PDA

View Full Version : Playtesters wanted - custom tourney



Xenavire
04-05-2014, 12:54 PM
OK guys, I am going to lead off with the concept, because I don't have a set deadline for this yet. I will edit this post when I have some feedback, and cement a date for playtesting.

Concept name: Hydra (may change.)

Concept flavour: The heads of a multiheaded beast (the Hydra) fight for dominance.

Concept mechanics: Players will be split into 'pods' (size will vary depending on participants and rounds) and play round robin style. The leading player in each pod when all games are played will proceed to the next round. In the event of tied scores, an impartial player (dubbed a rogue head) will attempt to break the tie.

Pod size will be a minimum of 3 (ideal for a 2 round 9 man tournament), and steadily increasing in size as needed. The idea is to be flexible and accommodate as many players as required, while keeping the number of rounds low.


Disclaimers: I know that this concept is currently incomplete. Part of me wanting to run this playtest is to identify the weaknesses of the idea, and see if it is both fun and interesting to play.

I also have not decided whether rounds will be best of 3, or simply sudden death. I also need to decide exactly how the 'rogue head' mechanic would work - I intend for it to be a tie breaker, but how to ensure that players wouldn't simply end up with the same win/loss ratio after?


I am looking for volunteers, criticisms, and advice. I want something that is fun and flexible, without taking an excessive amount of time. I also want to try and run these regularly - I am aiming for monthly, but if the response is positive I would happily run them more often.


Lastly, if anyone knows a format/custom rules that resemble this, I would be very interested in seeing them so I can compare notes, and see where I might be making mistakes.

stiii
04-05-2014, 02:27 PM
The most obvious problem I see is this rogue head thing. How exactly does someone pick who advances? Round robin has an issue where you can have loads of players all in joint first.

Xenavire
04-05-2014, 02:39 PM
The most obvious problem I see is this rogue head thing. How exactly does someone pick who advances? Round robin has an issue where you can have loads of players all in joint first.

The idea is to have the pods go through the round robin, and if there are ties in score, the 'rogue head' is meant to come in as a wildcard to try and break the tie. I am fully aware that the idea needs work, so I am open to suggestions. I considered 'Who can beat the rogue head the fastest', but that skews the favor towards aggro very heavily.

I have been considering match play, with the players using the total wins versus losses as a ranking (meaning a 2/0 is stronger than a 2/1). I don't know that a 'rogue head' round would fix that however, but it is the best tie breaker solution I can think of - pitting the players against each other indefinitely hardly seems efficient.

If someone can replace the 'rogue head' idea, I am perfectly happy to remove it. It is really a placeholder idea for tie breaking. Although it is what I will fall back on for the testing phase if nothing more fair comes along.

FlyingMeatchip
04-05-2014, 03:04 PM
Depends on what day of the week but I would be interested. My days off are Mon-Wed.

Xenavire
04-05-2014, 03:08 PM
Depends on what day of the week but I would be interested. My days off are Mon-Wed.

No day set as of yet, so I can be as flexible as any people wanting to take part. I should mention I am planning to run this at some point after the next patch, and for now I would like to test with a minimum of 9 people (although I will take what I can get, really.)

RobHaven
04-05-2014, 11:29 PM
If it's a round robin, wouldn't the tie-breaker be the head-to-head winner? Also (unless I'm misunderstanding your intentions), wouldn't a three man pod have only two possible outcomes: One player has two wins or all players have one win?

It's late. It's entirely too possible that I'm missing things because I've been up for 20 hours and I need to crash. Maybe not though. I don't know.

If you need bodies and I'm around, I'll fill in a gap for you.

Xenavire
04-06-2014, 04:06 AM
Well, in a 3 way round robin, it is like rock paper scissors. Or it can have someone who wins twice.

But aside from the 3 way tie, we want a system that can support larger pods too - 4/5 man pods would be useful when you have a lot of people playing.

Ebynfel
04-08-2014, 07:41 AM
honestly, either having a head to head playoff. Or having the winner of the round robins as a tie breaker would work best for the 3 player pod. When looking at it, though, you're going to have someone sitting once a round in each pod? I mean, 3 people means that 2 of them are playing and one is sitting.

Edit:
I think a better idea is, instead of having larger pods, have more pods. More people advancing, I think, is a better idea than flexible pod sizes. I'd probably aim for 4 players per pod to keep activity every round. If a pod has 3, then someone gets a bye. You're increasing round length by a game, but with 3 person pods there will always be a bye round for each player. I think the constant activity would be more desirable.

As to keeping the number of rounds low, more players, I think, should warrant a higher number of rounds that runs more smoothly.

Xenavire
04-08-2014, 09:33 AM
OK, thanks for the input. I can see the logic with making the pods a minimum of 4, so that seems like a positive change. So I think for the testing phase, pods of 4 would probably be the best fit. Good call.

As for the tie breakers, the head to head tie breaker, or the winner of the round robin match that the tied players had, would both work well. The problem is an equal tie (where every player has the same number of wins and losses.) I am obviously hoping this would be rare, and that the rogue head tie breaker system would be a last ditch resort, but I am not convinced it would work (even though it is my own idea, I know it has flaws.)

Ebynfel
04-08-2014, 10:02 AM
OK, thanks for the input. I can see the logic with making the pods a minimum of 4, so that seems like a positive change. So I think for the testing phase, pods of 4 would probably be the best fit. Good call.

As for the tie breakers, the head to head tie breaker, or the winner of the round robin match that the tied players had, would both work well. The problem is an equal tie (where every player has the same number of wins and losses.) I am obviously hoping this would be rare, and that the rogue head tie breaker system would be a last ditch resort, but I am not convinced it would work (even though it is my own idea, I know it has flaws.)

in round robin, though. the two players at 2/1 or what haveyou, have played each other. Tie breaker is the one that won that match, so the tie breaker there, will always work if the pods stay round robin.

Xenavire
04-08-2014, 10:25 AM
in round robin, though. the two players at 2/1 or what haveyou, have played each other. Tie breaker is the one that won that match, so the tie breaker there, will always work if the pods stay round robin.

I am pretty distracted right now, so I am just going to go through this quickly.

Player wins all 3 games - obvious winner.

Two players win 2 games, lose 1 each. Tie breaker is the winner of the game they played.

Now, I think this would still leave a 4 way tie of one win and 2 losses correct? Or am I missing something obvious?

Ebynfel
04-08-2014, 12:06 PM
r1
1 beats 2
3 beats 4

r2
2 beats 3
4 beats 1

that gives everyone a 1-1 record. in round 3, 1-1 would play 1-1 in both matchups. meaning the most you'd have is a 2 way tie for 2-1. and, they'd have all played each other over 3 rounds.

Edit:
Also, in 6 total games(3 rounds) for there to be a 4 way tie at 1-2 it means 8 games had to be lost. it is borderline possible, as draws count for losses(iirc). This would need a precedent, but it's be rough, as I believe it would take 2 draws in 6 games to make that happen. THe offense would literally require like you both have 1 life. You have a turreted wall and inferno hits you. Or something equally messed up. I've never seen a draw scenario yet, but i believe CZE had said that draws count as a loss for each player.

Xenavire
04-08-2014, 01:18 PM
r1
1 beats 2
3 beats 4

r2
2 beats 3
4 beats 1

that gives everyone a 1-1 record. in round 3, 1-1 would play 1-1 in both matchups. meaning the most you'd have is a 2 way tie for 2-1. and, they'd have all played each other over 3 rounds.

Edit:
Also, in 6 total games(3 rounds) for there to be a 4 way tie at 1-2 it means 8 games had to be lost. it is borderline possible, as draws count for losses(iirc). This would need a precedent, but it's be rough, as I believe it would take 2 draws in 6 games to make that happen. THe offense would literally require like you both have 1 life. You have a turreted wall and inferno hits you. Or something equally messed up. I've never seen a draw scenario yet, but i believe CZE had said that draws count as a loss for each player.

OK, so a 4 way pod/round robin would have the minute chance for a draw. If we include win/loss ratio per match, that narrows the chance even further.

On this near impossible outcome, what would be the best solution? Sudden death round? Losers get eliminated instead of being round robin?

Ebynfel
04-08-2014, 08:08 PM
i THINK this could have a sudden death round, though it would make it a lot easier if draws were tracked, then there's be a clear cut sudden death of the two players with a draw. I am not sure how to make it last less than 2 additional rounds though. I'd say roll with it as is, and IF the situation ever happens wing it?

I got nothing if all 4 players were involved in draws to account for only 4 total wins in 6 games.

Xenavire
04-09-2014, 04:07 AM
On the offchance of the draw situation, sudden death elimination, best of 1. The players already had their matches, so 1 game is fair. It should be pretty fast at only one game.

Now we just need testers. 2 volunteers from here, and 2 from my guild (including me). If we can double that, then we have 2 full pods, which would be enough to test, although I would love to get 16 (to make round 2 a 4 man pod.)

Xenavire
04-13-2014, 03:07 PM
OK, I want to get this tested within the next week. I need 4 more testers (minimum), and as soon as I have met the minimum we can discuss a day/time to run the test. I expect it to take an afternoon.

I really want this tested ASAP because I want to run an event near the start of closed beta, and another near the start of open beta, both of which I will try to offer prize support for (and will likely be free to enter.)

Ebynfel
04-13-2014, 05:09 PM
I'd offer, but I don't think i will have the time. Afternoons are def a no go for me unfortunately.

Xenavire
04-13-2014, 05:24 PM
I use the term 'afternoon' loosely. The round robin will take a while, but the final round will probably go by very quickly. The actual time of day would vary based on what was best for everyone.

Xenavire
04-17-2014, 12:13 PM
Ok, I am going to try filling the slots in-game, as there seem to be very few people interested in testing.

Can those who have expressed interest already make it this weekend? The time required should be approximately the same as a standard Swiss tournament (hopefully a little shorter.) I would prefer to do the testing on Saturday, is there any time that people would be available?

RobHaven
04-17-2014, 12:21 PM
I can play for as long as needed Saturday night. What time were you thinking?

Xenavire
04-17-2014, 12:31 PM
Well, I am GMT+1 for time zone, and I am free the whole night into the wee hours of the morning. So for PS(D?)T, the times could range anywhere from 9am to about 1pm for a start time (I could go later if needed) and it could run for a little over 3 hours at max (assuming a few long games, although I hope to avoid that.)

So most of Saturday is available, it really depends on the players.

Xenavire
04-18-2014, 04:08 PM
OK, all those wanting to take part, or just watch, I will be streaming here: http://www.twitch.tv/xenavire

I will start streaming at 7pm (GMT+1), which is 10am (PDT). The start of the stream is not the start time for the tournament, so players will have time to arrive and we will discuss how the event will play out.

The rules:

All matches will be best of 3 games, no reserves (due to proving grounds not supporting reserves.)

Round one: the 8(or more) players will be split into groups of 4. Games will be played by round robin rules, and the leading player will advance.

Round two: Any remaining players will play for placings. If more than two people advance, the round will play by round robin rules, with a tie breaker round should there be a tie.



There are no prizes up for grabs this time, but if things go well, the next tournament will have prize support.

Xenavire
04-19-2014, 10:01 AM
I have just started to stream. When we have enough players, I will get things started.