Skip to main content
Welcome guest. | Register | Login | Post

Every game slot of the festival to have two stages: qualifications and final tournament?

4 replies [Last post]
libervisco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-04

Festival is divided into game slots and each game slot is a separate competition that consists of two stages: qualifications and final tournament.

At least that's the current idea and we seek your approval. Eye

How would the qualifications be played depends on the nature of the game slot itself.

If it is a Free for all deathmatch on a first person shooter game we would divide them into groups and have those groups wreck each other in a series of classic deathmatches limited in number of maps played per match, recording their frags each time and ultimately lining them up to a final qualifications chart.

If it is a team deathmatch instead the team wins would be the one being qualified, not actual players, but per-player scores and outcoming charts may still be recorded.

Once the charts are available there are two ways to go about qualifying or disqualifying:

  • 1. Disqualify the bottom third of the players in the charts (weakest go home).
  • 2. Don't disqualify anyone, but the weaker third or half gets penalized in the final tournament, basically starts off in unfavorable conditions. For example, the penalized players may need to play single elimination (one loss and you're out) while the winners get to play double elimination.

Whatever basic rule we adopt here would apply generally to all games.

Opinions encouraged! Smiling

Thank you

Offline
Joined: 2007-09-10
I vote yes to have

I vote yes to have qualifiers.

I am definitely in favor or having qualifiers as a way to increase the number of games everyone will have available to play without getting the boot. Qualifiers allows people to settle down. Qualifiers allows for interesting stats (points) and extra winners [Imagine if MBA (baseball) only had a single team winner each year and not HR, RBI, ERA, etc champs?]

The more games played the more likely the tournament will be meaningful (aside from this fest, most people don't have "leagues" they are a part of; it would stink for their gameplay to end after just one or two rounds of tournament play).

How to set up the qualifiers is something that may best be done on a game/mode by game/mode basis (the game mode really sets up constraints on how we can proceed). Hopefully someone will introduce a few sample qualifier schedules later for voting. Getting that schedule requires some other decisions be made and that we have an idea of how many will be competing.

libervisco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-04
I agree. Qualifiers will

I agree.

Qualifiers will increase the number of potential points earned. And as they can be more lax overall than the final tournament schedules / brackets can be a bit more flexible, that is, not necessarily limited to single or double elimination.

It's partly for practice and partly to see who's who in game. It is an introduction to the actual tournaments.

Offline
Joined: 2007-09-10
I vote yes for this system

I vote yes for this system (see my post here: http://www.nuxified.org/topic/scheduling#comment-10568).
And I vote for solution 1: Disqualify the bottom third of the players in the charts (weakest go home).

libervisco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-04
Anyone else has opinions on

Anyone else has opinions on this?

Based on basically only one solid vote (by KIAze) one proposal would be to have "bottom third disqualification" the default option over all tournaments, but reserved for modification on a game component basis. For example, if there is a game in which it would be better to have a different rule of disqualification, less people being disqualified or noone, that option can be reserved for.

If noone votes that's what I'll put in the draft.

Cheers

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.