It's more fair, but it shuts out new players from a chance. The Rocky of Pokemon would never get a shot in the ranking system.
As far as I can see, there's no reason to not do bi-weekly, alternating between 16 and 32 people. The 16 who play every two weeks are people who want to play often. The 32 who play every two/four weeks are a combination of the people from the 16 person tournaments, and people who only can/want to play once a month. And because the 32 person one is bigger, it creates more bragging rights for the winner. Winning the monthly tournament is a bigger achievement than winning the bi-weekly tournament, so the bi-weekly tournament won't significantly degrade the importance of the monthly one. So everyone wins.
Thats the problem with having a "little" tournament between the "big" ones. The only fair way to do things is to allow in as many people who want to play and build the bracket based on the number of entrants. The only time you can start rejecting people is if the number of entrants is 16 or 32 and it doesn't look like many more people want to sign up, because we want a full bracket. And then we run into the problem that the "little" tournament is exactly the same as the big one.
I'd only be able to create new teams for the monthly ones, because I don't have the free time to create good 6-Poke teams every two weeks.
I would totally compete again with my current 6-man team (now with some general alterations).
Also, I'm going to vote against round-robin tournaments - at any number above, like, 10, those take FOREVER. Besides, if you have a shoddy team, you get the pleasure of having your ass kicked 31 times - which is hells fun, right?
I think we should do double-elimnation from now on. Single-elimination sucks, especially in Pokemon, where it's incredibly easy to fluke into or out of a win.
Hmm... Munkus... I know his team already, but it kicked my ass the last time I faced it. I wonder if this team will do much better. Actually, I'm sure this team will do much better, it hasn't lost once yet, even against Darion and Mystic_Knight. :P
But will it be enough?
Also, WHAT? ASHTON LOST? To SHUJIN?
Man oh man. All the people I imagined had the best chance of getting to the finals have been knocked out now. Maybe I better not underestimate Shujin, either.
I'm with Ashton and Taya, you guys are making it way too complicated. For what it's worth, people are going to lose interest, it's just a matter of when. With bi-weekly tournaments there's less time to prepare new teams (some will only have one weekend) which means less diversity and ultimately less fun. Not that I'll participate any time soon, so it doesn't really concern me. Just my two cents.
Also, WHAT? ASHTON LOST? To SHUJIN?
Man oh man. All the people I imagined had the best chance of getting to the finals have been knocked out now. Maybe I better not underestimate Shujin, either.
Yeah, he's got a good team. I pretty much got wrecked. You seem to have a really good team, though, so you probably have a very good chance.
Apparently, he's got some secret tech he's not willing to share. :P
Anyway, I'm rooting for you, B0.
SPLASH!
EDIT: Over the course of one month, what are the chances that half of you guys will even still be playing? I mean, look at the Friend Code list for Diamond and Pearl. How many of those people are still playing? This is only 2 months after release. If that many people dropped off that quick, how many more are going to completely disappear before the end of July?
Over at SA they reward with buyable TMs and Battle Tower TMs.
also I think some of this is getting too elitist. it's fucking pokemon. friendly tournaments and such. I'll admit I'm not that good and I'll be the first person to sit out for someone more competitive, but I do like to battle and a tournament is the place to see the action
If people losing interest is a concern, then I say that's all the more reason to do biweekly. Only one tournament a month is less interesting than two tournaments a month.
I still haven't really seen a good reason against biweekly big/small tournaments yet.
Also unless one of your fancypants photoshoppers wants to make some kind of victory banner or if someone wants to give away cool pokemon/items/whatever, this is strictly for bragging rights. The Hall of Hey Fuck You For Beating All of Us will transfer from tournament to tournament, so people will see your splendor for generations to come. Or at least for like another month.
I scrolled through a few posts, but I'm feeling lazy. Are the results being posted anywhere? Maybe a play by play of some of the more interesting battles? I know I'm not in it, but I'm curious how things are progressing and if anything fun has happened like a normally sissy Poke taking out a Garchomp.
Also, I'm still not sure I like having this Darkrai. So I can offer my "Semi legit" Darkrai to the winner.
Yeah. I see no reason to not have bi-weekly tournaments.
Once a month should be the Single/Double Elimination one, and the other one can change depending on the number of people who want to participate.
When I played in Magic:tG tournaments they did uh... well, I don't know what the style is, but here's how it worked:
Your first round you are randomly matched up.
A win is 3 points a loss is 0 points.
People with 3 points are matched up in the second round, likewise, people with 0 points are matched up.
Third round, people with the highest amount of points are matched up...
Rinse, repeat.
The number of rounds depends on the number of participants.
I mean, there's probably a tournament style that we can make work regardless of the number of people who want to sign up, and we could decide, based on the amount of participation, which style we do.
Heh, Ziz. That's what my prize package would consist of. A Darkrai and a Shaymin, both gotten myself from the Elite 4 glitch in the Japanese version and cloned.
That might be better because it'd be more "real". Mine was gotten, I'm told, by hacking something to make the even happen where you catch it. So while no hacking went into making the Darkrai itself, hacking did go into making the game make the even that made the Darkrai itself.
The results of matches are being posted in the OP. Since you can't spectate though, I'm unable to write up play-by-plays, or I would.
And if there are no further objections, I'm going with small-big bi-weekly tournaments. The current arguments raised do not convince me that this is a bad idea. I'll pull over the sign-up sheet from the last pokethread, and you can feel free to post there if you'd like to sign up for the July 11th, 16 player, single elimination tournament. On July 25th, we'll hold a 32 player double elimination tournament. Additionally, to make the 32 person tournaments seem more "official" or whatever, you can only get into the Hall of Hey Fuck You For Beating All of Us if you win a 32 player tournament.
I wouldnt mind writing up little summaries of my battles, I think the problem is we cant give away the strategies of the teams that havent been eliminated yet.
On that note, while it's an interesting change of pace to be able to see your opponent's team ahead of time and plan for it, can we not do this in the future? Your teams still should be given before the tournament begins to whoever is running it, and again after you are eliminated just to ensure that you used the proper pokemon. It's better if your opponent doesn't know that you have a pokemon with Water Absorb or Guts or something.
In the future, I'm going to make it optional by having players PM their opponents instead of me or a judge/coordinator do it. So if both players think they should see the other guy's team, then great. If not, whatever.
And on the topic of summaries, the whole "not giving away strategy" is certainly a valid point, however it's one that doesn't really matter for the finals. So maybe in the championship match we can have it? If the finalists want to write it up, that is.
If you want tournaments with any number of players, then go with a swiss-style tournament. This is basically the format RedMageDarion mentioned that Magic:tG tournaments use. In each round, everybody plays others who have records that are similar to their own. Usually there are one or two more rounds than normally needed to determine a winner in single elimination, but at the end the one with the best record is still champion. On the up side, this format allows players to continue playing even after defeated multiple times, plus it eliminates the waiting periods that people in the winners bracket sometime have in an unbalanced multi-elimination format (ie double elimination, etc.). However, this format requires more coordination of players, especially in an online environment, and takes slightly longer. I'd recommend using this format only on a monthly or three-week schedule, as bi-weekly will probably be too close together.
I still wish I had programming knowledge so I could set up an ELO-style ranking database for this game. Apparently PBR doesn't have a skill ranking system? What a gyp.
Yeah, the swiss-style tournament is a good idea. People who lose early can still continue to battle, but they can also choose to drop out at any time if they wish.
EDIT: Those tournaments would only be done monthly, since regular double-elimination tournaments will be done monthly as well.
We had 16 player single elimination tournaments and 32 player double elimination tournaments switching off on a biweekly basis. We're turning the 32 player tournaments into Swiss tournaments, since it allows for slightly more or less than 32 player brackets, and lets people that aren't as good play longer.
This may be a little late, but i do have an idea for the 16-man tourneys. You take that idea someone had eariler, where you fight for a spot to compete. The first 16 people to get into the tourney are listed one week before it really starts. Then for the next week, anyone who is not in it can challenge someone for their slot. Thus, keeping it interesting.
Also, i think we should do double elimination for the 32man one, unless we have many people than 32 wanting in (like when europe getstheir hands on it) in which case we go to the swiss style thingy
It should be mentioned that embedded within the swiss format, you can also see the single-elimination and (semi-balanced) double-elimination formats. That is to say, a swiss-style tournament can be made to contain the same matches that would be played in a semi-balanced double-elimination tournament. The only reason not to do a swiss tournament is an increase in management needed and increase in complexity. Not so much of a problem with Pokemon.
MrBlarney on
0
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
edited June 2007
I beat Zero, albeit barely.
Zero, the only reason why I think I won is because I used your knowledge of my team against you the best I could. This is not the exact same team that you have fought before, and I think that made the difference.
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
Fucking hell. I lost entirely because I left Zetsuei in stupidly against your (guy), so I had nothing to counter the (guy). Goddamnit.
Here's my team for the hall of shame:
Weavile
Poliwrath
Charizard
Donphan
Mismagius
Tangrowth
When I was selecting brick break on the 3rd turn, I was thinking to myself "don't do it, switch out to charizard, you know this isn't gonna kill it, stop stop stop noooo"
BahamutZERO on
0
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
edited June 2007
I ain't giving away no secrets to how it went down.
But it was an amazing match
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
I'm gonna say right now that if we had a rematch, it could go entirely the other way. But munkus won. Beat the crap out of Shujin for all the rest of us you sodomized to get this far.
Posts
http://www.audioentropy.com/
As far as I can see, there's no reason to not do bi-weekly, alternating between 16 and 32 people. The 16 who play every two weeks are people who want to play often. The 32 who play every two/four weeks are a combination of the people from the 16 person tournaments, and people who only can/want to play once a month. And because the 32 person one is bigger, it creates more bragging rights for the winner. Winning the monthly tournament is a bigger achievement than winning the bi-weekly tournament, so the bi-weekly tournament won't significantly degrade the importance of the monthly one. So everyone wins.
http://www.audioentropy.com/
http://www.audioentropy.com/
I would totally compete again with my current 6-man team (now with some general alterations).
Also, I'm going to vote against round-robin tournaments - at any number above, like, 10, those take FOREVER. Besides, if you have a shoddy team, you get the pleasure of having your ass kicked 31 times - which is hells fun, right?
I think we should do double-elimnation from now on. Single-elimination sucks, especially in Pokemon, where it's incredibly easy to fluke into or out of a win.
But will it be enough?
Also, WHAT? ASHTON LOST? To SHUJIN?
Man oh man. All the people I imagined had the best chance of getting to the finals have been knocked out now. Maybe I better not underestimate Shujin, either.
Yeah, he's got a good team. I pretty much got wrecked. You seem to have a really good team, though, so you probably have a very good chance.
Anyway, I'm rooting for you, B0.
EDIT: Over the course of one month, what are the chances that half of you guys will even still be playing? I mean, look at the Friend Code list for Diamond and Pearl. How many of those people are still playing? This is only 2 months after release. If that many people dropped off that quick, how many more are going to completely disappear before the end of July?
If not, I'm more than willing to toss together a (in-game) prize package for the champion.
also I think some of this is getting too elitist. it's fucking pokemon. friendly tournaments and such. I'll admit I'm not that good and I'll be the first person to sit out for someone more competitive, but I do like to battle and a tournament is the place to see the action
I still haven't really seen a good reason against biweekly big/small tournaments yet.
Also unless one of your fancypants photoshoppers wants to make some kind of victory banner or if someone wants to give away cool pokemon/items/whatever, this is strictly for bragging rights. The Hall of Hey Fuck You For Beating All of Us will transfer from tournament to tournament, so people will see your splendor for generations to come. Or at least for like another month.
http://www.audioentropy.com/
yeah, you didn't so much KO him as you destroyed my toughest tank and spit on the corpse. I hate crobats because of that
I scrolled through a few posts, but I'm feeling lazy. Are the results being posted anywhere? Maybe a play by play of some of the more interesting battles? I know I'm not in it, but I'm curious how things are progressing and if anything fun has happened like a normally sissy Poke taking out a Garchomp.
Also, I'm still not sure I like having this Darkrai. So I can offer my "Semi legit" Darkrai to the winner.
Once a month should be the Single/Double Elimination one, and the other one can change depending on the number of people who want to participate.
When I played in Magic:tG tournaments they did uh... well, I don't know what the style is, but here's how it worked:
Your first round you are randomly matched up.
A win is 3 points a loss is 0 points.
People with 3 points are matched up in the second round, likewise, people with 0 points are matched up.
Third round, people with the highest amount of points are matched up...
Rinse, repeat.
The number of rounds depends on the number of participants.
I mean, there's probably a tournament style that we can make work regardless of the number of people who want to sign up, and we could decide, based on the amount of participation, which style we do.
Heh, Ziz. That's what my prize package would consist of. A Darkrai and a Shaymin, both gotten myself from the Elite 4 glitch in the Japanese version and cloned.
And if there are no further objections, I'm going with small-big bi-weekly tournaments. The current arguments raised do not convince me that this is a bad idea. I'll pull over the sign-up sheet from the last pokethread, and you can feel free to post there if you'd like to sign up for the July 11th, 16 player, single elimination tournament. On July 25th, we'll hold a 32 player double elimination tournament. Additionally, to make the 32 person tournaments seem more "official" or whatever, you can only get into the Hall of Hey Fuck You For Beating All of Us if you win a 32 player tournament.
http://www.audioentropy.com/
On that note, while it's an interesting change of pace to be able to see your opponent's team ahead of time and plan for it, can we not do this in the future? Your teams still should be given before the tournament begins to whoever is running it, and again after you are eliminated just to ensure that you used the proper pokemon. It's better if your opponent doesn't know that you have a pokemon with Water Absorb or Guts or something.
And on the topic of summaries, the whole "not giving away strategy" is certainly a valid point, however it's one that doesn't really matter for the finals. So maybe in the championship match we can have it? If the finalists want to write it up, that is.
http://www.audioentropy.com/
If you want tournaments with any number of players, then go with a swiss-style tournament. This is basically the format RedMageDarion mentioned that Magic:tG tournaments use. In each round, everybody plays others who have records that are similar to their own. Usually there are one or two more rounds than normally needed to determine a winner in single elimination, but at the end the one with the best record is still champion. On the up side, this format allows players to continue playing even after defeated multiple times, plus it eliminates the waiting periods that people in the winners bracket sometime have in an unbalanced multi-elimination format (ie double elimination, etc.). However, this format requires more coordination of players, especially in an online environment, and takes slightly longer. I'd recommend using this format only on a monthly or three-week schedule, as bi-weekly will probably be too close together.
I still wish I had programming knowledge so I could set up an ELO-style ranking database for this game. Apparently PBR doesn't have a skill ranking system? What a gyp.
EDIT: Those tournaments would only be done monthly, since regular double-elimination tournaments will be done monthly as well.
http://www.audioentropy.com/
Or wait... I'm confused.
We had 16 player single elimination tournaments and 32 player double elimination tournaments switching off on a biweekly basis. We're turning the 32 player tournaments into Swiss tournaments, since it allows for slightly more or less than 32 player brackets, and lets people that aren't as good play longer.
http://www.audioentropy.com/
ME UNDRSTAND GOOD.
Makes more sense now.
Also, i think we should do double elimination for the 32man one, unless we have many people than 32 wanting in (like when europe getstheir hands on it) in which case we go to the swiss style thingy
Zero, the only reason why I think I won is because I used your knowledge of my team against you the best I could. This is not the exact same team that you have fought before, and I think that made the difference.
Here's my team for the hall of shame:
Weavile
Poliwrath
Charizard
Donphan
Mismagius
Tangrowth
When I was selecting brick break on the 3rd turn, I was thinking to myself "don't do it, switch out to charizard, you know this isn't gonna kill it, stop stop stop noooo"
But it was an amazing match