my next Tournament plans |
Post Reply 
|
Page <1234 10> |
| Author | ||||
Jim 
New Poster 
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 Status: Offline Points: 33 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Posted: 01 Nov 2016 at 12:04 |
|||
|
occ time/no. of cities = score. Rather. :)
|
||||
 |
||||
|
Jim
New Poster
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 Status: Offline Points: 33 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Nov 2016 at 12:02 |
|||
|
and most of the work would be done for you by players forming their own tourney alliances, just for the duration, so then maybe all you need to do is -
no. of cities/occ time = score.
That would be genuinely interesting. |
||||
|
||||
|
Jim
New Poster
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 Status: Offline Points: 33 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Nov 2016 at 11:20 |
|||
|
One suggestion would be to level the playing field further by weighting the scoring according to number of alliance cities held rather than number of alliance members. I appreciate that this would require additional coding, but perhaps not that much and if you could pull it off you would have made such a massive improvement to the whole tourney concept. It would be very worthwhile.
And if that actually works slightly against the large alliances who have a number of useless members then good. every tourney does not have to be geared to suit them and it may encourage some alliance trimming, which would be great.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Diva
Forum Warrior 
Joined: 20 Dec 2011 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 416 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 31 Oct 2016 at 01:16 |
|||
|
I'm not up to unending battle. I'm not online 24/7 and somedays recently not at all.. I am a planner much like Angrim and I do like to sleep A LOT when I'm exhausted from that thing called real life (I caregive 3 different age sets, children to a disabled family member to elders over 80)
Everything else about type or the rules are fine... 2 gold coins tossed in the pot.
D |
||||
|
"Um diva.... you are sort of acting like a .... diva...." - PhoenixFire
|
||||
|
||||
|
kodabear
Postmaster General 
Player Council - Astronomer Joined: 18 Jun 2013 Location: Lucerna Status: Offline Points: 1237 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 31 Oct 2016 at 00:32 |
|||
I have read your two post and they have the same problem you are complaining about, also it would make it pointless for smaller player to take part. The larger players will still win and pretty hard to make sure that no one breaks these rules without coding changes which currently cant be done and i am not a fan of having punishment of disqualifying alliance because they break the rules which is what I will needed to do if I were to do a Tournament based on teams.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Jim
New Poster
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 Status: Offline Points: 33 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Oct 2016 at 21:41 |
|||
|
Ummm, I have, repeatedly. A number of ways you can level the playing field by either arranging the entrants into equal sized alliances or teams, or by scoring it differently so that occupation time is divided by number of alliance members, would be the 2 most obvious options.
And people who do not necessarily agree with your opinions are not necessarily "whiners". Well done for encouraging forum debate and participation.
|
||||
|
||||
|
kodabear
Postmaster General
Player Council - Astronomer Joined: 18 Jun 2013 Location: Lucerna Status: Offline Points: 1237 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Oct 2016 at 21:22 |
|||
What you talking about Slaves to Armok [StA] (currently ranked 25) got 3rd in my last one and they arent a large alliance. and I hope you realize how hard it would be to do a Tournament that is fair to the smaller alliances. So instead of whining about it why dont you offer some idea for a more fairer Tournament
|
||||
|
||||
|
Jim
New Poster
Joined: 25 Mar 2010 Status: Offline Points: 33 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Oct 2016 at 21:09 |
|||
|
Same old, same old then. Nothing in it for the numerous smaller alliances. About as interesting as an F1 race. So announces the result of the next tourney - a win for VCROW.
Must be as boring for them as for everyone else.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Corwin
Forum Warrior
Joined: 21 Jun 2011 Location: Farshards Status: Offline Points: 310 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Oct 2016 at 11:52 |
|||
|
I like the idea of an unknown end date. However I doubt it would be a good idea. Who is going to decide when the end date is? Imagine what will happen if someone takes top place just before the end of the tournament is announced. I'm sure the alliance getting dropped to second place will think there's some scheme behind it. If it was dev run most would probably believe in a neutral decision, but when it's player run it would most likely come to a lot of forum bashing, gc conflicts and maybe even war between players who just wanted to have fun in a tournament.
The whole idea of a tournament is that there's rules and everyone involved knows them and knows they are being lived after.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Captain Kindly
Forum Warrior
Joined: 19 Aug 2011 Location: Fremorn Status: Offline Points: 276 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Oct 2016 at 06:55 |
|||
|
On a side note, with a preparation time of two months, I like having tournaments lasting two weeks instead of a month. It will be in favour of alliances not in the top 10 (unless those go kartel) because there is less reaction time.
It would also be a possibility for some unexpected pitched battles. Let the Lord of Chaos Rule
 Edited by Captain Kindly - 30 Oct 2016 at 07:00 |
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1234 10> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
Jim wrote: