Major+ 2009 Winter Doubles League [Winners: First Post]

[khazalid]

The idea of 3/4 team games is interesting, but the possibility of stalemate is too detrimental imo. I fear we'd be stuck on round 1 for a long time.... not to mention players headhunting leading teams and such.

Also, why were those players disqualified? Such as aliakber1001 and gp24176281? Or is that a private matter?

aliakber was my partner last time, he disappeared without a word after we won 7/8 of our first round matches..

i had not considered that some might deliberately skew games based on the league standings but that is a very good point big 4

[AndrewB]

In each round each team will play three 4-players double, two 6-players double and one 8-players double.???????????????

Try them, they are quite fun to play!

[AndrewB]

All 6 and 8 players games will be escalating only.

Regarding the possible stalemates, we have 35 rounds rule. If game does not finish by that time, then all remaining team will get -1 MP.

[AndrewB]

sigh it used to be such a great tournament.....

Oh, common? What is wrong with it?

A Map is just a map, and 6 and 8 players games area great fun!

What else is wrong with tournament?

[AndrewB]

Also, why were those players disqualified? Such as aliakber1001 and gp24176281? Or is that a private matter?

Drop outs from the previous tournaments...

[AndrewB]

Too bad. 6 and 8 player doubles are quite lame, not to mention we're likely to see teams throwing games on purpose to maintain their lead (reference: any other tourney).

I will consider this and try to resolve it.

I think it can be resolved by the points system i.e. we can implement negative points for second/third place...

[AndrewB]

(reference: any other tourney).

My Previous 6 players doubles tournament didnt end up in the stalemate

[firstholliday]

sigh it used to be such a great tournament.....

Oh, common? What is wrong with it?

A Map is just a map, and 6 and 8 players games area great fun!

What else is wrong with tournament?

sorry Andrew, the previous tournaments were so much fun coz everyone started out equal good players. Now you will use maps that require attention and lots of games in them to understand them due to in my opinion stupid rules of the map. Flat rate has to much luck also. And 6-8 player games will indeed spoil the rankings due to the fact that people will look at the scoreboard or points to loose ratio to give a team victory if they are sure they can't win themselves.

Sorry mate not for me, you will have 60 teamns no problem. But it is not THE Andrew tourney.

[tyche73]

tyche73 and AMGecko in please

[AndrewB]

sorry Andrew, the previous tournaments were so much fun coz everyone started out equal good players.

Not exactly sure that I know what you mean here. And no we didn't start all equal, some were stronger and some where weaker. That is a purpose to have the tournament, so the stronger teams will perform better.

Now you will use maps that require attention and lots of games in them to understand them due to in my opinion stupid rules of the map.

Again, I am not sure what you mean. A map is a map. And I hope that you put an attention in every game anyhow and not winning just by luck. And can you provide a single stupid rule of a map?

Flat rate has to much luck also.

This game have several components, which rely on luck. First and foremost, dice. Second is a drop. Spoils is third. There is luck involved with the escalating too. And you played them last league, no complains.

Furthermore in 4 players no cards chained with similar level of opponent 95% of it comes down to luck.

And 6-8 player games will indeed spoil the rankings due to the fact that people will look at the scoreboard or points to loose ratio to give a team victory if they are sure they can't win themselves.

You are right, there is a strategical component in it too. But this is bad why? This also happens in non-tournament games too. You would rather lose to the Colonel then to the Cook, would not you?

Sorry mate not for me, you will have 60 teamns no problem. But it is not THE Andrew tourney.

Last time I've checked, I am THE Andrew and it is THE my tournament As I said, I wanted to broaden the spectrum of the skills covered by this tournament. So if you don't have the skills required, don't sign up, it is your choice. But it would not hurt you to expand your horizon.

You cannot say something is bad, until you try it...

[Bruceswar]

Andrew you are taking First H to task over what many high ranks believe.

1. Many Believe flat rate is more luck than skill. You can get a 3 card set or 5 card set, and have the 3 card set be worth 10 and the 5 card set be worth 4. At least with Escalating you know what the set cash will be, weather it is 3, 4 or at 5 cards. Pretty equal for both teams. With flat rate 6 cards can be 20 men to a 5 card set that is 4 men. Hard to make up numbers like that in doubles.

2. Some people specialize in certain maps, which would screw with the scoreboard a bit. If you put Dragon Dor or Benjikat is dead on Waterloo, they are going to win most of the time. Many people I know do not play that map, nor have played it often. Hell I could play with Dragon Dor and win on that map and I know nothing about it.

3. Maps like Circus Maximus will played? Mine as well play craps or ring around the roosie.

4. also the 6 man and 8 games would cause people to suicide others to protect the lead. It will not matter to them since they were not going to win anyhow. The negative points would not phase them much. Your team could also be the result of a bad play if the settings are fog. Heck even no fog can have that as well. Team 3 takes out 1 player from Team 4 while Team 2 gets stronger. You just happened to be on Team 4, and now you both will lose, due to his play, which was rather bad. Most of the time those games turn into a run away for one team.

I think what First H is getting at is it should be 1 team vs another. Adding other teams to mix, can lead to tag teaming for the scoreboard, bad plays, etc. Not what a true doubles tournament should be about.

Maybe I am not in touch either. Just some thoughts.

[AndrewB]

This tournament is about diversification of skills. Not to play 4 players nocard chained.

1. Many Believe flat rate is more luck than skill. You can get a 3 card set or 5 card set, and have the 3 card set be worth 10 and the 5 card set be worth 4. At least with Escalating you know what the set cash will be, weather it is 3, 4 or at 5 cards. Pretty equal for both teams. With flat rate 6 cards can be 20 men to a 5 card set that is 4 men. Hard to make up numbers like that in doubles.

1. The flat rate would be played only in 4 players games. And only 1/3 of the games. And as I said luck is involved anyhow.

2. Some people specialize in certain maps, which would screw with the scoreboard a bit. If you put Dragon Dor or Benjikat is dead on Waterloo, they are going to win most of the time. Many people I know do not play that map, nor have played it often. Hell I could play with Dragon Dor and win on that map and I know nothing about it.

2. If someone is specialize ONLY in certain maps, then won't perform well at all. The maps will be RANDOMLY selected from the pool. So Waterloo may not even be played or played once. So you would lose one to Benji, but because you play very well on other maps, you will win against him in 10 other games.

3. Maps like Circus Maximus will played? Mine as well play craps or ring around the roosie.

3. Again, a map is a map. EDIT: Circus Maximus is a small map and will not be played.

4. also the 6 man and 8 games would cause people to suicide others to protect the lead. It will not matter to them since they were not going to win anyhow. The negative points would not phase them much. Your team could also be the result of a bad play if the settings are fog. Heck even no fog can have that as well. Team 3 takes out 1 player from Team 4 while Team 2 gets stronger. You just happened to be on Team 4, and now you both will lose, due to his play, which was rather bad. Most of the time those games turn into a run away for one team.

4. As I said, I realize it will happening. And it is already happening in any other game, where there is more then 2 players. And I don't see why is it bad. You can be either team 1 or team 4...

[khazalid]

[fastposted by andrew, point remains however]

in spite of all that you must admit that two equally balanced teams playing no cards chained on any regular map is probably in excess of 95% luck. i liked the format before, dont get me wrong.. but we all know what happened to the dinosaurs.

at this level, 6 and 8 player esc doubles is a far more strategic prospect than hitting auto against that 2nd round australia stack for an unlikely break ever will be.

[Hath]

Some of ya'll need to realize there's more to CC than whatever your point count is.

Broaden your horizons and stop playing the same damn games over and over.

Who knows...you might even have some *gasp* fun.

Hath and Knighthawk will play.

[khazalid]

Bruce - Maps like Circus Maximus will played? Mine as well play craps or ring around the roosie.


Andrew - Again, a map is a map.


isnt it also a 'small map' and therefore not in the pool for the tournament?

[AndrewB]

Bruce - Maps like Circus Maximus will played? Mine as well play craps or ring around the roosie.


Andrew - Again, a map is a map.


isnt it also a 'small map' and therefore not in the pool for the tournament?

You are right, it is indeed the small map... As far as I remember the rule is anything smaller then 42 countries, but I need to check.

[Bruceswar]

6 or 8 team games:

Your team could play the game flawlessly only to have Team X hand the game over to someone else. How is that reflecting on your skills? It reflects on someone else bad play, sure, but not your skills. I am sure you have been hung in a game before, where the next person is gifted. It happens in doubles as well.

As to the rest of it I am sure it will all even out. BTW Benji is no slouch on other maps, but someone who plays a certain map X amount of times surely has a leg up. I guess that is where the skill kicks in. Gimick type maps are great...

[firstholliday]

thanks bruce.

But hey it's no biggie. Just can't play it.

+ don't tell me bladibla horizon shit. I play what i like.

Good luck in the tournament all.

[Seulessliathan]

interesting discussion here, and i understand both sides.

I´m not sure if Flat Rate turns it into a lotto game, if you have a bad drop and bad dice, you are lost in a no cards team game, but perhaps the cards turn it again? I don´t like Flat, but these games always depend on luck (not sure if it´s 95% as Andrew said, but i guess it´s 50% or more)
Same about unlimited, dice will still be more important here.

laddida pushed me once to play a 8 player double, and it was really interesting, but i can understand that many people are afraid of them.

Well, everybody knows the rules and can decide if he plays or not. For people who worry about 6-8 player doubles, fog or flat rate, there are enough other tournaments, and you can create your own tourney if you prefer to chose the rules by yourself.

I think it´s a really interesting change and i´m curious to watch it Andrew.

[jiminski]

... For people who worry about 6-8 player doubles, fog or flat rate, there are enough other tournaments, and you can create your own tourney if you prefer to chose the rules by yourself.
....

Exactly Seul!

.. the thing is that this point works for both sides.
Andrews tournament was, in my opinion, the finest tournament bar none!
Andrews tournament was also one of the very few which paid careful attention to minimising the elements of luck and the imbalance of esoteric map types.

Andrews Tournament was the last, significant bastion for the old-guard.


The debate on complex maps:
This is well documented and very much based upon skill! It is also based upon players specialising on obscure maps to negate luck, thus reaping low-risk points from the uninitiated.
Though this may sound counter to the argument against their inclusion, it is not.
I Agree that Waterloo-Foggy is a very skilled game.. because if you aint played the map you have no frigging hope, at all, to win.
Now if you say that the disadvantage of not having played on BeNeLux-sunny equates to not having played on AOR in the fog ... I think your tenet is flawed and I also think you know it.
The fact, which i believe we all understand, is if you have played Classic then you can play a good game on Benelux.
The same is not immediately true for non-planar maps in the mist.

So the map argument in this case is not about luck, it is about game choice, fairness and playing on a level battle-field.


Regarding luck (in particular the affect of Flat Rate cards):
Even if i were to agree with the figure being as high as 95% luck for victory, in 4 player doubles with no cards (which i truly do not) the difference between 95% and 99% (99% for flat rate) means that there is more chance that the most skilled players win.
This is more acutely so over such a protracted series of games.. Any 2 idiots can win one game versus 2 genii in a 4 player, no cards game but the longer the series the more likely the best team are to win.
If we do not all believe it, then victory and crowning a champion is fucking pointless... you may as well make the tournament best of 3, Flat rate, freestyle, Doodle Earth


Hey! are me and First the best doubles team on the site? Well we certainly did get a lot of luck, you need that to beat such fine players.
And though this is your point, just because luck is an element do we say: 'what the hell! let's add some more luck to the equation!'?


6 and 8 player Doubles:
killing players to save table position, ganging-up, stalemates and collusion?
I think you have gone over to the dark side.



Now to the crux of the matter:
This localised, verbal tussle here is rather a microcosm of where the site is moving to; starkly illustrated by the Clan structure developments.
The core now seeks to universally homogenise game choice. That is fine! it really is.. but anything which no longer includes 'everything' is being precluded.
We play what we want to play but if we do play what we want - we play no one... some choice that is!

Now that is based upon the freedom to choose by others but the Battle line is drawn; dissenters harangued and pulled into toe!
The traditionalists, who just want a simple game, are being ostracised, discriminated against and lambasted! All to the point of no longer being catered for by the broader site structure.


So, as First says; this is your tournament and a fine one i am sure it will be but it no longer occupies the same seat as before.
This is not Firstholliday trying to change anything, it is him making clear his regret at no longer being able to sit with you.
It is also the regret at the paradoxical narrowing of the broader choices which everyone pretends to champion!
The Call to Arms has become: "broaden your horizons.. just as long as they are my horizons!"

hah! that is my last word on your tournament and i make it to stand toe to toe with my old mate Fisty one last time

No need to make argument back gentlemen; the argument is already won and i am lost.

[Forefall]

The tournament represented the pinacle of CC doubles play. The following is why I think it may not do so with the suggested settings:

1. Flat rate increases the luck component. Yes, the game is for the majority luck-based, but as said, through repeated encounters the effect of skill and strategy become recognized. Adding MORE luck to it just means you need to play MORE games for that to occur. It seems counter-intuitive for such a tournament to see who is the best. Perhaps the tournament has slightly shifted from a "see who is the best" to a "let's all have some fun"?

2. Complicated maps (eg. waterloo). As has been said, experience on this map and others like it is a must. If Team A is truly the best player but never played on waterloo, then they will probably lose. The tournament will test player's experience on maps, not necessarily their skill at the game. You could argue that certain players just have more skill on certain maps, which is true. But I don't think having to study and play all the creative maps should be a requirement to hoping to win this tournament. Again, this seems to move away from a "see who is the best" type of tournament.

3. 3/4 team games. Two things create an issue here. One is stalemates, which you say you've successfully tackled in previous tournaments and I'll take your word for it. Two is selective attacking based off of standings. This is by no means acceptable in a "see who is best" type of tournament. If 9/10 teams in a tournament are from LoW, guess who is going to get picked on? And if that last team is actually the most skilled, it won't matter - they'll lose. Furthermore, to a team who happens to be leading - they'll preferentially be chosen for attack, ensuring that any lead due to skill may be stifled. Neither of those last 2 points have any place in a "see who is the best" type of tournament.

In summary, I'm sure the tournament will be well run, as Andrew does such a nice job with them. I'm sure the tournament will be fun. But this tournament in the past was a rare spectacle of excellence. Points are silly because you freestyle / noob bash / quad to the top. Most clan wars are a large group effort. Most tournaments are about specific maps or dont' play enough games or incorporate much too much luck in them to really isolate out skill. There is a real lack of skill distinction in CC, imo. Andrew's double tournaments of the past were not - they were the finest tournament at selecting the most skilled competitors and recognizing them. I fear that with the newer settings, which perhaps will be more enjoyable?, that the tournament will lose its rare distinction and be mixed into a sea of "for fun" tournaments.

[AndrewB]

Ok, gents and ladies, everyone has it own opinion about the matter, which I appreciate.

But this is not general discussion forum, but the tournament registration.

And I agree this tournament is not the same as it was before. But this tournament will run in those settings, as described. I am open to change a thing or too, based on your suggestions, but in general, it will stay the same.

Everyone is free to register or not. But all of you will be getting an PM invite from me. So sorry in advance for double-bothering you

[jiminski]

Ok, gents and ladies, everyone has it own opinion about the matter, which I appreciate.

But this is not general discussion forum, but the tournament registration.

And I agree this tournament is not the same as it was before. But this tournament will run in those settings, as described. I am open to change a thing or too, based on your suggestions, but in general, it will stay the same.

Everyone is free to register or not. But all of you will be getting an PM invite from me. So sorry in advance for double-bothering you

it is a public forum though Andrew and we are permitted to voice those opinions... (I think .. no?.. i'll check with a mod.. back in a bit ..)

In the same way as it is your tournament and you can do exactly what you like and our opinions are irrelevant... just as it should be.

no one is attempting to change that.
For my part, i was contemplating just playing your tournament and nothing else but i will not now heheh... i am sure you can sense the resignation in the posts

anyway, thanks for your your previous efforts and good luck all!

edit .. yes checked it out with my pocket-mod and we are definitely allowed to voice our opinions here..
Note For Andrew: jim could just be being a tinker

[khazalid]

(edit - my last word on it andrew, just saw your post)

no argument here, but let me just pitch something to you:

its finals time.

dw and andrew are playing 1st and jimmy in a best of 11 for the championship.

are there any moves made during any of those 11 games that the other team would not have made?

1 or 2 at the very most. surely that is by now apparent and indisputable.

no cards chained is a formulaic, repetitive dive at the level indicated. i dont know when you joined jimmy, but prior to these settings being de rigeur it was no cards unlim that dominated. then everyone learned how to play it and it ended up coming down to who had the first turn (wins you 80% of unlim games) and who had the better dice (the other 20%) when you have two teams who know what they are doing.

no cards chained has turned this full circle. do you honestly believe that there is anything other than drop/dice that separates us on a classic map? obviously some teams will not be quite so well drilled in the art of nc/chained as others at the beginning of the tournament but by finals time you really would be as well playing it on doodle.

[jiminski]

(edit - my last word on it andrew, just saw your post)

no argument here, but let me just pitch something to you:

its finals time.

dw and andrew are playing 1st and jimmy in a best of 11 for the championship.

are there any moves made during any of those 11 games that the other team would not have made?

1 or 2 at the very most. surely that is by now apparent and indisputable.

no cards chained is a formulaic, repetitive dive at the level indicated. i dont know when you joined jimmy, but prior to these settings being de rigeur it was no cards unlim that dominated. then everyone learned how to play it and it ended up coming down to who had the first turn (wins you 80% of unlim games) and who had the better dice (the other 20%) when you have two teams who know what they are doing.

no cards chained has turned this full circle. do you honestly believe that there is anything other than drop/dice that separates us on a classic map? obviously some teams will not be quite so well drilled in the art of nc/chained as others at the beginning of the tournament but by finals time you really would be as well playing it on doodle.

Exactly i agree (sorry didn't read it Khaz ; ) )
and i am not sure when you joined mate .. (shit i looked 3 inches up and saw it .. i will ignore it for the moment!).. but when i joined i knew fuck all and now i know twice as much!*

To the tourney: I hope that the Andrew tourney does keep moving in the same direction and the next one is indeed just 3 games of Doodle Earth.

good luck chaps and genuinely thanks for the previous tournaments Andrew.


*twice fuck all is still fuck all.. just in case you were in doubt! however there are many things which we would do differently. The very reason First and I got so lucky in the final stages is that we made minuscule changes to the dynamics and fundamental techniques of play.. to both no cards and esc.