Pit for LM
Auto-translated
The organizers discussed and decided that the regulations will not be changed.
Regarding suggestions during our tournament:
Scheduling additional games. This is impossible. 1) It would be unfair to players in other groups. Adding time in one group means we must add time for everyone else. And by scheduling extra games in one group, we are obligated to schedule extra games in all the other groups. 2) No criteria have been proposed for determining the best player if there is a tie.
Introducing other criteria. This is impossible. 1) It would be unfair to those participants who played based on the announced criteria. 2) An objective skill metric is unknown.
Option 2, suggested by Alex_R. Impossible. 1) Unfair because some results for third place and below were assigned formally. Not all participants competed for 3rd place. All matches need to be reviewed, and additional time needs to be scheduled for rematches. 2) A final with three players again will require introducing additional criteria or additional games, which could take a long time.
Option 1, suggested by Alex_R. Definitely yes. The first person to withdraw will be replaced by Piterius. If anyone else withdraws, we will draw lots among the players willing to join as a "lucky loser" and who performed most successfully in the group stage.
Finding solutions to such situations is necessary, and I suggest continuing this in the "Tournament Rules" thread: /topic/at/301719/
Please move all posts regarding criteria for determining the best players there as well.
Added 18 minutes ago
In general, I was making statistics on the group stage. Of course, these statistics do not claim to be absolute; it's just our tournament.
67 out of 80 games were played within the allotted time. 84% of all scheduled matches were completed on time. Respect to everyone who played.
Castles:
Dungeon: +15-7=2 - 67% wins
Rampart: +15-9 - 63% wins
Conflux: +15-11=2 - 57% wins
Castle: +5-5 - 50% wins
Stronghold: +4-7 - 36% wins
Inferno: +4-7 - 36% wins
Swamp: +2-5 - 29% wins
Necropolis: +3-7=2 - 33% wins
Tower: +1-6 - 14% wins
During the group stage, there were / advanced from the group / % advancement:
Dungeons - 7 / 5 / 71% (if PReDS hadn't withdrawn, it would have been 7/6/86%)
Ramparts - 7 / 3 / 43%
Confluxes - 8 / 3 / 38%
Barbarians - 3 / 1 / 33%
Infern - 3 / 1 / 33%
Castles - 3 / 1 / 33%
Necropolises - 4 / 2 / 50% (if PReDS hadn't withdrawn, it would have been 4/1/25%)
Swamps - 2 / 0 / 0%
Towers - 3 / 0 / 0%
A total of 40 people participated in the group stage. 16 made it to the 1/8 round. The castles were distributed as follows:
There were 17.5% of all participants playing for Dungeon in the group stage / there are now 31% in the playoffs.
Rampart: 17.5% / 19%
Conflux: 20% / 19%
Castle: 7.5% / 6%
Stronghold: 7.5% / 6%
Inferno: 7.5% / 6%
Swamp: 5% / 0%
Necropolis: 10% / 13%
Tower: 7.5% / 0%
The overwhelming advantage of Dungeon and the weakness of Tower and Swamp are evident.
Templates: 2sm4d(3) - 52 games, 8mm6 - 8, Panic - 4, balance - 2, Jebus - 1.
Regarding suggestions during our tournament:
Scheduling additional games. This is impossible. 1) It would be unfair to players in other groups. Adding time in one group means we must add time for everyone else. And by scheduling extra games in one group, we are obligated to schedule extra games in all the other groups. 2) No criteria have been proposed for determining the best player if there is a tie.
Introducing other criteria. This is impossible. 1) It would be unfair to those participants who played based on the announced criteria. 2) An objective skill metric is unknown.
Option 2, suggested by Alex_R. Impossible. 1) Unfair because some results for third place and below were assigned formally. Not all participants competed for 3rd place. All matches need to be reviewed, and additional time needs to be scheduled for rematches. 2) A final with three players again will require introducing additional criteria or additional games, which could take a long time.
Option 1, suggested by Alex_R. Definitely yes. The first person to withdraw will be replaced by Piterius. If anyone else withdraws, we will draw lots among the players willing to join as a "lucky loser" and who performed most successfully in the group stage.
Finding solutions to such situations is necessary, and I suggest continuing this in the "Tournament Rules" thread: /topic/at/301719/
Please move all posts regarding criteria for determining the best players there as well.
Added 18 minutes ago
In general, I was making statistics on the group stage. Of course, these statistics do not claim to be absolute; it's just our tournament.
67 out of 80 games were played within the allotted time. 84% of all scheduled matches were completed on time. Respect to everyone who played.
Castles:
Dungeon: +15-7=2 - 67% wins
Rampart: +15-9 - 63% wins
Conflux: +15-11=2 - 57% wins
Castle: +5-5 - 50% wins
Stronghold: +4-7 - 36% wins
Inferno: +4-7 - 36% wins
Swamp: +2-5 - 29% wins
Necropolis: +3-7=2 - 33% wins
Tower: +1-6 - 14% wins
During the group stage, there were / advanced from the group / % advancement:
Dungeons - 7 / 5 / 71% (if PReDS hadn't withdrawn, it would have been 7/6/86%)
Ramparts - 7 / 3 / 43%
Confluxes - 8 / 3 / 38%
Barbarians - 3 / 1 / 33%
Infern - 3 / 1 / 33%
Castles - 3 / 1 / 33%
Necropolises - 4 / 2 / 50% (if PReDS hadn't withdrawn, it would have been 4/1/25%)
Swamps - 2 / 0 / 0%
Towers - 3 / 0 / 0%
A total of 40 people participated in the group stage. 16 made it to the 1/8 round. The castles were distributed as follows:
There were 17.5% of all participants playing for Dungeon in the group stage / there are now 31% in the playoffs.
Rampart: 17.5% / 19%
Conflux: 20% / 19%
Castle: 7.5% / 6%
Stronghold: 7.5% / 6%
Inferno: 7.5% / 6%
Swamp: 5% / 0%
Necropolis: 10% / 13%
Tower: 7.5% / 0%
The overwhelming advantage of Dungeon and the weakness of Tower and Swamp are evident.
Templates: 2sm4d(3) - 52 games, 8mm6 - 8, Panic - 4, balance - 2, Jebus - 1.