz. There are others, like CamStudio or uvnc. Look for screencasting in wikipedia for a more extrensive list.
I'd try uvnc if I had to use one, because it is purportedly fast, while camtasia is indeed quite slow.

[Baalz]

Yeah WL, no objection at all to recording stuff, that sounds like fun. Given the level of interest maybe I'll line up some sponsors. ;) I do tend to agree with Meglobob that this format tends to highlight my strengths as a player while minimizing my weaknesses (end game micro). Not that I particularly expect to win, certainly no shame to losing to Wraithord round one and might be fun to do some losers bracket duels for those that do get knocked out early and are still interested in playing.

[Squirrelloid]

if we keep the current pairings and ordering, and collapse the pairings treelike, i predict a lingchih vs. [baalz, wraithlord] final matchup, where [b,w] is the winner of that match.

The upper-half bracket looks a lot rougher, starting with baalz and wraithlord facing off in round 1 (ouch!), and continuing with a number of pretty decent players, so i'd be more likely to bet on an upset in the upper bracket than the lower bracket.

Of course, I'm extrapolating based on observed MP-skill, which might not translate as well to duels.

Edit: I also predict Ling's first pick will be Nieflheim

You underestimate me Squirrel. I can beat either Baalz or Wraithlord, though it is nice to see them fighting each other in one of the first matches.

Sorry, that wasn't what i meant by that. I meant [baalz, wraithlord] is one of Baalz or Wraithlord depending on who wins their matchup. I wasn't making a prediction as to the ultimate winner of the tournament, just a prediction as to the match pairings.

[Bananadine]

I don't know a lot about screen capture but I've been using CamStudio lately for a project, and I can vouch for its goodness (for simple work at least) and freeness. I just tried it on a Dominions 3 battle and it worked acceptably well.

Here's how I record videos:

Capture the basic video into a giant, weakly compressed file with CamStudio, which has been configured to use the lossless CamStudio codec. (I think you have to download this codec separately.)

Use SUPER (http://www.erightsoft.com/SUPER.html, also free) to convert that into a much smaller, better-compressed file that uses some awesome lossy format like H.264. (There are probably a lot of free conversion tools; SUPER is the first acceptably good one I was able to find.)

[WraithLord]

Yeah, I also tend to agree with MB. According to my one game only experience playing with you (Artifacts) I think that one of your major strengths is super optimal openings. Then add to that the pure awesomness of being probably the topmost dominions strategy expert. And last, I have 0 blitz experience and my skill set is probably heavily based on regular dominions MP - So yeah, I think you have an advantage here :)
That said, I'm certain that it would indeed be very interesting to see how this plays out.
Naturaly, the final outcome will probably also be effected by (in game) luck and our nation picks (some nations have rock, scisor, paper relations).
Also, whether or not the nations we've picked be public knowledge will make a big difference.

AoE, Baalz, Thanks for your approval for posting video captures.

LDiCesare, thanks for the tip. I D/Led camstudio and already captured my first battle. It's making it way slowly to my you tube channel :)

[Zeldor]

Hmm... why do you want to go with different nations anyway? It'd be more fair to use same nation. X vs X, ex. Ashdod vs Ashdod. Nation for each round could be random. It's quite easy to clone nation with a mod afaik.

Also - why eliminate defeated players? Let's do it like in normal tournaments in other games [I think MtG uses that] - first round can be random. Next round people with 1 victory play against random opponent with 1 victory, those with 0 play against 0. Repeat every round, winner is the one with highest score at the end. You can always use that as preliminary sorting [3-4 rounds?] and play elimination ladder later to determine winner.

[WraithLord]

AoE, when will we know our final nation assignment?- Would it be private or public knowledge (until first round at least)?

And hey, why only Baalz, Lingchih and me get mentioned? What about MB, Psycho, WingedDog and chridpedersen?- Should be some hype to go along with these names as well :)

AoE, do you think it would be interesting to make a vote on who ppl think be the winners and at the end compare it to real results?- It will also help hype the tourney.

[WraithLord]

Hmm... why do you want to go with different nations anyway? It'd be more fair to use same nation. X vs X, ex. Ashdod vs Ashdod. Nation for each round could be random. It's quite easy to clone nation with a mod afaik.

It's more fair? but is it more fun?- Is it more interesting?

Currently, This is kinda like the free all style fights, you know, like UFC and MMA. It helps answer not whose the best player neto but who is most deadly when wielding nation X. There's close corelation between the two but they're not neccerily the same answer.

[Squirrelloid]

AoE, when will we know our final nation assignment?- Would it be private or public knowledge (until first round at least)?

And hey, why only Baalz, Lingchih and me get mentioned? What about MB, Psycho, WingedDog and chridpedersen?- Should be some hype to go along with these names as well :)

I did say the upper bracket was rougher, and that list of names mostly explains why i thought that.

If people were really that interested I could post my predictions for all round outcomes based on current arrangement, and my estimated likelihood of the predicted result.

[Aethyr]

Ha! Squirrelloid's odds eh? :)

[Trumanator]

Can you act as a bookie too?

:D

[Meglobob]

Zeldor everyone having the same nations would be completely fair but extremely boring.

The round robin? I think its called, tourney type would be good but of course it adds alot of complication for AreaofEffect which I think he is trying to avoid. Probably the reason something like this never been done before is because its very complicated to organise all the way from start to finish.

How about, seeing its a knockout tournement calling it Dominions, the World Championship or Cup? Inspired by the football world cup to be played in South Africa this year and which as a similar format.

[Apsophos]

It's not round robin, it's the Swiss system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_system

It has the same amount of rounds as a knock-out tournament, can have any number of players (not just powers of two) but requires more bookkeeping.
I would prefer not eliminating losers but I'll play anyway.

[Ink]

I don't see your system for setting-up pairing beyond the first round. Do you plan to collapse the list of remaining players after each round (keeping the relative ordering) and then simply matching up just like you do now? (1 vs 2, 3 vs 4, etc).

Also, may I suggest Challonge (http://challonge.com/tournament/bracket_generator) for generating the bracket. It can also randomize seeds, so we don't have the sign-up order issue some are complaining about (frequent players tend to be frequent posters and were the first to sign up, making the bracket top-heavy, talent-wise.)

[Lingchih]

Snapz Pro X is a great movie screen cap app, if you are on a Mac.

http://www.ambrosiasw.com/utilities/snapzprox/

The free demo even works quite nicely.

[Ink]

...Then add to that the pure awesomness of being probably the most enthusiastic dominions strategy guide writer...

Fixed

[Swan]

i didn't get a thing about nations choice: you said "nation from any ages", does that means we will use single age mod? or we will fight people who choose the same ages?
and are all nations available?

[Jarkko]

i didn't get a thing about nations choice: you said "nation from any ages", does that means we will use single age mod? or we will fight people who choose the same ages?
and are all nations available?
As each player will have a unique nation, and the pairing is done in the order of reporting in, it is pretty safe to assume a single age mod is going to be used :)

Certain nations will be more desirable than others, which is why I presume the first post goes in such detail on what to do if several people choose the same nation. The most wanted candidates for blitz nations would (I believe) be the various giant nations, or nations being good at zapping giants (because it is likely you will meet giants).

The thing with nation selection, or so I like to tell myself, in this sort of game is "Will I try to get one of the really truly great blitz nations in the pre-game lottery, or will I go for one of the less obvious ones who I might be practically guaranteed to get?". It all depends on how many players there are along. If there will be 64 players, then it might be good to aim for one of the less obvious nations, so that those who do not win in the pre-game lottery one of the supernations, they will be forced to pick one of the crappier ones (and your chance to meet such a crappier nation is higher then!). If there are just 34 nations, then it might be worthwhile to risk it, and try to get the jack-pot (one of supernations) in the pregame lottery (how many will pick Ashdod for the lottery, how about Niefelheim or Vanheim? Choose wisely, and you might be the only one trying to get one of the supers!).

Then there is the knowledge of other players. Like in my case, I like Pangaea over everything else; slMagnvox (my apparent opponent for the first round) might take this into consideration, and choose a nation that is particulary good vs Pangaea. Of course, I might think that slMagnvox presumes me to take Pangaea, and thus I would try to metagame that and choose something that would be great against something which would be great against Pangea (if you follow my thoughts there, my thoughts go in paths which make the behaviour of a lobotomised rat in a maze look pretty logical in comparison).

[zlefin]

i'm in. me join! should be a fun tourney.
It is quite a challenge deciding which nation to go for when we get to that point. I know which nation is my top choice for pwnage, but the question of whether or not to take it remains. Also, do I want to win a tourney cause I got the nation I deem strongest for the format? Or it would it be better to challenge myself with a weaker nation? Oh the challenges.
Zlefin :)

[Baalz]

I've been thinking about the maps for this tournament. It seems like it would be desirable to have just one map, otherwise you run into the question with several nations of which map to use. Several of the nations are strongly amphibious so I can see some nations/players being unfairly handicapped by the lack of water/land because of the nominal designation of their nation. Seems like for optimal strategic fun even non amphibious land nations should potentially have water conquest to contemplate. Conversely, in keeping with the feel of a normal game aquatic nations should be likely forced to contemplate land conquests.

A map like Sha Bay seems like it would fit this bill. It is maybe a bit big for two people, (68 land + 12 sea) but otherwise I think it's a pretty good fit. Enough water to make a water entry worthwhile, but not (generally) required. Enough water to give a water nation a little breathing room with some strong incentive to not sit around in the drink indefinitely, with some relatively protected island land provinces to keep them from being really shut out of the land. In the event of a aquatic/aquatic matchup this would be a bit cramped and probably suboptimal, but there's a good chance that matchup may not even happen so it may be a better idea to let that be maybe an interesting dynamic if it does happen.

And while it's a bit larger than we would probably aim I don't think it's prohibitively large. Having 40 provinces per player is a problem for larger games because the leaders end up having 200+ large empires by the time they've finished their first conquest or two. Seeing as how I don't see how you could make it to having more than 60 provinces without having won I don't think it's too prohibitive. Particularly as in a lot of cases the water is just going to be ignored (including the 8 island provinces) and there are going to be plenty of unconquered indies because people go right for the throat in a duel rather than forming NAPs, etc.

[slMagnvox]

Shameless self-promotion of my Duel map (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=43645).

I played around with your map vfb and found it quite enjoyable.

Anyone else have strong feelings about a particular 1v1 map? Wanted to play a duel or two with friends in the lead up to this tourney and would love another map recommendation or two so we can try out more than one.

Visually my favorite maps are in the Cradle of Dominions or Silent Seas style and I count visuals being rather important when picking a map to play. I also am fond of Pashadawg's work.

Would there be any argument for a small wrap-around? I am thinking in 1v1 a more East vs West arrangement is favorable but maybe I am overlooking something.

EDIT: Guess I wasn't the only one thinking about maps this afternoon!

[Frozen Lama]

Sha Bay is a nice map, but i feel like its a little too big. maybe 40 provs total. most blitzes i've been in had 15 or less. didn't vfb make a duel map?

[Baalz]

Well, it's a matter of opinion I guess, but 15 provinces per player is pretty cramped for 1 on 1 which tilts the game towards very early fighting. You're probably going to encounter each other (and start fighting) early year one which makes the only viable strategies rush strats. Duels I play on generally have 40-50 provinces total, and as I mention they are usually decided before all the indies are conquered. With heavy fighting guaranteed inside year one its going to be all but impossible for many nations to face something like triple blessed Neifelheim. Giving just the few more turns it'll take to close on a larger map makes a lot more interested strategies viable IMO. The dynamic for duels is different, its not been my experience that 50 provinces mean 2 nations of 25 provinces duking it out, its more like one guy with 12 provinces and another with 20 maneuvering about with a bunch of unconquered indies that nobody has the time to get now.

[Kheldron]

I'm interested.

[slMagnvox]

Well, it's a matter of opinion I guess, but 15 provinces per player is pretty cramped for 1 on 1 which tilts the game towards very early fighting. <<<snip>>>

+1. More room to maneuver is good.

[Frozen Lama]

part of it is that when i played in the maptest game ShaBay2, it was with 5 players (one water nation) and it worked fine. using the same map for 2 seems like a lot. i'd vote for vfb's map.

[Aethyr]

I agree with Baalz, having a smaller map will tilt things (a bit too much)in the direction of bless/rush tactics. I vote for Sha Bay.

[Alpine Joe]

Yeah I vote shabay

[Swan]

what about silent seas? 47 lands (2 isles), 15 seas

[chrispedersen]

68 is simply too large. This could easily turn into a 70+ turn game should one nation go fort building, which would push the conclusion of the tourney into 2070.

Additionally, with easy research this strongly tilts the game.

Smaller maps will tilt it toward rush nations - but thats ok - we all know it and can take whatever precautions we feel are necessary. However it also has the salutary benefit of making shorter games.

I'd look for a map of ~40 ish territories, max. I'd vote for vfb's or silent - and I do think there should be map choice involved so as to make the water nations viable.

[Frozen Lama]

I'd be willing to practice duel with some people on a couple maps to see if sha bay is to big, or if vfb's map or silent are too small. i'm willing to be convinced that i am wrong

[Baalz]

Yeah, Silent Seas might be better than Sha Bay and also covers what I had in mind. I do think it's kinda silly to be too worried about 70+ turn games. Obviously the outliers might be absurdly long if neither player takes the imitative, but that's the case regardless of map size. I just played a duel on Sha Bay (with 2 AI players, admittedly) and we were fighting in year one and the game decided by turn 20.

The thing is, in a duel you don't have to siege all the castles while your opponent stalls - pretty much whenever you're to the point that the only thing your opponent can hope for is to cause a lot of casualties going down the game is over. I've played dozens of duels and honestly can't think of a single one that even required a capital to be taken, just for it to be shown that it was all but inevitable that it could be.

In a duel there is nobody who is going to save you. There is no diplomacy. There is no point in playing 100% defensively. There is no point in actually fighting to the last man. When you can't mount an offense and don't foresee being able to the game should be called.

[Frozen Lama]

I agree with what baalz says about duels and such, and sha bay is great for 4 people. Silent seas works for me. and with 15 water, it might work for having a sea nation too

[chrispedersen]

Yeah, Silent Seas might be better than Sha Bay and also covers what I had in mind. I do think it's kinda silly to be too worried about 70+ turn games. Obviously the outliers might be absurdly long if neither player takes the imitative, but that's the case regardless of map size. I just played a duel on Sha Bay (with 2 AI players, admittedly) and we were fighting in year one and the game decided by turn 20.

The thing is, in a duel you don't have to siege all the castles while your opponent stalls - pretty much whenever you're to the point that the only thing your opponent can hope for is to cause a lot of casualties going down the game is over. I've played dozens of duels and honestly can't think of a single one that even required a capital to be taken, just for it to be shown that it was all but inevitable that it could be.

In a duel there is nobody who is going to save you. There is no diplomacy. There is no point in playing 100% defensively. There is no point in actually fighting to the last man. When you can't mount an offense and don't foresee being able to the game should be called.

Baalz, my points are actually rarely silly, regardless if you agree or disagree with them.

With 64 players its the outliers you have to worry about; and which are virtualy guaranteed to happen with this many players.
Additionally, with this number of players you are virtually assured of getting matchups some of which will feature two 'slow' nations.

This is why I favor restricted nation choices: You can guarantee you wont' have to have abysia fighting LA-Ryleh.

You are going to lose a lot of players due to attrition if you have 50 players waiting around for 14 nations to finish, so keeping the game length down is is important.

[Micah]

Why would you have 64 players waiting on 14? Just start the next round up for everyone that has an opponent, there's not really any need to keep the rounds synched up.

[Ink]

Baalz, my points are actually rarely silly, regardless if you agree or disagree with them.

BWHAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

....

*looks again*

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

:rofl:

[Aethyr]

If the choice is to go with a smaller map, I'v vote for vrb's (and retricting sea nations) over silent seas for the balanced locations/geography.

[Lingchih]

My vote is for Silent Seas. It's the most balanced land/sea map of the desired size, and, it's a very good map.

[Jarkko]

I too would like to vote for Silent Seas (the unwrapped one; because the wrapped map gives a too huge boost to nations who can sail).

[WraithLord]

Silent seas is ok but I think an all land map would be better suited for the tourney.

[Squirrelloid]

If we're using Silent Seas, can i request fixed starts? Because random starts can lead to *really* close placements on that map.

[WraithLord]

second that.

[Fantomen]

Pashas Dogfight map is nice I think.

[LDiCesare]

I'd rather have an all land map of about 40 provinces.

[Baalz]

Silent seas is ok but I think an all land map would be better suited for the tourney.

I'm curious why you feel that was as I feel the opposite. No water reduces strategic options and removes one of the native advantages of several nations skewing the power even more towards those nations with first rate straightforward ground troop - Neifelheim, Mictlan, Lanka, etc. Having water is going to give a bit to Agartha, Atlantis, Patala, Marignon, etc. who are generally much lower on the power curve, and with the ratios its not like you could win without also winning on the land. If the matchup is between two nations poorly suited to water it'll probably mostly be ignored, though any nation could consider the water when designing their pretender. It just seems like the presence of water would lend itself to richer strategies.

[chrispedersen]

I agree completely.

I really wish that each round the tourney god could say it will be between EA-Mictlan and LA-Mictlan, Sauromatia and Ctis.

Or give 3 nations choices for A, three for B.

Then whoever choses a or b, the opponent choses the map out of maps 1,2,3,4.

[Ink]

Pashas Dogfight map is nice I think.

Do you mean Dawgbiscuit? Or does pasha have another 'dawg' map I am unaware of?

[WraithLord]

Ultimately, It's just a feeling.

Clearly there's a fine balance between the two extremes of equalizing everything or allowing all the nations and varied terrain map. I'm not advocating for either of the extremes but I feel like all land is a compromise that can be made towards making the duals more robust while keeping enough options open.

One situation I'd want to avoid is for a water nation to turtle in the water while the land nation is unable to achieve victory condition.
Another is taking away from the power of LA Ermor who is already very strong as it is.
So yes, Agartha and Atlantis would suffer from that but who'll take them anyway?
As for LA Mari and Van I'm not so sure. Van probably has enough going for it that it can still be viable w/o sailing.

It is most likely that many lessons would be learned during this tournament so I don't mind either way. We will all know better after.

[Squirrelloid]

First of all, CBM 1.6 has made entering the water easier than ever.

Second of all, I support some small number of water provinces on the map even if we ban water nations. Some nations want coastal starts and won't follow fixed start placements unless they get them (eg, Fomoria, LA Atlantis). And water provinces can give the map more interesting shape than just land provinces everywhere.

[Swan]

i don't see why to turtle in a duel.
it may be my first MP fight but to me seems that you gain nothing to turtle, you already survived untill the last enemy and a duel is too quick for gem massing, especialy without gem generator; also your enemy will crush you sooner or later as he will have more lands.
plus, the game organizer can just say"you there, you are not playing, you are eliminated"

[chrispedersen]

If we get to 64, I still think we need more viable nations, that water allows.

I don't think anyone is going to argue that LA-R, MA-R, arent viable.

As for Atlantis, with water in the game, LA-Atlantis is a perfectly viable nation - one I like a lot.

[Swan]

La atlantis should be viable also in a land only map, underwater they just gain troops designeted to kill r'lyeh

[Fantomen]

Pashas Dogfight map is nice I think.

Do you mean Dawgbiscuit? Or does pasha have another 'dawg' map I am unaware of?

I mean this one: http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=44132

[Squirrelloid]

La atlantis should be viable also in a land only map, underwater they just gain troops designeted to kill r'lyeh

... and access to astral magic?

LA Atlantis without UW provinces would suck. Also, without a coastal province they won't follow fixed starts, which is problematic for a duel because you really want to have fixed starts.

[Ink]

Pashas Dogfight map is nice I think.

Do you mean Dawgbiscuit? Or does pasha have another 'dawg' map I am unaware of?

I mean this one: http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=44132

Awesome. Another great Pasha map I didn't know about.

[WraithLord]

ok, I guess a few UW provinces wouldn't hurt :)

I have a clarification question, just to make sure I got that right. The nations assignments are unique per all the players right?- Not per dual. I mean, if two players or more choose Niefel they'd have to roll the dice to see who gets it. right?

[Lingchih]

Pashas Dogfight map is nice I think.

Do you mean Dawgbiscuit? Or does pasha have another 'dawg' map I am unaware of?

I mean this one: http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=44132

That's a nice little duel map, that I had never seen before. It even has a little water. And the games would god a lot quicker than on Silent Seas, which is actually a fairly large map for this sort of thing.

[Ink]

so do y'all think we've got all we're going to get? or are we going to wait and see if one more joins for Graeme Dice?

[Kheldron]

I already stated my interest but my post seems to have been overlooked

[chrispedersen]

several have added since then I dont' think aoe has updated

[WraithLord]

I vote for Dogfight. Seems perfect for the job.

[Xanatos]

I am in! EA Nifleheim, LA Ermor, LA rlyeh, EA Helheim, or Random for my picks please, if random isnt an option, then EA Gath

[chrispedersen]

I am in! EA Nifleheim, LA Ermor, LA rlyeh, EA Helheim, or Random for my picks please, if random isnt an option, then EA Gath

Like the weak nations, do you?

[Belac]

I am in! EA Nifleheim, LA Ermor, LA rlyeh, EA Helheim, or Random for my picks please, if random isnt an option, then EA Gath



<u>Selecting Nations</u>

1. When it is announced that I am accepting nation picks, I will require that each player submit 1 nation and 1 number from 0 to 99 via PM to me, areaofeffect. Nations can be from any age. Mod nations will not be allowed.


Good luck choosing the right number.

[AdmiralZhao]

I'm not greedy, I will just take MA Ashdod.

Oh, and number 27.

[rdonj]

Shouldn't you guys be PMing your picks privately? If you go around telling people your numbers they don't help a whole lot.

Unless you are just fooling around in which case you may proceed to ignore me.

[Aethyr]

Huh? I thought that AoE wasn't accepting picks yet.

[Lingchih]

I think he accepting picks by PM. At least, that is how I intend to send mine.

[Kheldron]

I'd like to start thinking on it but it would be nice of AoE to confirm to those coming after the 32th that they CAN start thinking.
Are we alternate or will we play from the start?

[shard]

If you are still accepting I'd like to participate.


I think someone mentioned Swiss system for pairing matches? Its how they sort out pairings when I play in chess tournaments - I remember there was some simple program that did the pairings automatically after each round; I can try and look it up if AOE is interested.

[Squirrelloid]

Swiss system is only useful if we plan on not eliminating participants who lose.

People posting their picks in this thread are silly.

[Swan]

Why are people stating nation and number?

[vfb]

What's the count at now? 33? Or something higher?

[Ink]

AoE seems to be AWOL.

[Jarkko]

AoE seems to be AWOL.
Considering he mentions in the first post he plans to get the game running sometime mid-January, I wouldn't go to too deep conclusions quite yet. One would almost believe from AoE's post he won't be much around before mid-January, you know, as he spesifically mentions it :)

[Sir_Dr_D]

This sounds like a good idea. I would like to sign up as well. Though I realize the chances of myself getting in at this time are small.

[Fantomen]

Sadly, I think this will be too time consuming for me. I'll have to drop out.

[Hadrian_II]

I would love to play in this tournament, but i will be travelling for a month, but if the tournament would be delayed for 5 weeks :)

[AreaOfEffect]

Pardon for my absence everyone. The holiday season overflowed much more then I thought it would and my internet has been dodgy. Be prepared for a lengthy response to everything.

[vfb]

Ah, it's all the way up to 39 now!

If you're gonna hit 64, I'd better sign up. So, count me in please. :D

[AreaOfEffect]

*The list of player's has been updated.

*I've changed the game settings so that renaming in on.

*I've made a slight revision to the match-up (pairings) rules and explained how pairings for later rounds is handled.

*The reasoning section has been updated to reflect these changes.

Wraithlord, ideally I want to start rolling for nation picks real soon. The real question is, are we going to make the 64 player mark. In my opinion I don't think that's not going to happen. My goal will be to settle the map issue first. I'll put out a last call and see how many players we have after a map is found.

On the subject of making predictions, feel free to post whatever you think. Just be sure to note that its just your opinion. Truminator, as for being a bookie for bets, I'm sure your just joking. If your not, then start a new thread?

Meglobob, interesting comparison to the world cup. I just might use that for the game name.

Apsophos, I'm familiar with organizing "swiss" tourneys. I use to organize brackets for my college's speech and debate team when we hosted. It can be a lot of work, though not as much in this case since I wouldn't have the added complexity of assigning judges. Still, I'm not interested in that sort of tournament just yet. This is for the fun of it.

Ink, I've decided to pair people up based on their order of readiness. The first to games to be complete will determine the first two match-ups. This will hopefully lead to the least amount of down time for players. I swear I wrote this down before Micah pointed it out so obviously. The original post has been updated to reflect this decision.

As for the Maps discussion, I'm taking in all your input. However, I want view the maps myself before I settle on which ones to use. Unfortunately my "new" computer has major lag issues when playing dominions, which is rather odd. I need to switch to the other PC before I can navigate the game at a reasonable rate.

Wrathlord again, for your "clarification question", yes. They would need to roll for the nation. In relation to this topic, it isn't actually possible to mod some nations due to some unique features that some nations have, LA Ry'leh comes to mind. So having same-nation matches is not entirely possible. Also, making mods is beyond the scope of my interest.

Welcome to the game zlefin, Kheldron, slMagnvox, Xanatos, shard, Sir_Dr_D, and Hadrian_II. I know your anxious to know if your playing or simply made it time to be alternates. Honestly, unless more interest is drummed up in the next day or two, you may not get the chance to play in this game.

Fantomen, sorry you can't play. Good luck.

I'm keeping track of any picks people send me, but I'm not actually looking at them until I'm done with the maps. AdmiralZhao, your pick is noted, though I'll leave you the option to submit again via PM.

Edit: Welcome to the list vfb.

[AreaOfEffect]

* Added two more items to the checklist.

I could use additional administrators. There are likely to be issues with games at all times of the day I would like to find people who will check the game page regularly and respond. I want to make sure we have support for games 24/7. Please post if you want to volunteer.

[Aethyr]

I would be happy to assist with the admin duties as needed.

[Micah]

WRT the uneven bracket size, maybe you could assign first round byes to people, either based on HoF win status or just randomly or to the last people that sign up instead of excluding people?

[slMagnvox]

Welcome to the game zlefin, Kheldron, slMagnvox, Xanatos, shard, Sir_Dr_D, and Hadrian_II. I know your anxious to know if your playing or simply made it time to be alternates.

Hi AoE. You doubled me up again, I was already on the list.

EDIT: I thought I remembered lining up against Jarkko? Maybe?

23. KIM . . . . . . . . . . 24. slMagnvox
25. Jarkko. . . . . . . . . 26. Apsophos
27. AdmiralZhao . . . . . . 28. Lingchih
29. Swan. . . . . . . . . . 30. Stagger Lee
31. ghoul31 . . . . . . . . 32. Graeme Dice
33. zlefin. . . . . . . . . 34. Kheldron
35. slMagnvox . . . . . . . 36. Xanatos

[Belac]

WRT the uneven bracket size, maybe you could assign first round byes to people, either based on HoF win status or just randomly or to the last people that sign up instead of excluding people?

Better to have an even number of people, and assign second-round byes based on impressiveness of victory (speed, thoroughness, etc) in the first round.

[WraithLord]

If there would be a future tourney like this I suggest to make the pairing randomly and not according to order of sign up. For starters this is more interesting and secondly this will prevent possible misuse of the current pairing system (for example, no sane player signs up after Micah expresses interest :p )

[chrispedersen]

LOL.. In the intersts of protecting the sanity of players, AND to have micah have to wait until there asre 63 players to sign up, I'll offer to switch places with whoever gets micah in the draw.

[Micah]

Ha, given this pairing scheme you really think I'd sign up in an odd slot and have a mystery pairing instead of poaching a noob so I could get a better shot at scoring a viable nation before I run into a good player? =)

[WraithLord]

Ha, given this pairing scheme you really think I'd sign up in an odd slot and have a mystery pairing instead of poaching a noob ...
I could make that ultimate sacrifice for you and allow you to switch places with me vs. Baalz :D

[Squirrelloid]

The advantage of swiss-style is we'd only need an even number, not powers of 2. After say 3 preliminary rounds we could run a top 16 elimination bracket or somesuch.

[Micah]

Which has about a 25% chance of being a good game and a 75% chance of being a nation mismatch, which is why I'm not so enthused about this format and hence haven't signed up.

[chrispedersen]

Ha, given this pairing scheme you really think I'd sign up in an odd slot and have a mystery pairing instead of poaching a noob so I could get a better shot at scoring a viable nation before I run into a good player? =)

Why damn Micah
I thought as the preeminent Dominons player you'd be above such petty concerns as... placement.

[Micah]

As I said in my other post, I don't fancy being stuck into a match where the nation selection determines the outcome if the players are anywhere on par, and with purely random selection I think that will describe a lot of matchups.

I'd much rather play a duel format where one player chose two nations and the other player picked which one they'd prefer to play, or some other method that provided a relatively level playing field.

[chrispedersen]

Yeah, thats what I said. Its the standard reverse auction.

I pick two nations - you pick which one you want to play.
You pick two maps, I pick which one.

[WingedDog]

Yes, I find nation pick selection irrational too. Let's suppose AoE get's 64 PMs with selection of Niefelheim and a number of 50, what's next? Admining hell to sort out this mess.
Besides I don't like the idea of dueling nations from different ages as they differ much in power and initial gem income. It would be better (at least for me) to have a nation pick for every match and for the same age as Micah proposed. Let the players choose their nation for themselves and only notify the admin about it. Saves trouble for everyone.

[Ink]

well the selection method is only a problem for the first round. once everyone has two nations to select from, things get a lot more even.

OTOH: why can't this be a 'dueling' tourny? the point here is the skill of the players, not the relative merits of the nations. Perhaps the simplest possible setup is to have each pairup organize a duel, with maybe some rules in place on how the duel should be carried (how nations selected, what map(s) to use, etc).

the duel setup does seem to be what at least some of the hold-outs want, and I find it hard to imagine that anyone currently signed up would object.

[WraithLord]

As I said in my other post, I don't fancy being stuck into a match where the nation selection determines the outcome if the players are anywhere on par, and with purely random selection I think that will describe a lot of matchups.

I'd much rather play a duel format where one player chose two nations and the other player picked which one they'd prefer to play, or some other method that provided a relatively level playing field.

I second that suggestion. This way AoE won't really need to administer the nation assignments, so long as each pair of duelers can thus make it's choice of nations and report it back to AoE.

[Alpine Joe]

I agree with wraithlord and Micah. Lets avoid any possibility of unfair matchups.

[Bananadine]

Niefelheim Niefelheim Niefelheim! Y'all seem more interested in the nation-selection metagame than in the actual wars we are planning to fight here. Why not just assume, then, that everybody has indeed chosen Niefelheim as a rational person clearly must, let AreaOfEffect line up the tournament schedule, and have some of these veteran duellists here just simulate the fights for us. :)

[Aethyr]

Lets just stick to the rules in the OP, this is the first tourny of its type and AreaofEffects rules/setup seem pretty good to me.



I concur w/Meglobob.

[vfb]

I for one, will not be welcoming my Niefelheim overlords.

[Jarkko]

I think AoE's idea of the Mega-Dueling tourney is sound. The word "megaXXX" 'traditionally' in Dom lingo means something where many/most nations are in the game. I for one refuse to believe who ever gets Niefel will win the tournament. I just don't believe that the nation selection is where we can immediatly declare game over and announce the winner.

If somebody is not happy with the idea on Mega-Duelling tourney, perhaps they should set up a duel campaign of their own? I for one support AoE's idea.

[Belac]

Niefelheim would seem to be, for all its power, pretty counterable in a duel. Its weaknesses aren't exactly secret, and nations that can exploit them aren't exactly rare. I'm not saying it's not a good choice, just that choosing it's not worth the risk of not getting it and being stuck with a truly crappy nation. If 50 people choose Niefelheim, ~47 of them are making a bad choice.

[WingedDog]

The hell with Niefelheim, you miss my point entirely.
Suppose you are the admin, you have 64 picks PMed. Of them: 8 picks of nation A, 6 picks of nation B, 5 picks of nation C, 4 picks of nation D, etc. You have to PM to 7 players chosen nation A they don't get it, in return you have 7 PMs with another pick, some of them are of nation B and C. You respond them they don't get the nation either, they send you pick of nation D and so on.
The question is: how many PMs it would require to settle all the nations, and how soon will the administarator break?

[Sir_Dr_D]

I will agree that we should go with the format of what the original poster picked. He has put a lot of thought into this. Remember that easy reasearch is on, which will help balance the nations. Also we know the nation that we will be fighting against, so we can include counters to that nation right in our build.

I don't think that the method listed for using random numbers for nation selection would work though. Wouldn't the most logical number to pick be 50, which everyone would then take? Instead the numbers should be seen as going around in a circle like a clock. (That means that 1, would come after 100) The persons number that is closest to the generated number in a clockwise direction gets the nation. That way there is no halfway point.

[Bananadine]

The hell with Niefelheim, you miss my point entirely.
Suppose you are the admin, you have 64 picks PMed. Of them: 8 picks of nation A, 6 picks of nation B, 5 picks of nation C, 4 picks of nation D, etc. You have to PM to 7 players chosen nation A they don't get it, in return you have 7 PMs with another pick, some of them are of nation B and C. You respond them they don't get the nation either, they send you pick of nation D and so on.
The question is: how many PMs it would require to settle all the nations, and how soon will the administarator break?

The secret metametagame: us versus the administrator!

In order to most effectively overwhelm him, we'll need many more players, and also many more nations. I volunteer to start work on the sea dog nation mod. This leaves open many other possibilities: Hoburg nation, ronin nation, vine man nation, catoblepas nation. Choose one each, please. I'll use a sophisticated random number system to resolve any conflicts.

Of course once the actual tournament begins, we must all still pick Niefelheim, in order to maximize the number of private messages that will be needed. And also in order to ensure that all of us will win.

[the Vanishag]

I'm interested.

[chrispedersen]

And I'd still like AoE to just pick two a couple (few) nations and each challenger pics one. Everyone plays those nations.

Next round, same thing..

If you have some people sticking out of the game, because of format, its not a good thing.

Still, I'll go with anything =)

[Sir_Dr_D]

I myself prefer the format as described by AOE. Even if I end up as a weaker nation against a strong nation, there is still the challenge of trying to do as much damage to the other nation as possible. I can understand why some people would want another matching system to better test player skill, as per some of the ealier suggestions. Someone can always start one up. But I like the idea of everyone playing a different nation, as described by AoE. To me it adds more magic, depth and mystery to the game.

[Lihaässä]

Sounds fun, you can add me to the list.

[Bananadine]

A frost giant has cast Grip of Winter on the thread. Niefelheim wins before it even starts!

[Ink]

did this thing die?

[Lingchih]

did this thing die?

No, I think it's just a little slow on getting started. Believe me, you will wish it would die before the end.

[Bananadine]

It might be regenerating. In that case, fatigue probably won't be enough to kill it.

[Ink]

I think the mage that summoned has fled (I havn't seen him in a while) and now it is dissolving.

[WraithLord]

This thread has lost momentum, or maybe I got less enthusiastic seeing as it seems to be going nowhere. Add to that my dislike of the nation selection scheme and my 2/3 MP games that by now are progressed enough to require a significant chunk of my free time and, well, I think I'll just bow out of this one.

GL all, foremost in getting this thing going :)

[Belac]

We can do it ourselves. For instance, I challenge to a duel match Raiel (the player I was originally matched with). Let's PM to agree on nations. After the duel, the winner will pick another winner to duel in the 2nd round.

(2nd-round matches will involve players choosing between their nation and the one they defeated; even if the 2nd-round opponents have the same 2 nations, they can agree amongst themselves which one gets which. So this version doesn't even require complex nation-selecting)

[chrispedersen]

I sort of second that suggestion.... we can have someone step up and take over the thread. Just copy the first post to a nother thread, and then update it for additions changes deletions...

[Meglobob]

I am going to be very busy over the next couple of months, so I will withdraw from this game before it starts for real.

Sorry for any inconvenience.

[Evilhomer]

Finally got my internet up and running. Sign me up.

[Belac]

What I propose is this:

1: New Thread, everyone interested posts their names
2: Each pairing chooses nations amongst themselves, with no reference to any other pairing
3: In the 2nd round, each pairing again chooses nations amongst themselves. They may choose between the 4 nations that took part in their respective 1st-round battles, and may choose in any way they can agree upon
4: In subsequent rounds, the same thing happens
5: Seeding is determined randomly. If no one else wants to, I will establish the initial pairings using a random method. To keep things moving, 2nd-round pairings should be assigned in order of game completion (so the winners of the first 2 games to finish face each other, and so on)
6: In the event of not getting 32 or 64 players, 2nd-round byes will be awarded for especially-impressive victories. Criteria would include speed of victory and use of weak nations (if you can take out Niefelheim with Bandar Log, say, you deserve a free pass to the 3rd round).

Or we can do something else entirely, or wait for Areaofeffect to return. Just throwing this out there.

[chrispedersen]

Belac - I propose you do something like the following:

Set your thread up. copy all thepeople over.
Give a firm date 3-4 days - to give Area of Effect time to take his thread back over. Otherwise give people 3-4 days to report their first results in.

.02 of course. The thread is going to die anyway in a couple more days if people don't see action on it.

[militarist]

I'd play

[Aethyr]

I have other commitments so I'll have to withdraw. GL all.