Moderator: Tournament Directors
Kind of wondering myself when the next round is starting. Figured it was run as an autotournament and next round would be immediate.Winged Cat wrote:The final round 1 game has ended! (With an anticlimactic deadbeating, but it's over.) How much time do the remaining freemiums in the top 96 have to upgrade? (I upgraded specifically for this tournament.)
I think they have to set it up and it creates the games. They need to seed the players moving on based on wins into groups of 16 (I think?)shoop76 wrote:Kind of wondering myself when the next round is starting. Figured it was run as an autotournament and next round would be immediate.Winged Cat wrote:The final round 1 game has ended! (With an anticlimactic deadbeating, but it's over.) How much time do the remaining freemiums in the top 96 have to upgrade? (I upgraded specifically for this tournament.)
They are waiting for my premium to expire, so I'm forced to buy another one.PedroV100 wrote:for some reason i think murphys law is going to get me this time... these bunch of new games are going to come at worst time posible lol
any guestimates for how much longer it will be?


Nice work. Though I don't see how head to head can be used here, with the discrepancies in amount of head to head games. What if 1 player would be eliminated because he had no head to head games. I see its not the case here, but for me this tiebreaker makes no sense.Bigragooch wrote:If it helps, here is what I determined to be the tiebreakers among those with six wins. I only determined the 2nd to play wins for the three that it affected since I could only figure it out manually.
Thanks. I agree with you that the H2H tiebreaker is an odd one with this many players. Usually, it is only used when everyone has played one another at least once. To your point, in this case, stuboy is being eliminated because he played no H2H games. I just followed the tiebreaker rules and showed the results in case someone hadn't had time to do it.shoop76 wrote: Nice work. Though I don't see how head to head can be used here, with the discrepancies in amount of head to head games. What if 1 player would be eliminated because he had no head to head games. I see its not the case here, but for me this tiebreaker makes no sense.

And why is 1/4 better than 0/0. Besides the obvious percentage it gives you.Bigragooch wrote:Thanks. I agree with you that the H2H tiebreaker is an odd one with this many players. Usually, it is only used when everyone has played one another at least once. To your point, in this case, stuboy is being eliminated because he played no H2H games. I just followed the tiebreaker rules and showed the results in case someone hadn't had time to do it.shoop76 wrote: Nice work. Though I don't see how head to head can be used here, with the discrepancies in amount of head to head games. What if 1 player would be eliminated because he had no head to head games. I see its not the case here, but for me this tiebreaker makes no sense.
To alaskanassassin - I believe they determined that they were going to ignore the sitter rule in round 1 and revised the rules for the remainder of the tournament.
I had already pointed out this issue, check it here: http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 5#p4408777shoop76 wrote:And why is 1/4 better than 0/0. Besides the obvious percentage it gives you.Bigragooch wrote:Thanks. I agree with you that the H2H tiebreaker is an odd one with this many players. Usually, it is only used when everyone has played one another at least once. To your point, in this case, stuboy is being eliminated because he played no H2H games. I just followed the tiebreaker rules and showed the results in case someone hadn't had time to do it.shoop76 wrote: Nice work. Though I don't see how head to head can be used here, with the discrepancies in amount of head to head games. What if 1 player would be eliminated because he had no head to head games. I see its not the case here, but for me this tiebreaker makes no sense.
To alaskanassassin - I believe they determined that they were going to ignore the sitter rule in round 1 and revised the rules for the remainder of the tournament.
chapcrap wrote:I am not worried about this. That's why there are additional tiebreakers. Obviously, I can't give you the answer to your Player A, B, C hypothetical, because you didn't tell me who the winners were. But, I tiebreak there is easy enough to figure out.


What you're saying there makes a lot of sense. It could also explain why they've put up the standings with the order within groups. That was a bit of a mystery to me.pearljamrox2 wrote:Spoiler
H2H is the 1st tie-breaker. It should always be used first to break the tie. But if you have multiple people tied, head to head usually doesn't work. So if the 1st tie-breaker doesn't break the tie, you go on to the next one. There are more ties to break in this tournament than just who is on the cut off line. Every round gets seeded in some way. H2H will be used as a tiebreaker a bit, I'm sure...but when it doesn't work you go on to the next one. I hope you are not saying what you have shown is official. I think maybe you misunderstand. I would assume in this instance the second and third tiebreakers would determine the field.
I'm not saying this is how it will be done, or should be done. But in the NFL, when they have a tie for the wildcard, they break the ties in the divisions first. So in our case, you take all the "group A" players with 6 wins, come up with the top rep from that division and do the same for all divisions. Once all groups have only 1 rep, compare those players to come up with the winner. If you break the ties in the divisions first, you MIGHT be able to use head to head, since teams in a division have played each other. But even then, it could be inconclusive. After you have determined the one who beat out all the rest, you do it again. All the other divisions winners are the same, you just check the division that the winner came from and replace him/her with the next winner from that division...repeat until tie is sufficiently broken.
But ultimately, everytime you try to break a tie, you try to use head to head. Eventually it will work, but when it doesn't you move to the next one. I dont think it works here. If someone has an 0-0 record in H2H, wouldn't that just mean they came from a division where they were the only team that had 6 wins? And someone 1-4 just means a bunch of people in their division had 6 wins.
Anyway, I'm sure Chap has it under control. I really don't think it will come out like you think.
Also, head to head means how I did against YOU, individually...not a collections of people....that would be head to heads..right?