Auto-translated
But isn't a personal meeting a good criterion?
Dirty_Player
Posts from Rules for organizing, conducting, and participating in online Heroes of Might and Magic III tournaments.
Dirty_Player
Piterius
Auto-translated
Well, additional games are not an option. But what to do if the situation repeats itself after the extra games? Again, one wins against another, and another against a third, and the third against the first (which has already happened in practice. Pita, Javdet, and Dream had to wait a month or even two). Should we play again?
Хаос - это порядок, которым сложнее управлять.
icq: 407907277
skype: piterius_i
icq: 407907277
skype: piterius_i
Javdet
Auto-translated
Roma, do you remember the tournament on TE, where you, Pit, and Dream competed for a spot in the group stage? There were extra games. Should we remind everyone how long it lasted and how it ended? ;)
(
Ehh... I'm talking about the first game, the three of us on a special map, in "no rules" mode, right? What are you talking about? :)
Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:
Зима 2011-12.
Зима 2011-12.
Dirty_Player
Auto-translated
What does "it depends on luck" mean? To negotiate, adapt to the opponent, find the right time.
SEM_56
Auto-translated
I'm ready to play an extra game with Peterius, as a qualifier for 1.8. If I lose, Peter advances to 1.8, and I'm out. I'm willing to sacrifice my spot for the sake of someone who follows all the rules and offers an alternative!!!
Ушел с героев, пока пряники)
Dirty_Player
Auto-translated
Ehh... I'm talking about playing the first game with three players on a special map, in "no rules" mode, that's how we used to play, what are you talking about?:)
I'm talking about the tournament where you played in the final against Vik. Remember? Vik has a medal for that :)
Javdet
Auto-translated
Playing in a group of three is actually an interesting option. Maybe that's the solution. Then only two games would be needed, and the winner would be determined definitively.
I'm talking about the tournament where you played in the final against Vikka. Remember? Vikka has a medal for that :)
I remember...
But why two games? One would be enough.
Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:
Зима 2011-12.
Зима 2011-12.
Volodymyr
Auto-translated
Let's take your TC-3 tournament as an example. There were players who were like little Kamikazes. He played a few games and disappeared... So, whoever managed to play against him, good for them? Is that it?
Javdet
Auto-translated
However, playing with three people only works if all parties are willing to compromise:)
In that case, we managed to reach an agreement, and everyone was satisfied in the end.
In that case, we managed to reach an agreement, and everyone was satisfied in the end.
Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:
Зима 2011-12.
Зима 2011-12.
Dirty_Player
Auto-translated
I remember...
But why two games? One would be enough.
Javdet
Auto-translated
the one who dies second might be a problem, but here there could be "unforeseen alliances," which isn't good.
But in general, if it's just for nostalgia's sake, it's not that bad; you can take down two of them.
But in general, if it's just for nostalgia's sake, it's not that bad; you can take down two of them.
Даже если вас съели - у вас два выхода:smile19:
Зима 2011-12.
Зима 2011-12.
Piterius
Auto-translated
I'm ready to play an extra game with Peterius, as a tiebreaker for 1.8. If I lose, Peter advances to 1.8, and I'm out. I'm willing to sacrifice my spot for the sake of someone who follows all the rules and offers an alternative!!!
Roma, thank you! But I can't accept your offer! You earned your spot, and I have nothing to do with your group. Just as I have nothing to do with any third-place spot in another group! It wouldn't be fair to take their place in case of someone's withdrawal. We were only talking about the competition within my group.
Хаос - это порядок, которым сложнее управлять.
icq: 407907277
skype: piterius_i
icq: 407907277
skype: piterius_i
SEM_56
Auto-translated
2 games with three players is a perfectly reasonable suggestion. Who else has any other ideas?
Ушел с героев, пока пряники)
Pit for LM
Auto-translated
Let me clearly state the question being discussed.
What are the possible ways to determine the best player in a tournament when conditions are equal?
Possible scenarios:
1. Round-robin tournament. Equal number of points scored. With a large number of participants (by the way, I don't know how many), the Berger coefficient is used. Who has the advantage?
2. Cup tournament. Elimination games. A draw or a game is not played. Who advances?
3. Final. How to determine the winner if the finalists don't play? For example, if their schedules don't align?
If we provide a clear criterion, will it lead to the player with the advantage simply not playing under various pretexts and waiting for a technical win?
We need to come up with all possible options, and perhaps vote on them. Then, each organizer can choose the most suitable and widely accepted solution for their tournament rules.
Here are some proposed options:
1. Seasonal rating.
2. Permanent rating.
3. Speed of playing all games in a round-robin tournament.
4. Additional games.
5. Coin toss or dice roll.
6. Finding the ultimate skill meter.
Suggest more options and discuss what has been proposed.
What are the possible ways to determine the best player in a tournament when conditions are equal?
Possible scenarios:
1. Round-robin tournament. Equal number of points scored. With a large number of participants (by the way, I don't know how many), the Berger coefficient is used. Who has the advantage?
2. Cup tournament. Elimination games. A draw or a game is not played. Who advances?
3. Final. How to determine the winner if the finalists don't play? For example, if their schedules don't align?
If we provide a clear criterion, will it lead to the player with the advantage simply not playing under various pretexts and waiting for a technical win?
We need to come up with all possible options, and perhaps vote on them. Then, each organizer can choose the most suitable and widely accepted solution for their tournament rules.
Here are some proposed options:
1. Seasonal rating.
2. Permanent rating.
3. Speed of playing all games in a round-robin tournament.
4. Additional games.
5. Coin toss or dice roll.
6. Finding the ultimate skill meter.
Suggest more options and discuss what has been proposed.
Kash
Auto-translated
2. Cup. Elimination games. Draw or game not played. Who goes on?
3. Final. How to determine the winner if the finalists don't play? For example, if the timing doesn't work out?
The following options are suggested:
1. Seasonal rating.
2. Permanent rating.
3. Speed of playing all games in a round-robin tournament.
4. Additional games.
5. Tossing a coin or dice.
6. Searching for the ultimate skill meter.
The speed of playing is a very subjective factor. How is it measured, and what is the standard?
Additional games are the most acceptable option, no matter how you look at it.