Posts from Let's organize a tournament.

I think the issue of choosing captains won't be a major one, because, essentially, the captains in this tournament will only have one function: to initially select the teams. However, to ensure this selection is done properly, it would be best to choose players who are reasonably familiar with the game capabilities of most participants.
I didn't quite understand the group stages and their purpose in relation to the idea of this tournament.

Thank you, I received an answer to one of the two questions. The role of the captains was not entirely clear (+, answer provided), and now I need to understand what is meant by a team tournament.
Now, specifically. The option hidden in my group stages was taken from a tournament I'm planning for the third game (1*1*1), and there must be 6 in each group. (Yesterday, during a tournament game on Heroes of Might and Magic, my opponent told me that the selection had begun. When we switched to turn-based mode, I quickly went over the topic, so I apologize in advance for the pun.)
1. After thinking about it, I figured that 4 in a group in the initial stage is not too few; no matter how balanced it is, it won't eliminate the element of chance. 8 is already too many, and 7 games "without progress" would be a bit boring, and it would take approximately almost 2 real months.
Furthermore, in standard group formats, there is already an imbalance in the advancement of more or less prepared players. And here, the optimal number is 4 people in a group: 2 are eliminated, and 2 advance, but a fairly strong player may end up in 3rd place by chance, simply because they were unlucky (even though Heroes of Might and Magic resembles chess... colorful and interesting..., but it's not chess). And if we talk about 8 in a group, then only 2 advance... no comment.
2. I remembered the TV show "Weakest Link."
3. I realized that the tournament is a team one and that the game always needs intrigue – that's what I came up with.
....
Let's say there were 24 participants at the start. I'm skipping the distribution. The result is 4 groups I, II, III, IV, each with three participants from the team. Therefore, in the first stage, each has three games with each member of the opposing team in the group. They played. The following table-like result was obtained:
group I
team A team B
1st place 1st place
2nd place 2nd place
3rd place 3rd place
group II
team A team B
1st place 1st place
2nd place 2nd place
3rd place 3rd place
group III
team A team B
1st place 1st place
2nd place 2nd place
3rd place 3rd place
group IV
team A team B
1st place 1st place
2nd place 2nd place
3rd place 3rd place
The third places are eliminated from the tournament. Next: we create 2 groups of 8 people according to the following principle: first, we distribute the first places, then the second. From group I, the first place of team A goes to the first in the new I group, the first place of team B goes to the first place in group II, and so on. This is what will happen (read as: from group... team... who took... place):
I ........................................ II
=A=..........=B=........................=A=...... =B=
1. I A1......1. II B1..................1. II A1.....1. I B1
2. III A1....2.IV B1..................2. IV A1....2.III B1
3. I A2......3. II B2..................3. II A2.....3. I B2
4. III A2....4. IVB2..................4. IV A2....4. III B2
Now, each has 4 games with each member of the opposing team in the group
There are many possible scenarios next.
You can eliminate the fourth places and repeat, starting with the upper scheme (yes... a game within the teams in their group between 3rd and 4th place may be needed)
You can... it's not worth going further for now, until it's accepted (even with changes)
The most interesting thing about this option: 1. It's unclear who your opponent will be in the future – I think this is a great intrigue. 2. A good player won't be eliminated due to a random loss. 4. In the team, there are 2 first and 2 second places, and everyone will have to play against two first and two second places. 3. It will not be possible to "throw" a game to your teammate, as the game is only with members of the opposing team((( I don't understand why I wrote the last one, probably just in case)))
The disadvantage is that it will still take about 2 real months, assuming one week per game.
Thank you for reading, I apologize for my inexperience.
Sincerely, leosnow.

Are we planning a tournament for beginners? If so, will you be playing TE or the original version?
Let me know who is ready to participate in this tournament starting December 1st.
I will open registration for the tournament next Monday...

Why create a separate one? The upcoming team tournament is a great solution. Divide experienced players and newcomers equally among the teams, and everyone will play in their own weight category. For example, I submitted an application; maybe there are other newcomers who want to join.

Are you planning a tournament for beginners? If so, will you be using the TE version or the original?
Let me know who is ready to participate in this tournament starting December 1st.
I will open registration for the tournament next Monday...

I don't understand the point of the question. You are organizing the tournament, so it's up to you to decide what kind and for whom. However, considering the number of people, I wouldn't divide it this way because there won't be enough participants. Some intermediate players might feel they are no longer beginners but not good enough to be considered top players, and they will skip it.
Secondly, a beginner is someone who has played very few games, say, less than 3 games with each player in the league. A beginner doesn't necessarily play poorly, as I do; the root of the word "beginner" (NOV) comes from the word "new."
I would like to play with players of different skill levels, just for the experience (it's a pity that there isn't an option to replay a game from a save file, like in Heroes 3). I'm just deciding for myself whether I will have time for a game once a week, considering that I also want to play Heroes 3.
...
If you want to divide it, create several leagues for Heroes of Might and Magic: a top league, a first league, and a second league. You can do it like in real football, or based on the principle of an online game http://www.hattrick.org/. For example, create two divisions: a top division and a first division, with one league in the top division and two in the first division. In the first division, have 32 teams (16 is too few; 20 or 24 might be possible, but could be inconvenient). In the second division, have 16 or 32 teams in each league; if there are many players, you can create a third division with 4 leagues. At the end of the season, the 8 lowest-ranked teams from the first division are distributed among the two leagues of the second division. And the top 4 teams from the two leagues of the first division take the honorable vacated spots.
As for TE, you don't need to ask. You are the organizers, you can ask for advice, use it completely or as a basis, or combine different suggestions, and then make a decision and "announce" it. After that: it's a collaborative effort, if you want to participate, you can; if not, there's no pressure, and whether it works out or not is up to you to decide initially. If someone is tired of everything, not interested, and thinks everything is wrong, they are welcome to create their own portal or fully organize their own "SUPER INTERESTING" tournament.
Sincerely, leosnow.

Some players simply wanted to test their skills in a tournament, either with TE or on the original game, especially those who hadn't participated in tournaments before.
If there's no such desire, then the issue is closed.
If there is a desire, I will organize a tournament.
However, it's still too early to create a League, mainly due to the insufficient number of players and the lack of a constant influx of new players...

Well, I'm all for such a tournament; I've been saying it for a long time. It's just that there don't seem to be many others who feel the same way.

The autumn blitz on Liga is over, by the way, my sincere congratulations to Exekutor :) The team tournament on HeroesWorld has practically reached its logical conclusion. TE Masters on Liga is a tournament not for everyone. Therefore, dear residents of Heroes resources, I would like to resume the process of discussing another tournament on HeroesWorld. We share our suggestions and wishes. Personally, I would be interested in a tournament with the maximum possible number of games against the maximum possible number of opponents :)

Personally, based on team and master, I am interested in a tournament with an approximate separation of players by level. This is good both for experienced players (there won't be many situations with frequent surrenders from opponents) and for newcomers and less experienced players - there won't be situations where a newcomer just leaves the adjacent zone, and some cunning Will, for example, has already cleared the treasure zone and is about to go through ГО to visit. I think such games with too big a gap in player level are not interesting to anyone playing.
And as for the team format, it seems a game for first place was planned between the first and second teams.

Personally, based on the team and master tournaments, I am interested in a tournament with an approximate division of players by level. This is good both for experienced players (there won't be many situations with frequent resignations from opponents) and for newcomers and less experienced players - there won't be a situation where a newcomer has just left the adjacent zone, and some cunning Will, for example, has already cleared the treasure zone and is planning to go through ГО for a visit. I think such games with too large a skill gap between players are not interesting to anyone playing.
Also, regarding the team tournament, it seems there was a plan for a game for first place between the first and second teams.

Regarding the team tournament, I thought similarly, but today I re-read the rules and, alas, did not find such a stage there. The rules provide for 3 stages, stages 1 and 2 being the actual games themselves, and stage 3 is supposed to simply determine the best of the 4 teams based on points earned. Any additional games are only provided for in the event of an equal number of points between the two leading teams. Perhaps I misunderstood something. As for dividing players into white and black, I see this as possible on ХВ only if: 1) there is a clear regulation of this issue (who is white and why, who is black and why, how can black become white, etc., etc.); 2) the organization and conduct of simultaneous tournaments for white and black, or one tournament, but with the opportunity for everyone to participate (let's say a unified tournament format with two game groups "masters", "apprentices" or whatever else you call them). IMHO, making tournaments only for the old hands, and letting the rest play among themselves or against the computer is not good.

I agree with ABK about the new tournament; it's much more interesting to play against opponents of equal strength. Personally, I'm against having a large number of rounds and unnecessary matches where the outcome is predictable; a Swiss-system tournament would be better.

Well, the commander, imho, did a very good job of dividing players by strength using the draft - almost all games were between more or less equal opponents. Launching a league with divisions is, in my opinion, a doomed idea - imho, those who are relegated from a higher division to a lower one will just give up on it, and we'll simply lose players on HeroesWorld.

I agree with ABK regarding the new tournament; it's much more interesting to play against opponents of similar skill levels. Personally, I'm against a large number of rounds and unnecessary games where the outcome is predictable; a Swiss-system tournament would be better.

No problem, that's exactly why I suggest considering a tournament format with a single set of rules but with two groups: "advanced" and "less advanced" players. However, creating a cohort of "masters" and holding tournaments only for them is not right: 1) The resource will turn into a closed club for the chosen few; 2) "Non-masters" will be deprived of the basic opportunity to hypothetically reach the "master" level because, by not participating in tournaments, they will lose the criteria for their evaluation. So, I fully understand the desire to play against equals, but there are still options to make it good for everyone.

What do white and black have to do with it? It's clear that there are strong players, weak players, and average players. The criteria are: results in team competitions, results in master tournaments, and the subjective opinion of the judges about the strength of a player based on their experience in personal games. Here's how I envision it: we create four groups, two for beginners and two for strong/average players, with 6 people in each. From the groups with experienced players, 5 people advance; from the less experienced groups, 3 of the weaker players advance, totaling 16 people. Then, we have a playoff (if anyone thinks this is unfair, I disagree, because when forming the general groups, the number of weaker players who would make it to the playoff would be even smaller). And then, the playoff is based on the final results. The players who took first place in the experienced group play against the players who took third place in the beginner group, and so on. This way, the weaker players can play normally among themselves, gain experience, and then compete in the playoff with the stronger players. We can either have a playoff or use a double-elimination bracket if we want the tournament to be longer, or a single-elimination bracket if we want it to be shorter. That's how I see it.

What do white and black have to do with it? It's clear that there are strong players, weak players, and average players. The criteria are: results in team competitions, results in Masters tournaments, and the subjective opinion of the judges about the strength of a player based on their experience in personal games.
Here's how I envision it: four groups are created, two for beginners, and two for strong/average players, with 6 people in each. From the groups with experienced players, 5 people advance, and from the inexperienced groups, 3 of the weaker players advance, totaling 16 people. Then, a playoff is held (if anyone thinks this is unfair, I disagree, because when forming the general groups, the number of weaker players who make it to the playoffs would be even smaller). Then, the playoffs proceed based on the final results: the players who took first place in the experienced group play against the players who took third place in the beginner group, and so on. This way, the weaker players can play normally among themselves, gain experience, and, accordingly, compete in the playoffs with stronger players.
We can either have a playoff or use a double-elimination bracket if we want the tournament to last longer, or a single-elimination bracket if we want it to be shorter.
That's how I see it.

Good idea, that's exactly what I'm talking about: to think through the regulations for tournaments in which everyone who wants to participate can take part, but at the same time, to provide for some kind of gradation, i.e., groups, subgroups. In this case, those who play well will still have the priority of playing against opponents of equal strength, and those who play weaker will have the opportunity to improve their skills without being excluded from the tournament and at the same time show results that allow them to compete with stronger opponents, and with consistent high game results, they can rightfully take their place in the "top league."
P.S. Regarding white and black, it was an allegory inspired by the inflexible regulations of the TE Masters

I'm all for games with strong opponents. The playoffs will definitely feature worthy contenders. The team-based aspect was also interesting.