USA Supertournament [COMPLETED] WINNER overlander

[Dukasaur]

No.

I was so busy last week writing Great War tourneys I ran out of time. Then the last few days I've been working. I just plain ran out of time.

I finally have a few days off now, and I suppose I could get it up and running for tomorrow, but I think rather than rushing it through we may as well have a 1-week recess. There's been people asking for a break in the actions, and I guess they get their wish. Not by design, but mostly by coincidence, this week we'll have a break in the action and we'll resume with Maryland next Tuesday.

[LiveLoveTeach]

No.

I was so busy last week writing Great War tourneys I ran out of time. Then the last few days I've been working. I just plain ran out of time.

I finally have a few days off now, and I suppose I could get it up and running for tomorrow, but I think rather than rushing it through we may as well have a 1-week recess. There's been people asking for a break in the actions, and I guess they get their wish. Not by design, but mostly by coincidence, this week we'll have a break in the action and we'll resume with Maryland next Tuesday.

No worries, and that sounds good to me!

Thanks Duk!

[Dukasaur]

PLEASE REMEMBER TO VOTE



PLEASE REMEMBER TO VOTE

[jytreberg]

Whew! It will be nice to have a little break in the action. Especially with all the new WWI tourneys, the game load is getting crazy lately! Don't get me wrong, I love both of these tourneys, but it's tough to keep up, especially on weekends when the Mrs. is looking over my shoulder when I'm trying to play.

No.

I was so busy last week writing Great War tourneys I ran out of time. Then the last few days I've been working. I just plain ran out of time.

I finally have a few days off now, and I suppose I could get it up and running for tomorrow, but I think rather than rushing it through we may as well have a 1-week recess. There's been people asking for a break in the actions, and I guess they get their wish. Not by design, but mostly by coincidence, this week we'll have a break in the action and we'll resume with Maryland next Tuesday.

[lokisgal]

No.

I was so busy last week writing Great War tourneys I ran out of time. Then the last few days I've been working. I just plain ran out of time.

I finally have a few days off now, and I suppose I could get it up and running for tomorrow, but I think rather than rushing it through we may as well have a 1-week recess. There's been people asking for a break in the actions, and I guess they get their wish. Not by design, but mostly by coincidence, this week we'll have a break in the action and we'll resume with Maryland next Tuesday.

When you get this going again can you stagger the games from previous rounds - ie not send them all out on the same day

thanks!

[Dukasaur]

No.

I was so busy last week writing Great War tourneys I ran out of time. Then the last few days I've been working. I just plain ran out of time.

I finally have a few days off now, and I suppose I could get it up and running for tomorrow, but I think rather than rushing it through we may as well have a 1-week recess. There's been people asking for a break in the actions, and I guess they get their wish. Not by design, but mostly by coincidence, this week we'll have a break in the action and we'll resume with Maryland next Tuesday.

When you get this going again can you stagger the games from previous rounds - ie not send them all out on the same day

thanks!

No, the autotourney engine isn't that flexible. It does the whole round at once.

[lokisgal]

I meant from each round ie different maps on different days?

[CatchersMitt14]

I meant from each round ie different maps on different days?

It's still the same limitation with the auto-tournament system. Different maps drop on the same day because you finished rounds in the different auto-tournaments on the same day.

[ReDBuLLS]

The current auto tournament for Maryland lists France as the map. I think it should be British Isles?

[Dukasaur]

The current auto tournament for Maryland lists France as the map. I think it should be British Isles?

Fixed!

Thanks for posting... I was able to fix it before the first one launched. If nobody had said anything, could have been worse...

[Frito Bandito]

Do you think you could slow down on new maps until after the New Year?? The pace of games is killin' me!

[LiveLoveTeach]

Do you think you could slow down on new maps until after the New Year?? The pace of games is killin' me!

We just had a one week break.

[Dukasaur]

Do you think you could slow down on new maps until after the New Year?? The pace of games is killin' me!

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you don't have to join every single one. I'm only joining the ones on maps I like, which is about half.

In order to keep this event on track, we need to keep moving with a state every week.

[Dukasaur]

A proposal to introduce eliminations has been rejected.
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=225475


However, within the discussion there was another proposal:
Subject: Should the USA Supertournament introduce eliminations?

Just restructure the rounds so that the lowest point-value rounds are first and the higher point-value rounds are later.

.... which is accepted.


Starting with Massachusetts this week:
The old Round 1 remains Round 1 (1v1, 2 pts per game)
The old Round 2 becomes Round 5 (4p standard, 5 pts per game)
The old Round 3 becomes Round 2 (Poly3, 3 pts per game)
The old Round 4 becomes Round 6 (6p Term, 7 pts per game)
The old Round 5 becomes Round 3 (4p randomly Stan-Term-Ass, 4pts per game)
The old Round 6 becomes Round 4 (Poly 4, 4 pts per game)
The old Round 7 remains Round 7 (8p Assassin, 8 pts per game)

The new progression by round is therefore 2, 3, 4, 4. 5, 7, 8 points per game. This should help preserve the tension to the end and make these tourneys more exciting.

[dhallmeyer]

I just went through and tallied up my own standings for each one. I'm in 19/20 and have 335 points, if things ended today. Where is everyone else at?

update 12/12/17
21/22 tourneys
341
avg 16 pts, 9th place

update 12/18/17

show

update 12/26/17

show

Update 1/5/18

show

Update 1/11/18

show

Update 1/17/18

show

Update 1/23/18

show

Update 2/2/18

show

Update 2/13/18

show

Update 2/24/18

show

Update 3/9/18

show

Update 3/17/18

show

Update 3/28/18

show

Update 4/9/18

show

Update 4/16/18

show

Update 4/26/18

show

Update 5/8/18

show

Update 5/15/18

show

Update 5/25/18

show

Update 7/20/18

show

[Tobikera]

I've played and finished the first three games in the Maryland/Br. Isles tourney. However, now I see under "Tournaments" that the Maryland map is being offered again and that there are about 19 folks signed up.
I know the Mason/Dixon line went through parts of Maryland, but is this new signup kosher? I joined first time as a Yankee, but lived in Alabama for 18 years, so will be very comfortable joining a re-do as a Confederate..... Just let me know...
cheers, Tobi

[Dukasaur]

I've played and finished the first three games in the Maryland/Br. Isles tourney. However, now I see under "Tournaments" that the Maryland map is being offered again and that there are about 19 folks signed up.
I know the Mason/Dixon line went through parts of Maryland, but is this new signup kosher? I joined first time as a Yankee, but lived in Alabama for 18 years, so will be very comfortable joining a re-do as a Confederate..... Just let me know...
cheers, Tobi

Every week's tourney will reiterate for the full week. That means, as soon as one copy of the tournament is full, another one is launched, until the week is over. However, you cannot join more than one of each.

[Tobikera]

I've played and finished the first three games in the Maryland/Br. Isles tourney. However, now I see under "Tournaments" that the Maryland map is being offered again and that there are about 19 folks signed up.
I know the Mason/Dixon line went through parts of Maryland, but is this new signup kosher? I joined first time as a Yankee, but lived in Alabama for 18 years, so will be very comfortable joining a re-do as a Confederate..... Just let me know...
cheers, Tobi

Every week's tourney will reiterate for the full week. That means, as soon as one copy of the tournament is full, another one is launched, until the week is over. However, you cannot join more than one of each.

Yowser! Missed that little detail. Got it! Thanks for the quick reply. Only one slot left, but my finger's off the trigger.
Cheers, Tobi

[Dukasaur]

Okay, looking forward to the usual complaints about too many events at the end of the year, I'm looking at easing off the throttle for both USA and the Great War.

The first parameter are the Christmas event and the 12 Anniversary event. (Admin-level events)

7 Days of Conquer Club Dec. 22 to 28.
12 Anniversary Event Jan. 1 to TBD.

For USA, I'm planning as follows:
Michigan Dec. 5th
Minnesota Dec. 12th
(first break Dec. 19th)
Mississippi Dec. 26th
(second break Jan 2nd)
resume full speed with Missouri Jan 9th.

For Great War, I'm planning as follows:
Kostiuchnowka Dec 8th
Rumania Part 2 Dec. 11th
Maghdaba Dec. 14th
Second Kut Dec. 15th
long-ish break
resume full speed with the Battle of Khadairi Bend, January 9th

This should avoid having too much stuff competing with the admin-level events. There will be no new Great War tourneys and only one new USA tourney during the critical two weeks of the major celebrations.

[djelebert]

something quite unfair :
Rounds are seeded by score so for poly games rounds for example first in score board will fight againt last, 2nd against penultimate etc. In four player games, 1st, 2nd penultimate and last will fight etc.
The problem is with people who left, they will be always last, so it's really easy to keep the first place.
For example for this tourney
https://www.conquerclub.com/player.php? ... nt_id=5691

Look who general cod fighted all rounds. On round 3 and 5, poly rounds, he fighted against bigbrow74 who left and is not premium. So 6 games already won. How is it possible for followers who want to fight for victory? nothing against general cod, but this kind of thing is deserving the fun of tourney.

I know it's not previewed to change format, but can it be possible to seed players for round not on score but randomly?

Perhaps this issue was already discussed but didn't see anything about it.

[Dukasaur]

something quite unfair :
Rounds are seeded by score so for poly games rounds for example first in score board will fight againt last, 2nd against penultimate etc. In four player games, 1st, 2nd penultimate and last will fight etc.
The problem is with people who left, they will be always last, so it's really easy to keep the first place.
For example for this tourney
https://www.conquerclub.com/player.php? ... nt_id=5691

Look who general cod fighted all rounds. On round 3 and 5, poly rounds, he fighted against bigbrow74 who left and is not premium. So 6 games already won. How is it possible for followers who want to fight for victory? nothing against general cod, but this kind of thing is deserving the fun of tourney.

I know it's not previewed to change format, but can it be possible to seed players for round not on score but randomly?

Perhaps this issue was already discussed but didn't see anything about it.

The real problem is that autotourneys don't allow you to replace deadbeats. Sadly, that's a side effect of the brain-dead autotourney engine and outside the scope of my power to change.

I see what you mean that seeding by score exacerbates the problem. I think for future tourneys I will accept your suggestion and change the Poly rounds to seed randomly.

[LiveLoveTeach]

something quite unfair :
Rounds are seeded by score so for poly games rounds for example first in score board will fight againt last, 2nd against penultimate etc. In four player games, 1st, 2nd penultimate and last will fight etc.
The problem is with people who left, they will be always last, so it's really easy to keep the first place.
For example for this tourney
https://www.conquerclub.com/player.php? ... nt_id=5691

Look who general cod fighted all rounds. On round 3 and 5, poly rounds, he fighted against bigbrow74 who left and is not premium. So 6 games already won. How is it possible for followers who want to fight for victory? nothing against general cod, but this kind of thing is deserving the fun of tourney.

I know it's not previewed to change format, but can it be possible to seed players for round not on score but randomly?

Perhaps this issue was already discussed but didn't see anything about it.

The real problem is that autotourneys don't allow you to replace deadbeats. Sadly, that's a side effect of the brain-dead autotourney engine and outside the scope of my power to change.

I see what you mean that seeding by score exacerbates the problem. I think for future tourneys I will accept your suggestion and change the Poly rounds to seed randomly.

I don't think this is going to be as much of an issue in the future tournaments because of the rounds being restructured. I think it might help to switch the poly4 with the 4p random... so that it becomes:
Round 1: 1v1 (2pts)
Round 2: poly3 (3pts)
SWITCH (this is the current round 4) Round 3: poly4 (4pts)
SWITCH (this is the current round 3) Round 4: 4p random standard-terminator-assassin (4pts)
Round 5: 4p standard (5pts)
Round 6: 6p terminator (7pts)
Round 7: 8p assassin (8pts)

This accomplishes the same thing you intended when you restructured the rounds in the first place (lowest point-value rounds first), but has all 2 player games at the beginning of the tournament. Since those rounds tend to move much faster than the multiplayer rounds, it's possible that we'll see less people deadbeating out of the games in those early rounds, esp since they probably shouldn't be joining tournaments and then deadbeating out of one of the first few rounds.

Switching the two I'm suggesting is to move the multiplayer round back with the others, and move the 2 player round up to the others, the point values for those two rounds are the same, and it may help the first 3 rounds move a bit faster. This eliminates the need for randomizing the seeding for the poly rounds (or any rounds).

However, within the discussion there was another proposal:
Subject: Should the USA Supertournament introduce eliminations?

Just restructure the rounds so that the lowest point-value rounds are first and the higher point-value rounds are later.

.... which is accepted.

Starting with Massachusetts this week:
The old Round 1 remains Round 1 (1v1, 2 pts per game)
The old Round 2 becomes Round 5 (4p standard, 5 pts per game)
The old Round 3 becomes Round 2 (Poly3, 3 pts per game)
The old Round 4 becomes Round 6 (6p Term, 7 pts per game)
The old Round 5 becomes Round 3 (4p randomly Stan-Term-Ass, 4pts per game)
The old Round 6 becomes Round 4 (Poly 4, 4 pts per game)
The old Round 7 remains Round 7 (8p Assassin, 8 pts per game)

The new progression by round is therefore 2, 3, 4, 4. 5, 7, 8 points per game. This should help preserve the tension to the end and make these tourneys more exciting.

[DJENRE]

Hello Duka,
Are they prices given for the player who'll have more points at the end? I don't see any...

[Dukasaur]

Hello Duka,
Are they prices given for the player who'll have more points at the end? I don't see any...

Yeah, every time I start putting together a proposal for BW, I get distracted by something more urgent. But I just have 2 tourneys left to code this month so in the second half of the month I should have some spare time to catch up on stuff like that.

[Dukasaur]

something quite unfair :
Rounds are seeded by score so for poly games rounds for example first in score board will fight againt last, 2nd against penultimate etc. In four player games, 1st, 2nd penultimate and last will fight etc.
The problem is with people who left, they will be always last, so it's really easy to keep the first place.
For example for this tourney
https://www.conquerclub.com/player.php? ... nt_id=5691

Look who general cod fighted all rounds. On round 3 and 5, poly rounds, he fighted against bigbrow74 who left and is not premium. So 6 games already won. How is it possible for followers who want to fight for victory? nothing against general cod, but this kind of thing is deserving the fun of tourney.

I know it's not previewed to change format, but can it be possible to seed players for round not on score but randomly?

Perhaps this issue was already discussed but didn't see anything about it.

The real problem is that autotourneys don't allow you to replace deadbeats. Sadly, that's a side effect of the brain-dead autotourney engine and outside the scope of my power to change.

I see what you mean that seeding by score exacerbates the problem. I think for future tourneys I will accept your suggestion and change the Poly rounds to seed randomly.

I don't think this is going to be as much of an issue in the future tournaments because of the rounds being restructured. I think it might help to switch the poly4 with the 4p random... so that it becomes:
Round 1: 1v1 (2pts)
Round 2: poly3 (3pts)
SWITCH (this is the current round 4) Round 3: poly4 (4pts)
SWITCH (this is the current round 3) Round 4: 4p random standard-terminator-assassin (4pts)
Round 5: 4p standard (5pts)
Round 6: 6p terminator (7pts)
Round 7: 8p assassin (8pts)

This accomplishes the same thing you intended when you restructured the rounds in the first place (lowest point-value rounds first), but has all 2 player games at the beginning of the tournament. Since those rounds tend to move much faster than the multiplayer rounds, it's possible that we'll see less people deadbeating out of the games in those early rounds, esp since they probably shouldn't be joining tournaments and then deadbeating out of one of the first few rounds.

Switching the two I'm suggesting is to move the multiplayer round back with the others, and move the 2 player round up to the others, the point values for those two rounds are the same, and it may help the first 3 rounds move a bit faster. This eliminates the need for randomizing the seeding for the poly rounds (or any rounds).

However, within the discussion there was another proposal:
Subject: Should the USA Supertournament introduce eliminations?

Just restructure the rounds so that the lowest point-value rounds are first and the higher point-value rounds are later.

.... which is accepted.

Starting with Massachusetts this week:
The old Round 1 remains Round 1 (1v1, 2 pts per game)
The old Round 2 becomes Round 5 (4p standard, 5 pts per game)
The old Round 3 becomes Round 2 (Poly3, 3 pts per game)
The old Round 4 becomes Round 6 (6p Term, 7 pts per game)
The old Round 5 becomes Round 3 (4p randomly Stan-Term-Ass, 4pts per game)
The old Round 6 becomes Round 4 (Poly 4, 4 pts per game)
The old Round 7 remains Round 7 (8p Assassin, 8 pts per game)

The new progression by round is therefore 2, 3, 4, 4. 5, 7, 8 points per game. This should help preserve the tension to the end and make these tourneys more exciting.

I liked your idea, but I took it a step further: I just eliminated Round 3 entirely, and moved the others up. Round 3, after all, was the bastard child of the original Round 5, which was supposed to have been a team game but became impossible due to autotourney limitations. I was never completely happy with what I replaced it with, and it finally occurred to me, after reading your thoughts there, that it no longer serves any real purpose and can be cut outright.

Starting with Week 24 (Mississippi) the new progression is:
Round 1 (2 Points per Game): Seeded by Score, 3 Games, 2 Player Standard
Round 2 (3 Points per Game): 24 Start, Seeded by Score, 2 Player Poly (3)
Round 3 (4 Points per Game): 24 Start, Random Draw, 2 Player Poly (4)
Round 4 (5 Points per Game): 24 Start, Seeded by Score, 4 Player Standard
Round 5 (7 Points per Game): 24 Start, Seeded by Score, 6 Player Terminator
Round 6 (8 Points per Game): 24 Start, Seeded by Score, 8 Player Assassin

The points-per-game steadily increase, and the size of the games steadily increases, with all the two-player games in the first half. This should much reduce the effect of deadbeats (they have a lot less effect in a 6- or 8- player game than in a 2-player game). In keeping with djelebert's idea, I made the second poly round randomly seeded, but kept the first poly round seeded by score.