Conquer Club

The scoreboard is at :

Note that tabs will be added for completed tournaments as they are completed.

Tournament Schedule

show

Tournament Types

show

Scoring

show

Sanctioning

show

Joining the Tournaments

show

Exemptions and Reserves

show

Looking into the way points are applied over the last two years, I really like the first year's formula used:

Points =(Multiplier x (Number of Players+1-Position))/Number of Players
i.e First place gets the Multiplier points (was between 1 and 5); each player below gets 1/Number of Players fewer points.

What is good is that it represents the complexity of the tournament (Multiplier) and the number of players in it.
What is not so good is that the first few players do not get a great difference in their points - also the decimalised points are not easy to follow.

A better differentiation of top scores was addressed in the second year by having a table of scores to be applied according to the three types of tournaments. However the number of players taking part was not taken into account apart from the classification into the three types.

What does everyone think for year 3?

i'm all for TPA2 scoring, although i haven't looked at the team scoring at all.

those entering a Standard tournament with 256 players are well aware only 32 were required for this event and that they will need to overcome far more opposition than someone in a 32 player Standard event.

it is also partially the overseers fault for not aligning/matching tournaments with the appropriate level of TPA tournament.

Yes - I prefer the year 2 format of scores, though I think we need some way of recognising the number of players taking part other than just the three types of tournament.
Looking at the scoring for a premium tournament, bart specified:
1000 600 420 300 240 195 155 130 115 110 for the first 10 places;
A harmonic series (1+1/2+1/3 etc) is similar;
1000 500 333 250 200 167 143 125 111 100

And then a factor to represent the number of players/teams (N) would be a multiplier such as (N/32).

So the score for a player in a tournament of n players finishing in x'th position would be:

(Type * N /32) * 1/x) where Type is 2000, 1000 or 500 depending on Major, Premium or Standard.

It would be good to set the lowest entry in Premier and Major. I might be interested in leading one But will have all facts before I decide.

Yes that's a good point. I have missed any definition that Bart may have had about the different types, but, from the TPA2 games that have finished, the 2 Majors were 61 player/teams and 156; the 4 Premier 64, 82, 90 & 125; the 9 Standard 16, 22, 31, 32, 36, 64, 64, 72 & 72.

However that takes no account of total number of games/rounds, the type of game (5 player assassin being a harder round to win through than 1 v 1 etc), and whether there were several chances of winning (double entry tournaments for instance).

The two majors had 40 games for the doubles winners and 24 games of 5 player assassin games for the winners.

So I think a broad brush approach might be to look at the number of games/rounds required to win and the number of opponents to be defeated each round.

One disadvantage in any system is that the problem with specifying the type in advance is that the number of players that are recruited may be vary much different from the planned number.

However, the scoring system I have proposed does compensate for the number of recruited players, so a broad brush approach may be as follows:

Major Tournaments must require the winning player or team to have a minimum of 100 planned player eliminations i.e. 100 individual games; 50 doubles games etc.

Standard tournaments have 50 or fewer planned player eliminations.

Therefore Premier tournaments have between 51 and 99 planned player eliminations.

....as a starter.......but then there are round-robin tournaments.....?!

Standard required 32 players.

any tournament less than that was in breach and shouldn't be counted.

DaveH wrote: from the TPA2 games that have finished, the 2 Majors were 61 player/teams and 156; the 4 Premier 64, 82, 90 & 125; the 9 Standard 16, 22, 31, 32, 36, 64, 64, 72 & 72.

greenoaks wrote:Standard required 32 players.

any tournament less than that was in breach and shouldn't be counted.

30 actually , but yeah, if it was fewer than 30 players then it definitely didn't fulfil the TPA minimum requirement and should be set aside. However, it's not clear from the above if the Standards with 16, 22, and 31 were team tournaments. 16 teams would fulfil the mandate.

I would like to host a tournament. Am I eligible? I have only hosted once, but it was fairly long and lasted 9 months. LINK!!

If I am eligible, where do I submit my plan?

Hi Jonty125 - and others!

TPA3 is open to all CC members who have some sort of track record at hosting tournaments.

(even supporting Stoke does not rule you out)

To enter, at least provisionally, let me know by pm or this thread with a brief summary of your planned tournament and estimated start date from the list in the thread above.

I say "some sort of record" in that the original rules suggests that hosting just 1 tournament before would rule you out, however, looking at the number of TPA1 and 2 tournaments had to be rescued, I would place the enthusiasm that you show as being a factor in accepting a tournament from you.

Because the TPA is a year long does not mean that your tournament has to last for a year! Why not plana short "Standard" tournament early in the calendar year and then another later?

For type definitions therefore, we have:

Major Tournaments must require the winning player or team to have a minimum of 100 planned player eliminations i.e. 100 individual games; 50 doubles games etc.

Standard tournaments have between 30 and 50 planned player eliminations.

Therefore Premier tournaments have between 51 and 99 planned player eliminations.

I'll add this in the main thread.

OK, my idea was in a Mastermind (BBC TV show) style.

96 contestants, pick there specialist subject (map, spoils etc., no map may be repeated). 96 contestants are split into 24 groups of 4. In Round 1 each 'show' has 8 maps. 4 specialist subjects, and 4 general knowledge.

Everybody will play all the games in the show. So DaveH, chooses World 2.1, foggy, etc. as his home settings. I pick Age Of Realms 3, etc. We have one game on Dave's settings, one round on mine; until everbody in our group has played on their home settings with the the three other contestants. We then play 4 maps of 'General Knowledge' Maps 5,6,7 will be random settings but map 8 will be Classic, Manual, Sequential, Escalating, Unlimited, Sunny.

Points will be awarded for positions 5 for 1st, 3 for 2nd, 2 for 3rd, 1 for 4th. If you finish LAST, you will get a PASS. (as in passing a question instead of answering). This is used as a tiebreaker in a tie of points. The winner of each group will advance with the 6 best runners-up. 30 contestants are split into 6 groups of 5. 6 winners advance to the final. The amount of general knowledge rounds increases by one each round, to keep track with the increase in specialist maps.

Excellent! - but I am no expert on tournaments as complex as that - though I think it would be hard work for you to manage.

The concept is great but how about reducing it to 32 players to see how it goes?

DaveH wrote:though I think it would be hard work for you to manage.

The last (only) one I managed had 2347 games in it. This one will have (24*8)+(6*10)+12=264. So I would quite like to leave it at its current shape.

Wow - understood mate! It is the size of a Premier (just short of a Major unless you up the player count above 100), so pick a Premier start date and I'll write you in!

I'll take 10 September. Thank you for letting me host

06-May Standard
13-May Premier
13-May Standard
20-May Premier

Hmm? Accident or intentional?

Thanks for spotting that! Amended!

You should get this topic made into an 'announcement' thread (is that what they call it?) - one of those that actually stays at the top of all the threads (:

It'd also be better if you create a topic in the Tournament Organisers group. That's where bart got most of the groundwork done, and where TOs would go to offer their services as organisers for the tournaments in the TPA year.

The first tournament was scheduled to start on 3Sep - has the thread been created yet? (:

And as for the scoring system, I think the TPA2 scoring system works just fine. Yes, there are differences in the number of games played, and stuff like that. But the fact is the odds of winning the tournament is still dependent on the number of players/teams participating, as you'll have to eliminate everyone else eventually anyway, no matter what the means are. Moreover, players are of course more likely to join tournaments which require strategies that play to their own strengths. Some may fare better at 1v1s, while others at round robins with points awarded and such. So yep, the players already should understand that when they join various sanctioned tournaments (:

Many thanks for that feedback. Yes, I am aware that there is a lack of interest that is perhaps due to my inexperience of how to progress things, We seem to have too few TO's interested in order to be able to progress on the scheduled date, so I am not sure of how to progress things.

Anyway I shall do what you advise and try and push forward!

I'll take the standard slot for Jan. 14

I have a format that I will go on with for a wile. That is my Lufsen terminator series of 6 player. 36 entrys so that will be a standard then. Pick it in any time you like.

If necessary I also can make any tournament with single Knockout (best of five or seven) of 64 or 128 if you like me to run a premier or major.

If the 1v1 major/premier hasent been taken yet I would love to do that (already have it planned out) and I am working on a league style tourney

Thanks guys!

flexmaster33, booked for standard slot for Jan. 14

Lufsen75, standard on 01-Oct - if that's not too soon. Perhaps an additional Premier/Major, though there is just one Major slot left for 22nd April, so perhaps best to go for a Premier earlier in the year.

redhedge47 - again, perhaps a premier rather than a major. I am not too fussed at this stage about trying to ensure that we have every style of tournament, as each TO has their own preferences, so I am sure that we will get a very varied selection anyway. The last "block" of dates from April to July could always be more specific if we seem to be missing a particular style of tournament by then.

Again, thank you all for the feedback; at least we can make a good start!

I would like the Mar. 11 Premier event. I will have a tourney with a minimum of 64 players. Lots of time to plan too.