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

Scheduling

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

Once we have set a basic framework of qualifications and final tournaments (on each game slot), what's left to do is "simply" schedule the matches.

We would have a certain order of how matches should go, so that much is not an issue. However WHEN do these matches happen is something that requires all players involved in a match to be available, connected to the server and ready. Ideally the timing will be when all are available to play, but despite this "deal" no-shows could still happen.

The question is, how to deal with them.

And one obvious answer is, they simply lose a match. What if a no-show is a player that is a part of a team though? Cancel the match or have the team blamed and suffer the consequences of a no-show by playing with one-man down?

I guess that may be a fair thing to do, without racking up minds too much coming up with complex solutions...

What do you people think?

Offline
Joined: 2007-09-10
We should consider specific game slots and point systems

>> And one obvious answer is, they simply lose a match. What if a no-show is a player that is a part of a team though? Cancel the match or have the team blamed and suffer the consequences of a no-show by playing with one-man down?

Like some of the other questions you have put forth, the best option might depend on the particular game.

In some games, we might let the sole player start the game and start racking up points until the end of match is called or until the other player arrives and then has to deal with that handicap. For teams, this would naturally imply that the game starts with whatever players are available. If a full match consists over various matches, we'll have to think carefully, since allowing one side to go all out may result in an insurmountable lead for tie-breakers all on account of one single no-show appearance. In other words, it may not be a good idea to any of the players in the tournament/qualifiers to allow one team to rack up so many "points."

If we simply do a "forfeit," we have to consider how this affects intermatch point totals (eg, we might want to give out a standard set of points to all that win by forfeit). To have a fair system, we can't avoid dealing with this issue. This would add a little complexity, but it is worthwhile to deal with it in order to preserve the integrity of any point system we might want.

Generally, I think that what you presented for teams is the way to handle team player no-shows, except that we might give the team that is short the opportunity to not play period. In this way, the side that is short can take their chances that they will no do worse than to get a forfeit (this could be important if there is a double match or if there are tournament point totals they care about).

** Another alternative might be to give the side that did not show, an opportunity to reschedule later. We might give only a certain number of such opportunities, after which point we revert to whatever alternative we decide on. **

Basically, I think we have to first decide on things like points and look at all the slots game by game before fully determining how to handle no-shows. We'll probably come up with simple rules to apply to most or all the slots, but we should still look at all the game slots before making a final decision, just to be sure.

Oh, and if we implement the wagering rule? Might those forfeits amount to NIL since those matches were sort of optional to begin with? [ http://www.nuxified.org/topic/a_special_twist_in_the_gamefest_betting ]

Sorry to throw in monkey wrenches, but I really think that in some cases we should strive to improve upon a simple vanilla forfeit in order to preserve the integrity of intergame/tournament points. I also say that we should always consider rescheduling as a way to avoid complications and difficult scenarios.

libervisco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-04
Jose wrote: In some games,
Jose wrote:

In some games, we might let the sole player start the game and start racking up points until the end of match is called or until the other player arrives and then has to deal with that handicap.

Matches are unlikely to last long enough for a no-show to be really expected to show while it lasts, though it's not inconceivable to have "late-shows". In any case that option is pretty much what the second part of my question suggested (play with a man down and suffer the consequences). This would mean that the team should be held partly responsible for the shows of their members, if they care to win or have good results.

Jose wrote:

If a full match consists over various matches

God forbid. We'll scare people away with so much complexity (yes, being complexity-fearful again). One match is essentially one game or a row of games when using multiple maps, but NOT multiple schedule matches counting as one. The only exception here is when we have to deal with latency issues and therefore hold a double match.

Jose wrote:

If we simply do a "forfeit," we have to consider how this affects intermatch point totals (eg, we might want to give out a standard set of points to all that win by forfeit). To have a fair system, we can't avoid dealing with this issue.

What's a forfeit in this case? Allowing a handicap to a team with no-shows? I think this could reflect on the overall points in a simple way: no-shows get 0 points regardless if their team wins (which gives all playing team members at least half a point) or -1 if their team loses (since theirs might be largely the fault of it losing, for they didn't show for the fight).

As for rescheduling I think this can always be kept as an option, albeit in limited supplies (we really want to move forward, not just keep canceling and rescheduling).

Offline
Joined: 2007-09-10
Basically I agree.. now, see the discussion on subs

[Please don't miss the substitute player discussion in the bottom half of this reply. I think we can solve many potentially ugly situations in a very smooth way while increasing the number of "satisfied customers."]

Short reply: I agree with your position almost completely. [A double match might also be useful if we do a multi-mode game tournament by having the matchup consist of one round played in the mode prefered by one player and the other round played in the mode the other player chooses.]

>> Matches are unlikely to last long enough for a no-show to be really expected to show while it lasts,

Testing the water. I was thinking maybe that something like a multi-map free-for-all(??) mode might last long enough for someone to come in 20 minutes late.. I don't know. I haven't tested most modes yet. I guess the answer is that this will not happen because matches are essentially too short.

Next.

>> >> If a full match consists over various matches
>> God forbid. We'll scare people away with so much complexity

The main reason I mentioned a match lasting more than one was if we look at a double-match (I can think of two occasions where this might be necessary). If there was a split, the tie-breaker was based on frags, and the one side had a free-for-all on the no-show, then the no-show losing that first match would have no real chance to win (down by 200 frags). Instead if the first match was lost and some standard forfeit frag points were given to the winner (eg 10), then the no-show would be down by a manageable number of frags for tie-breaker status. [Note, that I am talking about individual matches.]

OK, but let's forget about ever allowing a free-for-all on the no-show. That was a test idea that obviously will be more trouble than worthwhile to us. [See below for a way to handle no-show matches -- use substitutes that want to play!]

Next.

>> What's a forfeit in this case? Allowing a handicap to a team with no-shows?

Most of my comments have been addressed to individuals. For teams I agree on allowing them to wait for a little while (eg, 15 min) and then playing with whatever they have or else having them acknowledge a forfeit.

A forfeit would give the winner the 1 win (however many points comes with a victory.. or some other quantity.. I am not taking a general position). Any other points, eg, frag totals, should have a designated standard amount go to the winner (and/or removed from the no-show).

*****

Suggestion for Stand-by substitutes:

Consider the following commment items #3 and #4 http://www.nuxified.org/topic/should_we_accept_late_registrations_for_the_game_fest#comment-10555 . I'll reword it.

When to substitute an unregistered potential player for a player that leaves the tournament is not obvious since a player that leaves may not tell us about the permanent exit. One way to handle this is to try and schedule as many games as possible around the same time period in order to maximize that chances of no-shows happening at a known time. Then we invite unregistered potential players to come in at that time to sit and wait as potential stand-ins. We call on them to fill in for no-shows as needed. Note that if a player calls in to reschedule a match and is approved then that player would not be a no-show for the original, now cancelled, match time. Note also that clumping schedule times makes this substitution system practical, as no one wants to come and wait over and over again at different times to maybe perhaps possibly play .. if the moon was out. This procedure gives unregistered players an opportunity to participate, limits reschedules and forfeits, and gives the player that did show and opportunity to play. Most players want to play and win rather than get a forfeit win without playing.

As for win/loss/points, we can do the following. A sub'd match result counts ONLY (a) if the no-show called in to acknowledges s/he is retiring from that tournament OR (b) if the no-show has already missed two previous games and has not called in to confirm that s/he will be returning. In the first case, one lucky unregistered player will have found a spot on the tournament by taking over the record and schedule of the retiring player. In the second case, the player is retired automatically since we have no way to know if they will come back. A lucky unregistered player now takes over the retired player's record/schedule and starts by filling in for what would have been the third no-show. Understand that the idea is not to punish no-shows, but to find a practical way to deal with a no-show whom we have no idea will ever return. In this way, we can give an opportunity to someone that wants to play, and we wait as little time as possible to make the decision without being too unreasonable to anyone [if we wait too long too many no-show losses will accumulate in the record].

If we implement a substitution system like this one, we have to let people know when we make the upcoming announcements that this is a possibility. Once the game registration cut-off comes and goes, we post prominently on the website that substitutes are welcomed to show up at XXXXX and YYYYY times to possibly catch a game or two and maybe even to take over the spot of someone retiring. Perhaps we can put up a table showing game/modes that are accepting subs and the times subs should come in. ** Dealing with time calculations might be tricky because everyone is not comfortable using a conversion calculater/website or doing it by hand. **

To keep our pool of stand-bys available (happy) we should provide resources for them to keep busy playing games during the time they are not needed. This can be great!! In this way we don't turn back anyone that wants to play, even if the games will not be official. This means people that have a change of heart or get excited during the fest can come and enjoy themselves too. We can get an idea of demand for the fest as it works its way through, and we have a larger number of people that may want to return for the next one.

libervisco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-04
Overall the whole idea of

Overall the whole idea of subs sounds like a good tool to use for drop outs, although in some way it feels wrong that a late player would inherit somebody's earned record. I really hope we wont have to do this much.

As long as we have some options for late comers I think it should be good. They ARE latecomers after all and they can't possibly be treated the same way as those that registered in time, not without putting a serious strain on an already strained framework.

The "Keep It Simple Stupid" principle keeps ringing in my head.

But I like the idea of having some practice matches for those waiting to substitute if necessary. We can use backup servers for that. However there may not be enough sub players for such practice "while waiting" matches to make sense.

But that's the thing, you never know! We rack our minds here trying to anticipate every case and deal with something that is by default marginal to the game fest (and IMHO latecomers are) yet we don't even know if all this will be necessary. I can say that most of what was said here wont be in the final rule set because it's just too much for it not to bloat it to a point where noone will read it.

The rule set will probably simply say, in the "latecomers" section: "We will allow some late players to join in as substitutes for players that quit, as backup players or add them to yet not started game slots." Then we might list these three options with very brief and only basic descriptions of how it will be done.

So if the case that we actually need a framework for dealing with this occurs.. we'll look into this thread for details, where quite a bit has already been said (and enough that I don't actually expect anyone else to comment on these posts, noone will bother to read all of it).

So I thank you for anticipating the details and laying out the options. You seem to be quite a strategist, way better then me, and have helped me look at some of the issues I otherwise might not have. However I keep and will keep to strive for simplicity exactly because I'm not such a big strategist. I hence escape complexity that feels too burdening to be an advantage it would otherwise be.

Cheers

Offline
Joined: 2007-09-10
I like the substitute

I like the substitute system. It might be very useful for teams.
Here how see things:

Missing players
* general:
1)player unable to show up for some reason can designate (or his team does it for him) somebody else not signed up for the tournament to play in his name
2)All participants not showing up => rescheduling allowed
3)Participants can agree on waiting or rescheduling. This is possible until the end of the qualificatioon phase for qualification matches and until the start of the next final match in the final phase.

* solo player not showing up in a 1vs1 game = forfeit for absent player / victory for the other player

* solo player not showing up in an FFA game = forfeit for absent player / nothing for others / substitute not allowed (because not necessary)

* member of a team not showing up:
1)The team can designate another player not signed up for the tournament to replace him (cf rule 1 of "general")
2)The opposing team(s) remove one of their players to balance the game
3)All participating teams can agree on waiting more time or rescheduling the match. (cf rule 3 of "general")

Leavers/disconnection problems:
Disconnection can happen in online games. The reasons for it can vary.
How should we deal with that?

In an FFA game, it doesn't matter that much.
In a team-based game or a 1vs1 it is a big problem however.

Possibilities:
a)penalty for the leaver -> problem: unfair in case of connection problems
b)replay the match -> problem: unfair if the remaining participant was about to win, rescheduling problems
c)continue the match as is -> problem: imbalance in team-based games
d)continue the match with one less player in the opposing team -> problem: who leaves? quick decision necessary

Personally, I prefer solution "a" for 1vs1 games and solution "d" for team games.

Note: Wesnoth is a special case, since multiplayer games can be saved.

Scoring system:
1)Game specific scoring
Each game type will have special ingame points (ex: frags, areas controlled, etc)
2)Bonus points
Betting system? Flawless victory?
3)Penalties
Leavers? Cheaters?
4)Match points:
-4 points for a victory
-2 points for a draw
-1 point for a defeat
·O points for a forfeit

A 0-0 score (if possible in a game) is considered as a double-defeat. Each player/team then scores 1 point.

Global organization:
-qualification phase: every player/team plays a set number of matches and are awarded points according to the scoring system
-final phase: quarter-finals/semi-finals/final/third place final -> direct elimination process (cf finals.jpg for an example of match-ups)

After the qualification matches, the 16 best players/teams participate in the final phase.
Additional matches may have to be played in case of players/teams with the same amount of points in the 16 first ones. (others can keep the same classification, i.e it is OK if several teams are 17th at the end of the tournament)

===============================================================
I know everything is still under discussion, but I think we should already create a wiki or some other centralized document to start making things a bit clearer.
Because right now everything is scattered through different topics.

P.S:
How do you keep other unwanted players from jumping into an FFA game?

libervisco's picture
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-04
Sounds good overall.. I'm

Sounds good overall.. I'm not sure really what to comment, just that the details regarding dealing with these special cases like no-shows and quits should probably be in a subpage, and we first need to finish the basic rule set.

I've tried setting up a wiki on freedomware-gamefest.com with a liquid drupal module but it doesn't seem to be working well, so I've posted the draft of the rule set on a Libervis wiki (which we sometimes use for all Libervis Network issues: http://www.libervis.com/wiki/index.php?title=Freedomware_Gamefest

The final that we come up with there will be then posted to the official site, which is, afterall, basically a brochure and a news publication more than a collaboration and planning site regarding the festival, which is Nuxified.org (and now with help of Libervis wiki). Smiling

Cheers

Comment viewing options

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