Field of Glory II Second Tournament

[rbodleyscott]

The advantage of more rounds is that the Swiss Chess system works better, so that (at least in theory) you get a "perfect champion".

Not everybody (apart, I guess, from the "perfect champion") care about this. The advantage of the Swiss Chess system not producing a perfect champion is that more people are in with a chance of placing!

"Submarining" (where the people at the top of the draw fight each other to a standstill in the last round and someone else from lower down the chart overtakes their scores) is in the long and honourable tradition of tabletop tournament gaming, and I owe my few tournament wins to it!

Also, as igorputski says, many people would prefer the tournament not to have too many rounds.

[Geordietaf]

Not getting email notification that opponent has completed his turn.

But are the turns appearing in your "My Turn" tab in game? Note that they normally appear there much sooner than the emails are sent out.[/quote]

I tend to check in following receipt of emails, which never arrived for the set of turns in question. I wondered at the radio silence from my opponent and checked in to find they did appear in the My Turn tab. Emails did arrive for next turns so maybe it was just a hiccup.

[rbodleyscott]

I tend to check in following receipt of emails, which never arrived for the set of turns in question. I wondered at the radio silence from my opponent and checked in to find they did appear in the My Turn tab. Emails did arrive for next turns so maybe it was just a hiccup.

Strange. I guess so.

[jamespcrowley]

I have never received any emails relating to this tourney.

I have to go in-game and check the my-turns tab

[rbodleyscott]

I have never received any emails relating to this tourney.

I have to go in-game and check the my-turns tab

If you contact support@slitherine.co.uk they should be able to set you up to receive emails.

[Fysh]

Just to add some input to the debate over the number of rounds. In chess, you would indeed, need more rounds, however there is a major difference between the two games; a chess game can only end with the score 1, 0, or 0.5, and a win is a win, and lose is a lose. Chess results contain no information about how decisive the victory was.

Because of this, chess tournaments need at least n rounds, where 2^n >= number of players. Conversely, as FoG II scores reflect the scale of the victory, a swiss style system can give a fair result in fewer rounds.

[rbodleyscott]

Just to add some input to the debate over the number of rounds. In chess, you would indeed, need more rounds, however there is a major difference between the two games; a chess game can only end with the score 1, 0, or 0.5, and a win is a win, and lose is a lose. Chess results contain no information about how decisive the victory was.

Because of this, chess tournaments need at least n rounds, where 2^n >= number of players. Conversely, as FoG II scores reflect the scale of the victory, a swiss style system can give a fair result in fewer rounds.

You are right, but I think the issue about more rounds is not so much spreading the scores, as ensuring that the top players have had to fight each other, and have not achieved a very high score by being lucky in their opponents.

Personally, I think it is nicer if more people are in with a chance, which is the effect of having less rounds.

[AlessandroD]

Personally, I think it is nicer if more people are in with a chance, which is the effect of having less rounds.

I guess there are several people that want more rounds (like myself), any chance to have a tournament with 5 or more rounds?
If you think few players are willing to join a tournament like this,, then 32 can be a good start

[rbodleyscott]

Personally, I think it is nicer if more people are in with a chance, which is the effect of having less rounds.

I guess there are several people that want more rounds (like myself), any chance to have a tournament with 5 or more rounds?
If you think few players are willing to join a tournament like this,, then 32 can be a good start

Not my choice - I just do what Milan tells me. I think there probably will be tournaments with more rounds, once we have ironed out all the wrinkles.

[AlessandroD]

Personally, I think it is nicer if more people are in with a chance, which is the effect of having less rounds.

I guess there are several people that want more rounds (like myself), any chance to have a tournament with 5 or more rounds?
If you think few players are willing to join a tournament like this,, then 32 can be a good start

Not my choice - I just do what Milan tells me. I think there probably will be tournaments with more rounds, once we have ironed out all the wrinkles.

Thanks!

[Igorputski]

Just to add some input to the debate over the number of rounds. In chess, you would indeed, need more rounds, however there is a major difference between the two games; a chess game can only end with the score 1, 0, or 0.5, and a win is a win, and lose is a lose. Chess results contain no information about how decisive the victory was.

Because of this, chess tournaments need at least n rounds, where 2^n >= number of players. Conversely, as FoG II scores reflect the scale of the victory, a swiss style system can give a fair result in fewer rounds.

You are right, but I think the issue about more rounds is not so much spreading the scores, as ensuring that the top players have had to fight each other, and have not achieved a very high score by being lucky in their opponents.

Personally, I think it is nicer if more people are in with a chance, which is the effect of having less rounds.

I totally agree with thies ^^^, please keep it that way. Less rounds means more tournaments and like you said gives more people more chances to win instead of the same ole one all the time which can run players away. Everyone likes to win and everyone likes the same chances of winning.

[AlessandroD]

I totally agree with thies ^^^, please keep it that way. Less rounds means more tournaments and like you said gives more people more chances to win instead of the same ole one all the time which can run players away. Everyone likes to win and everyone likes the same chances of winning.

I understand your point (even if I don't agree because it is enough to run different tournament formats to have all players happy) but I don't understand the reason behind it, do you really think that playing less rounds give you more chances to win the tournament?

[rbodleyscott]

I totally agree with thies ^^^, please keep it that way. Less rounds means more tournaments and like you said gives more people more chances to win instead of the same ole one all the time which can run players away. Everyone likes to win and everyone likes the same chances of winning.

I understand your point (even if I don't agree because it is enough to run different tournament formats to have all players happy) but I don't understand the reason behind it, do you really think that playing less rounds give you more chances to win the tournament?

It is a mathematical fact in a Swiss Chess system - when there are fewer rounds, you have more chance of sneaking your way to the top score without playing the best players. The more rounds there are in the tournament, the less chance there is of avoiding playing the best players.

[stockwellpete]

It is a mathematical fact in a Swiss Chess system - when there are fewer rounds, you have more chance of sneaking your way to the top score without playing the best players. The more rounds there are in the tournament, the less chance there is of avoiding playing the best players.

Richard, are there any plans to develop a rating system for players based on their results in the automated tournament? Just dividing the total number of points gained by the number of games played would do. The reason that I ask this is that in the first round of these tournaments there are quite a few uneven matches between more and less experienced players. If you could use the rating system (which would not necessarily have to be published on the forum) you could divide the entrants into two pools at the start and pick the first round matches from these two pools. In that way the first round matches would be a bit more even - the top 32 players would be in one pool and players 33 to 64 would be in the other. The FOG2 Digital League will use a rating system to help allocate players to divisions where they will meet players of a similar standard.

[AlessandroD]

It is a mathematical fact in a Swiss Chess system - when there are fewer rounds, you have more chance of sneaking your way to the top score without playing the best players. The more rounds there are in the tournament, the less chance there is of avoiding playing the best players.

Yes but if you won the first round you will be paired with another winner, the chances that you play three rounds scoring a lot of points will be slim anyway.
An average player can end the tournament with a good performance if lucky, but I doubt he can won if several stronger players are in the same tournament.

Anyhow I got the point, thanks.

[rbodleyscott]

Richard, are there any plans to develop a rating system for players based on their results in the automated tournament?

Yes.

The reason that I ask this is that in the first round of these tournaments there are quite a few uneven matches between more and less experienced players. If you could use the rating system (which would not necessarily have to be published on the forum) you could divide the entrants into two pools at the start and pick the first round matches from these two pools. In that way the first round matches would be a bit more even - the top 32 players would be in one pool and players 33 to 64 would be in the other. The FOG2 Digital League will use a rating system to help allocate players to divisions where they will meet players of a similar standard.

Some form of seeding is also on the wish list.

[stockwellpete]

OK, that's great.

[IainMcNeil]

The plan is to vary the size and round length and round number so each tournaments has a different feel. We're still experimenting at the moment so feel free to suggest and we'll try and make sure there is something for everyone.

[AlessandroD]

The plan is to vary the size and round length and round number so each tournaments has a different feel. We're still experimenting at the moment so feel free to suggest and we'll try and make sure there is something for everyone.

Already done in the specific thread, thanks for the support

[SpeedyCM]

Just trying to load the first turn of my round 3 match in this tourney and I am getting a failed to load message, are there server issues happening at the moment?