[AT] Conquer Map Marathon Cup - Completed

[josko.ri]

I still find unclear will games be played twice versus each of 121 opponents, like I suggested? Kind of draw like that was made in 1v1 Championship so I am sure it can be done from coding perspective.

[Mad777]

So, somewhere between 11months and 2 years, what are the sitting rules?

There is no definition about sitting rules for this 1st edition, let's hope for the fair play

[Kevi]

On the join page it says -

Load: 1 Game(s)
22 Total

[Vid_FISO]

So, somewhere between 11months and 2 years, what are the sitting rules?

There is no definition about sitting rules for this 1st edition, let's hope for the fair play

I was thinking more along the lines of given the length of the comp many of us will have at least one period of time away from CC and require sitting for maybe a 2-3 week stretch, simple enough for clan games as those players won't be used, for tourneys you contact the TO and games can be delayed, a sitter allowed to start/ play games or even possibly auto default/ expulsion.

This is longer and the most likely sitters could well be entrants themselves, maybe better if what is and isn't considered fair and reasonable is defined before it starts?

[Mad777]

On the join page it says -

Load: 1 Game(s)
22 Total

Thanks, I was working it and now it's fixed

[xroads]

So, somewhere between 11months and 2 years, what are the sitting rules?

There is no definition about sitting rules for this 1st edition, let's hope for the fair play

I was thinking more along the lines of given the length of the comp many of us will have at least one period of time away from CC and require sitting for maybe a 2-3 week stretch, simple enough for clan games as those players won't be used, for tourneys you contact the TO and games can be delayed, a sitter allowed to start/ play games or even possibly auto default/ expulsion.

This is longer and the most likely sitters could well be entrants themselves, maybe better if what is and isn't considered fair and reasonable is defined before it starts?

How many people needs sitters for 2-3 weeks in a row?

I am sure almost every player will need a sitter during the tourny, but this is a marathon, so a few turns or games shouldnt impact the final results much.

If it doubt, defer to site rules on sitting and everyone should be fine.

[Mad777]

I still find unclear will games be played twice versus each of 121 opponents, like I suggested? Kind of draw like that was made in 1v1 Championship so I am sure it can be done from coding perspective.

The setup to have a player facing all others can be made in such a way to have 242 rounds, 122 players total and that way you will play all players twice, however, with this type of setup the tournament will last forever with a "1 game" game load per round, with the current setup and with 100 players you will actually face 22 different players randomly selected, each round you will play 11 games against your single opponent using 11 different map.

If you really want to have an equal way to ensure winner is the Master of all map you would have to play a player with all map and so on and so forth with the 242 maps....I let you calculate the amount of game

(99 players times 242 maps equal 23,958 games, per players...a bit too excessive )

So playing against every one but only on a different map doesn't make the player a "Master" unless he plays everyone on all maps...to me doesn't matter how much player you face (of course the most is better and in this case to 22), but more how you do play in all 242 maps

The goal here is to have a big amount of entrant rather than a handfull of players who will face each other and allow every one to play each single map. I can have something like 10 players times 242 maps equal 2,178 games still per player...The way the Championship was made didn't have such a setup where a player faced all other entrant, I will double check again but I doubt it was like that.

With that being said the amount of players doesn't need to be at 122 and reverted back to the initial 100 entry.

Let's see how this goes and mainly how long it will take to complete it...

[Keefie]

I predict nobody will win 25 games in a row, let alone 50.

[grt]

I predict nobody will win 25 games in a row, let alone 50.

Well if we are playing 1 opponent in batches of 11 then I could see this happening - someone drops out - that's 11 wins instantly. Follow that with a matchup of a strong vs a weak player then one could take the next 11 games. Just need a few more in the next batch - slow play the games you will likely lose and win those last few. That would get 25 which is possibly achievable. I still think 50 is too excessive.

Also, I think Josko's idea of playing each opponent twice throughout the whole event would be better. Playing 11 games in a batch against some players who have signed up will be a lot tougher than others. I guess the standard tournament setup can't handle this.

[Vid_FISO]

So it's possible that the winner might avoid the whole of the top 100?

[xroads]

When I presented this idea, there were things I wanted to do that the system just cant handle at this point.

I wanted to auto start a round every 2 weeks to make it go faster, have a rotating round robin match up, etc, etc. This was the final product within the framework of what the system can do.

My thought was anyone who hits 150 wins gets a GA achievement medal, he just threw the 50 win streak in as an added challenge. So what if no one can hit it, it wasn't in my original plans anyway.

This is supposed to be something new & fun. If everyone keeps complaining about every little detail, it will take the fun out of it.

So far we have almost 90 players in less then 2 days, so it is bringing some good interest.

Lets play, see who wins, and celebrate the victor as a truly rounded player.

[agentcom]

When I presented this idea, there were things I wanted to do that the system just cant handle at this point.

I wanted to auto start a round every 2 weeks to make it go faster, have a rotating round robin match up, etc, etc. This was the final product within the framework of what the system can do.

My thought was anyone who hits 150 wins gets a GA achievement medal, he just threw the 50 win streak in as an added challenge. So what if no one can hit it, it wasn't in my original plans anyway.

This is supposed to be something new & fun. If everyone keeps complaining about every little detail, it will take the fun out of it.

So far we have almost 90 players in less then 2 days, so it is bringing some good interest.

Lets play, see who wins, and celebrate the victor as a truly rounded player.

This whole thing sounds great, and I think you have a good handle on how it's going to work out. And it sounds like you're ready to make some adjustments as it goes along concerning players who drop out, which would be my main worry for reasons that others have expressed. So, thanks for setting this up, and I can't wait for it to begin.

Just one thing I noticed: OP mentions 11,000 credits, but I only see 8500.

[Mad777]

...Just one thing I noticed: OP mentions 11,000 credits, but I only see 8500.

....You forgot to add the Green Star value (worth 2,5000

The ideas with stars is valid only if some tough & special Auto tournament has it as an entry ticket which will happen in the near future...as said this is a first of a kind and expect more good stuff using Auto-tournaments...

Note: you are all right with your comments about what would be the best setup to make it the most prestigious tournament playing all maps but like xroads & myself are keep saying is that the system/setup to create such a tournament is very complex and need several hours of headache to make it work if all possible...I have tried using Beta web site but inputing dozens of "tester" bot players is a long process to simulate a large event like this therefore it will have to be tested using a lower scale and see how I can play with the settings...so far I can't spend that much time until the Madness in Rio is complete

...but make sure that I appreciate all the comment above and that is what I need to understand the needs as far setting up great auto-tournament...I need to test the crowd first to also see if the time spending worth it, I don't want to put my heads on something that don't bring players , but I have to say that I'm impressed to see this Marathon Cup filled at 80 % in 2 days and without any massive PM send!! (At least not from my side...)

[davekettering]

The sign on page still says 100 players, it says there are 91/100 signed up. Are you or did you extend this to 122? Please advise.

thanks guys for putting this together.

Dave

[josko.ri]

Given the huge interest for this tournament, it is pity that my suggestion to extend to 122 players was not accepted. Many interested players will be excluded.

I still find unclear will games be played twice versus each of 121 opponents, like I suggested? Kind of draw like that was made in 1v1 Championship so I am sure it can be done from coding perspective.

The setup to have a player facing all others can be made in such a way to have 242 rounds, 122 players total and that way you will play all players twice, however, with this type of setup the tournament will last forever with a "1 game" game load per round, with the current setup and with 100 players you will actually face 22 different players randomly selected, each round you will play 11 games against your single opponent using 11 different map.

If you really want to have an equal way to ensure winner is the Master of all map you would have to play a player with all map and so on and so forth with the 242 maps....I let you calculate the amount of game

(99 players times 242 maps equal 23,958 games, per players...a bit too excessive )

So playing against every one but only on a different map doesn't make the player a "Master" unless he plays everyone on all maps...to me doesn't matter how much player you face (of course the most is better and in this case to 22), but more how you do play in all 242 maps

The goal here is to have a big amount of entrant rather than a handfull of players who will face each other and allow every one to play each single map. I can have something like 10 players times 242 maps equal 2,178 games still per player...The way the Championship was made didn't have such a setup where a player faced all other entrant, I will double check again but I doubt it was like that.

With that being said the amount of players doesn't need to be at 122 and reverted back to the initial 100 entry.

Let's see how this goes and mainly how long it will take to complete it...

you are greatly mistaken if you put 11 games versus the same player. Someone will just get lucky with draw several times and take the win of the tournament. I don't say it should be play versus every player on every map because it is impossible, but it should be play versus every player (twice) on some random map among the 242. It is still better and more leveled draw than playing versus only 22 players during the whole tournament which may be very lucky draw for some players, especially in case of deadbeats.

The Championship 1v1 tournament had playing versus X different opponents every round. I remember that, and it worked well there. It is easily possible to do within the code.

[xroads]

[quote="josko.ri"]Given the huge interest for this tournament, it is pity that my suggestion to extend to 122 players was not accepted. Many interested players will be excluded.

Why take every suggestion everyone puts in?

If they are interested, then they should join. It has been open for 3 days so everyone will have had an equal chance to join. If people want to play join. If people dont want to play, or dont like the settings, dont play. There are many tournaments, this is something new.

[Mad777]

Given the huge interest for this tournament, it is pity that my suggestion to extend to 122 players was not accepted. Many interested players will be excluded.

josko, one more time just for you, this is a test edition to see how this work, for that it will stay with 100 players, I will evaluate how it goes and monitor what would be the changes to be made for the next edition, if I feel it needs 200 the next time then it will have as many entrants as possible.

I still find unclear will games be played twice versus each of 121 opponents, like I suggested? Kind of draw like that was made in 1v1 Championship so I am sure it can be done from coding perspective.

The setup to have a player facing all others can be made in such a way to have 242 rounds, 122 players total and that way you will play all players twice, however, with this type of setup the tournament will last forever with a "1 game" game load per round, with the current setup and with 100 players you will actually face 22 different players randomly selected, each round you will play 11 games against your single opponent using 11 different map.

If you really want to have an equal way to ensure winner is the Master of all map you would have to play a player with all map and so on and so forth with the 242 maps....I let you calculate the amount of game

(99 players times 242 maps equal 23,958 games, per players...a bit too excessive )

So playing against every one but only on a different map doesn't make the player a "Master" unless he plays everyone on all maps...to me doesn't matter how much player you face (of course the most is better and in this case to 22), but more how you do play in all 242 maps

The goal here is to have a big amount of entrant rather than a handfull of players who will face each other and allow every one to play each single map. I can have something like 10 players times 242 maps equal 2,178 games still per player...The way the Championship was made didn't have such a setup where a player faced all other entrant, I will double check again but I doubt it was like that.

With that being said the amount of players doesn't need to be at 122 and reverted back to the initial 100 entry.

Let's see how this goes and mainly how long it will take to complete it...

you are greatly mistaken if you put 11 games versus the same player. Someone will just get lucky with draw several times and take the win of the tournament. I don't say it should be play versus every player on every map because it is impossible, but it should be play versus every player (twice) on some random map among the 242. It is still better and more leveled draw than playing versus only 22 players during the whole tournament which may be very lucky draw for some players, especially in case of deadbeats.

....I guess you don't get my point here josko, it is not that it can't be done, it is about the time to set it up and this without being 100% sure it will work, again, auto-tournament is a "new" tool that has lots of unknown area to play with, if you feel that is not per your vision then I'm sorry but you will have to wait to see more specific stuff coming out the day I will have spent enough time to masterize the Auto-tournament tool, right now that is all "I can offer" being by myself!

The Championship 1v1 tournament had playing versus X different opponents every round. I remember that, and it worked well there. It is easily possible to do within the code.

It did worked well but what you didn't see was the hard work behind the scene to make it the way it was, was several player involved to help making the Championships happened and successful at the beginning, the issue was, after some rounds, only few among the initial peoples stayed to make the next rounds working, I think you have no idea about the amount of work it takes, one more time, it is not because the system doesn't work as you suggest, it's about the time of pre-work, ongoing monitoring to maintain playable setup, that is required to make it running smooth for YOU players.
Just be patient and enjoy it

[All Black Rugby]

Thanks Mad777. Appreciate the work you're putting into this.

I love the concept, and agree that playing everyone twice would be preferable, but accept what you're saying.

BTW, pity those who have to play josko.ri 11 games consecutively...[where's that resign button!] If anyone could win 50 times, I'm backing him!

[Keefie]

Just an observation.

In my first 11 games 7 are no reinforcement, 2 chained and 2 parachute. Has anyone else noticed a bias towards no reinforcement or am I just unlucky ?

Also we're probably a long way off from it happening but has anyone thought not to allow Promontory Summit with no reinforcements / nukes-zombie combination ?

[josko.ri]

I think no reinforcements should be banned at all. Kills fun more than unlimited which is banned.

[Keefie]

I think no reinforcements should be banned at all. Kills fun more than unlimited which is banned.

I totally agree with that comment

I don't mind the odd one or two but 7/11 is a bit much.

Can things be changed for future rounds ?

[Mad777]

I think no reinforcements should be banned at all. Kills fun more than unlimited which is banned.

I totally agree with that comment

I don't mind the odd one or two but 7/11 is a bit much.

Can things be changed for future rounds ?

I was going to not have it in the random setting...I found myself having also 50% of my games with No Reinf...I will make some change from Round 2 and ban No Reinf...I have to double check for the Promontory Summit I believe it has been setup without "No Reinf" but since it's part of 10 other maps I will need to find it

[benga]

Thanks Mad777.

BTW, pity those who have to play josko.ri 11 games consecutively...[where's that resign button!] If anyone could win 50 times, I'm backing him!

I hope others have more fighting spirit than you, not sure why you joined if you think like this.

I think no reinforcements should be banned at all. Kills fun more than unlimited which is banned.

I totally agree with that comment

I don't mind the odd one or two but 7/11 is a bit much.

Can things be changed for future rounds ?

I was going to not have it in the random setting...I found myself having also 50% of my games with No Reinf...I will make some change from Round 2 and ban No Reinf...I have to double check for the Promontory Summit I believe it has been setup without "No Reinf" but since it's part of 10 other maps I will need to find it

wow just noticed all reinforcements are not included
why is adjacent banned too?

[Mad777]

I think no reinforcements should be banned at all. Kills fun more than unlimited which is banned.

I totally agree with that comment

I don't mind the odd one or two but 7/11 is a bit much.

Can things be changed for future rounds ?

I went and checked all the round 1 games, it appears to have about 45-50% of the games that are "No Reinforcement", was 3 reinforcement type selected and should have been no more than a third with this setting (at least I was guessing the system to even out the 3 types throughout all games)...No Reinforcement removed from now and the whole tournament except for the actual ongoing Round

@ benga, I have chosen the settings to prevent game dragging, even do there is a round limit I expect most of the game to complete before it and therefore having the tournament not lasting for ever...

The unlimited settings hasn't not been taken because too many chance to have unfair advantage with drop and unlimited reinforcement that could kill the game after round 1.
Adjacent seems to be okay but again, we are playing all 242 maps and some settings aren't suitable for all maps....I found chained and parachute to be the most common and will fit for all.

As far the spoil, I believe it doesn't realy impact except for the Promontory Summit but with this we have 20 round limit and since this map is part of 10 others in that bulk I didn't want to make it "too easy" for those 10 other maps.

cheers folks

[josko.ri]

I think adjacent is strategically much more demanding and playable setting than parachute. Parachute is just choose any region and you cannot do mistake and therefore there is no strategy. In contrary adjacent requires a lot of strategy to play well. It is a Shame the most strategical reinforcements adjacent is banned AnD the least strategical reinforcements parachute will occupy 50% of games.