HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

    Loads video thumbnails from YouTube, which lets it see your IP address. Off until you turn it on, and remembered in this browser only.

Posts from Favorites, into battle! - 11.

Tournament History
No ratings yet — be the first to rate!
User Avatar
Offline sir Davos Seaworth
Registered:
Posts: 1,274
#257
Auto-translated
According to Buchholz, he receives a lower score. It's difficult to say whether this is good or bad; serious analysis is needed (which would involve considering all possible scenarios, and that's not something that can be done in a day or two). However, this system has been used successfully in various sports for a long time. Therefore, such issues should not be resolved hastily, and certainly not during an already ongoing tournament.
"There's no need to execute me,sir Davos . I'll be dead before dawn."
ICQ 716748479
0
⚖️
0
Offline kamukag3e
Registered:
Posts: 928
#258
Auto-translated
And what does Buchholz have to do with it? Berger is considered in the rules, isn't he?
艰难获胜 herolwy
0
⚖️
0
In reply to sir Davos Seaworth
User Avatar
Offline MerlinTheMagician
Registered:
Posts: 1,073
#259
Auto-translated
Sir Davos Seaworth
Therefore, such issues should not be resolved "on the fly," especially during an already ongoing tournament.
That's why I recommend discussing the risks with the judging panel. The fact that the tournament has started is not yet a problem at this stage, during the first few days: I highly doubt that anyone will refuse to play if we remove the 1-1 draw now until the end of the first round and in general until the first draw occurs.
In chess, for example, if both opponents are absent (without a valid reason - illness or incapacity), they don't score any points.
Нам это идеально подойдёт! (с)

"Совесть - она либо есть, либо её нет" (с) RedWhait HP
0
⚖️
0
In reply to kamukag3e
User Avatar
Offline sir Davos Seaworth
Registered:
Posts: 1,274
#260
Auto-translated
kamukag3e
What does Buchholz have to do with it? Berger is considered in the rules.
Exactly. I confused it with OFB.
"There's no need to execute me,sir Davos . I'll be dead before dawn."
ICQ 716748479
0
⚖️
0
Offline Grando
Registered:
Posts: 1,827
#261
Auto-translated
Merlin, give me a clear example of a situation that concerns you. 6 people in a group, how many points does each person have, and what prospect worries you? Like Korovka wrote (they went into a private chat to reread the rules - you need to make sure that you have read and understood them). Write a specific example. There were several tasks: - to move away from large groups of 8 people, where there are many situations when it is generally impossible to finish the group - ideally, to fully motivate them until the last round - to simplify the calculation of points / technical and coefficient scores as much as possible (thanks to the presence of motivation, including). I admit that the approach may not work somewhere. But I need to see a specific situation where. Abstract phrases like "players have 4-5-6 equal points" are not helpful here. How many exactly are equal, and how did this happen? More details, please.
https://www.twitch.tv/grando__
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Grando
User Avatar
Offline MerlinTheMagician
Registered:
Posts: 1,073
#262
Auto-translated
A simplified private version without considering coefficients. Players 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Player 1 won against 5 and 6, drew with 2 and 3, lost to 4. Total: 8. Player 2 won against 3 and 6, drew with 1, lost to 4 and 5. Total: 7. Player 3 won against 4 and 5, drew with 1, lost to 2 and 6. Total: 7. Player 4 won against 1 and 2, lost to 3, 5, 6. Total: 6. Player 5 won against 2 and 4, lost to 1 and 3. Current total: 6. (1 game left against player 6) Player 6 won against 3 and 4, lost to 1 and 2. Current total: 6. (1 game left against player 5) A negotiated or, even more so, technical draw automatically eliminates player 4 from the tournament. I repeat, I don't understand the point of introducing any kind of draw: a player who doesn't show up for the round loses, if both don't show up, both lose. And the very possibility of a draw allows for manipulation and control over the distribution of places in the table.
Нам это идеально подойдёт! (с)

"Совесть - она либо есть, либо её нет" (с) RedWhait HP
0
⚖️
0
Offline Grando
Registered:
Posts: 1,827
#263
Auto-translated
Two questions.
1) Okay, and how do you think we can improve this? Should we eliminate draws altogether?
2) The example is also amusing – a victory for either of the players you mentioned in this last game puts them in the winners' bracket.
And a draw puts them at the very bottom of the losers' bracket. I can hardly imagine how they could agree on a draw in that situation.
Do they both think they are so much weaker than their opponent that a draw is the optimal outcome in terms of chances?
https://www.twitch.tv/grando__
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Grando
User Avatar
Offline MerlinTheMagician
Registered:
Posts: 1,073
#264
Auto-translated
Al Feyn
Two questions.
1) Okay, and how do you think we can improve this? Should we eliminate draws altogether?
2) The example is also amusing – a victory for either of the players you mentioned in this last game puts them in the winners' bracket.
And a draw puts them at the very bottom of the losers' bracket. I can hardly imagine how they could agree to a draw in that situation.
Do they both think they are so much weaker than their opponent that a draw is the optimal outcome in terms of chances?
1. Exactly. Eliminate draws altogether. The players have 2 weeks to determine a winner – more than enough time.
2. There are several such examples. As an example, such a tactical draw can move someone from first place directly to third, although I can't say for sure here – it needs to be calculated and modeled.
In the situation I proposed, a draw is the optimal outcome for them in terms of chances because a loss for either of them moves them to 6th place, and if (since we're fantasizing) the fifth player's victory over the second was simply due to the second player's random mistake, then the uncertainty is quite justified. And player 4 managed to beat the first and second – hypothetically, not a very weak player, whom both would want to eliminate.
Нам это идеально подойдёт! (с)

"Совесть - она либо есть, либо её нет" (с) RedWhait HP
0
⚖️
0
Offline Grando
Registered:
Posts: 1,827
#265
Auto-translated
1. I have nothing against it. The situation is exactly the same as with the Necromancers. If in the Haven rules, draws are completely abolished in tournaments, we'll try to participate in this group stage if there are no draws by that time. Go for it. 2. You didn't convince me. I think the example I gave was not very good. Both players won't immediately play for a draw. One will decide that he is stronger and will try to win the super prize. If you can find several such examples, find another one. Maybe it will be better.
https://www.twitch.tv/grando__
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Grando
User Avatar
Offline Dirty_Player
Registered:
Posts: 11,030
#266
Auto-translated
There's no need to completely eliminate draws. If players can secure a higher ranking through a draw, it's their legitimate right, as they performed better in the previous rounds. However, awarding a draw when both opponents haven't played is absurd; they should receive a 0:0 score and nothing else.
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
User Avatar
Offline sir Davos Seaworth
Registered:
Posts: 1,274
#267
Auto-translated
I'll add that there are situations where the game can reach a stalemate, continuing indefinitely. For example, when a player with a fast hero takes refuge in a Sanctuary (or a single-cell hole between mountains), and even without castles, can control the game by taking one of several nearby towns each turn, replenishing mana, and returning to the Sanctuary. In this case, a draw is a reasonable outcome.
"There's no need to execute me,sir Davos . I'll be dead before dawn."
ICQ 716748479
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Dirty_Player
Offline Grando
Registered:
Posts: 1,827
#268
Auto-translated
Dirty_Player
Well, there's no need to completely abolish draws. If players can secure a higher position for themselves through a draw, it's their legitimate right, as they performed better in the previous rounds. However, awarding a draw when both opponents haven't played is absurd; they should receive a 0:0 score, and nothing else.
There are two extreme viewpoints here. You expressed one.
The opposite view is that it's absurd to force people to come up with a report about a draw (in a broader sense, to pay any attention to it at all) if a draw suits both of them. They'll come up with something because you, as the judge, demand it. Does this change the essence of the matter? It's a pre-arranged draw without any actual play.
Come on, either put your pants on or take off your cross.
In other words, either abolish pre-arranged draws or don't ask people to perform some kind of ritual around them.

If we're talking about missing players, I also don't understand what the problem is. They'll be disqualified from the tournament – what difference does it make whether it's 0:0 or 1:1?
Then you start discussing something that doesn't determine the final result.
Disqualification will determine their position, and the position of the one who ends up in the "Merlin's" sixth place (and rises to fourth again), not the number of points for a draw.
https://www.twitch.tv/grando__
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Grando
User Avatar
Offline sir Davos Seaworth
Registered:
Posts: 1,274
#269
Auto-translated
Al Feyn
There are two extreme viewpoints here. You voiced one.
The opposite one states that it's absurd to force people to come up with a report about a draw if it suits both of them. Well, they'll come up with something because you, as a judge, require it. Does this change the essence of the matter? It's a negotiated draw without any actual play. Come on, either abolish negotiated draws or don't ask people to perform some kind of ritual around them.
There's another option. It was used in the previous OFB. Negotiated draws were prohibited in the last two rounds, but if the game dragged on and the players didn't finish within the allotted time, they could submit the save files to the arbitrators, and the result could be accepted based on the judges' decision, including a draw.

If there is no report, and no one requested an ODD (Overtime Decision Draw) or a judge's decision, then both receive a technical loss.
"There's no need to execute me,sir Davos . I'll be dead before dawn."
ICQ 716748479
0
⚖️
0
Offline Grando
Registered:
Posts: 1,827
#270
Auto-translated
Again, two questions: 1) First, the previous tie-break system was a very cleverly designed and specific Swiss system. And it's unrealistic to apply its principles one-to-one to something else. 2) There was a rule. So what? Were there really no pre-arranged draws in the last two rounds? Including those that affected Buchholz and other players, including those who, because of Buchholz, did or did not qualify for the tie-break?
sir Davos Seaworth
If there is no report, no one asked to appoint an odd-man-out, or a judge's decision, then both receive a loss.
Why? Give at least one example of a situation where this has a real impact.
https://www.twitch.tv/grando__
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Grando
User Avatar
Offline sir Davos Seaworth
Registered:
Posts: 1,274
#271
Auto-translated
Al Feyn
Again, two questions:
1) First of all, the previous OFB (Online Fischer-Random Chess Championship) was a very cleverly designed and specific Swiss system tournament. It is impossible to apply its principles one-to-one elsewhere.
2) There was a rule. So what? Were there really no prearranged draws in the last two rounds? Including those that affected Buchholz and other players, including those who ended up in/not in the FB because of Buchholz?
1. What prevents us from banning prearranged draws in the final round? If the players played their first game in the final round and agreed on a draw, then please go ahead. Let them agree even in the penultimate round; it is impossible to foresee everything in advance.
2. There were no prearranged draws in the last rounds. More details can be found here: /topic/12464/

Added 10 minutes later
Al Feyn


Why? Give at least one example of a situation where this has real significance.

There are many examples. In the same blitz chess tournament, if players did not play matches or failed to notify the organizer about problems in time, they received forfeits. However,
the kind "Korovka" allowed them to finish the games and change the results after the technical forfeits had been assigned.
"There's no need to execute me,sir Davos . I'll be dead before dawn."
ICQ 716748479
0
⚖️
0