Moderator: Community Team
greenoaks wrote:subscribe to the weekly tournament newsletter.
all that information is contained within, providing the organiser submits it to the editor. hint hint organisers.
rebelman wrote:EIOT Battle for Waterloo (22/64)
yeti_c wrote:rebelman wrote:EIOT Battle for Waterloo (22/64)
I've a feeling that I can workout what map this one is on?!
C.
greenoaks wrote:i do like the idea it is just that we already have a way of providing that information (the weekly newsletter) and most organisers aren't providing a summary of what their tourney entails so i just think - cool feature but organisers too lazy to use.
rebelman wrote:greenoaks wrote:i do like the idea it is just that we already have a way of providing that information (the weekly newsletter) and most organisers aren't providing a summary of what their tourney entails so i just think - cool feature but organisers too lazy to use.
laziness can be overcome if its a requirement it would take a few secs when they set it up initally. If organisers were told without tags lke this they will not be granted privs I'm sure they would get over their laziness quickly
rebelman wrote:yeti_c wrote:rebelman wrote:EIOT Battle for Waterloo (22/64)
I've a feeling that I can workout what map this one is on?!
C.
agreed
but if it read:
EIOT Battle for Waterloo (22/64) [brack][1v1][sun]
you would know at a glance its a sunny 1 v 1 bracket tournie
whereas if it read
EIOT Battle for Waterloo (22/64) [dub elim][quad][fog]
you would then know at a glance it was a a double elimination quads tournie with fog of war.
ps i actually dont know what format it is those 2 examples are purely that.
yeti_c wrote:But what about tournies where you choose options etc?
C.
greenoaks wrote:yeti_c wrote:But what about tournies where you choose options etc?
C.
various, players choice, random.
greenoaks wrote:it is just that we already have a way of providing that information (the weekly newsletter)
yeti_c wrote:greenoaks wrote:yeti_c wrote:But what about tournies where you choose options etc?
C.
various, players choice, random.
Yeah - but what applies to what...
So a tourney that said
Daves Tourney [Classic, Choice, Various, Random] means bugger all except that it's on Classic map.
C.
Natewolfman wrote:yeti_c wrote:greenoaks wrote:yeti_c wrote:But what about tournies where you choose options etc?
C.
various, players choice, random.
Yeah - but what applies to what...
So a tourney that said
Daves Tourney [Classic, Choice, Various, Random] means bugger all except that it's on Classic map.
C.
perhaps in that case you would just say "Daves Tourney [Classic]" and nothing more... if every tournament organizer is going with the format, a lack of options means that itwould be your choice, or it is yet undecided
Night Strike wrote:First off, I feel that it's a bad idea to require this information in the Newsletter. If Gozar wishes to do so, that's his choice and his work.
This idea is also irrelevant for requesting privileges. They can't be requested until after the tournament is full, so why should a TD bother to check if this tag is included?? Steel and Optimus don't care (in their roles as TDs) what specific formats people use for their tournaments, just that they are run smoothly without being abandoned.
Now, with this being said, I believe that it is the organizer's responsibility to find the best way to fill their own tournament. When I recruited for Heroes: Choose Your Power, I included a tag that said [4 player games]. This was because of the high amount of 1v1 tournaments being created at that time. I also included [6 player doubles] for Amazing Race. If an organizer wants to fill up the tournament in an efficient manner, they need to make an attractive, easy-to-understand first post as well as information in the topic header. If any organizers need help with these, I'm sure a TD would be glad to provide assistance.
Perhaps someone should make up a list of abbreviations that could be used in headings. Then PM them to Optimus to make a sticky or something. Or do the work in one of the Tournament forums.
greenoaks wrote:rebelman wrote:greenoaks wrote:i do like the idea it is just that we already have a way of providing that information (the weekly newsletter) and most organisers aren't providing a summary of what their tourney entails so i just think - cool feature but organisers too lazy to use.
laziness can be overcome if its a requirement it would take a few secs when they set it up initally. If organisers were told without tags lke this they will not be granted privs I'm sure they would get over their laziness quickly
now that i really like, if it could also be required that the same info is provided for the mailout or no privs - a perfect world.
rebelman wrote:NS what that person was suggesting was more tos should submit their details to gozar which is actually something he himself has asked for.
as for the making it a privs requirement again this is just a suggestion as one way to overcome laziness
Optimus Prime wrote:So, you know what is really funny about this entire thread? I've already discussed tagging the threads with "Singles, Doubles, Triples, Quads, 1 vs 1, etc." with Twill and Lack. Like......3 months ago at least.
This entire thread makes me chuckle.![]()
![]()
Optimus Prime wrote:Now, in regards to all the variety of tags being mentioned here, I think things are getting a bit overboard. I can see mention of using things such as:
Singles
Doubles
Triples
Quads
1 vs 1
Fog
Sunny
Bracket
Round-Robin
Various Map Names
...and so on down the list.
Return to Archived Suggestions
Users browsing this forum: No registered users