SpielByWeb

Gaditus · Joined: 05 Feb 07 Posts: 1924 Location: Canterbury, UK

5/48

3 2 IBX (11)
1 1 almondralf (0)
2 1 Dobinator (19)
2 1 Alashar (24)
1 0 GamesOnTheBrain (4)
1 0 Joshuaaaaaa (8)
1 0 Wildfire2099 (8)
1 0 mongo (14)
1 0 skk7878 (15)
1 0 borisumi (18)
1 0 bpalm (25)

Not many games finshed yet (unless you are called IBX!).

Games played, games won and (points lost by).

Gaditus · Joined: 05 Feb 07 Posts: 1924 Location: Canterbury, UK

12/48

2 2 Early_10 (0)
4 2 IBX (15)
4 2 Alashar (62)
1 1 klingone (0)
1 1 almondralf (0)
1 1 mikemanley (0)
1 1 Rebelslayer (0)
3 1 skk7878 (38)
4 1 Dobinator (47)
1 0 Gaditus (8)
1 0 mongo (14)
1 0 daveszum (17)
2 0 GamesOnTheBrain (21)
2 0 Wildfire2099 (26)
2 0 borisumi (39)
2 0 Joshuaaaaaa (44)
4 0 bpalm (106)

The draw for the 4 player tournament has been made - please join your games if you haven't already.

Gaditus · Joined: 05 Feb 07 Posts: 1924 Location: Canterbury, UK

18/48

3 3 Early_10 (0)
5 3 IBX (15)
4 2 Alashar (62)
5 1.5 Dobinator (47)
1 1 almondralf (0)
1 1 Zaui (0)
1 1 Rebelslayer (0)
1 1 klingone (0)
2 1 mikemanley (5)
2 1 t_o_m9 (10)
3 1 Wildfire2099 (26)
3 1 skk7878 (38)
2 0.5 Gaditus (8)
1 0 swok (10)
1 0 mongo (14)
1 0 daveszum (17)
2 0 GamesOnTheBrain (21)
2 0 mooka (31)
2 0 NoMoreCheese (40)
3 0 Joshuaaaaaa (73)
4 0 borisumi (72)
5 0 bpalm (135)

In one of my games, tom made a complaint about the suitability of the map (451). He felt it was unfair to the player(s) going later in order because there are some particularly advantageous places for an early grab. I don't play the game well enough to know how true that is.

I guess I could create a map veto list if enough people don't like a particular map.

Oddly enough, I chose the same map for the 4 player tournament so everyone will have a chance to play it.

So does anyone else agree with tom enough to want to veto the map for tournament purposes? If so please comment here.

Mac S · Joined: 06 Apr 04 Posts: 9 Location: The Netherlands

Map 451: It does seem that the 3 spaces of non-pampa in the middle are very advantageous to have, but as I have never played on this map I can't say for sure.

Alashar · Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 11:08 am Post subject:

I'm in the 4-player on that same map with tom; in our case, he goes 2nd while I'm 3rd. Yeah, I agree. There's one premo spot that gives easy access to 4 markets (and tom's got in this game) while the others are rather distant. The map is flawed in that regard and I don't think it's suitable for tourney play either.

almondralf · Joined: 04 Dec 06 Posts: 232 Location: Central California

I always thought the location around those three water tiles on the right is the best start!!

Gaditus · Joined: 05 Feb 07 Posts: 1924 Location: Canterbury, UK

25/48

4 4 Early_10 (0)
5 3 IBX (15)
2 2 klingone (0)
4 2 almondralf (16)
4 2 mooka (31)
4 2 Alashar (62)
6 1.5 Dobinator (52)
1 1 Rebelslayer (0)
1 1 Zaui (0)
2 1 MacS (0)
2 1 mikemanley (5)
2 1 swok (10)
2 1 t_o_m9 (10)
4 1 Wildfire2099 (35)
4 1 skk7878 (55)
3 0.5 Gaditus (59)
2 0 GamesOnTheBrain (21)
2 0 mongo (32)
3 0 daveszum (75)
4 0 borisumi (72)
4 0 Joshuaaaaaa (80)
0 0 marcx (0)
5 0 NoMoreCheese (100)

Just over the half way mark.

As I have compiled the scores, I am having doubts about using the fairness of number of points lost by as a tie breaker. The different maps/variants throw up significant differences in total points scored and therefore in the points lost by.

Alternatives are:

Points from average (eg 117, 113, 106 would get 5, 1, and -6 respectively).

Credit for 2nd place (or 3rd/4th if applicable)

Proportion lost by (eg 117, 113, 106 would get 0, .034, .094 respectively)

Remember this is only for breaking ties after counting number of wins.

It may be less of a problem in tournaments like the 4p one where all players play the same maps/variants, but that is only possible with certain number of entrants.

Any observations?

(Of course, I will not be making any changes for this tournament - I am only thinking about possible future ones)

Rebelslayer · Joined: 17 Jan 06 Posts: 298 Location: Adelaide, Australia

I think there are worse maps than 451.
Lots of maps give a 1st/2nd player advantage, and are therefore not appropriate for tournament play. 451 has a few different options.

As for deciding tourney ties ... if you made it first/second third etc then you migh t encourage more meta gaming ... I think that the few times that it decides who gets in, the points lost by is a reasonable option.

Wildfire2099 · Joined: 20 Aug 07 Posts: 122

I'd prefer having place matter, rather than points, like the Amun-Re league... I think that makes it so people don't 'give up' on a game more.

Rebelslayer · Joined: 17 Jan 06 Posts: 298 Location: Adelaide, Australia

I think it would be a big mistake to change to order as the tie-breaker. You would then see people not trying to maximise their score, but minimise the other players (ie far more turns in a game would have the potential to be decided by what the rest of the tournament requires).

With points lost by, the only player others try to take down is the leader.

Do you really want to encourage more negative interaction in the gaming community?

And points lost by isn't a worse way to do it anyway, and avoids this happening (or at least leads to it happening less).

almondralf · Joined: 04 Dec 06 Posts: 232 Location: Central California

I agree with Rebel!!

Gaditus · Joined: 05 Feb 07 Posts: 1924 Location: Canterbury, UK

3/4 finished

36/48

5 4 Early_10 (13)
4 3 Rebelslayer (1)
4 3 klingone (10)
5 3 IBX (15)
5 3 almondralf (16)
5 3 GamesOnTheBrain (21)
4 2 mikemanley (32)
4 2 Alashar (62)
5 2 Zaui (40)
5 2 mooka (87)
6 2 skk7878 (60)
6 1.5 Dobinator (52)
2 1 t_o_m9 (10)
3 1 MacS (40)
4 1 swok (59)
5 1 Wildfire2099 (55)
6 1 NoMoreCheese (100)
4 0.5 Gaditus (63)
3 0 mongo (38)
3 0 marcx (60)
4 0 daveszum (117)
5 0 Joshuaaaaaa (94)
5 0 borisumi (94)
6 0 bpalm (141)

If you are wondering why (for example) Alashar is shown above Zaui in the table, it is because I have valued a game in hand as worth more than points lost by in these interim tables.

Gaditus · Joined: 05 Feb 07 Posts: 1924 Location: Canterbury, UK

44/48

6 5 Early_10 (13)
6 4 IBX (15)
6 4 klingone (20)
5 3 GamesOnTheBrain (21)
5 3 t_o_m9 (22)
6 3 Rebelslayer (21)
6 3 almondralf (38)
4 2 mikemanley (32)
4 2 Alashar (62)
6 2 Zaui (41)
6 2 MacS (59)
6 2 skk7878 (60)
6 2 mooka (112)
5 1.5 Gaditus (63)
6 1.5 Dobinator (52)
5 1 swok (78)
5 1 marcx (109)
6 1 Wildfire2099 (67)
6 1 NoMoreCheese (100)
4 0 mongo (67)
5 0 daveszum (153)
6 0 borisumi (104)
6 0 Joshuaaaaaa (128)
6 0 bpalm (141)

It looks like 3 wins will be enough (and necessary?) to be in the semi final.

Gaditus · Joined: 05 Feb 07 Posts: 1924 Location: Canterbury, UK

46/48

6 5 Early_10 (13)
6 4 IBX (15)
6 4 klingone (20)
6 4 t_o_m9 (22)
5 3 Alashar (62)
6 3 Rebelslayer (21)
6 3 GamesOnTheBrain (24)
6 3 almondralf (38)
4 2 mikemanley (32)
6 2 Zaui (41)
6 2 MacS (59)
6 2 skk7878 (60)
6 2 mooka (112)
6 1.5 Dobinator (52)
6 1.5 Gaditus (79)
5 1 swok (78)
5 1 marcx (109)
6 1 Wildfire2099 (67)
6 1 NoMoreCheese (100)
5 0 mongo (74)
6 0 borisumi (104)
6 0 Joshuaaaaaa (128)
6 0 bpalm (141)
6 0 daveszum (190)

One place still undecided. Zaui can take it if mikemanley doesn't get another win (and loses by more than 9).

I'll put up the draw for the semi final round shortly.

Gaditus · Joined: 05 Feb 07 Posts: 1924 Location: Canterbury, UK

48/48

6 5 Early_10 (13)
6 4 IBX (15)
6 4 klingone (20)
6 4 t_o_m9 (22)
6 4 Alashar (62)
6 3 Rebelslayer (21)
6 3 GamesOnTheBrain (24)
6 3 almondralf (38)
6 3 mikemanley (55)
6 2 Zaui (41)
6 2 MacS (59)
6 2 skk7878 (60)
6 2 mooka (112)
6 1.5 Dobinator (52)
6 1.5 Gaditus (79)
6 1 Wildfire2099 (67)
6 1 swok (96)
6 1 NoMoreCheese (100)
6 1 marcx (113)
6 0 mongo (83)
6 0 borisumi (104)
6 0 Joshuaaaaaa (128)
6 0 bpalm (141)
6 0 daveszum (190)