Proposed modification to tournament rules.

Grauniad · March 13, 2013, 12:30:58 PM

Quote from: Helper on March 13, 2013, 10:00:32 AM
Quote from: asmussen on March 12, 2013, 01:38:56 PM
...the usual suspects

I normally tend to go along with existing rules, but it IS true that the same half-dozen or so names create the games every week.

How radical (and/or good/bad) would it be if we modify the existing rules? Something trackable such as no one who has made a map in the past 5 games can do the next one.

This post may need to be moved to a different thread, but I thought it worthwhile to throw out for discussion.
H

Go for it.

One suggestion. Allow the first player to complete all 5 maps to make the next week's tournament.

Lord_Farin · March 13, 2013, 01:06:14 PM

Seems like a great idea, Grauniad. One way to organise this is to let the first person to post a score table with their own completed game accompanied by some sort of announcement (e.g. "I'll post next week's tournament") do it.

We can always build in the current rules as a fallback for the unlikely case that this does not provide a consistent flow of tournament creators.

Helper · March 13, 2013, 01:24:13 PM

Good idea. It would give everyone a chance to post a tournament.
I like it.

MizInIA · March 13, 2013, 01:50:26 PM

i dunno.... you mean us cellar dwellers are going to have to figure out how to build the score table and other technical stuff. :)

Helper · March 13, 2013, 02:06:27 PM

Quote from: MizInIA on March 13, 2013, 01:50:26 PM
i dunno.... you mean us cellar dwellers are going to have to figure out how to build the score table and other technical stuff. :)

The magic Mopa-Man has automated the basic functions enough that TOTAL non-programmer/web folks (me) can do it fairly simply.
I'm sure that someone with experience would be glad to help, but you can always delay posting that 5th score until someone else does.

My primary reason for suggesting this was to (a) give those who want to a chance to create a game, and (2) maybe up the fun level a bit for more players.

mopa42 · March 13, 2013, 05:26:42 PM

I'm game.

Maybe the rules will read something like this:
The first person to complete all 5 maps and post the score table will earn the privilege of creating next week's tournament. The last 4 tournaments' creators (mopa42, Lord_Farin, Helper, and asmussen) are ineligible to create next week's tournament. If no maps for a week are up by Monday at midnight (forum time), anyone can create the tournament.

Do we want some magic phrase like "I'll post next week's tournament"?
If nobody posts by Monday, can anybody create the tournament, even the last 4 people?
Is past 4 creators a good number?
Who has next week? I'm not sure who was first to complete (dt42, Hunter Seeker, or inept_celt) this week. Or do we grandfather over and have first place create this last time?

asmussen · March 13, 2013, 05:43:42 PM

Quote from: mopa42 on March 13, 2013, 05:26:42 PM
Who has next week? I'm not sure who was first to complete (dt42, Hunter Seeker, or inept_celt) this week. Or do we grandfather over and have first place create this last time?

I'm pretty sure it was Hunter Seeker.

Helper · March 13, 2013, 05:45:38 PM

I agree - he was the first I saw when I ran the scorer program earlier this week.

EDIT:

I definitely think the mapee needs to indicate that they understand and will take on the task.
If they decline or don't post by midnight on Monday, it is open season for anyone who wants to take it.
4 sounds like a good number to me.
Not sure about next week. If Hunter Seeker wants to go for it, I say let him.

asmussen · March 13, 2013, 05:49:16 PM

I think this could at the very least be an interesting thing to try out for a while. However, I do see how it could tend to make it much easier on some players than others to be able to earn the right to do the next tournament. Some players, like myself for example, can usually find time on Monday or Tuesday to crank out all of the maps. In my case, I telecommute, and my Mondays are usually light meeting days. However, a lot of people may not even be able to start playing the tournament maps until later in the week because of other obligations, and with this system it would be very difficult for those people to be the first finisher.

Helper · March 13, 2013, 06:52:48 PM

To clarify:
I thought this concept might be a 'sometime' thing - just to give all regular players a shot at making up a series.
In general, I believe in the concept of rewarding whoever is demonstrably 'best' at doing something...but was also hoping to up the fun level for all the regular participants.

Permanently changing the map maker to whoever finishes first would take away the skill basis and replace it with only those who have a lot of free time on Mondays. You know, old retired guys (like me).

Maybe we make it the first game of the month - with none of the winners during the prior month being allowed to win.

Any changes made should follow the KISS (Keep It Simple, Sir) principle.

MizInIA · March 13, 2013, 09:32:00 PM

maybe something on the order of first or last tournament of the month could be awarded to one of the lower players or first done. that way the majority of the tournaments go to the top qualifiers. or... how about putting the number of participants that finished all 5 maps into a random number generator and the number that gets kicked back out is the finishing place that picks the next map.

ctuna · March 14, 2013, 10:58:18 AM

It all sounds complicated to me. Though I agree it might be nice to have some others produce the tournament maps, why not let the "winner" (with the caveats already in place regarding repeaters) offer the option to some other person in line who hasn't done it? It might take a little more time to do the coordination, but seems easier than try to chase down the "first" or design some random process.

I'll be ok with whatever you decide, but to me, simpler is better.

Lord_Farin · March 14, 2013, 11:00:37 AM

Quote from: ctuna on March 14, 2013, 10:58:18 AM
It all sounds complicated to me. Though I agree it might be nice to have some others produce the tournament maps, why not let the "winner" (with the caveats already in place regarding repeaters) offer the option to some other person in line who hasn't done it? It might take a little more time to do the coordination, but seems easier than try to chase down the "first" or design some random process.

I'll be ok with whatever you decide, but to me, simpler is better.

Like a leaf in the wind, I'll turn, and support this suggestion. People can indicate that they would be willing to create a tournament. The week's winner then has the option to delegate his duties.

Helper · March 14, 2013, 11:45:07 AM

These last two comments were kind of a wake up call for me. No need to re-invent the wheel - just modify it a bit.

Just let it be known that the option exists for someone other than the winner to do the next week. I personally don't mind creating the games, but would just as soon let someone else do it - especially if they volunteer.

MizInIA · March 14, 2013, 12:39:40 PM

Quote from: ctuna on March 14, 2013, 10:58:18 AM
why not let the "winner" (with the caveats already in place regarding repeaters) offer the option to some other person in line who hasn't done it?

I'll be ok with whatever you decide, but to me, simpler is better.

I will add a vote for the simpler is better approach. this one seems very workable.