EBOT 2012 June

[vartan]

You didn't count my loss against Arjos.

Oh but I think I did. Did you win against Arjos twice so far (as indicated by your two replays)? If you go to your row, which is #16, and go to where it meets the second column (i.e., player #2: Arjos). You'll see a '2' there, meaning you beat that player twice. Were there more than 2 victories against him?

[The Celtic Viking]

Oh but I think I did. Did you win against Arjos twice so far (as indicated by your two replays)? If you go to your row, which is #16, and go to where it meets the second column (i.e., player #2: Arjos). You'll see a '2' there, meaning you beat that player twice. Were there more than 2 victories against him?

No, I meant that he beat me once, meaning he should have a point against me. To make it absolutely clear, my first game against Arjos ended in a victory for me. The second game I played against him he won. The third game I played against him I won again. So the score between us is, The Celtic Viking [2] - [1] Arjos.

[vartan]

No, I meant that he beat me once, meaning he should have a point against me. To make it absolutely clear, my first game against Arjos ended in a victory for me. The second game I played against him he won. The third game I played against him I won again. So the score between us is, The Celtic Viking [2] - [1] Arjos.

It was probably not entered in the ladder, so I missed it. I've corrected the screenshot in the OP to reflect the change.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Continuing the terrible reign of Carthage, the forests of the north eastern continent have been cleansed of many Getic warriors, brave and worthy though they may be under the command of LMT.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/dszgivlo7...2012-06-11.rpy

[The Celtic Viking]

It was probably not entered in the ladder, so I missed it. I've corrected the screenshot in the OP to reflect the change.

Oh, it's definitely in the lobby as one of my two losses. Never mind that though, you must've forgotten to switch the picture links in the OP because they still don't count that loss. But perhaps I'm talking too much for my own good.

[vartan]

Oh, it's definitely in the lobby as one of my two losses. Never mind that though, you must've forgotten to switch the picture links in the OP because they still don't count that loss. But perhaps I'm talking too much for my own good.

I just realized why the links weren't pointing to the right images. First report fixed and updated to reflect all scores to this day.

Also, just a quick note. A couple of people have fed over 3 wins to their opponents. This is not the only reason, but one of the reasons why I want to make subsequent tournaments bracketed double-elimination tournaments. I want to hear your reactions to this. Would you appreciate a double-elimination tournament? Would you rather we continue in this lazy ffa format? Are you asking yourself what a double-elimination tournament even is? Do let me know.

V

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

How do we force players to face each other in brackets?

Capo's played about 20 battles and I've only seen him online and active once. Yavana about 30 and I've played him once and seen him about two times. Time zone differences are a pain for planning this sort of thing.

[Kival]

I also don't think we should make a bracket. If we want to reduce it, we should make some kind of "only x points of battles between two players" or "only x points against one player".

[Arjos]

Not feasible and would feel more like a job than a game...
I mean we could arrange it, but with a very limited number of players I think...

Bottom line, there are all kind of players: some join for fun, some avoid others, some give up after few games, some don't even show up etc...

[vartan]

How do we force players to face each other in brackets?

How do you force playoff games between various sports teams? Also, it's not forcing. People have a choice in participating.

I also don't think we should make a bracket. If we want to reduce it, we should make some kind of "only x points of battles between two players" or "only x points against one player".

The unwritten rule so far is that you may not win against another player over three times.

Not feasible and would feel more like a job than a game...
I mean we could arrange it, but with a very limited number of players I think...

Bottom line, there are all kind of players: some join for fun, some avoid others, some give up after few games, some don't even show up etc...

Have you ever played in elimination tournaments? If you have played on any sports team, or chess, or any esports, then you know it's no 'job'. It's the most competitive gaming you'll find. The stakes are higher as your presence in the tournament is maintained only by winning all your games. We wouldn't need to limit the number of players because we can have up to 16 games going at the same time. We could take in as many as 64 players in a tournament this way. If I had it single-elimination we could even have 128 in a single month. We have far fewer players at the moment, so this would not be an issue.

EDIT: I bring this up because I figure it would be unsuccessful if we ran a trial month alongside a normal monthly tournament. The only way I think we could get people to participate is by completely substituting the tournament system for a whole month (e.g., July 2012 runs an elim tourney instead of an FFA).

[Arjos]

I didn't say limited because the system needs it, but because imo people won't show up for it...

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Brackets create a ton of problems. For one, if one game of a bracket is played on say, Day 2, the winner would need to wait until the winner of the connecting bracket is determined. What if one of the players in that bracket is unavailable for a week or two? Does that mean the winner of the other can't play tourney games for so long? We can't force people to attend as there is no tangible incentive nor disincentive for attendance. That is the difference between this and any other organized sport.

[Arjos]

And get ready to see endless complains about X was lucky he faced Y, while this guy only had to defeat Z etc...
If the problem is some players always facing the same opponents, be more rigid with rules for that...

[Yavana]

At first if I remember correctly i had score with lmt 4-1 for him, now its 4-3... Restrictions about facing same opponent arent good...
What i find most imortant in this game is trying to get better and better and finally beat the opponent you lost to hundred times before..

[Kival]

Kival gewinnt gegen Capo

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/dszgivlo7...2012-06-12.rpy

EDIT: Damnit... Kival wins against Capo.

[Arjos]

lol I love tired Kiv using german unconsciously :D

Arjos vs Stormrage #1

Anatolia was secured and the Galatikoi have swarmed to the Philadelphoi's side :P

[The Celtic Viking]

For the record, I think I would like a bracketed double-elim tournament, though I'd hate to play as a western barbarian and be forced to face a nomad.

At first if I remember correctly i had score with lmt 4-1 for him, now its 4-3... Restrictions about facing same opponent arent good...
What i find most imortant in this game is trying to get better and better and finally beat the opponent you lost to hundred times before..

If you want to do this then you can still play friendlies with them. If you're just feeding someone else points then that's not fair to the other players in the tournament.

[Lazy O]

Western Barbarians are good against certain nomads .

[Arjos]

Western Barbarians are good against certain nomads .

The incapable, lame horses, not running away nomads? :D

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I mean, this was with the old Aedui and the old Pahlava, but me and Lazy found quite literally almost no way to win with the Parthians against the Gauls. Your infantry just cuts and runs too quickly.

Now with 100 man Mardian Fire Warriors I'm not so sure.

[Lazy O]

Basically, all functional "steppe" armies require infantry, which do not last very long against gauls .

[Kival]

Kival wins vs stormrage

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/dszgivlo7...2012-06-13.rpy

[vartan]

TCV that's what I was thinking. Tournament limits on the number of times you can play a certain opponent, if implemented, would not amount to any effective or even intended limitation on the number of matches against a certain player. Instead it would be a limit on how many games could count toward your tournament score. For instance, if the Player Match Limit was set to 3, then once any two players hit 0-3, 1-2, 2-1, or 3-0, any further games they play that month would not be allowed in ranked play (i.e., the ladder + monthly tournament scores + ranked replays). They could only be broadcast as friendlies.

[The Celtic Viking]

Indeed.

In other news, the Greeks were suffering under a Swedish summer as they waded through meters of snow to defeat a Seleukid army under the command of Capo. The replay is here.

[-Stormrage-]

TCV that's what I was thinking. Tournament limits on the number of times you can play a certain opponent, if implemented, would not amount to any effective or even intended limitation on the number of matches against a certain player. Instead it would be a limit on how many games could count toward your tournament score. For instance, if the Player Match Limit was set to 3, then once any two players hit 0-3, 1-2, 2-1, or 3-0, any further games they play that month would not be allowed in ranked play (i.e., the ladder + monthly tournament scores + ranked replays). They could only be broadcast as friendlies.

we dont want it.

[Arjos]

Arjos vs capomafioso #3

Snowy day in Thraike, but Galatai don't freeze :D

[Vega]

New win vs Arjos and his Egyptians, https://www.dropbox.com/sh/dszgivlo7...2012-06-15.rpy

[-Stormrage-]

while they are getting theyre wins i got my 5th loss in a row.

well, it was good while it lasted.

[Lazy O]

People please do not use snow maps

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Do any units actually have bonuses in the snow?