HeroesWorld

Posts from TOURNAMENT TROUBLES!

Tournaments for all games.
5.0 (2 ratings)
User Avatar
Offline Kamikaze
Registered:
Posts: 1,700
#213
Auto-translated
Without a rating system, many won't participate. So, the only solution is to IMPLEMENT A RATING SYSTEM. You can simply divide tournaments into two types, and consequently, have two different ratings. Like Grand Slam tournaments. And a separate rating for them.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Kamikaze
User Avatar
Offline Alex_R
Registered:
Posts: 1,739
#214
Auto-translated
No, I still support the original point of view of the organizers... to divide tournaments into official and unofficial ones... because there can be many such tournaments (anyone can organize them), and regarding the unwillingness to participate in unofficial tournaments, you are all exaggerating... there are plenty of people who play for fun or for other reasons... for example, I play (when I have time) online just for fun (friendly matches) that most people don't even know about!
And I'm not the only one:smile13:
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Kamikaze
User Avatar
Offline Ley
Registered:
Posts: 1,299
#215
Auto-translated
Kamikaze;104916
Without a rating, many will not participate. So, there is only one way out – COUNT THE RATING.
You can simply divide tournaments into two types, and consequently, the rating as well. Like Grand Slam tournaments. And a separate rating for them.

Yeah, a Grand Slam tournament... :D
And what exactly do you mean by that? That, for example, in a "small tournament," the rating will also not be very high :), but in a "big" one, it will be better... Develop the thought or continue what you said ;)

Added 3 minutes ago
Alex_R;104918
No, I still support the organizers' original point of view... to divide tournaments into official and unofficial... because there can be many such tournaments (anyone who wants can organize them), and regarding the unwillingness to participate in unofficial tournaments – you are all exaggerating... there are many people who play for fun or for other reasons.... for example, I play (when I have time) online just for fun (friendly matches) that most people don't even know about!!!
And I'm not the only one :smile13:

Yes, that's understandable. On the portal, everyone mostly plays for fun, not for recognition, but, damn, there are exceptions. What should be done with them: "if you don't want to, don't play"? And should we just destroy the idea of Grail tournaments?
That tournaments will be divided – that's for sure, but the question is, how much will they differ from each other?
"Единственное, что можно сказать с уверенностью об удаче - она изменит..."
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Ley
User Avatar
Offline Alex_R
Registered:
Posts: 1,739
#216
Auto-translated
Ley;104924
Is the idea to simply eliminate the Grail rewards?
That tournaments will be divided – that’s for sure, but how much will they differ from each other?
The Grails have nothing to do with it... they are awarded if the tournament is supported by the portal!!! And in general, we don’t influence the Grails in any way... this is decided by VDV_forever and the Creator... however they decide, that’s how it will be!!!
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Svercha
Registered:
Posts: 134
#217
Auto-translated
Actually, in general, what is the difference between official and unofficial tournaments in terms of their structure? Is it only that one is organized by the administration, and the other by ordinary users? And that only official tournaments award rating points, while unofficial ones don't? That's not really about the structure. It seems kind of silly... Both types of tournaments have the same structure, for example, in terms of gameplay... So, ratings should be awarded for all tournaments, otherwise, it's just some kind of discrimination... Personally, I feel bad for the unofficial tournaments... What makes them worse?! I don't understand why the administration is so strongly opposed to awarding ratings for unofficial tournaments... IMHO. And, by the way, I will participate in unofficial tournaments as well, because, as Alex R said, I play for fun and for the
Мудрость должна найти применение в твоей жизни,иначе она заржавеет,как меч,который ни разу не пустили в дело.
Первооткрывательница,советник по делам мира Клана "E pluribus unum":rolleyes:

0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline AmberSoler
Registered:
Posts: 1,396
#218
Auto-translated
In my opinion, there is only one criterion – the players' interest in the tournament. How to solve the issue: 1. Award a rating for all official tournaments. 2. Consider unofficial tournaments that have gathered a sufficient number of participants as official. That's it. There are no problems. :)
Сначала было слово...
FizMiG v.2.0 *** Очередное обновление справочника! *** http://vk.com/fizmig

0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline AlexeyPank
Registered:
Posts: 2,416
#219
Auto-translated
To avoid a situation where a weak newcomer gets a higher rating – the rating system needs to be changed. I am currently working on a new bonus system based on the strength of the tournament, which might be interesting.
Мы спасемся? Я не знаю. Верьте...
Геройский Интернационал
Клан Homo homini - основатель клана
Член РКСМ с 07.07.07.
ФЛУДОВСКИЕ ССЫЛКИ!- сообщить о бесполезной теме/сообщении.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Kamikaze
User Avatar
Offline IronAxe
Registered:
Posts: 1,585
#220
Auto-translated
Kamikaze;104916
Without a ranking, many won't participate. So, there's only one way out – COUNT THE RANKING.
You could simply divide the tournaments into two types, and consequently, the ranking as well. Like Grand Slam tournaments. And have a separate ranking for them.
:) We're already confused with the rankings due to a bunch of different systems, a bunch of tables + clan + for different versions of the game. Initially, it was assumed that a player in Heroes could have a maximum of 6 rankings!! :) One for each version of Heroes + a universal one. That's the official version. Well, you can also add rankings for online play across five versions and a universal one. That's already 12. And now you're suggesting tripling that number :) And also taking into account rankings for small, medium, and grand slam tournaments :) And what if there's a slam for that :smile19: Just kidding :)

Added 8 minutes ago
Alex_R;104918
No, I still support the original point of view of the organizers... to divide tournaments into official and unofficial...
Everyone supports this point of view, that is, to divide them into official and unofficial. But VDV_forever expressed himself vaguely about the ranking for them, and Kyle supported him. But I, for example, know the point of view of Alex Panka, AmberSolera, and it's not the same - and aren't they also organizers? And I don't yet know Alan's point of view. So, don't say that absolutely all organizers are in favor of not awarding a ranking for unofficial tournaments. Name specific names - so that the country knows its heroes :)
PS. Official and unofficial differ in that an unofficial tournament must обязательно have a quorum for the ranking. You could also suggest not counting the clan ranking for unofficial tournaments. I can easily agree with that.

Added 1 minute ago
AmberSoler;104977
In my opinion, there is only one criterion - the players' interest in the tournament.
How to solve the problem:
1. Award a ranking for all official tournaments by definition.
2. Unofficial tournaments that gather a quorum should be considered official.
That's it. There are no problems. :)
I vote FOR this proposal.

Added 4 minutes ago
AlexeyPank;104992
And so that it doesn't turn out that a weak unofficial tournament gives more ranking points - we need to change the ranking system. I'm currently working on a new version of a bonus for the strength of the tournament, it might be interesting.
Wow, you're tireless :) Well, give it a try. And maybe let's recalculate all the ranking tables for the Kanigema tournament for each new proposed system, so that we can immediately see on real examples how the new system behaves and in which direction it deviates from the existing ones.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Svercha
Registered:
Posts: 134
#221
Auto-translated
I AM FOR the idea of AmberSolera...)
Мудрость должна найти применение в твоей жизни,иначе она заржавеет,как меч,который ни разу не пустили в дело.
Первооткрывательница,советник по делам мира Клана "E pluribus unum":rolleyes:

0
⚖️
0
In reply to AmberSoler
User Avatar
Offline Kyle
Registered:
Posts: 2,071
#222
Auto-translated
AmberSoler;104977
2. Unofficial tournaments that gather a quorum should be considered official. Everything is fine. :)
I disagree; problems may arise: Since any portal user can host an unofficial tournament, and in unlimited quantities, the following situation is possible: A player creates several tournaments at once (let's say 10) and gathers a quorum consisting of their friends (let's say representatives of one clan). Other users simply don'

Кто состоянием своим доволен, тому жить весело. (с)Алекса́ндр Васи́льевич Суво́ров
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Kyle
User Avatar
Offline AmberSoler
Registered:
Posts: 1,396
#223
Auto-translated
Kyle;105170
...then the following situation is possible:
A player creates several tournaments at once (let's say 10) and gathers a quorum consisting of his friends (let's say, representatives of one Clan). Other users simply don't have time to physically play in all these tournaments, and therefore the player and his team earn a lot of rating and Grails.
There is one excellent way to avoid this headache, and it is to solve problems as they arise, rather than in advance... Of course, foresight won't hurt, but it's not always appropriate...

Here is a simple argument in favor of this idea: if only representatives of one Clan participate in the tournament, then no one else simply knew about this tournament - it is an intra-clan tournament, and we do not consider it at all...

If the tournament is public, like your current tournament, try to organize it so that no player other than the members of your Clan registers for it... Will you refuse them registration? That is, it is impossible, even if they really want to, to hold a public tournament for players of one Clan... Even if they all conspire and deliberately go for fraud.

And what does it mean that "Other users simply don't have time to physically play in all these tournaments"? Some managed, and the others didn't? And what are ten tournaments at the same time? If they plan this scheme, they will not see high places - it is clear that it is impossible to play many tournaments at the same time and achieve impressive results everywhere... Are we not talking about a "cooperative" here?

In addition, increasing the number of unofficial tournaments reduces the average number of participants per tournament, thereby depriving it of a quorum. This is simply a doomed undertaking.

That is, the problem is at least only theoretical...

This does not mean that they will never be able to implement such a situation, but let's wait for at least one precedent, which will be the basis for revising the idea. And for now, we can quite leave this option...
Сначала было слово...
FizMiG v.2.0 *** Очередное обновление справочника! *** http://vk.com/fizmig

0
⚖️
0
In reply to AmberSoler
User Avatar
Offline Kyle
Registered:
Posts: 2,071
#224
Auto-translated
AmberSoler;105175
Aren't we talking about "co-op" here?
How so? We are talking about it... :D
AmberSoler;105175
This doesn't mean they won't be able to implement such a situation at some point, but let's wait for at least one example before reconsidering the idea. For now, we can leave this option...
Well, your position is clear.
But I still hold a different opinion.
I think we should wait to hear what VDV_forever has to say about this.

Sincerely.

Кто состоянием своим доволен, тому жить весело. (с)Алекса́ндр Васи́льевич Суво́ров
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Kyle
User Avatar
Offline IronAxe
Registered:
Posts: 1,585
#225
Auto-translated
Kyle;105170
I disagree, there could be problems:
Since any portal user can host an unofficial tournament, and in unlimited quantities, the following situation is possible:
A player creates several tournaments at once (let's say 10).
And immediately gets reprimanded by the administration. An official organizer can create 2-3 tournaments, for example, while unofficial organizers are prohibited from creating more than one tournament at a time. The clan affiliation of unofficial player-creators can also be tracked. AmberSoler perfectly described the other aspects of this problem.
Kyle;105170

By the way, a question for IronAxe: how will he update the rating in such a situation? For each tournament held? Yes? Then this player and team will always be at the top of the rating table.
At the same time, they may not even play in official tournaments, because they will easily accumulate a high rating from their own tournaments.
I've already said that the rating in an alternative system will be updated as follows. A day is chosen when the rating for each version of the Heroes game is updated for ALL players. The universal rating will also be updated. It is clear that the player who has played more games and has a higher rating will retain a higher rating. However, players with a high rating will lose more during the update, while players with a lower rating will lose less. To put it mildly, a player with a rating of 100 will retain 50 points after the update, which is 50% of their original rating. A player with a rating of 2 will retain 1 point. With this action, I am trying to prevent the leaders from pulling away indefinitely from the outsiders, so that everyone has a chance to catch up.
But if we talk about the fact that the more games a player plays, the higher their rating may be, this is also true in other systems. I'll explain: tournaments in Heroes 3. Only official players play, and we only count the rating for them (as you suggest). So, after 10 tournaments, there will easily be a difference among the players in how many games they have played - some will play all 10, some 7, some 1 (a beginner), and some 0 (just came to the forum). Which of these players will have a better chance of having a higher rating? We will calculate it based on the average per number of games :) A player with one game and 100 points will beat everyone :)
And what will change if we also count the rating for unofficial players with a quorum? My system can handle this problem as well, even if not perfectly :)

Added 5 minutes ago
Kyle;105223
How so? That's exactly what we're talking about... :D
Well, your position is clear.
But I still hold a different opinion.
I think we should wait to see what VDV_forever has to say about this.
Whatever he says, it's already clear from the discussion that only two people have spoken out against not counting the rating for unofficial tournaments with a quorum. The majority currently say they are FOR it. AlexPank has already calculated the rating. It is better to find out the opinion of other official organizers, for example, Alana and whoever else.
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Svercha
Registered:
Posts: 134
#226
Auto-translated
It would be good to limit the number of unofficial tournaments. For example, allow only 3 unofficial tournaments to run simultaneously. Subsequent tournaments would be placed in a queue. Once one of the 3 tournaments ends, the next one in the queue can be started.
Мудрость должна найти применение в твоей жизни,иначе она заржавеет,как меч,который ни разу не пустили в дело.
Первооткрывательница,советник по делам мира Клана "E pluribus unum":rolleyes:

0
⚖️
0
In reply to Svercha
User Avatar
Offline IronAxe
Registered:
Posts: 1,585
#227
Auto-translated
Svercha;105243
We could limit the number of unofficial tournaments. For example, allow only 3 unofficial tournaments to run simultaneously. Subsequent tournaments would be placed in a queue. Once one of the tournaments from the "group of 3" ends, the next one can be started...
That's another option ;) Because the more tournaments there are, the higher the chance that people will spread out among them, instead of playing each map more frequently.
0
⚖️
0

Statistics

12k / 1.15M Discussions 699 Wiki pages 1.7k Maps
55k Members

Library

Welcome our newest member: Фёдор Фёдорович

Users Online 12 users 1447 guests

Today's Visitors 15