(Possible) new 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 (Possible) new tournament

This topic contains 673 replies, has 80 voices, and was last updated by  bf_markymark 6 years, 7 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 151 through 180 (of 674 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #203279

    Serahfemme
    Member

    Regarding the newly sprung debate about stack splitting, I think it could be fairly easily summed up one simple rule: Let your opponent’s piece settle for a few seconds after it moves before attacking it. That way, if they’re planning on moving multi-hex armies, they have enough time to do so and aren’t punished because the game lacks a tool to move these armies simultaneously. As far as I understand, this is pretty much the ONLY type “opportunistic” stack splitting we’re trying to avoid, and I feel like this rule would concisely and easily summarize what is or what isn’t legal. In other words, taking advantage of your opponent’s poor positioning (attacking 4v3 for example) is totally legal, but attacking your opponent while they’re trying to move is not.

    If we’re really going to insist on scrapping stack splitting rules altogether, I really must insist we move to classic turns like Ayenara suggested. A game can easily be decided because your opponent attacks you 2v1 stacks while you’re trying to position your stacks to attack him; this isn’t taking advantage of poor positioning, this is taking advantage of poor connection, and I would be really sore if I lost a round because of this sort of thing.

    #203289

    gabthegab
    Member

    Ayenara we are lucky to be in the 32 players i think of course if players leave the tournament, it s normal to take player in the reserve list. May be it s not too hard of add 1 or 2 players by group :). Serious players dont leave the tournament without very good reason …

    #203295

    @ Ayenara, ok now I get what you are asking.

    Like I said, let’s get this round done first, then worry about the next round.

    However, I’m inclined to treat people leaving in the next round as a forfeit, which in effect = a free victory for the opponent, which is not ideal but hey, that’s life.

    #203296

    Regarding the newly sprung debate about stack splitting, I think it could be fairly easily summed up one simple rule: Let your opponent’s piece settle for a few seconds after it moves before attacking it. That way, if they’re planning on moving multi-hex armies, they have enough time to do so and aren’t punished because the game lacks a tool to move these armies simultaneously. As far as I understand, this is pretty much the ONLY type “opportunistic” stack splitting we’re trying to avoid, and I feel like this rule would concisely and easily summarize what is or what isn’t legal. In other words, taking advantage of your opponent’s poor positioning (attacking 4v3 for example) is totally legal, but attacking your opponent while they’re trying to move is not.

    If we’re really going to insist on scrapping stack splitting rules altogether, I really must insist we move to classic turns like Ayenara suggested. A game can easily be decided because your opponent attacks you 2v1 stacks while you’re trying to position your stacks to attack him; this isn’t taking advantage of poor positioning, this is taking advantage of poor connection, and I would be really sore if I lost a round because of this sort of thing.

    But then this is open to abuse as well. I move my main stack forward, suddenly see you have more than I can handle, but I now get a grace period to settle my stacks, and bring in reinforcements. And how long do I need to settle my stacks? 1 extra second, 2? How do you measure it? And this is why you have the 15 second rule (or 20 now).

    Any rule gets exceptions, the “but what about city sieges?” etc etc.

    It’s a frustrating thing to deal with, but ultimately, it is something I think the player should deal with, and it can be dealt with – triangle movement.

    As for simultaneous/classic turns, if your opponent is happy, then you can play what you like. In the event of non agreement, the default kicks in, which will be simultaneous turns.

    #203297

    Ayenara we are lucky to be in the 32 players i think of course if players leave the tournament, it s normal to take player in the reserve list. May be it s not too hard of add 1 or 2 players by group :). Serious players dont leave the tournament without very good reason …

    And I am hoping/assuming that if you get to the last 16, you are indeed a “serious” player.

    #203307

    Serahfemme
    Member

    In that case, I must ask: Are we scrapping the stack splitting rules or not? The rules say one thing, but you’re leaning towards another here in the thread, and it’d be nice to have a definitive answer before the tournament starts.

    #203310

    gabthegab
    Member

    Why my group have goblin for picture? This is discrediting!!!

    #203312

    @ Serahfemme, already updated the website.

    At the end of the day, it’s something almost impossible to actually police or to enforce. No solution we can come up with is ideal, so this is the “least bad” solution.

    Ultimately, the best thing would be a change in mechanics, like an expanded adjacent hex rule, which lets you feed in units outside of the original 7 hexes as reinforcements perhaps…

    #203313

    Stormwind
    Member

    I know timer decisions are still in the air, but I want to point out that triangle moving can be very time consuming, so I would prefer 3 minutes as a default.

    And I agree with the simpler version of the rules…after 15 (or 30) seconds basically anything goes. At least that is my understanding. If I have the time to keep my stacks adjacent, then anything bad that happens is my own fault.

    I dont know if it has been proposed already, but since so many extra people are interested, maybe add one more to each group but still only take the top 2, with a playoff round in case of a tie? (actually thinking about..playoff round not neccesary. tiebreak can be what happens in their individual game).

    #203381

    Why my group have goblin for picture? This is discrediting!!!

    Goblins OP.

    #203386

    alf978
    Member

    @BBB

    is it intentional that Aeynara & Jomungur are in adjacent groups and could meet early in the tournament (after the group stages) or coincidence?

    Or will the second round be randomized match-ups, unlike the World Cup for example?

    Just wondering, it struck me as peculiar…

    #203444

    Meeky
    Member

    Is there a Steam group or something similar being made so we can start communicating with the people we’ll be going up against? I pretty much want to bug the people I’m playing against about map settings.

    I’m hoping to request classic turns from the people I’ll be up against, basically. Obviously can play simultaneous, but I’d rather make my preference known.

    #203451

    @ alf, 2nd round hasn’t been organised yet.

    Groups 1-4 have the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th place people from the last tournament.

    #203487

    gabthegab
    Member

    Meeky i will be glad to play classic turn with you,i have play PBEM game but not classic turn.
    If you want test classic turn with me, my steam is gabriel.benichou. No problem of split and no problem of low connection with classic turn and pbem game :).

    #203508

    Marcus
    Member

    @gabthegab @meeky
    If you guys feel like it I would be happy to play classic turns as well. It just makes so much more sense to me instead of simultaneous where things depends more on how fast your clicks per second are.

    Maybe we can make it a little house rule for our group (:

    @BBB
    Any chance you can post a link to the tourney in your original post? I think it would help.

    #203514

    alyra
    Member

    I think I missed this but I am still interested in playing a casual match with someone sometime 🙂 my steam id is alyra if anyone fancies a match! I am novice in the multiplayer world of Age of Wonders!

    #203516

    alyra
    Member

    Oh disregard that previous message, I managed to find the site and see I am on for it! ah well still add alyra anyways 🙂

    #203550

    Castaneda
    Member

    Any chance to extend the amount of players to 40 with all the new requests? Had my heart broken when i had to read that I dropped out of the tourney! 🙂

    #203553

    Xaneorath
    Member

    I’ll play classic too, if my opponent is fine with it, and I have the time for it during that day.

    #203568

    AbednegoJC
    Member

    @xaneorath
    great, I will be happy to play classic turns 🙂

    #203570

    AbednegoJC
    Member

    Actually, making tournament classic turn based would solve all those issues like 15sec rule or splitstacking. Also in 1v1 its possible imho.

    #203616

    Meeky
    Member

    @gabthegab @meeky
    If you guys feel like it I would be happy to play classic turns as well. It just makes so much more sense to me instead of simultaneous where things depends more on how fast your clicks per second are.

    Maybe we can make it a little house rule for our group (:

    I’m in a separate group from you two, so that won’t work, but I’m happy to play practice games with folks. (Mostly because I’m in need of practice.)

    #203630

    Ayenara
    Member

    Anyone that wants to practice, add me on steam: http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198031669297

    Just send me a message and we can arrange something 🙂

    #203633

    n0rf
    Member

    Any chance to extend the amount of players to 40 with all the new requests? Had my heart broken when i had to read that I dropped out of the tourney! :-)

    I agree with Castaneda. It’s not cool to miss tourney, just because you learn about it after several days when it was anounced.

    #203664

    Deus_Mortis
    Member

    Ye, tourney was in real lack of advertise…
    Btw classic turns are widely welcome for me.

    Better to loose some extra time, but save our neurves and friendly attitude.

    #203698

    Any chance to extend the amount of players to 40 with all the new requests? Had my heart broken when i had to read that I dropped out of the tourney! :-)

    And then 40, and then 42, and then 50, and then 64….

    and then have a dozen people not show up for their matches.

    No.

    Not after last time.

    Ye, tourney was in real lack of advertise…

    True, but despite bad advertising, somehow we got more players than spaces.

    Can’t be all that bad then…

    #203721

    n0rf
    Member

    and then have a dozen people not show up for their matches.

    Actually I can’t understand how limitting number of players solves this problem. If there were 32 most responsible players in the world, I’d understand. But there are just 32 players that were first who’d seen this topic.

    Btw, I didn’t participate in previous tournament, so I don’t really understand what’s bad if someone leaves earlier? Just count him technical defeat. I believe after second round most or nonresponsible players will have left tourney. Also I think responsible players would not be dissapointed if they go further for free in such case.

    #203742

    Castaneda
    Member

    cannot agree anymore on that. 32,40,or 64. limiting the amount of players won´t eliminate the risk of irresponsible players 😉

    #203769

    Ayenara
    Member

    and then have a dozen people not show up for their matches.

    Actually I can’t understand how limitting number of players solves this problem. If there were 32 most responsible players in the world, I’d understand. But there are just 32 players that were first who’d seen this topic.

    Btw, I didn’t participate in previous tournament, so I don’t really understand what’s bad if someone leaves earlier? Just count him technical defeat. I believe after second round most or nonresponsible players will have left tourney. Also I think responsible players would not be dissapointed if they go further for free in such case.

    Good points.

    BBB I think it’s unavoidable that some people will drop out in a tourney like this. But I’d rather see that everyone has a chance to play than exclude some because they don’t frequent this forum. It’s not that difficult to adjust later round if needed.

    #203785

    @ norf, castaneda, last tournament started with 64 players, which meant 16 start groups with 6 matches in.

    It was a pain to coordinate, and people didn’t show up.

    Fewer starting players = less logistics, simple as that, i.e. less people to chase up.

    Having the sign up be this much before things start means that out of the 32 now in, there are 2 weeks for people to really think about whether or not they can commit, and if they can’t there are reserve players to take their place.

    It gives a safety margin of time, because last time there were people quitting (and more than a few without any notice or explanation – just disappeared) and I was frantically trying to find replacements for matches due to start that very night.

    BBB I think it’s unavoidable that some people will drop out in a tourney like this.

    Like I said, fewer people = fewer moving parts.

    The one thing I said to myself after the last tournament was that no way would I run 64 players again. I also ditched the mibbit chatroom because noone used it.

    And considering that it’s 1 v 1, and is modelled on the world cup, you need a number divisible by 4 really, that also leaves 2 players at the end, so 40 doesn’t work (40 become 20 become 10 become 5…flip a coin to get the last 4?)

    that everyone has a chance to play than exclude some because they don’t frequent this forum.

    Noone has been excluded because of that. Quite a few of the people on the list heard about it through Steam, like yourself and Garresh. First come first serve basis, unless you want me to start cherry picking through the list and deciding that person x will be better for the tournament than person z?

    The only other alternative that could work, and be fair, would be if there were many more players than there are now, and they were divided into bigger groups and had the chance to play for a place in the tournament, like how the World cup has regional qualifiers.

    Logically, there needs to be a number somewhere, and 32 is convenient and manageable, 64 less so, 128 even less so. So, whilst it’d be lovely to have 128, or even 256 or even more players, and make this a really big thing, ultimately, there’s quite the jump between 32 and 64, and based on previous experience of managing 64, it is not fun.

Viewing 30 posts - 151 through 180 (of 674 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.