OFB-8 — Tournament History online

No ratings yet — be the first to rate!

Announcement

злой_романтик

12 years ago

Auto-translated

The time has come and so... drumroll... the qualifying tournament for FB-8 is declared open :smile44:

I. Regulations and Deadlines

The qualifying tournament will be held using the "Swiss" system

Start of the tournament: April 1, 2014; registration until March 29, 2014 inclusive

Time limit per round: 2 weeks - technical losses will be assigned without regard to opinions or authority (the sole exception is CIS-14 in Minsk)
Players have the right to arrange a convenient time among themselves, but if an agreement cannot be reached, the critical time for playing is the night from Saturday to Sunday of the first week. (if the game was not completed in one session, then during the second week). In case one player fails to show up at the set time, the other must write to the organizer or one of the judges, and when the tech result is assigned, this will be the main argument.
This clause is not subject to discussion.

7 players advance to the final stage.

II. Rules and Templates.

1. By default, games are played according to /topic/10593/
2. By default, the game version is SoD 3.2 (4.0); by mutual agreement, WT or any other version of HOMM3.

3.The template for each round will be determined as follows - during registration, each participant must indicate 5 favorite templates; from all these templates, 9 will be selected (depending on the number of participants and the number of rounds, respectively). Then the selected templates are randomly "shuffled" and a list is compiled (e.g., 1-2sm4d3, 2-mininoszta, 3-Jebus Cross, 4-skirmish, etc.). In the 1st round, players ban templates that "came up" under numbers 1, 2, 3 (i.e., banning occurs from 2sm4d3, mininoszta, and Jebus Cross). In the next round, banning occurs from templates 2, 3, 4 (mininoszta, Jebus Cross, skirmish), etc. In the last 7th (9th) round, banning will occur from templates 7 (9), 1, 2. Red starts the ban

4. Town selection: standard ban. Blue starts the ban. Colors are determined during the draw and do not change with restarts.

A win awards 1 point, a draw 0.5, a loss 0.
The winners, and accordingly those who qualify for FB, will be 7 people.
The winner is determined by the total number of points scored. In case of a tie in points, additional tiebreakers apply.
1) Buchholz Coefficient
2) Head-to-head result

III. Organizational Matters
1. The tournament is official and regular.
2. The tournament is conducted according to the Rules for Organizing, Conducting, and Participating in Tournaments.
3. Tournament Host: zloi_romantic (296524052)
Tournament Judges: Pit for LM (471401475), Dirty_Player (ICQ 408722873).
4. For each game played, participants must submit a report and confirmation.
5. Saves of all games must be kept until the end of the tournament and presented at the first request of the tournament hosts or any AC member.
6. Regarding controversial issues, if any arise, please discuss them outside the forum. To resolve them, contact the host or a tournament judge via ICQ and provide daily saves, ICQ logs, and other necessary information.
The judges' decision is made primarily based on the tournament rules. If the situation that arises is not regulated by the rules, then the judges will be guided by basic logic and gaming ethics.
7. All tournament games count towards the season rating. Reports and confirmations are written in this thread and will be copied to the "Game Reports and Confirmations Online" thread. I.e., there is NO need to duplicate reports in the seasonal thread.
8. The final part of the tournament will be held using a round-robin system.

IV. Participants
1. Experienced players from HW and other gaming resources are invited to the tournament.
2. Newcomers who have shown good results are allowed (applications will be considered on an individual basis).
3. Newly registered players are not allowed to participate in the tournament (exception: active players from other gaming resources; applications will be considered on an individual basis).
4. Players who have a BWP are not eligible to participate in the tournament. If any player is awarded a BWP during the tournament, they will be disqualified and their results annulled.
5. Applications from undisciplined players who have repeatedly "ditched" tournaments may be rejected.
6. The organizers reserve the right to refuse a user participation in the tournament without publicly explaining the reasons.
7. The Winner and 2nd-3rd place finishers of the FB-7 tournament are NOT allowed to participate in the qualifiers.
8. The tournament application must include:
- 5 most favorite templates
- convenient time for playing
9. Players Gomunguls, Aya, Maretti advance to FB-8 without a qualifier, while players Piterius and LeBron have a bonus of a byeslot for 1 round (if, of course, they wish to participate)

The randomizer arranged the templates as follows
1-2sm4d3
2-Spider
3-skirmish (played according to OFB rules, i.e., with a town ban and no color change, but by mutual agreement you can play according to seasonal rules, i.e., allrandom)
4-6lm10a
5-JC
6-8mm6a
7-anarchy
8-diamond
9-Mini nostalgia

Thus, in the 1st round Red starts the ban from templates - 2sm4d3, Spider, skirmish
In the 2nd round, the ban proceeds from templates Spider, skirmish, 6lm10a
In all rounds, Red starts the template ban

I repeat for everyone - if you have a problem with your opponent (cannot find a common time, being ignored, etc.), write to me on ICQ - we will sort it out
Draw

In reply to Dima Surmay

Dirty_Player

11 years ago

Auto-translated

StickyFingaz

Well, starting with the very first FB, the tournament consistently undermines its reputation as a top-tier and exemplary event on HVM. Something needs to change...

Said the person who "ran" a top-tier and exemplary tournament that "slightly" discredited itself.

Dima Surmay

The problem isn't the tournament itself, but the people, mainly those involved in its organization.

I don't see anyone who is willing to help those people "who are the problem."

Added 7 minutes later

Wicc

Yeah, I realized that after I wrote it, but I was too lazy to correct it. Considering the possible presence of pre-arranged matches in the later stages of the tournament, the number of guaranteed spots is critical for tournament strategy.

No, I'm sorry. The tournament promised 7 guaranteed spots. 7 players from the tournament advance. BUT. nowhere was it written how many spots would be in the FB? Where did the idea come from that there should be 10 participants? :confused: The fact that 2 more spots were added shouldn't concern other participants. The quotas could have been allocated for the winners of other tournaments or for other achievements. This has nothing to do with the OFB. If instead of 7 people, 5 were allowed to advance, that would be a violation. But as it is, they promised 7, and 7 advanced.

In reply to Dark

Noom

11 years ago

Auto-translated

darkello

Please calculate it and enlighten me, I'm a bit clueless:confused:

You seem to have some doubts – just Google the formula and calculate it yourself. I don't have any calculation problems right now.

In reply to Dirty_Player

Wicc

11 years ago

Auto-translated

The discussion is interesting... Throughout my entire career as a player (and even before that), I've always adhered to a strict principle: to distinguish between a player, a chatter, and a judge. When I'm playing or just chatting, I can swear, troll, insult, and generally engage in demagoguery, arguments, and other inappropriate behavior. But when I'm acting as a judge, my rhetoric and behavior change – my posts become serious, logically consistent, respectful to the other person, and as non-confrontational as the situation allows. Without any jokes, sarcasm, whining, ambiguous hints, or condescending tones, etc. When Rebel/Cobra are stirring up trouble, it's acceptable – they're defending their interests as best they can. But when members of the administration start doing it, it's disappointing.

Added 3 minutes ago

Dirty_Player

But they promised 7, and 7 were eliminated.

In the topic header, I see 9 players who made it through. You can say anything, but knowing that the passing score is 6.5, not 7.0, objectively changes the tournament strategy for players who are "close to passing."

Added 8 minutes ago
Here are the exact quotes:

злой_романтик

7 players will advance to the final stage.

злой_романтик

There will be 7 winners, and therefore 7 players will advance to the final bracket. The winner is determined by the number of points scored. In the event of a tie, additional criteria apply: 1) Buchholz coefficient 2) Head-to-head record

The same thought is repeated twice, clearly and unambiguously, with no "ifs" or "at least 7" – to make it clear to everyone that there will be no easy way through, and no one is going to twist the rules. After that, the position of "our rules, we can change them if we want" looks pathetic. If you want to change something, first make sure that no one will object; the administration has no moral right to speak from a position of power in this matter.

In reply to Wicc

Dirty_Player

11 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

I see 9 players who have passed in the topic header.

This means that the promised 7 have passed!

Wicc

You can say anything, but knowing that the passing score is 6.5, not 7.0, objectively changes the tournament strategy for "near-passing" players.

Let's assume there is a situation where the organizer unexpectedly comes up with a FB scheme that requires exactly 12 players. How to find two more? Either conduct another selection, or invite some participants for other merits, or take the next ones according to the OFB. The problem is that there is no single regulation for the FB tournament, in which the rules and the number of participants are clearly defined.

In reply to Wicc

bubuch

11 years ago

Auto-translated

I am satisfied with everything :smile44:

In reply to Wicc

Dark

11 years ago

Auto-translated

hellight:
toganash , simon5760, diabler, dima surmay , aiwe, twaryna, thesevanasian, bubuch
6+3+5+5+6+6+6+6.5=43.5
bubuch:
kashcnei, dima surmay, kilgor , justobserver, diabler, stinger, mizrael, hellight
3+5+8+4+5+7+5+6.5=43.5
The question is, why did hellight assume that he specifically would advance from 7th place and not bubuch?

TO noom!

Added after 1 minute

Wicc

. But when members of the AC start doing this, it's sad.

Added after 3 minutes
In the topic header, I see 9 advancing spots.

You can say whatever you want, but knowing that the qualifying score is 6.5, and not 7.0, objectively changes the tournament strategy for "borderline" players.

Added after 8 minutes
Here are the exact quotes:

The same thought was repeated strictly and unambiguously twice, no "ifs" or "minimum 7" — so that everyone understands there will be no freebies; nobody intends to twist the regulations.

After this, the position of "it's our regulation, we change it if we want" looks pathetic. If you want to change something, first make sure that no one will be against it; the AC has no moral right to speak from a position of power on this matter.

Completely agree!!!
The only thing I want to say is that if an insignificant tournament condition had been changed (extending the deadline, for example, which didn't affect the course of games and participants advancing to the next round), that would be one thing, but when they change perhaps the most significant condition that alters strategy — it's complete nonsense!!!

In reply to Dirty_Player

Wicc

11 years ago

Auto-translated

Dirty_Player

Let's imagine a situation where the tournament organizer unexpectedly comes up with a scheme for the Fortress Battle, requiring exactly 12 players. How do you find the other two? Either conduct another selection, invite participants for other merits, or take the next in line from the Open Fortress Battle. The problem is that there is no single regulation for the Fortress Battle tournament, clearly outlining the rules and the number of participants.

I can imagine many things. I don't like that you're saying all this in a condescending tone. Especially considering that both the letter and the spirit of the law are against you. That is, you are relying on the rank of a member of the Arbitration Committee and on your personal authority as a judge. And yet, for many, the former is not an argument, and the latter has been undermined by this particular situation (I don't know how it was possible not to realize that a dispute between Rebel and Cobra will always be a stinky substance that can only be dealt with in rubber gloves, following the points and sub-points of the regulations).

The correct way to present an expansion of the Fortress Battle:

"Guys, we've been thinking that it would be nice to expand the Fortress Battle a bit (here, explain the reason), is anyone against it? No? Okay, then we'll add two more players based on rating/voting by participants/results of the Open Fortress Battle/wildcard from the organizer, is anyone against it?"

That is, it was necessary to: 1) ask the players 2) decouple the expansion of the Fortress Battle from the results of the Open Fortress Battle. And certainly not to interfere with such a delicate moment with dubious ideas like forcing Rebel and Cobra to finish their match as part of the Fortress Battle.

In reply to Wicc

Dark

11 years ago

Auto-translated

The rule stating that 7 players pass to the next stage has been changed to 9 players **at the end of the tournament**. This is a FUNDAMENTAL POINT!!! Which, given the initial setup, would change the strategy of at least 10-12 players in this tournament and give them a chance to advance, if of course they knew about it in advance:cool:

In reply to Wicc

KobRa_RR

11 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

The discussion is interesting...

Throughout my entire career (both before and after becoming a hero), I've always adhered to a strict principle: to separate the Wic-player, the Wic-flooder, and the Wic-judge. When I'm playing the role of a player or a flooder, I can swear, troll, insult, and generally engage in demagoguery/banter/other inappropriate behavior.

But when I'm playing the role of a judge, my rhetoric and behavior change – my posts become serious, logically sound, respectful to the other person, and as conflict-free as the situation allows. Without any jokes, teasing, whining, ambiguous hints, condescending tones, etc.

When Rebel/Cobra are causing trouble, it's acceptable – they're defending their interests as best they can. But when members of the AC (Administration Committee) start doing it, it's disappointing.

Added 3 minutes ago
In the topic header, I see 9 completed slots.

You can say anything, but knowing that the passing score is 6.5, not 7.0, objectively changes the tournament strategy for "near-passing" players.

Added 8 minutes ago
Here are the exact quotes:

The same thought was repeated twice, clearly and unambiguously, with no "ifs" or "at least 7" – to make it clear to everyone that there would be no leniency, and no one would try to twist the rules.

After that, the position of "our rules, we'll change them if we want" looks pathetic. If you want to change something, first make sure that no one will object; the AC has no moral right to speak from a position of strength in this matter.

Wicc, you're talking like Wicc-Demagogue or Wicc-Nagger ;) Here's how I see it "from the judges' perspective": they took 7 people, then saw that Gomunguls withdrew, so there were only 9 people, and the Rebel-Cobra match was interesting and challenging, and both were worthy of winning, so they decided to take 11 people to avoid offending anyone, then Rebelius got upset, and there were ten of them left, as originally intended. Furthermore:
The argument that if "I had known that the passing score would be 6.5, not 7, I would have..." and then a choice of continuation: a). scored not 6.5 but immediately 11 b). crushed everyone like a hot knife through butter c). my name is Darkello
go to hell with such arguments))) honestly!!
YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO PLAY TO THE END!!!!!!! There are always possibilities, both in the game and in life. There are a million examples.

Dima Surmay

The problem isn't the tournament; it's the people, mainly those involved in running it. I don't want to offend anyone, but I support Rebelius's claim that he should be able to continue the game in the Facebook group that he started in the official forum.

So what's the problem? Organize your own tournament, with strict deadlines and... well, you know. A model tournament, so to speak. Right now, all we see is internet... nonsense. I can still understand the complaint from Wicc, who is actually doing something for people and trying to try new things. Do something, and then criticize, damn it. Or another option: the AC needs fresh blood, so elect yourselves and bring order there. The elections are open.

P.S. Dima, 5 mistakes in one sentence, I don't want to "offend" you, but how can you do that?))
*******************

Now, a couple of suggestions for running FB-8, I'm tired of the endless chatter
- use only a chess timer to avoid delays and pauses in moves.
- set strict deadlines for the game, and have them played in order, not everyone playing whenever they want – to avoid situations where one player has played 7 games, and another has played 1 or 2
- introduce 3 points for a win – to avoid the circus of draws and collusion.

In reply to Dark

Noom

11 years ago

Auto-translated

darkello

hellight:
toganash, simon5760, diabler, dima surmay, aiwe, twaryna, thesevanasian, bubuch
6+3+5+5+6+6+6+6.5=43.5
bubuch:
kashcnei, dima surmay, kilgor, justobserver, diabler, stinger, mizrael, hellight
3+5+8+4+5+7+5+6.5=43.5
The question is, why did Hellight assume that he would be ranked 7th instead of Bubuch?

Well, that's what should have been written, instead of "raises doubts, blah blah blah."

In reply to Wicc

Roger DAltavilla

11 years ago

Auto-translated

Wicc

The discussion is...

Throughout my entire gaming (and pre-gaming) career, I've always had a strict rule: to separate the Wic-player, the Wic-flooder, and the Wic-judge. As long as I'm playing the role of a player or a flooder, I can swear, troll, insult, and generally engage in demagoguery/flame wars/other inappropriate behavior.

Wicc and the tragedy of Russian liberalism :smile40:
He claims to be a supporter of strong and centralized power, serious and well-considered decisions, but in reality, complete chaos and anarchy reign in Wicca's tournaments: the participants conduct the draw themselves, whoever can, the tournament rules are constantly being added to, and eliminated players suddenly return. :smile34:

In reply to Noom

Dark

11 years ago

Auto-translated

Noom

Well, that's what should have been written, not "raises doubts, blah blah blah."

Well, if the organizers even miscalculated, as I understand, what is there to talk about?! To bash them?! (if I'm not mistaken:) )
+ my opinion or that of any other ordinary participant won't change anything (it would!), it's better to leave it to the conscience and competence of the judges!!! Besides, everyone is good at criticizing and bashing, but running and managing Tournaments, I think, is not an easy task!!!

Added 2 minutes later

KobRa_RR

Now, a couple of suggestions for running FB-8, I'm tired of the chatter.
- use only a chess timer to avoid delays and pauses in turns.
- set strict time limits for each match, and have them played in order, not everyone playing each other whenever they want - to avoid situations where one player has played 7 matches and another has played 1 or 2.
- introduce 3 points for a win - to avoid the circus of draws and match-fixing.

- which doesn't even exist in the approved, template form yet!
- what are you even talking about?
- so that they have to bother counting?! Wouldn't it be easier to just ban draws?!

In reply to Roger DAltavilla

Wicc

11 years ago

Auto-translated

Roger DAltavilla

Wicc and the tragedy of Russian liberalism :smile40:

Oh, wow... so I'm a liberal now... how quirky are the twists and turns of history :D

In words, a supporter of strong and centralized power, serious and well-considered decisions, but in practice, in Wicca tournaments, there is complete chaos and anarchy: the draw is conducted by the participants themselves, whoever manages to do it, the tournament rules are constantly being added, and eliminated players suddenly return. :smile34:

//unleashed the big one//
...
...
...
//okay, sheathed it, too much honor//

Added 7 minutes ago

KobRa_RR

Vic, you're talking like Vic the Demagogue now, or Vic the Bore ;)

You write as if I deny it. I wrote exactly the same thing above.

This is how I see it "from the judges' point of view": they took 7 people, then saw that Gomunguls withdrew, there were only 9 people, and the Reb-Kobra match was interesting and complex, both were worthy of victory, and they decided to take 11 people so as not to offend anyone, then Rebellius messed up and there were ten of them left, as originally intended.

Regarding the adopted decision, I only have complaints about the point of transferring the match from one tournament to another.

Regarding the expansion of the FB, I am only pointing out the flaws in the presentation of this decision.

Or another option: AK needs fresh blood, so get elected and bring order there. The elections are open.

Pasha, give Kobra his computer back!

Now a couple of suggestions for running FB-8, I'm tired of the chatter
- use only a chess timer to avoid delays and pauses in moves.
- set strict deadlines for the match, and that they are played in order, and not everyone plays whenever they want - to avoid situations where one player has played 7 matches, and another has 1 or 2
- introduce 3 points for a win - to avoid the circus with draws and collusion.

That makes sense, although 3-1-0 is more of a psychological measure; in reality, no one is likely to make 3 draws, at most 1, which will have a similar effect even with 2-1-0.

In reply to Wicc

HellLighT

11 years ago

Auto-translated

2darkello, are you aware that the number of games played also includes those who didn't actually play against you in a match but were listed as opponents in the tournament? If you don't know all the details, don't try to calculate it, you'll just end up with a headache :smile09:

In reply to HellLighT

Dark

11 years ago

Auto-translated

HellLighT

2darkello, are you aware that Cove also counts players who didn't play against you but were listed as opponents in the round? If you don't know all the aspects, don't try to calculate it; your head will hurt:smile09:

Here is another piece of garbage for you.
Message from darkello (SOME TIME IN JULY)
By the way, I want to clarify with the organizers how many players advance to the final stage – 7 or 9?
Let's read the rules, point 4 (THE ANSWER IS IN POINT 7!!!)
__________________/topic/10883/