Five Tribes Five Tribes

Forums

Search
Forums » T2R Competitive Play - English » NC 2013 : organization
Show: Today's Posts 
  
AuthorTopic
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
NC 2013 : organization Thu, 27 June 2013 04:47
Hi all,

End of June, time to start thinking of our next NC.
Anybody who's willing to help organizing is more than welcome.
How to help ?

We need a TD.
Truckerteller did the job the last 2 NC. His decision to continue or not.

Stats
I'd use anybody to prepare a list of players eligible to play NC by the end of July. I.e : top 500 with their score and nationality.

Tickipedia
Dom would use any help to prepare the tables on ticki. That's a pain in the butt !
Any extra contribution (new stats, screenshots, etc...) is more than welcome.
Maximour told me he was ready to do something new. If you have ideas, share them with him.


About organization
As an organizer over the last 2 years, here are my thoughts :

Organizing NC, discussing changes and implement them is a pain in the butt.
It is hard to prepare such a big tourney when too many voices are involved.
In my opinion, board discussions are not productive. Nc does not need a board, some of us just need to be in charge.
We don't need that 'so-called' democracy, just here to please everybody.
It takes not only forever to discuss matters, but also to organize a vote. By the time any discussion is over, the tourney is always almost finished, and the vote pointless.
People who are in charge need to be in charge for faster decisions, and more efficient gestion.
I dont know what dea and Qorlas think about it officially, but we've been in charge of most tourneys for a while, and only NC requires extra-time, extra-discussions, extra-pains in the butt.
Rules should be clear and discussions over when registration opens.
Whoever who wants to be in charge can offer a draft of the new rules by the end of July, and adjust them by mid-august, if need be, thanks to the forum's contribution.
Whoever who wants to be in charge : make yourself known here

I'm ok to launch NC one more time but if all decisions have to go through a board or the approval of too many players, then I'd be happy to leave my place to anyone who wants to do it.





[Updated on: Fri, 28 June 2013 06:56]

      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member

Posts: 801
Registered:
March 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Thu, 27 June 2013 06:57
Did you get board approval to post this message...
      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Thu, 27 June 2013 07:16
For 1 second I naively thought you wanted to be in charge !
      
AAA_dea1
Senior Member
T2R Nation Cup 2007 Winner

Posts: 1902
Registered:
September 2005
Re:NC 2013 : organization Fri, 28 June 2013 22:40
Here are my thoughts:

I hope Truckerteller will continue as TD - he does a great job

I hope Sysyphus will continue as organizer - he does a great job

I'm OK to assist with organization if needed.
I can confirm from experience, that votes can be a pain in the butt - we even had people complain about rules they themselves voted for ... knowing that, I understand Sysy's stance.
Given that Sysy continues (and I hope that's given)
- if you care about the rules and have suggestions, make yourselves heard in advance and you certainly will be heard.
- if you like to contribute in discussing and working out rules, show your interest and you will be included. But beware, it's a lot of work.
      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
NC 2013 : Key ideas Sun, 30 June 2013 22:53
Thanks to Beka who will prepare the top 500 list to help teams find their players !

Well, we discussed with dea (nobody else has expressed any interest yet).

We wanted to use the Fusion Cup as an experience lab for NC, and we would like to integrate a couple rules from it.

1. Seeding :
Use the captains' perceived rankings for the seeding of the teams.
Then maybe take away the top/bottom 1/2 rankings for each team.
We have also the desire to publish the results of the vote.

2. Tie breaker and KO format.
Play 6 games/match also in KO.

Tie breaker would then be:
a) matches won
b) games won
c) Drake's proposal : give multiplying factor to each player of a team.

We would then avoid a 5th match to schedule and avoid to have the same player play twice in the same clash.
Nothing else would be change. NC looked globally good last year on its new format.

You can send pm's and offer your contribution or comments to Sysyphus/dea1.
We will publish the final rules by July 15th so that everybody can prepare NC serenely.

[Updated on: Sun, 30 June 2013 22:57]

      
Vballman20 MAD
Senior Member

Posts: 164
Registered:
January 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Mon, 01 July 2013 03:54
I think if Truck can continue and wants to continue as TD, that is excellent!

Sysy, I too think you are doing a good job organizing.

As for everything else, your other suggestions seem fine to me, especially about removing the board. Just pick a group of 4-5 people from different countries to make decisions. You and Dea might be a good start Very Happy

I like the seeding suggestions, as that could create a more perceived fair seeding...which we all know will be somehow disproved. However, it will be a vote, so less complaining maybe?? Also, I think it will stop teams from adding a low seeded player to pull down their ranks despite that player most likely not playing.

Otherwise, I look forward to it!! Very Happy Very Happy

Keep up the good work!! Cool
      
Knockando
Senior Member
T2R Multi-Player World Championship 2010 Winner

Posts: 1214
Registered:
January 2010
Re:NC 2013 : organization Mon, 01 July 2013 07:46
For me there was one bad thing last year : one player playing 2 matches in a clash. So if we avoid that, it will be fine for me
      
Qorlas
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 1374
Registered:
January 2008
Re:NC 2013 : organization Mon, 01 July 2013 08:13
Time to insert my feedback,

I could not make it before but I was travelling Wink

I agree mainly with the ideas of Sysyphus.
In my view:

1) Keep the format of the matches the same in KO and RR
2) Play matches of 6 games
3) Tie-breaking? Number of games, then weighted games

4) Seeding: same as Fusion

As usual I am ready to help Smile
      
onyx puffin
Senior Member

Posts: 966
Registered:
January 2005
Re:NC 2013 : organization Mon, 01 July 2013 20:19
Not sure how to word this, but I have a concern about Fusion Cup and Nation's Cup becoming too similar if changes are made that makes them seem the same, with exception of nation factor.

In many ways I ask about changes to Nation's Cup when Nation's Cup works so fantastically? IS there really a need to change parts of the format that has worked for years?

Do away with the board? Sure, that is minor as long as there is some multi-national group that gives input to organizers.

Change the seeding? Really, Who cares as all seeding methods are flawed.

Certainly visiting the 4 players OR 5 players in a clash needs done. I am sure opinions vary there.

Finally, I really think the Best of 5 format needs kept in KO, and whatever the number is in the following rounds. That format allows a distinct winner of a match, and keeps it as a distinction from Fusion Cup.

Just my 2 cents.
      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Mon, 01 July 2013 21:11
The change of format is required because of the crap tiebreaker we currently have in KO.

Problem of best of 5 or 7 is that we would still need a 5th match to break to tie.
Unless we are using weights as a second tiebreaker.
We can keep KO indeed, but we still need that adjustment.


About seeding.
*)That would relieve Dom a bit.
*)It brings something fun before the tourney and that gives captains responsibility.
*)Being interested on who your opponent is pairs well with the fantasy concept.
*) And results are indisputable.

If we dont need/dont believe in any seedings, then let's go for a full random seeding.

4/5 players.
From what I hear, some teams may have only 4 or 5 players. Going back to a 5-player lineup = more TNT's = not a NC.
      
AAA_dea1
Senior Member
T2R Nation Cup 2007 Winner

Posts: 1902
Registered:
September 2005
Re:NC 2013 : organization Tue, 02 July 2013 12:38
Question: Do we (why would we) want a distinction from Fusion Cup other than nationalities and maps played?

NC = national teams; US 2er only
FC = you can play with whom you want; you can play different maps
That's the relevant distinction, right?

Wherever organization can be alike, I think that's a good thing.
Maybe it's a good idea to try out new ideas (if there are any) in Fusion and apply them in NC if they work well.
      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Thu, 11 July 2013 05:33
Hi all,

So we plan on using the captain's perception for the rankings, and on using the 6-game format in the KO round like mentionned above.


We still had to discuss over a tiebreaker, here's our prime idea :
('match #1' = match-up between players in the slot#1)

To decide upon win in the KO round, number of matches won is the first tiebreaker, then number of games won, then result of the match #1, then result of the match #2, then match #3 and match #4.

In the case of anoverall perfect tie, (4 matches resulting in a 3-3) :
if match #1 happens to be a tie, the players have to play a 7th game (or more, if the games happen to be a tie) and the result of this game will stand as the final tiebreaker.



We had only 5 "2-2" clashes in Fusion over 37 clashes played. Only 1 resulted in a 12-12 overall result.
Since we needed a final tie-breaker we thought that having a match slightly more important (the result of the match with players on the slot #1 would break the tie) would be the best solution.

Low maintenance : No extra match to schedule. Easy to implement.
Close to the idea of "weights" : without the need of making calculations.
May bring up some strategy in the lineup, and maybe have some exciting match-ups at the top of the bill.

In the very rare case those 4 matches could result in 4 "3-3",
players of the match #1 have to play a 7th game during their match if they finish on a 3-3. The result of game 7 may just be for fun (3-3 would still stand as an official result), and will likely not count at all in the end.
But it could also be used as the ultimate tie-breaker if need be.

Feel free to comment asap. I plan on publishing the final rules on Monday 15th.
      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member

Posts: 801
Registered:
March 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 13 July 2013 01:00
Suggestions and/or Issues with format changes:
(will make seperate posts for some so all ideas don't get mashed together).

1.) After groups have been formed, when the schedule is being produced - Teams of the same nation must play during the earlier rounds of the tournament.

*I see no benefit to having the same nation play each other during the final week. I only see the downside of either collusion (maybe not throwing a whole clash, but throwing a match or even a single game - and since it often comes down to tie breakers to get into the KO round, it is an issue), or knocking out your own nation from the KO round (maybe the French don't mind, but I really don't want to play a US team the final week and the result determine who gets into the KO round).

*How it would be implemented - just make the schedule as normal, and if the same nation is playing in the final week, move their match one week earlier and adjust the schedule accordingly. If there are 3 teams of the same nation in the same group it might take more juggling, but shouldn't be too much trouble.

2.) If there is a group where teams have a "bye" week, the last seeded team in the group should have their bye week last.

*In other words, the teams more likely to get into the KO round, shouldn't be idle the final week.

*It was correct for Group C last year where there was no bye week (i.e. in the final week, the top 2 teams in a group play each other, then the next 2, etc.), but it was not the case for the other groups.
      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member

Posts: 801
Registered:
March 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 13 July 2013 01:35
I posted this last year, but don't think anything got resolved.

If a Team is going to get a "Bye" in the first round of the KO, which team(s) is it?
*Important when groups have uneven number of teams and thus clashes/matches aren't even.

My proposal(s).

Top team in each group, and then one of the 3 options below for determining the best of the 2nd place teams.

1.) Make it random. Sure this seems to suck, but the groups aren't evenly matched anyway, and so how can you say which 2nd place team did the best.

2.) Compare how the 2nd place team did against the top team in their Group. If equal (i.e. they all lost, all ties, or all won), continue down the list until one of the 2nd place teams did better (i.e. check results against the 3rd place teams, then 4th place).
*With this choice, would need to decide if comparing to top seeded team or top team after the RR.
*With this option you wouldn't have to do any recalculating due to uneven groups as in option 3 below.

3.) Remove the results of the last seeded team(s) [Not the last RANKED team in the group after the RR] from the results to make all groups even, then compare across the groups (first clashes, then matches, etc.). If the last seeded group is in the running for a bye, then remove the second to last seed from the results.

I obviously like #2 or #3, not sure which would be better.
      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member

Posts: 801
Registered:
March 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 13 July 2013 01:46
Transnational Teams:

I think there needs to be some kind of stricter rules for their formation.

Since I've been playing in NC, in the finals its been:
Germany 8 times (4 Wins)
Austria 2 times (1 Win)
Transnational 3 times (1 Win)
Spain 1 time (1 Win)

Last 4 years all Germany and the Super Transnational Teams (with CAT slipping in there once).

I don't have an answer off the top of my head, because the more rigid the solution, the less teams participate most likely. And I'm not sure the real goal of the NC (i.e. a National Competition or a Competition between teams of top players with lesser teams thrown in as fodder).
      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 13 July 2013 08:17
DrakeStorm wrote on Fri, 12 July 2013 17:00


1.) After groups have been formed, when the schedule is being produced - Teams of the same nation must play during the earlier rounds of the tournament.


Sounds good to me.
Quote:


2.) If there is a group where teams have a "bye" week, the last seeded team in the group should have their bye week last.


Can be implemented. But for what purpose exactly? Keep the dynamic on for KO-likely team?

[Updated on: Sat, 13 July 2013 08:45]

      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 13 July 2013 08:29
DrakeStorm wrote on Fri, 12 July 2013 17:46

Transnational Teams:

I think there needs to be some kind of stricter rules for their formation.

I don't have an answer off the top of my head, because the more rigid the solution, the less teams participate most likely. And I'm not sure the real goal of the NC (i.e. a National Competition or a Competition between teams of top players with lesser teams thrown in as fodder).



Well, this is the Nations' Cup how it was defined by Bassie at its creation. As a founder, he made up the rules which he thought were the best in 2005.
( TNTs + accomodation for players living abroad which probably helped him play with Jac at the time. Wild guess since I wasnot there in 2005)
Question is : the number of small nations keeps declining. I dont expect more than 16/18 teams this year. Some nations are dying despite the change to a 4-player lineup.Finland disappeared last year. Netherlands and Portugal are likely out this year. Probably UK too. Austria consists of 4 players at the moment when they used to have 2 full teams...
If national teams are just made of 4 German teams, 4 French and 3 USA, 1 Swiss 1 Italian, the rest being TNT, it will be time indeed to discuss over the relevance of NC and the purpose of the fall tournament after next NC.

[Updated on: Sat, 13 July 2013 08:55]

      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 13 July 2013 08:54
DrakeStorm wrote on Fri, 12 July 2013 17:35

I posted this last year, but don't think anything got resolved.

If a Team is going to get a "Bye" in the first round of the KO, which team(s) is it?
*Important when groups have uneven number of teams and thus clashes/matches aren't even.
(Proposals)

2.) Compare how the 2nd place team did against the top team in their Group. If equal (i.e. they all lost, all ties, or all won), continue down the list until one of the 2nd place teams did better (i.e. check results against the 3rd place teams, then 4th place).
*With this choice, would need to decide if comparing to top seeded team or top team after the RR.


I personally like proposal 2 better, by comparing the results against the winner of their group (then not the top seed). Like you say, no calculation. .+ rewards solid performances in round robin.
      
AAA_dea1
Senior Member
T2R Nation Cup 2007 Winner

Posts: 1902
Registered:
September 2005
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 13 July 2013 16:24
DrakeStorm wrote on Fri, 12 July 2013 17:00


1.) After groups have been formed, when the schedule is being produced - Teams of the same nation must play during the earlier rounds of the tournament.


Agree
As Sysy agreed already, consider it done.

Quote:


2.) If there is a group where teams have a "bye" week, the last seeded team in the group should have their bye week last.


Agree
Reason I see is, that teams with many members can produce completely different lineups depending on whether they need some more points or not.
      
AAA_dea1
Senior Member
T2R Nation Cup 2007 Winner

Posts: 1902
Registered:
September 2005
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 13 July 2013 16:33
DrakeStorm schrieb am Sat, 13 July 2013 01:35



If a Team is going to get a "Bye" in the first round of the KO, which team(s) is it?
*Important when groups have uneven number of teams and thus clashes/matches aren't even.

My proposal(s).

Top team in each group, and then one of the 3 options below for determining the best of the 2nd place teams.

1.) Make it random. Sure this seems to suck, but the groups aren't evenly matched anyway, and so how can you say which 2nd place team did the best.

2.) Compare how the 2nd place team did against the top team in their Group. If equal (i.e. they all lost, all ties, or all won), continue down the list until one of the 2nd place teams did better (i.e. check results against the 3rd place teams, then 4th place).
*With this choice, would need to decide if comparing to top seeded team or top team after the RR.
*With this option you wouldn't have to do any recalculating due to uneven groups as in option 3 below.

3.) Remove the results of the last seeded team(s) [Not the last RANKED team in the group after the RR] from the results to make all groups even, then compare across the groups (first clashes, then matches, etc.). If the last seeded group is in the running for a bye, then remove the second to last seed from the results.

I obviously like #2 or #3, not sure which would be better.


Certainly not #1 (yes, random sucks)

Not so sure I like #2 - why should a single clash (the one vs the group winner) be more important than the overall performance?

#3 seems OK for me
      
AAA_dea1
Senior Member
T2R Nation Cup 2007 Winner

Posts: 1902
Registered:
September 2005
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 13 July 2013 16:43
@TNTs

I don't think we find a really good solution that keeps everybody happy, so I'd leave the rules as they are.

The spirit should be clear - try to build national teams whenever possible.
The change to 4 players + fast exit should allow to follow the spirit as good as possible.

I think we are happy to have players who really tried to build a national team but couldn't in TNTs (however strong these teams may be eventually).
If the prize for that is, that somebody who could have tried more sneaks into a TNT, so be it.
TD, organizers and community can still give "friendly reminders" to pleople who seem to have forgotten the spirit Wink
      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 13 July 2013 17:11
Quote:


2.) If there is a group where teams have a "bye" week, the last seeded team in the group should have their bye week last.


Agree
Reason I see is, that teams with many members can produce completely different lineups depending on whether they need some more points or not.[/quote]

I actually looked up the rules, and it was only the case for groups of 7. Easy to correct.

From :
7 teams
Round 1: 7-1, 3-5, 6-2
Round 2: 1-4, 2-5, 6-7
Round 3: 5-1, 2-3, 4-7
Round 4: 7-2, 4-5, 3-6
Round 5: 1-2, 3-4, 5-6
Round 6: 6-1, 7-3, 2-4
Round 7: 1-3, 5-7, 4-6


We will go to :

7 teams
Round 1: 7-1, 3-5, 6-2
Round 2: 1-4, 2-5, 6-7
Round 3: 5-1, 2-3, 4-7
Round 4: 7-2, 4-5, 3-6
Round 5: 6-1, 7-3, 2-4
Round 6: 1-3, 5-7, 4-6
Round 7: 1-2, 3-4, 5-6
      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member

Posts: 801
Registered:
March 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sun, 14 July 2013 07:09
Think it has already been decided, but I will lobby for my Tie Breaker method one more time!!

I think it should be:

Clash Points - Match Points - Rank Points - Games Won

(It would be the same in the KO as RR except obviously Clashes wouldn't be there).

Clash Points = win = 1 point, tie = .5 points and a loss = 0.

Match Points = win = 1 point, tie = .5 points and a loss = 0.

Rank Points = each player's Match Point result (1,.5 or 0) multiplied by their rank, where a rank of 1-4 is included for each player when lineups are sent in (4 being best player, 1 being worst).

*How it would work - example of a round from last year (don't know how captain would have ranked players so just a guess):

Lineup:
1. Drake, Rank 3 vs. Will, Rank 4
2. Vball, Rank 1 vs. Iron, Rank 1
3. Ommie, Rank 2 vs. Robin, Rank 3
4. Sys, Rank 4 vs. Stemayf, Rank 2

Results:
Drake AMD vs SNS Will-Skyfall : 2 - 4
Vballman20 AMD vs SNS Ironhorse moonraker : 3 - 3
ommie AMD vs SNS Robin-Goldeneye : 4 - 2
Sysyphus AMD vs SNS stemayf-Thunderballs : 3 - 3

Rank Points for AMD = 3*0 + 1*.5 + 2*1 + 4*.5 = 4.5
Rank Points for SNS = 4*1 + 1*.5 + 3*0 + 2*.5 = 5.5

If games won was used it would be a tie, but with this method SNS would be ahead on tie breakers, which makes sense to me because in this example, AMDs best player (rank 4) only tied whereas SNSs best player won.

*Remember Rank Points would only be after match points, so might not come into play often (but I still think better then using games won as next tie breaker). Looking at last year's RR, it would have been used to determine 1st/2nd seed in Group A, and 3rd/4th seed in Group B. In the KO it would have been used 4 times instead of playing a 5th match.

*I think this method is better because it would put more pressure on the good players of the teams rather than equally on all players (as games won does). And maybe some good players would be more inclined to have weaker players on their teams rather than make super teams or join transnational teams. Just 2 Strong players on a team could do well.

*Logistically to make it easier, captains could set their rankings at the beginning of NC if they don't want to change it every week (they would still have an option to change it every week if they wanted). For example AMD could have set it Sys,Drake,Ommie,Vball,Onyx and then depending on who plays the rank would be predetermined. If Ommie didn't play a week, then it would be Sys 4, Drake 3, Vball 2, Onyx 1. If Sys didn't play, then it would be Drake 4, Ommie 3, Vball 2, Onyx 1, etc.

[Updated on: Sun, 14 July 2013 07:54]

      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member

Posts: 801
Registered:
March 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sun, 14 July 2013 07:25
One last issue for now.

I'm not sure on the wording or exactly how it would work, but I think there needs to be a little more effort to accommodate matches between players in significantly different time zones.

There either has to be an understanding that players can't expect to play only during evening hours. They may have to play at 5am in the morning.

And/Or

Matches between players in significantly different time zones (mainly US vs. Europe now, but someone could be from Asia or Australia, etc.), get an extra week to play their match during RR - this means that it would bleed into other rounds and there might be a delay in the final week before the KO phase. In the KO phase it would be up to the TD to deal with scheduling problems as normal.



      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sun, 14 July 2013 07:43
I think you are ready to launch and organize NC in 2014 !
Thanks Drake, I can retire relieved.

Giving more time to play has never solved the scheduling issue. As a TD, giving extra time to schedule was only OK when, before deadline, players agreed on a date and time set beyond deadline.
Time zone is not the real issue. The real issue are :
a) bad communication
b) not making an effort to accomodate
c) incompatible schedule. (because of time zones indeed, but also night shifts, busy weekends, emergencies, baby going to sleep at 2am :8 etc...).


That said, Truck as a TD has always been understanding with scheduling issues provided communication is going on.
If you are worried about the last round, you can also use Safe Exit and exchange lineup with the captain one week earlier.

[Updated on: Sun, 14 July 2013 08:11]

      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member

Posts: 801
Registered:
March 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sun, 14 July 2013 08:11
Just using data from last year's KO round with the 4 matches that went to a fifth match. How they would have been different using different tie breakers (For my Rank point system, I ranked players by ELO which obviously the captains might not have done).

Champ vs AT
Fifth Match = AT wins
Games Won = AT wins
Rank Points = Tie, so goes to games won = AT wins

CAT vs. SNS
Fifth Match = SNS wins
Games Won = CAT wins
Rank Points = SNS wins

Wasa vs. OLE
Fifth Match = Wasa wins
Games Won = Wasa wins
Rank Points = OLE wins

Wasa vs. SNS
Fifth Match = Wasa wins
Games Won = SNS wins
Rank Points = SNS wins

What does this tell us? Not sure! AT results would have been the same regardless, but with games won, SNS and Wasa would have been knocked out, and with Rank points Wasa would have been knocked out.

In my view, the fifth match put too much emphasis on one good player, which I think is similar to what is going to be used this year. My rank points puts some emphasis on the best player, but spreads it out to all players a little more (your best player needs to win or you need one of your lesser ranked players to beat the other team's best player), whereas games won puts burden on the entire team (but especially the weaker players on the team to not get shut out and win a few games).

Only playing 6 games in KO might effect the number of matches that end in ties this year (last year 4 of the 11 KO matches were ties), so might not be as bad this year.

[Updated on: Sun, 14 July 2013 08:16]

      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sun, 14 July 2013 08:24
DrakeStorm wrote on Sun, 14 July 2013 00:11


In my view, the fifth match put too much emphasis on one good player, which I think is similar to what is going to be used this year.


Like you said it was putting too much emphasis on one player, that's why we needed to get rid of last year's tiebreaker.

This year, games won is the primary tie breaker, so like you say, it's a burden on the whole team, not really similar than last year.

Problem of the rank points like you presented it is :

Rank 1 vs Rank 4 : 4 - 2. Big upset is rewarded with 1 point only.
Rank 4 vs Rank 1 : 5 - 1. A logical win is rewarded with 4 points.
Again the strongest player is rewarded.


Edit : Also thanks to your contribution. Useful, elaborated and pretty clear.

[Updated on: Sun, 14 July 2013 08:32]

      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member

Posts: 801
Registered:
March 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sun, 14 July 2013 08:32
Sysyphus wrote on Sat, 13 July 2013 23:24

DrakeStorm wrote on Sun, 14 July 2013 00:11


In my view, the fifth match put too much emphasis on one good player, which I think is similar to what is going to be used this year.


Like you said it was putting too much emphasis on one player, that's why we needed to get rid of last year's tiebreaker.

This year, games won is the primary tie breaker, so like you say, it's a burden on the whole team, not really similar than last year.

Problem of the rank points like you presented it is :

Rank 1 vs Rank 4 : 4 - 2. Big upset is rewarded with 1 point only.
Rank 4 vs Rank 1 : 5 - 1. A logical win is rewarded with 4 points.
Again the strongest player is rewarded.


Didn't know games won was the next tie breaker! Thought it was going to be the match in slot #1.

But one thing from your example you aren't considering is, the big upset is only rewarded 1 point, BUT it is denying the other team 4 points which is a BIG deal!

[Updated on: Sun, 14 July 2013 08:44]

      
GSV3
Senior Member
T2R Nation Cup 2012 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 669
Registered:
May 2009
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sun, 14 July 2013 10:05
dea1 écrit le Sat, 13 July 2013 16:43

@TNTs

I don't think we find a really good solution that keeps everybody happy, so I'd leave the rules as they are.

The spirit should be clear - try to build national teams whenever possible.
The change to 4 players + fast exit should allow to follow the spirit as good as possible.

I think we are happy to have players who really tried to build a national team but couldn't in TNTs (however strong these teams may be eventually).
If the prize for that is, that somebody who could have tried more sneaks into a TNT, so be it.
TD, organizers and community can still give "friendly reminders" to pleople who seem to have forgotten the spirit Wink


natürlich Cool
      
The Tinman
Member

User Pages
Posts: 84
Registered:
January 2009
Re:NC 2013 : organization Mon, 15 July 2013 15:22
The only comment I have is on the TNT's. Since this is a Nations Cup I think those countries who cannot form a team should all be put together and their teams randomly formed. This would eliminate the Super All World teams from existing but still allow everyone to participate. (Actually I'm in favor of a random draw for all teams, but that's a different story)

This may appear to punish smaller nations but it is no more unfair than having an all world team formed.

[Updated on: Mon, 15 July 2013 15:23]

      
GSV3
Senior Member
T2R Nation Cup 2012 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 669
Registered:
May 2009
Re:NC 2013 : organization Mon, 15 July 2013 16:56
my 50 cent about Gary's idea ...

Not sure WASA was a Super All World Team (was also suggested by Drake).
Try to compare with UEG, TuS, CAT, AT, AMD, Red, SOS, SNS ...

Doing that (all players together, then randomly formed) looks very funny but I have some objections :

- why only for TNT and not for all countries?
- what if we have 'enemies' in the same team?
- what if we have all big small-country-players together?

After split UKB, Kostas and me became free.
After split TRUE, Olof was looking for a new team also.
Peter De Zeeuw (The Nederlands) was alone.
2 other players were refused by TD.
At the very last moment, I found 2 other belgian players (almost inactive since months).

What's wrong with this?
      
AAA_dea1
Senior Member
T2R Nation Cup 2007 Winner

Posts: 1902
Registered:
September 2005
Re:NC 2013 : organization Mon, 15 July 2013 17:48
agree with GSV, this idea won't work

a)There are people with whom I wouldn't want to be on the same team (for whatever reason). Maybe somebody else wants them - fine. If nobody wants them, they will end up alone and therefore cannot participate (in that case there probably is a good reason why nobody wants them).
Making a random draw could 1) force somebody to play with s.o. else he definitely doesn't want to play with and 2) could bring players into the event that nobody would have accepted on his team.

b) I don't think it's possible to create an "all world team" that is stronger than UEG (on paper).
Germany is lucky to have so many good players that they can create a complete "club #1 team" (and still have some #1s left for other teams). What's wrong with others maybe being lucky, too?

c) History has shown that "invincible teams" don't always win.
UEG has not won ALL NCs.
In Fusion Cup some people were worried about having no ELO maximum, so "all world teams" were possible. The top team that signed up would certainly qualify as an "all world team", they were the team with the highest ELO (by far), they were perceived as being the strongest team by almost everyone. ... They didn't win.

Summary: I think, we worry too much about "all world teams"
      
ACP Miguel
Senior Member
T2R Swiss Map Championship 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 591
Registered:
October 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Mon, 15 July 2013 20:01
Hi all.

TNTs Smile - eternal they seem

I never saw a dream team of TNT. I saw "dream teams" from countries (good for them)

So overall i think transnational players played (mostly) within the idea of NC being a Cup for Nations.

Last year Portugal made it. but i'm sure we won't make it this year for example. Maybe u can have Rui for a dream TNT Smile

Miguel

      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member

Posts: 801
Registered:
March 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Tue, 16 July 2013 00:08
dea1 wrote on Mon, 15 July 2013 08:48


b) I don't think it's possible to create an "all world team" that is stronger than UEG (on paper).
Germany is lucky to have so many good players that they can create a complete "club #1 team" (and still have some #1s left for other teams). What's wrong with others maybe being lucky, too?

c) History has shown that "invincible teams" don't always win.
UEG has not won ALL NCs.



My problem isn't with "invincible teams". If 2 Germany teams made it to the finals every year, I would be fine with that.

My problem is that looking back over the results, especially the last 4 years, I don't get a sense that it is a "Nation's Cup". As I have brought up before, it almost could be an event called "Germany vs. the World", then TNT teams would be fine.

Alot of it might just be dumb luck. Last year Wasa would have been knocked out if a different tie breaker rule was in place. With alot of teams similar in skill level it could just come down to the rules and luck - even more so with only 4 matches/ 6 games instead of 5 matches/bo7.

      
GSV3
Senior Member
T2R Nation Cup 2012 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 669
Registered:
May 2009
Re:NC 2013 : organization Tue, 16 July 2013 07:52
I'm not an expert, but is there another sport where we can have multiple teams from the same nation in the Nation Cup?

Maybe, the only problem we have is the tournament's title?

Then rename it to Masters or Federation Cup or Whatever Cup...

Doesn't the matter, no?
      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
T2R All Around Tournament 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 2334
Registered:
December 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Tue, 16 July 2013 16:42
Well the NC rules' spirit is to include as many players as possible.
Hence the top 500 players, 'the Meat market', to incitate countries to find as many fellow players as possible.
Hence the acceptance of DoW as a TNT at the time, and the inclusion of TNT's in general.

The issue here is not the TNTs as they have been defined since 2007 or so but the lack of national teams nowadays.
USA, France and Germany should keep working on having more people involved.
It would be nice for instance to see a new generation of German players, or a Canadian team if we look at the top 500 players.

The TD uses the rules as a frame to take his decisions.
Organizers try to amend the rules so that we can have as many players possible participating. That's how I see it.

[Updated on: Tue, 16 July 2013 16:42]

      
Truckerteller
Senior Member
T2R European Map Championship 2011 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 633
Registered:
October 2007
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 20 July 2013 17:33
I'll be TD again this year.
Thx, Julien, dea, Brad.

Same will be true as the previous two years:
- Most policing will be done at the gate. If you've cheated (that includes idiotic rank escalation), behaved overly shady, have been repeatedly offensive, you're not playing NC.
- I'm flexible with the rules and scheduling. I haven't read most of the rules and will only do so if an incident occurs. Generally the biggest incidents occur with at least one problem child involved.
- Warning, loss of game, loss of match, exclusion. I may and will skip steps.
- No lobby or forum drama, please have your captain and your opp's captain write me a PM.
- If you plan to captain a team, you are responsible for your and your team's reputation. If one of your teammates cheats or turns out to be a fraud, I will hold you accountable.
- If you join a team and your captain turns out to act in a way that you totally disagree with, don't blame me or others.

Have fun all !

PS. THEBEEF recently met me in Paris and thought I wasn't as hardcore rule-obsessed as he expected Smile, so, don't worry.





[Updated on: Sat, 20 July 2013 17:56]

      
dizz
Senior Member
T2R FEUd Cup 2010 Winner

User Pages
Posts: 258
Registered:
January 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 20 July 2013 19:36
Yes, but I heard you got him drunk. Or was it he got YOU drunk? Rolling Eyes
      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member

Posts: 801
Registered:
March 2006
Re:NC 2013 : organization Sat, 20 July 2013 20:44
Truckerteller wrote on Sat, 20 July 2013 08:33

(that includes idiotic rank escalation


like you getting to #1 in Asia.....!!!
      
dandee
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 446
Registered:
November 2008
Re:NC 2013 : organization Fri, 26 July 2013 09:18
my suggestion is to also enter the multiplayer

in their group games in addition to the two players also multiplayer

one player for nation
usa map

the nc would be more complete

dan;)
      
Pages (2): [1  2  >  » ]     
Previous Topic:Fantasy NC Games
Next Topic:ITALIAN CHAMPIONSHIP
Goto Forum: