2015 PBEM duel tournament

We’ve moved over to the paradox forums. Please come visit us there to discuss:
You can still read the collective wisdom - and lolz - of the community here, but posting is no longer possible.

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions 2015 PBEM duel tournament

This topic contains 73 replies, has 13 voices, and was last updated by  Hiliadan 5 years, 1 month ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 74 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #234725

    Hiliadan
    Member

    As announced in this post http://aow.triumph.net/forums/topic/possible-new-tournament/page/22/#post-231898, a 1 vs 1 PBEM tournament is organized by Markymark.

    The proposed rules are as follow (see them in “Rules” here: http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=tourneymain&tourneyid=1):
    In-Game settings

    Turn timer = 1 day
    NO BETA
    Small Map & UnderGround on Continents with Water Slider all the way down to minimum
    Undiggable walls and Diggable Wall Sliders down to 15-20 %
    All other sliders left untouched at standard 50 %
    Settler startFar Starting Distance Few Roads / Cities / Dwellings
    Starting Units, Roamers , Treasures , Visit Structure and Treasure Structures all average.
    ……………………
    Each Player is given a team # ( 2 different teams, one for each competitor ) at start of game to prevent alliances.
    Seal Victory off , Beacon Victory @ 2 Beacons , Empire Quests on
    Normal Speed , Standard Resource start , Normal Skills , Defenders Strong
    Heros = Leader Plus 5 heros , Max Level 30 , HEROS MATCH RACE turned OFF
    No hero Resurgence
    City Founding On , High Speed Tactical , Medium Cosmic Events.

    Submit for tournament:

    Account on http://www.the-battlefield.com
    Ladderpage: http://www.the-battlefield.co
    Tournament Page:
    http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=tourneymain&tourneyid=1
    Press Join-Event Button

    Matchplan:
    Double-Elimination Tree ==>
    http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=tourneyroster&tourneyid=1

    Rules

    One round cannot exceed 2 months. If neither of the two player won 2 months after the start of the round, then one should surrender and take a screenshot of the score and provide it to the judge. The player with the highest score then wins the match.

    Players can arrange whatever settings (e.g. no dwellings) they choose, but in the absence of consensus, the settings described in the “In-Game settings” above are to be considered the default.

    If one player temporarily cannot play his turns in 24 hours (e.g. because of holidays, or personal issues), and warn the host reasonably in advance, then the host should temporarily change the turn timer to accommodate him.

    In the event of a crash (from your PC or from AoW), reload are allowed BUT the player who crashed needs to take appropriate screenshots or pictures (with a mobile phone for instance) and sends them to the judge. If no proof of a justified crash or in case of repeated reloading (during one match or during the tournament as a whole), the judge has full power to disqualify the player.

    You cannot play the same class, or race twice in a row. You must let the Judge by private message in the Battlefield website BEFORE the match, but not your opponent, know what class and race you will play for your upcoming match. For example, if you play Human Theocrat, for your next match, you cannot be either Human or Theocrat.

    Banter and taunting is allowed, rudeness, swearing and racial (or other prejudicial) language is not. Repeatedly trolling will lead to forfeiting the match.

    The decision of the Judges is to be respected. Players breaking the rules get a total of 3 warnings before being disqualified from the tournament entirely. Judges may disqualify a player without warnings if their behaviour is deemed to be completely out of order (e.g. racism).

    When awaiting judge’s decision, the host must remove the turn timer and may need to revert turns to come back to the situation existing prior to the issue being judged.

    Players must play with the latest official version of the game (no beta). If the official version is updated during the tournament, players must update to it as soon as it is released both on GoG and Steam (and turn timer must be removed while waiting for the GoG release).

    If you feel one of the rules had been broken, but you carry on playing, then you have no recourse.

    ==

    If you want to join, please join this player pool first: http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=bfmgames&listid=55

    What do you think of the rules?

    We have about 10 players interested so far. I think having 32 participants is a relatively safe bet but we will see!

    #234738

    Ha, so interesting to see my original rules, from 2014 (!) get reworded and reused!

    You guys should really implement a dispute/appeals procedure, and highlight who the judge is/judges are.

    Otherwise you run the risk of one player ruining things for everyone else. You saw it happen already.

    Also, you need a procedure in case someone can’t play a turn in that day. For example, if I were to enter the tournament, I know in November, for at least one weekend, I won’t be able to play any games.

    What happens if a player is in the same situation (e.g. having to work over a weekend?) – do they automatically lose that match? I think this is important because the whole point of pbem is flexibility.

    Do players get the option of a restart, due to bad map rolls? If so, within how many turns, and under what conditions?

    Also, with any set of rules, you need to consider how you can enforce them. What screenshot can I use to prove a crash? What if, and this has happened, my computer freezes, and I have to hard reboot? How can I prove that? How can you prove it didn’t happen? I could just have some bad luck in a dungeon, reload and say “hey my computer crashed” and use my mobile phone to take a picture of a screen and say “my computer froze.”

    You need to be very clear on exactly what does, and does not constitute proof, or you open up the possibility for a type of cheating and abuse which can’t be dis/proven.

    You might be best off just using ironman rules, and a reload counts as a strike against you. You might still get someone who tries to reload, but now they get to do it a max of 3 times and they’re out. This does penalise someone who has a genuine fail, but hey, welcome to the world of being an arbiter (it sucks!)

    You might think I’m over emphasizing the need to be able to enforce something, but if running the last 2 tournaments has taught me anything, it’s that a rule means nothing unless you can prove it and enforce it. Also, don’t rely on people to play fairly – if there is any loophole in your rules that allow for dishonourable play/exploits, even cheating, it will be used. You might think people are adults and should be trusted to just get on with stuff, but you saw the last tournament. It’s not easy managing people. Herding cats might be easier.

    Also, what leeway are you giving yourself to change the rules if need be?

    What if both players in a match don’t show up/ can’t play? What is the knock on effect for the next match(es)? What is your plan to deal with that?

    The decision of the Judges is to be respected. Players breaking the rules get a total of 3 warnings before being disqualified from the tournament entirely. Judges may disqualify a player without warnings if their behaviour is deemed to be completely out of order (e.g. racism).

    I wrote this rule with a specific intent, which was to allow myself, as a judge, a ‘nuclear’ option to deal with problem players. I hoped to never have to use it. In the just finished tournament, there was one such problem player. You saw what happened with him. Are you prepared to deal with a similar player?

    Anyway, good luck. I won’t be entering, because
    a) there is at least one weekend in November I can’t play, as mentioned earlier
    b) Problem player is most likely going to play and I don’t want to have to deal with him.
    c) I have a huge backlog of games to play, and a mod I should really get to work on.
    d) most importantly, I’d get my ass kicked very quickly by some very capable players.

    #234746

    bf_markymark
    Member

    Hi BBB,

    sorry about this bad experience. But i think this tournament is something other, because it is
    smaller and it is pbem. PBEM Turns can play every player or he is out. Easy rule.
    When someone can not play a turn per day, he is out and it is okay for all. And it is the second pbem tournament and
    the first one was difficult but we got this with turn timer.

    A duel game is fast, maybe we can convince you to join.

    Ha, so interesting to see my original rules, from 2014 (!) get reworded and reused!

    “Okay, i do not know this rules. Hope it is not a problem. maybe we are changing it too”

    You guys should really implement a dispute/appeals procedure, and highlight who the judge is/judges are.

    “Every Game get a game blog automatically, players can use it, and we can read the players profils too.
    so we know which player are reliable or not. this is reason using the-battlefield.com”

    Otherwise you run the risk of one player ruining things for everyone else. You saw it happen already.
    Also, you need a procedure in case someone can’t play a turn in that day.
    For example, if I were to enter the tournament, I know in November, for at least one weekend, I won’t be able to play any games.

    What happens if a player is in the same situation (e.g. having to work over a weekend?) – do they automatically lose that match? I think this is important because the whole point of pbem is flexibility.

    “When game can not be end, it will be decided after activitiy, points, or random or both players are out (when no one is showing up)”

    Do players get the option of a restart, due to bad map rolls? If so, within how many turns, and under what conditions?

    “Only when there is a reason and both players will accept and only at first turn”.

    Also, with any set of rules, you need to consider how you can enforce them.
    What screenshot can I use to prove a crash? What if, and this has happened, my computer freezes, and I have to hard reboot? H
    ow can I prove that? How can you prove it didn’t happen? I could just have some bad luck in a dungeon, reload and say “hey my computer crashed” and use my mobile phone to take a picture of a screen and say “my computer froze.”

    “then he shall easy play his turn again, when he not can play the turn, he is out”.

    You need to be very clear on exactly what does, and does not constitute proof, or you open up the possibility for a type of cheating and abuse which can’t be dis/proven.

    “Proof is a screen, the opponent must accept the report, when he not accept the report, the game is invalid, when someone cheated with report, he is out”.

    You might be best off just using ironman rules, and a reload counts as a strike against you. You might still get someone who tries to reload, but now they get to do it a max of 3 times and they’re out. This does penalise someone who has a genuine fail, but hey, welcome to the world of being an arbiter (it sucks!)
    You might think I’m over emphasizing the need to be able to enforce something, but if running the last 2 tournaments has taught me anything, it’s that a rule means nothing unless you can prove it and enforce it. Also, don’t rely on people to play fairly – if there is any loophole in your rules that allow for dishonourable play/exploits, even cheating, it will be used. You might think people are adults and should be trusted to just get on with stuff, but you saw the last tournament.
    It’s not easy managing people. Herding cats might be easier.

    “Hard, there is a tool against cheater?”

    Also, what leeway are you giving yourself to change the rules if need be?

    “Think we do it together, when we find one”

    What if both players in a match don’t show up/ can’t play? What is the knock on effect for the next match(es)? What is your plan to deal with that?

    “Both players are out and the next opponent have a free game”

    Regards, Mark

    #234785

    @ Mark, ofcourse you are welcome to use those rules. There are there to provide some sort of framework/reference/food for thought for the mp community. I may have written them, but I don’t “own” them.

    Anyway, good luck, have fun! When things run smoothly, it’s a great feeling being part of a Tournament.

    #234787

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Do players get the option of a restart, due to bad map rolls? If so, within how many turns, and under what conditions?

    “Only when there is a reason and both players will accept and only at first turn”.

    I deleted that from the rules of the live tournament because I don’t think it’s a good idea but it should be added if you think it should be possible then.

    Regarding the issue of one player not able to play a turn, the rules allow to extend the turn timer if players ask for it reasonably soon in advance. So if someone cannot play his turn without notifying the other player and asking an extension of the turn timer first, then he just lost its turn. It seems clear enough for me with current rules.

    Regarding the prevention of cheating, it seems pretty hard to me. There will always be possibility to exploit grey areas. Do you see any ways to prevent that?

    Regarding the judges and the appeal procedure, yes I think it could be strengthened. For me the judge would be Markymark but, I guess it would be better to have 2 assistant judges and state that the judge cannot be one of the player involved (obviously). + turn timer should be turned off while awaiting judge decision and host should revert turn to before the issue + saves should be sent to judge. Decision could be taken at the majority of the 3 judges (+ additional temporary judge chosen by the main judge if one judge is not available). Would that be good?

    Regarding the settings, does it seem good to everyone?

    #234793

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    Couple of bad rules, imo:

    1) Water all the way down means, one continous land mass is more than possible – check it out. That makes the continent setting pretty redundant. Setting water on 25% is fine.
    2) Leader +5 heroes for a 1 on 1? Overkill and looks suspiciously like hero meta game. Leader +2 is more than enough, having only 1 opponent.
    3) 2 Beacon victory – it may be difficult to get hold of a second race in such a gaming environment, simply because of the map setup (you may end up with the 2nd town of your race and a dwelling, while opponent may have a 2nd race in easy range), but of course 1 Beacon victory would be ridiculous. With such a map setup, not finding a usable 2nd race in time may put you under the same presure as Seals, but Seals are more flexible and the rewards for taking a Seal are positive (for the conquerer) and not negative (when building Beacon).
    4) 2 months playing time and losing if missing a turn – 2 months would be fine, if there was a clock running separately for each player, giving everyone a month, like in chess. As it is, if it nears the end, a player can delay by using up the allowed 24 hours which isn’t good. Also, if a player misses a turn, isn’t that penalty enough as such?
    Seal victory is a better tie-breaker since Seals are better customizable (points). The meta is about battling, not about producing, which is another advantage.
    5) I have also suggested, like BBB, to give everyone a number of reloads per game, like, 2 or 3, next one loses, because that will simply allow to correct a game breaking error without even be tempted to cheat, the axe coming down without further ado will save a lot of complaints and protests.
    So the only thing to do in this case will be officially reporting and counting reloads…

    #234804

    bf_markymark
    Member

    @Jolly Joker: Seem okay for me. Maybe Hilidian can takeover some points.

    Notice
    Some players will not join because turn timer.
    When we have a two month limit and rules maybe we can allow to play without timer.

    Another idea:
    we create anohter small tournament without timer and others settings.
    Maybe two small tournaments with difference settings are better than one with diplomatic settings and one half are unhappy about and some players will not join. And some players can play in two tournaments.

    Just an idea. We can organisate it, will not a problem.

    #234828

    Hiliadan
    Member

    1) Water all the way down means, one continous land mass is more than possible – check it out. That makes the continent setting pretty redundant. Setting water on 25% is fine.

    I don’t know, that’s the setting of the PBEM 6 players tournament and I played all my other maps with this setting and the maps seem ok to me.

    2) Leader +5 heroes for a 1 on 1? Overkill and looks suspiciously like hero meta game. Leader +2 is more than enough, having only 1 opponent.

    Alright, you’re right.

    3) 2 Beacon victory – it may be difficult to get hold of a second race in such a gaming environment, simply because of the map setup (you may end up with the 2nd town of your race and a dwelling, while opponent may have a 2nd race in easy range), but of course 1 Beacon victory would be ridiculous. With such a map setup, not finding a usable 2nd race in time may put you under the same presure as Seals, but Seals are more flexible and the rewards for taking a Seal are positive (for the conquerer) and not negative (when building Beacon).

    Beacons make a Keeper of the Peace strategy have more sense. Beacons do not seem to allow any type of specific strategy to me. So I think Beacons are more interesting. As you said 1 beacon doesn’t make sense. 2 is the only setting that make some sense. I agree that the settings do not favour beacons, but for me it doesn’t cost anything to keep that setting.

    4) 2 months playing time and losing if missing a turn […] Also, if a player misses a turn, isn’t that penalty enough as such?

    I don’t get what you mean. You do not lose if you miss your turn, you just miss it, that’s all. Maybe one rule needs clarification if you understood that?

    5) I have also suggested, like BBB, to give everyone a number of reloads per game, like, 2 or 3, next one loses, because that will simply allow to correct a game breaking error without even be tempted to cheat, the axe coming down without further ado will save a lot of complaints and protests.
    So the only thing to do in this case will be officially reporting and counting reloads…

    Yes I think reload should be counted. But giving a specific number seems like a bad idea to me (and to BBB as far as I understood) as it may encourage cheaters to just go up to that limit. Leaving it to the judge to assess if it’s “too many reloads” or not seem better to me, even if it is subjective, it is more flexible.

    EDIT: regarding the turn timer issue, I don’t think it’s a good idea to have a tournament without it. Anyway, I won’t participate in a game without a turn timer.
    It would not be fair if some players were able to play 40 turns in 2 months, and others 10 turns and the higher score wins.
    The turn timer can be extended both when one player needs it, and, in theory, if both players agree. But for me it doesn’t make sense to play in a tournament if you cannot commit to play 1 turn every 24 hours.

    #234872

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    1) Water all the way down means, one continous land mass is more than possible – check it out. That makes the continent setting pretty redundant. Setting water on 25% is fine.

    I don’t know, that’s the setting of the PBEM 6 players tournament and I played all my other maps with this setting and the maps seem ok to me.

    I’m pretty sure our game was played with water at 25%. In any case it helps producing maps with that setting and looking at them with the barentz cheat. For all I know, that setting won’t produce many continents and may hapen to produce just one.

    3) 2 Beacon victory – it may be difficult to get hold of a second race in such a gaming environment, simply because of the map setup (you may end up with the 2nd town of your race and a dwelling, while opponent may have a 2nd race in easy range), but of course 1 Beacon victory would be ridiculous. With such a map setup, not finding a usable 2nd race in time may put you under the same presure as Seals, but Seals are more flexible and the rewards for taking a Seal are positive (for the conquerer) and not negative (when building Beacon).

    Beacons make a Keeper of the Peace strategy have more sense. Beacons do not seem to allow any type of specific strategy to me. So I think Beacons are more interesting. As you said 1 beacon doesn’t make sense. 2 is the only setting that make some sense. I agree that the settings do not favour beacons, but for me it doesn’t cost anything to keep that setting.

    It may heavily favor one side: for two beacons you need two different races – one side may have no access. (barentz helps here as well.)
    In any case I don’t see what’s wrong with Seals (you can put in as much as 100 points, but the Seals itself are attractive first-time targets). I also don’t see why the settings would be geared to make a certain spec more attractive – you could just as well suggest 75% water to make Water spec more viable?

    4) 2 months playing time and losing if missing a turn […] Also, if a player misses a turn, isn’t that penalty enough as such?

    I don’t get what you mean. You do not lose if you miss your turn, you just miss it, that’s all. Maybe one rule needs clarification if you understood that?

    I think, I misunderstood it that way that you loser if you miss a turn. 🙂 My bad.
    In any case there is the point with the time limit of 2 months. That can be used to defend a good position by delaying. I understand the problem, but I wouldn’t want to play a PBEM game I may lose because opponent is defending a slightly superior position by delaying.
    Also, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to declare someone winner, because he has 10 points more than opponent: you would have to define a draw margin (say, winner has to have double the points of opponent for a win), and you’d have to define that 2 draws make 1 loss or something like that. That does make sense, right?

    5) I have also suggested, like BBB, to give everyone a number of reloads per game, like, 2 or 3, next one loses, because that will simply allow to correct a game breaking error without even be tempted to cheat, the axe coming down without further ado will save a lot of complaints and protests.
    So the only thing to do in this case will be officially reporting and counting reloads…

    Yes I think reload should be counted. But giving a specific number seems like a bad idea to me (and to BBB as far as I understood) as it may encourage cheaters to just go up to that limit. Leaving it to the judge to assess if it’s “too many reloads” or not seem better to me, even if it is subjective, it is more flexible.

    But that will start debates again; the whole point is to have rules that take the stress away from the ref(s). I mean, you know how it is: if you make a critical error that in all probability will cost you the game (believe me, it happens), you can just as well “cheat” and reload, because you are bound to lose anyway. Now, what you do NOT want is letting someone play on, although he had 2 reloads, because you trust and believe it were genuine crashes, and kick another one after 1 reload because you are fairly certain it was a cheat. Oh, the drama!
    We are all human, so we make mistakes. Having a legal emergency brake seems fine in a game where you trust pvp battles to autocombat.
    So I don’t see anything wrong with allowing 2 reloads per game, no matter what. Use up one with reloading because foolishly ending in the void against a too-lucky Halfling Dungeon, and you just have one left – and that may just be needed for a real crash, so you know the score. It’s not that you can “crash” a live pvp battle, because there are none, so why make it unnecessarily difficult for the refs?

    #234933

    Hiliadan
    Member

    We reached 16 players! (14 registered in the player pool of the tournament: http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=bfmgames&listid=55) + SeeR + Castaneda who expressed their interested but did not join there yet.

    Maybe we can reach 32, otherwise, I guess it will be a 16 players tournament.

    I don’t see what Seals bring and I think there is already enough things to manage and to aim for, without adding them.
    Regarding Beacons, the idea is not to make a spec more attractive, it’s not to make none unattractive. I think it’s more interesting if all races, all classes and all specializations are playable. Well, I don’t use Water much so I don’t know. Is it useless without more water? If yes, then maybe we need more water. Why not 25%. It also helps Humans I guess.

    “But that will start debates again;”
    Well, that would be naive to think we can make rules that prevent any debate. As I said above, you will always have people who find ways to bend rules. So I don’t think our aim should be to prevent debate and reduce the stress on judges. The aim should be to make fair rules that limit cheating possibilities and give enough power and flexibility to judges.
    Allowing people to cheat by restarting after they lose a battle is a very bad idea IMO. It should not be allowed. If one made a mistake, he needs to assume it. That’s also why it’s a double elimination, to give everyone one a second chance.

    #234975

    bf_markymark
    Member

    About 32. Think it is possible when we try to convice players and we get an annoucement or news. Think 16 is a perfect size for 2 admins. For 32 we need more helpers (and help from truimphstudio too)

    I think we can maybe organisate a pbem team tournament when $eer Tournament is finished than next one.

    #235016

    Castaneda
    Member

    I actually registered 😉

    Btw, I think the battlefield site, as great the idea may be, still feels cluttered and confusing. Or maybe im getting to old for the Internet? 😉

    #235021

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Except if I’m blind, you didn’t join that specific player pool: http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=bfmgames&listid=55

    And what do you find cluttered and confusing? There has been a lot of improvements and things can be improved further. In any case, the disadvantages you may feel are largely outweighed by the benefits: automatic match generations, private message system, general announcement system, ranking, automatic statistics about classes / races, chat, etc.

    I contacted BBB to see how he got the support from Triumph to see if we can get the same for this tournament.

    #235050

    Castaneda
    Member

    hm, it shows me as participant of the poem competition.

    I didn’t mean that as criticism, the site itself is very good. Maybe I need to dedicate more time to finding out all the benefits and where they are hidden 😉

    #235316

    bf_markymark
    Member

    You are in.
    Thank you.

    So we are 17 now 🙂

    #235621

    Hiliadan
    Member

    19 in now, so 3 in the reserve list or potentially 13 slots free if we are 32.

    The updated rules should be published this week end. Still time to join: http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=bfmgames&listid=55

    #235630

    bf_markymark
    Member

    Another idea:

    Maybe better:

    We create a league-system up with 8 players
    First Season is qualification

    Quali League I -> 10 players, every plays against every ==> Best 4 for League I, 5-8 League II
    Quali League II -> 9 players, every plays against every ==> Best 4 for League I, 5-8 League II
    The games can be played parallel, so a player can play two matches.

    Then Season 2
    First AOW3 League Best of 8
    Second AOW3 League, 9-16
    Newbee League for qualification for League 2.

    A League goes 4 dates, so we can finish league in 8 Month. Maybe we can use a name for League, for example AOW3 Wizards League

    #235734

    Hiliadan
    Member

    The tournament should start in about a week. It’s still time to join but if we do not reach 32 players, the last players to join will be added to the reserve list.
    We currently have 19 players (so 3 players in the reserve).

    Updated rules:

    In-Game settings

    Turn timer = 1 day
    NO BETA
    Small Map with Surface and Underground on Continents
    Normal Game flow speed

    Start town: Settler
    Starting units: Medium
    Starting distance: Far
    Roads: Few
    Roaming units: Average
    Treasures: Average
    Cities: Few
    Dwellings: Few
    Ressource structures: Average
    Visit structure: Average
    Treasure structures: Average

    Water Slider at 25%
    Undiggable walls and Diggable Wall Sliders down to 15-20 %
    All other sliders left untouched at standard 50 %
    ……………………
    Each Player is given a team number (two different teams, one for each competitor)
    Seal Victory: off
    Unifier Victory: at 2 Beacons

    Game speed: Normal
    Starting Resource: Standard
    Starting Skills: Normal
    All Heroes Have Resurgence: Never
    Defenders Strength: Strong
    Cosmic Events: Medium
    Maximum Number of Heroes: 2 (1 Leader + 2 heroes)
    Maximum Heroes Level: 30

    Map Exploration: On
    City Founding: On
    Random heroes match player race: Off
    Empire Quests: On

    Submit for tournament:

    Account on http://www.the-battlefield.com
    Ladderpage: http://www.the-battlefield.co
    Tournament Page:
    http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=tourneymain&tourneyid=1
    Press Join-Event Button

    Matchplan:
    Double-Elimination Tree ==>
    http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=tourneyroster&tourneyid=1

    Rules

    1. One round cannot exceed 2 months. If neither of the two player won 2 months after the start of the round, then one should surrender and take a screenshot of the score and provide it to the judges. The player with the highest score then wins the match. If scores are very close, the judges can decide that it is a draw and ask the players to replay the game with a shorter (for instance 1 month) deadline.

    2. Players can arrange whatever settings (e.g. no dwellings) they choose, but in the absence of consensus, the settings described in the “In-Game settings” above are to be considered the default. The host must take screenshots of the settings and post them publicly (so that his opponent and the judges can access them) before the match starts.

    3. If one player temporarily cannot play his turns in 24 hours (e.g. because of holidays, or personal issues), and warn the host reasonably in advance, then the host should temporarily change the turn timer to accommodate him.

    4. In the event of a crash (from your PC or from AoW), reload are allowed BUT the player who crashed needs to take appropriate screenshots or pictures (with a mobile phone for instance) and sends them to the judges. Reloads should be counted by both players and reported to the judges. If no proof of a justified crash or in case of repeated reloading (during one match or during the tournament as a whole), the judges have full power to disqualify the player.

    5. You cannot play the same class, or race twice in a row. You must let the Judges by private message in the Battlefield website BEFORE the match, but not your opponent, know what class and race you will play for your upcoming match. For example, if you play Human Theocrat, for your next match, you cannot be either Human or Theocrat.

    6. Banter and taunting is allowed, rudeness, swearing and racial (or other prejudicial) language is not. Repeatedly trolling will lead to forfeiting the match.

    7. The decision of the Judges is to be respected. Players breaking the rules get a total of 3 warnings before being disqualified from the tournament entirely. Judges may disqualify a player without warnings if their behaviour is deemed to be completely out of order (e.g. racism).

    8. When awaiting judges’ decision (as soon as his opponent requests arbitration), the host must remove the turn timer and may need to revert turns to come back to the situation existing prior to the issue being judged.

    9. Players must play with the latest official version of the game (no beta). If the official version is updated during the tournament, players must update to it as soon as it is released both on GoG and Steam (and turn timer must be removed while waiting for the GoG release).

    10. If you feel one of the rules had been broken, but you carry on playing without reporting to the judges, then you have no recourse.

    Arbitration process
    The main judge is Markymark.
    Assistant judges are: Hiliadan and [to be confirme].
    When arbitration is necessary:

    1. If 1 or 2 of the judges are involved in the game which needs arbitration, the 3rd judge should name two temporary judges to replace them for this arbitration;

    2. The players should both send their latest saved game to the judges (saved game can be found here in Windows: C:\Users\[user name]\Documents\My Games\AoW3\Profiles\[profile name]\PBEM) by email or any other means

    3. The arbitration will be taken at the majority of the 3 judges and the decision taken is definitive. If one player refuses it, he is disqualified.

    #235803

    bf_markymark
    Member

    judges are Hiliadan, Markymark, but we still need one.
    Are someone here for taking this job?

    Now 13/16 joined in tournament tree.
    When you want play in tournament and you have only joined in pool,
    please join now in tournament tree too or you are only a reserve player.

    http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=tourneymain&tourneyid=1

    #235858

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Tournament is full!

    If some players still want to join or if some are not in the list of registered players there: http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=playerlist&tourneyid=1 , please quickly let us know to see what solutions we have.

    You can see the tournament tree, which should soon be generated, there:
    http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=tourneyroster&tourneyid=1

    #235957

    Hiliadan
    Member

    List of players by order of expression of interest (priority to join the 16 slots):
    1. markymark
    2. Olop
    3. Hiliadan
    4. Redil
    5. gabthegab
    6. Eskild
    7. $eeR (through forum) [not in]
    8. cbower
    9. Gilafron
    10. AlXStormrage [not in]
    11. Warlord Keldon [not in]
    12. BLACKCAT
    13. Voltoir
    14. CiceroSUN
    15. badborre
    16. Castaneda
    17. olschenstein
    18. Lightform
    19. Jonny Thunder

    That list is not 100% clear cut as some may have expressed interest outside the official player pool.

    The idea right now is to replace Jonny Thunder by AlXStormage (who registered first) and keep 3 players in reserve in case some players do not show up for the 1st round.
    If we get 5 more players in the reserve, a separate 8 players tournament will be organized and we’ll see how it can blend with the main tournament later on.

    #236031

    bf_markymark
    Member

    AIX Stomrage is now in instead Johny Thunder.
    When we find no complaints: we can start it tommorrow (or this night), think i need a talk with hiliadian. The first round shall be played then since end of december.

    Regards, Mark

    #236135

    Hiliadan
    Member

    Tournament started! 🙂
    May the best win!

    http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=tourneyroster&tourneyid=1

    If you are still interested in joining the tournament, there are still 4 slots left in the 2nd 8 players tournament. Please join the player pool: http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=bfmgames&listid=55

    #236138

    Go Cbower!

    #236142

    Hiliadan
    Member

    lol
    I’m pretty confident we’ll have a final France vs France with me against gabthegab! 😀 (I played 1 game against him which he won with a huge margin and am in another one where he may won + he won his match from the other PBEM tournament) Go France go! 😀

    #236313

    Hiliadan
    Member

    First victory reported in the tournament! cbower vs olschenstein! Halfling Warlord won against Human Sorcerer.
    http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=resultinfo&gamenumber=49

    The elimination tree has been updated and cbower is waiting the winner of Eskild vs Warlord Keldon to play his second round match. http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=tourneyroster&tourneyid=1

    If you still want to join the tournament, you can do so here: http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=bfmgames&listid=55
    If 3 more players are found, a second 8 players tournament may be started.

    #236317

    bf_markymark
    Member

    Happy Halloween.
    We just Need a judge and one game is not startet, maybe we Need soon replacement.

    And congratulation cbower.

    #236486

    Hiliadan
    Member

    23 players now expressed interest. So we are 1 player away from starting an additional 8 players tournament.
    However, 2 players did not start their game so will probably need replacement.

    So if you’re interested in playing PBEM and would like to measure your skills against worthy opponent, please register there: http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3/index.php?page=bfmgames&listid=55 We’re still looking for players!

    #236520

    xlnt
    Member

    Heyya,

    as someone who has never played a PBEM game – i find the http://www.the-battlefield.com/ site terrible and i need some more info and explanations and just any kind of user-friendliness (;

    help me get into

    #236535

    bf_markymark
    Member

    use http://www.the-battlefield.com/aow3 -> Bookmark it (<STRG-D).

    What is your expectation?
    With a Project (maybe with truimphstudios) and money, you can do more much (own Domain, own Server, Prices for tournaments …) but it is only a project with fans (Born because no ladder was here).

    Tried only, if we have a chance to get some laddergames (because some players missing such a feature…).
    Can not develop a complete/perfect page (without a Team and without knowing of game) and then, “no you will not make aow3 ladders….because we have it in-game or we have a special partner for it”.

    We organisate many PBEM-Games, sure, in CIV5 -we have a complete other PBEM Solution- but it is not a page for pbem, ya for fans when they missing something (like ladder, tournaments or pbem).
    Maybe an only pbem page (with others games) will be a nice Project, but you need a team too for it. I’m not a designer.

    Can only developing this page together with fans,
    and when you say – it is terrible- i have no motivation and stop work on site.

    I do not need it, have enough work.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 74 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.