Moderator: Tournament Directors

Already looking forward to them. The more maps the merrier!brandoncfi wrote:Actually danalan was talking about his round three games. Anyway 120 games at once is pretty intense. In Map Blaster 1 I think we had 73 games for the final and I remember thinking how badass that was. I can only imagine how many games MB VIII or IX will have.Vikermac wrote:danalan wrote:Holy crap.
I just logged in to play, and found 100 games waiting for me. What have I gotten myself into?
Where have you been? It's Round 2 of a MB tourney, of course you have that many games waiting for you.
I'm not 'serving people up', I just sometimes feel lucky.I know what you're thinking, punk. You're thinking "did he fire six shots or only five?" Now to tell you the truth I forgot myself in all this excitement. But being this is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and will blow you head clean off, you've gotta ask yourself a question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?
I have to say I am a bit upset with myself for doing so horribly I think this will be the worst round that I have ever played. A lot of credit to the players in november group, some of the best...I'm going to have to rethink my gameplay after this one. I've been cruising so far in this MB until this round. I think I have only won 2 games...when I usually average around 20%. The final round is going to be a challenge good luck to those moving on in November groupTtD wrote:I'm assigning minimum points possible, as I explained earlier in the thread. So for any game where four people are eliminated, the remaining four all have assigned 5 points a piece until anything further happens, etc...
If a player was to be the next eliminated in every remaining game they have, this is the point total they'd have.
Updated scores as of 1min ago;
TtD-442
Danalan-425
Jug68-410
Keefie-403
Vexx-403
Golson-357
Brandoncfi-348
General Flashman-330
Keefie has had an amazing night and racked up game after game and has dragged along Vexx in the process. With Jug having a stinker of a night, highlighted by deploying wrong on Sydney Metro, he's now really at threat from both of them.
Love the way this is running, as usual; if I were to change anything from MBV to MBVI, I might re-seed the players and form new groups every round, rather than only doing it once after qualifying. There are some people who could conceivably play against one another in every single round of the tourney, and I have to believe that gets a little boring.brandoncfi wrote:Great I have the lowest score, thats awsome...I've been on a bad run for the last several weeks...both here and RL but I did pass all my finals!!! On to PY3. After 7 years od school I'm ready to be done.
If any of you have some Ideas for MBVI now it the time please post here with anything that you want to see happen or any fresh ideas. I will be planning and starting MBVI over the next 2-3 weeks as we start to decide who will make the final
As the competitions resident cockroach I think that such a bias can have it's place, but you don't want to overdo it. The idea of so many games is to work out the strongest consistant scorer, wins are as much down to luck as skill and at least 2nd/3rd should get decent points. I'm fond of the current scoring, as despite the brutal luck i've had the past few days the scoring rewards me being in place almost every map to take a swing at the win. Far too many tournaments overly favour the wins column and it ends up being down to who can get lucky at the key moment, it really shouldn't be such a crapshoot.danalan wrote:This has been a difficult round, and I've had some good luck -- I've made Colonel for the first time ever, which is quite exciting. I don't expect it to last, but it's an important milestone for me.
I have to believe that there are some players in the November group that still don't understand escalating games very well. However I've just realized that over half of the games I've played are 8-player escalating games in Map Blaster tournaments. Clearly experience is an important factor in this tournament.
I still think the points awards are not balanced correctly. In my 007: "Bond, James Bond" #2: From Russia w/ Love tournament (BTW, I need reserves) I'm awarding 7 points for a win, 3 for second, 2 for third, 1 for 4th & 5th, and 0 for 6th & 7th. I'm not saying you should do the same, but it seems to work well, and rewards winning far more than playing it safe. I think you should consider the following points awards:
Win: 8
2nd: 4
3rd: 3
4th: 2
5th: 1
6th: 1
7th: 0
8th: 0
I agree that survival should be rewarded, but the current award of 5 points for coming in 4th, and 4 points for not even making the top half is too generous. I'm flexible as to changes in my suggestion, of course, but still think the award for a win should be much more significant than 2nd and 3rd. And I think the last 4 places shouldn't get much of anything. How about this:TtD wrote:As the competitions resident cockroach I think that such a bias can have it's place, but you don't want to overdo it. The idea of so many games is to work out the strongest consistant scorer, wins are as much down to luck as skill and at least 2nd/3rd should get decent points. I'm fond of the current scoring, as despite the brutal luck i've had the past few days the scoring rewards me being in place almost every map to take a swing at the win. Far too many tournaments overly favour the wins column and it ends up being down to who can get lucky at the key moment, it really shouldn't be such a crapshoot.danalan wrote: I still think the points awards are not balanced correctly. In my 007: "Bond, James Bond" #2: From Russia w/ Love tournament (BTW, I need reserves) I'm awarding 7 points for a win, 3 for second, 2 for third, 1 for 4th & 5th, and 0 for 6th & 7th. I'm not saying you should do the same, but it seems to work well, and rewards winning far more than playing it safe. I think you should consider the following points awards:
Win: 8
2nd: 4
3rd: 3
4th: 2
5th: 1
6th: 1
7th: 0
8th: 0