USA Supertournament [COMPLETED] WINNER overlander

[Dukasaur]

Is it possible to go over the loophole if you put Team games in round 1 instead of round 5? Then you just need to do the manual adjustment once when the tournament starts.

I would refer that Team doubles is replaced with Poly (2) because it seems most natural similar and replacement and because you already have Poly (4) and Poly(3) but not Poly(2) in the tournament. Poly (2) is not that far from Team Doubles but Assassin and Terminator which you offer as replacements are definitely far different from Team Doubles.

That's true, and it did occur to me, but I'm thinking of the majority. Poly is not as popular as A/S/T, and there are already two rounds of Poly in these tournaments. Having three rounds of Poly in seven would hugely over-represent them for the many players that aren't fond of that format.

To give you counterargument, there are already 3 rounds of Standard/Terminator/Assassin, with points per game 8+7+5 = 20 from these rounds. For comparison, there are two rounds of Poly (3) and (4), with 3+4 = 7 points per game. So from S/T/A we can already earn 20 points per game from 3 rounds while from Poly we can only earn 7 points per game from 2 rounds.

Is it really fair to add one more round of S/T/A in addition to already existing rounds where there can be earned 20 points per game if a players wins 1 S/T/A, which is way much more points than how much it can be earned by Poly rounds?

Yes. The points depend mainly on the number of opponents. In Poly you only have to beat one opponent. Even though you may have to kill two of his ghosts, once you kill his first identity he's probably done. In a 6-player Terminator game, you have to beat 5 opponents.

Also, many people on the site rarely play Poly. Especially if they compound that by not having much team experience, they are really at a disadvantage on Poly rounds. Remember, we are trying to create something here that will be a good experience for the vast majority of the site, not benefit the specialists and experts.

[Dukasaur]

Upcoming start dates:

Hawaii -- Pearl Harbor Sept 12th
Idaho -- USA West (not actually on the USA West maps, but the four states that are have better representatives already) Sept 19th
Illinois -- Chicago Sept 26th
Indiana -- Conquer 500 (Indy 500) Octover 3rd
Iowa -- Quad Cities Oct. 10th
Kansas -- Halloween Hallows (Dorothy from Kansas, killed the witch in Wizard of Oz.) Oct 17th
Kentucky -- Circus Maximus (Kentucky Derby) Oct. 24th
Louisiana -- Rail USA (New Orleans is 5th largest center on Rail USA map -- the other four are already represented) Oct. 31st
Maine -- France (named for province in France, and settled by French in 1604, 3 years before any British settlement in North America.) November 7th

[josko.ri]

Is it possible to go over the loophole if you put Team games in round 1 instead of round 5? Then you just need to do the manual adjustment once when the tournament starts.

I would refer that Team doubles is replaced with Poly (2) because it seems most natural similar and replacement and because you already have Poly (4) and Poly(3) but not Poly(2) in the tournament. Poly (2) is not that far from Team Doubles but Assassin and Terminator which you offer as replacements are definitely far different from Team Doubles.

That's true, and it did occur to me, but I'm thinking of the majority. Poly is not as popular as A/S/T, and there are already two rounds of Poly in these tournaments. Having three rounds of Poly in seven would hugely over-represent them for the many players that aren't fond of that format.

To give you counterargument, there are already 3 rounds of Standard/Terminator/Assassin, with points per game 8+7+5 = 20 from these rounds. For comparison, there are two rounds of Poly (3) and (4), with 3+4 = 7 points per game. So from S/T/A we can already earn 20 points per game from 3 rounds while from Poly we can only earn 7 points per game from 2 rounds.

Is it really fair to add one more round of S/T/A in addition to already existing rounds where there can be earned 20 points per game if a players wins 1 S/T/A, which is way much more points than how much it can be earned by Poly rounds?

Yes. The points depend mainly on the number of opponents. In Poly you only have to beat one opponent. Even though you may have to kill two of his ghosts, once you kill his first identity he's probably done. In a 6-player Terminator game, you have to beat 5 opponents.

Also, many people on the site rarely play Poly. Especially if they compound that by not having much team experience, they are really at a disadvantage on Poly rounds. Remember, we are trying to create something here that will be a good experience for the vast majority of the site, not benefit the specialists and experts.

As I said previously, if you are changing setings during mid-tournament, the replacement settings should be as much as closer to original, whenever possible. And the closest thing to original Doubles games is Poly(2). In addition, you dont have Poly(2) in the tournament yet but you already have rounds of Standard, Terminator and Assassin for the ones who love these settings. Make the tournament to cover all settings, not to eliminate Poly(2) but use S/T/A twice, in their original rounds and in this replacement rounds.

Gameplay and strategizing of Poly (2), (3) and (4) is VERY different for the same map due to different number of territories and starting neutrals. So It is not valid argument to exclude Poly(2) because you already have Poly(3) and Poly(4) because they are very different. I see you want to make variety of settings in the tournament, so make it more variety not with repeating some of settings. Common sense prevails.

[Dukasaur]

Is it possible to go over the loophole if you put Team games in round 1 instead of round 5? Then you just need to do the manual adjustment once when the tournament starts.

I would refer that Team doubles is replaced with Poly (2) because it seems most natural similar and replacement and because you already have Poly (4) and Poly(3) but not Poly(2) in the tournament. Poly (2) is not that far from Team Doubles but Assassin and Terminator which you offer as replacements are definitely far different from Team Doubles.

That's true, and it did occur to me, but I'm thinking of the majority. Poly is not as popular as A/S/T, and there are already two rounds of Poly in these tournaments. Having three rounds of Poly in seven would hugely over-represent them for the many players that aren't fond of that format.

To give you counterargument, there are already 3 rounds of Standard/Terminator/Assassin, with points per game 8+7+5 = 20 from these rounds. For comparison, there are two rounds of Poly (3) and (4), with 3+4 = 7 points per game. So from S/T/A we can already earn 20 points per game from 3 rounds while from Poly we can only earn 7 points per game from 2 rounds.

Is it really fair to add one more round of S/T/A in addition to already existing rounds where there can be earned 20 points per game if a players wins 1 S/T/A, which is way much more points than how much it can be earned by Poly rounds?

Yes. The points depend mainly on the number of opponents. In Poly you only have to beat one opponent. Even though you may have to kill two of his ghosts, once you kill his first identity he's probably done. In a 6-player Terminator game, you have to beat 5 opponents.

Also, many people on the site rarely play Poly. Especially if they compound that by not having much team experience, they are really at a disadvantage on Poly rounds. Remember, we are trying to create something here that will be a good experience for the vast majority of the site, not benefit the specialists and experts.

As I said previously, if you are changing setings during mid-tournament, the replacement settings should be as much as closer to original, whenever possible. And the closest thing to original Doubles games is Poly(2). In addition, you dont have Poly(2) in the tournament yet but you already have rounds of Standard, Terminator and Assassin for the ones who love these settings. Make the tournament to cover all settings, not to eliminate Poly(2) but use S/T/A twice, in their original rounds and in this replacement rounds.

Gameplay and strategizing of Poly (2), (3) and (4) is VERY different for the same map due to different number of territories and starting neutrals. So It is not valid argument to exclude Poly(2) because you already have Poly(3) and Poly(4) because they are very different. I see you want to make variety of settings in the tournament, so make it more variety not with repeating some of settings. Common sense prevails.

I'm not debating every decision I make. This isn't about "how do I make this really difficult for the average player so josko wins the maximum number of medals?" This is about "how do I provide an interesting and fun experience that everybody on the site can enjoy?" That is my mandate as Community Co-ordinator -- to produce events that are fun for the whole community, which includes players of average ability feeling that they at least have a chance. I was already hesitant to include two rounds of Poly, I'm not adding a third. Period.

[josko.ri]

You are not going to produce more fun by repeating S/T/A rounds that already existed twice. You will produce more fun if you add something that doesn't already exist such as Poly(2).

I know I won the discussion with using proper arguments so only what is left for you is personal attacks rather than admitting that I am right and change the structure to the proposed one which covers more variety of settings

So sad when someone's ego is higher than common sense

[Dukasaur]

Maryland contest has been posted:

https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=224625#p4968659

[josko.ri]

This isn't about "how do I make this really difficult for the average player so josko wins the maximum number of medals?" This is about "how do I provide an interesting and fun experience that everybody on the site can enjoy?" That is my mandate as Community Co-ordinator -- to produce events that are fun for the whole community, which includes players of average ability feeling that they at least have a chance.

It is interesting how you think that I suggest to add Poly(2) for my personal benefit. For your information, I have won maybe the biggest ever 6 player standard escalating tournament "6 Man Madness" viewtopic.php?t=107293 with having 49 wins in finals while second placed uckuki had 33 wins. You may also check how many famous CC players played in the tournament. I have also won twice in a row Glow-in-the-dark-archery Assassin olympic tournament which is worth Platinum medal, and last year these 10 points from that tournament were decisive for me being Olympic winner. So I am definitely not at personal disadvantage if games will be S/T/A instead of Poly.

Who is on true disadvantage is not me but your tournament and players who participate in it. You have chance to put wide wariety of settings to make the tournament really "Supertournament" as you named it but no, why something would be simple when it can be complicated so instead of putting wide variety of settings for everyone to enjoy, you put S/T/A games twice so players who like these settings will enjoy more. You seem to ignore argument that Poly(2) is something completely different than Poly(3) and Poly(4) on every map, similarity is only in name because all are named "Poly" but in gameplay and strategizing they are quite different.

Last but not least, you kind of cheated players who signed up to your tournaments in first 10 rounds seeing "Doubles" as round 5 settings. If the system can not allow you to make it Doubles, then at least you should offer replacement settings which is the most closest to Doubles and it is Poly (2). However, instead of replacement settings be something close to original settings, you chose S/T/A which is something TOTALLY different, therefore you cheated all payers who signed up for your tournaments thinking it will be Doubles in round 5 (or at least something similar/the most closest to Doubles).

[josko.ri]

sorry for double posting, just continuing from previous post...

This isn't about "how do I make this really difficult for the average player so josko wins the maximum number of medals?" This is about "how do I provide an interesting and fun experience that everybody on the site can enjoy?" That is my mandate as Community Co-ordinator -- to produce events that are fun for the whole community, which includes players of average ability feeling that they at least have a chance.

Also, you pointed fingers into me that I vote for Poly(2) because I am good at that settings so I defended myself showing that I also won some prestigious Standard and Assassin tournaments in past. Now, I can also point fingers into you that you prefer Standard/Terminator/Assasin not for benefit of the site and the tournament but for your personal benefit as a player. You have played Standard 4+ players 3600 times, Terminator 2400 times and Assassin 900 times. Comparing to that, you have played only 600 Poly games. I did not want to start with accusations of "personal benefit" from the settings but since you started it versus me then I am giving it back to you, it is obvious from your past games that you have personal benefit as a player if you use Standard/Terminator/Assassin twice than if you use Poly(2) once.

Can this tournament be called "how do I make a format which fit Dukasaur's playing style well so that he wins maximum number of medals"?

[Dukasaur]

sorry for double posting, just continuing from previous post...

This isn't about "how do I make this really difficult for the average player so josko wins the maximum number of medals?" This is about "how do I provide an interesting and fun experience that everybody on the site can enjoy?" That is my mandate as Community Co-ordinator -- to produce events that are fun for the whole community, which includes players of average ability feeling that they at least have a chance.

Also, you pointed fingers into me that I vote for Poly(2) because I am good at that settings so I defended myself showing that I also won some prestigious Standard and Assassin tournaments in past. Now, I can also point fingers into you that you prefer Standard/Terminator/Assasin not for benefit of the site and the tournament but for your personal benefit as a player. You have played Standard 4+ players 3600 times, Terminator 2400 times and Assassin 900 times. Comparing to that, you have played only 600 Poly games. I did not want to start with accusations of "personal benefit" from the settings but since you started it versus me then I am giving it back to you, it is obvious from your past games that you have personal benefit as a player if you use Standard/Terminator/Assassin twice than if you use Poly(2) once.

Can this tournament be called "how do I make a format which fit Dukasaur's playing style well so that he wins maximum number of medals"?

Yes. My ratio of game types is much closer to what the average player plays. Yours is much farther from what the average player plays. You have more than 1700 Poly games. That's not typical, by any stretch. I won't go so far as to call it farming, but Poly gives a massive advantage to specialists at the expense of generalists. The majority of players never play Poly unless a tournament forces them to.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I was hesitant to even have two rounds of Poly in these. I'm certainly not adding a third. No matter how you try to twist the logic, the fact is there are seven rounds. Having three of them devoted to the least popular of the five game types is ludicrous. Think about it: 3/7 is almost half. Poly represents something like 3% of the games created on this site. You want to devote 43% of the tournaments to a specialist game type that most people play only 3% of the time. Ridiculous.

[josko.ri]

sorry for double posting, just continuing from previous post...

This isn't about "how do I make this really difficult for the average player so josko wins the maximum number of medals?" This is about "how do I provide an interesting and fun experience that everybody on the site can enjoy?" That is my mandate as Community Co-ordinator -- to produce events that are fun for the whole community, which includes players of average ability feeling that they at least have a chance.

Also, you pointed fingers into me that I vote for Poly(2) because I am good at that settings so I defended myself showing that I also won some prestigious Standard and Assassin tournaments in past. Now, I can also point fingers into you that you prefer Standard/Terminator/Assasin not for benefit of the site and the tournament but for your personal benefit as a player. You have played Standard 4+ players 3600 times, Terminator 2400 times and Assassin 900 times. Comparing to that, you have played only 600 Poly games. I did not want to start with accusations of "personal benefit" from the settings but since you started it versus me then I am giving it back to you, it is obvious from your past games that you have personal benefit as a player if you use Standard/Terminator/Assassin twice than if you use Poly(2) once.

Can this tournament be called "how do I make a format which fit Dukasaur's playing style well so that he wins maximum number of medals"?

Yes. My ratio of game types is much closer to what the average player plays. Yours is much farther from what the average player plays. You have more than 1700 Poly games. That's not typical, by any stretch. I won't go so far as to call it farming, but Poly gives a massive advantage to specialists at the expense of generalists. The majority of players never play Poly unless a tournament forces them to.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I was hesitant to even have two rounds of Poly in these. I'm certainly not adding a third. No matter how you try to twist the logic, the fact is there are seven rounds. Having three of them devoted to the least popular of the five game types is ludicrous. Think about it: 3/7 is almost half. Poly represents something like 3% of the games created on this site. You want to devote 43% of the tournaments to a specialist game type that most people play only 3% of the time. Ridiculous.

I won Polymorphic Gold medal just 4 months ago (4 years after the medal was introduced) and I am 38th User to win that medal. It means 37 Users are more experienced in Poly than me so that is not settings which really favors me.

My calculation of Poly involvement is different than yours: Points earned from Poly games (if you include poly(2)) =4+3+2 = 9 and if you exclude Poly(2) =7. Points earned from S/T/A (if you include Poly(2) = 8+7+5=20 and if you exclude Poly(2) =24. So, even if you include Poly(2), maximum points earned from those settings are less than a half than maximum points earned from S/T/A, so still S/T/A takes huge amount of weight in the tournament. But if you exclude Poly(2) then points which can be earned from Poly games (7) are only about 30% of points which can be earned from S/T/A (24). Isnt it too much in favor of S/T/A?

Anyway, I have my opinion and you have your opinion, so what about putting it on democratic vote? We are voting for maps so why not listen to the community opinion when it is about settings? If you agree to put it on vote, then I will volunteer to write why should Poly(2) be chosen and I expect it to be included in the OP. Similarly, you may write why should S/T/A be chosen as a counterargument so we will see for which option will community vote.

[Dukasaur]

It means 37 Users are more experienced in Poly than me so that is not settings which really favors me.

37 users are more experienced in Poly than you? So that means 5907 users are less experienced. Thank you for helping make the point.

You're pushing for a specialist setting where 99.36% of the community have less experience than you. You know damn well that most people struggle with Poly.

Anyway, I have my opinion and you have your opinion, so what about putting it on democratic vote?

I actually did consider having a poll. Having quite a bit of experience in this regard, however, I decided against it. There would have been a lot of options -- the five basic game types, plus several possible combinations thereof, so the poll would have had at least 8 or 10 options. It is extremely unlikely that any option would have scored a majority. So we would have been left with a vague, indecisive result that really wouldn't make anybody particularly happy.

Having run something like 125 manual tournaments plus something over 650 autos, I've been through this a lot. Most players just want to play the game. They figure the tournament design is up to the tournament designer, and they're content to let him fix problems.

Whenever I've run a poll in a manual tournament, I've found:

1. Less than a quarter of players in the tournament usually vote, even if you pester them with PMs and stuff
2. Of the ones that do vote, a majority will add qualifying comments like, "I'm fine with whatever you decide."

In this case, with tons of other work going on with Great War and stuff, I decided to just cut to the chase and make a decision, and not waste time with the tedious process and indecisive result that polls usually bring. Recoding all those tournaments is a not-inconsiderable task, which fortunately Mad777 volunteered to do. I won't ask him to re-do it.

The bottom line:

Also, many people on the site rarely play Poly. Especially if they compound that by not having much team experience, they are really at a disadvantage on Poly rounds. Remember, we are trying to create something here that will be a good experience for the vast majority of the site, not benefit the specialists and experts.

This is about "how do I provide an interesting and fun experience that everybody on the site can enjoy?" That is my mandate as Community Co-ordinator -- to produce events that are fun for the whole community, which includes players of average ability feeling that they at least have a chance. I was already hesitant to include two rounds of Poly, I'm not adding a third. Period.

[josko.ri]

It means 37 Users are more experienced in Poly than me so that is not settings which really favors me.

37 users are more experienced in Poly than you? So that means 5907 users are less experienced. Thank you for helping make the point.

You're pushing for a specialist setting where 99.36% of the community have less experience than you. You know damn well that most people struggle with Poly.

I can also play with number like this and say that you have Gold Terminator medal, and only 33 Users have Platinum Terminator medal (bigger than you), while 11600 Users have Gold, Silver or Bronze Terminator medal, and countless more Users have no Terminator medal. Similarly, you have Silver Assassin medal and only top 2 of 29 medal pages of Assassin medals have Gold or Platinum. Therefore, you choose settings where 99,72% Users who earned Terminator medal have equal or less experience than you and 93,10% for Assassin. And notice, I did not count countless Users who never earned Assassin or Terminator medals (which you counted for my Poly case), I only counted Users who earned at least Bronze medal.

I never wanted to take that road but you wanted to play with "personal benefit from settings" as argument so here it is, going back to you

I still think you cheated players who signed up for your week 1-10 tournaments because you replaced Doubles with something totally different while you had chance to replace it with similar settings Poly(2). Players signed up thinking it will be something, to find out that it will be something else TOTALLY different, not at least similar.

These is your series of tournament so I respect your decision to proceed with your setup from round 11 onwards (nobody including me doesn't have to sign up if he doesn't like offered settings), however I ask you to put Poly(2) in already ongoing round 1-10 because Poly(2) is the most similar to original Doubles for which I and countless other Users signed up. Changing settings to something totally different is cheating players who signed up for Doubles (or if not Doubles then the most possible similar to Doubles, which is definitely Poly(2)).

[jytreberg]

Just curious if there are any tournaments from the first few weeks (Alabama and Alaska mainly) that have gotten past the third round. The version of Alabama I'm in is about 75% complete in the 3rd round, and Alaska is not even halfway through round 3.

Thanks for everything you guys are doing on this tournament. It's been pretty awesome so far and I'm learning a LOT about playing on this site.

[Dukasaur]

Just curious if there are any tournaments from the first few weeks (Alabama and Alaska mainly) that have gotten past the third round. The version of Alabama I'm in is about 75% complete in the 3rd round, and Alaska is not even halfway through round 3.

Thanks for everything you guys are doing on this tournament. It's been pretty awesome so far and I'm learning a LOT about playing on this site.

Thank you...

All of those early tourneys are somewhere in Round 3. There is one Alaska tourney that is still in Round 2.

I know, I'd love to see some results on the scoreboard, but it will still be a few months. I imagine we'll start to see the first few tourneys finishing early in the New Year.

[SimplyObsessed]

I only recently got back into CC last week and honestly this tourney is the most fun thing since i returned, I was able to squeeze into the Hawaii one and have just joined Illinois and Idaho. Wish i'd been on for the first few rounds! Thanks for making this happen.

[Dukasaur]

I only recently got back into CC last week and honestly this tourney is the most fun thing since i returned, I was able to squeeze into the Hawaii one and have just joined Illinois and Idaho. Wish i'd been on for the first few rounds! Thanks for making this happen.

Thank you very much!

[josko.ri]

Hoe about adding GA medals for winner of each week tournament with the highest score? Being top 1 of about 144 players participated is really an outstanding achievement worth recognition.

[Dukasaur]

Hoe about adding GA medals for winner of each week tournament with the highest score? Being top 1 of about 144 players participated is really an outstanding achievement worth recognition.

Not a bad idea.

[Dukasaur]

Some of the Alabamas are into Round 4 now.

[ironsij0287]

I'm excited to see my Quad Cities map is being used for the Iowa tournament.

[Dukasaur]

I'm excited to see my Quad Cities map is being used for the Iowa tournament.

And an excellent map it is!

[mcshanester29]

Great work mate, I have been enjoying the tournament!!

[ViperOverLord]

I currently have 16 active US tourneys. Speaking not just for myself, this could start to create problems with game loads as more tournaments are added. Perhaps there should be a couple interludes to help keep game loads down.

[Mad777]

I currently have 16 active US tourneys. Speaking not just for myself, this could start to create problems with game loads as more tournaments are added. Perhaps there should be a couple interludes to help keep game loads down.

That's why I stopped after the 2nd since I was looking to give a shot to each one but game loading was going to be way to high for me...Since the schedule is for a year to have all states out I don't think a slower pace is on the book...and honestly this could be seen unfair for those decided to not join because the weekly pace vs game loading if now things change.

[IcePack]

Yeah I also stopped very early on after realizing there was no way I could keep up w the game count, especially if I advanced in any of them