This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - cephalopod
3681
« on: October 12, 2013, 03:16:15 AM »
I think with the minimum I was just trying to say how big the bracket must be planned, rather than a minimum of bots, so say someone planned an 8 bot tournament, they should still run the interest poll and get at least 50% (even at a size that small - introducing different rules for different bracket sizes will just over-complicate)
3682
« on: October 11, 2013, 03:07:40 PM »
I'd say it was just the usage of the periodic poll that slowed everything.
3683
« on: October 11, 2013, 10:50:56 AM »
I don't think the complexity of it is too much of an issue, it's the length of time it took for tournaments to get through that needs to be addressed.
3684
« on: October 11, 2013, 10:42:24 AM »
So, to copy/paste/adjust your ruleset, the current draft is: Entry Level Tournament Rules
Entry List Size:
Your first tournament (e.g. for a host with Tournament Host Score of 0) must be planned to hold at least 8, but no more than 16 entries.
Your second (e.g. for a host with Tournament Host Score of 1) must be planned to hold at least 16, but no more than 32 entries.
You may do what you wish with these numbers, splitting the quota into multiple brackets if you wish.
If you have a Host Score of 2 or above, you proceed to the Major League.
Moving to signups:
It is your duty to add a poll to your thread asking "Would you consider entering this tournament?" once the poll option "Yes" has at least half the entry list size in votes it becomes eligible for the Signups section. You can then submit your tournament for approval, where the rules will be screened by a moderator.
From the day your sign ups are approved you have 3 months to complete your tournament.
This averages out 1 month for sign ups and 2 videos a week but you may spend the time however you see fit (more sign up time, more video time, whatever) This could probably be simplified, also we'd need Trov to make the Signups section approval-only, like the Discussion area - I believe it is simply closed right now.
3685
« on: October 11, 2013, 10:21:55 AM »
So what about...
Tournament 1 must have a planned bracket of 12-16
Number 2's bracket must be planned to hold 16-24
Number 3's bracket must be planned to hold 16-32
Or something along those lines?
(I don't mind about having to check these, it only takes a few seconds - also a note must be added that these are relative to your score in Tournament Management - for example if someone successfully hosted a tournament, but then failed at one, they must start at number 1 again as their score would be 0)
3686
« on: October 11, 2013, 09:38:53 AM »
Forced bracket size, as in your tournament must have this many entries? That's an awful idea.
Imposing a maximum is sensible however, and I'm warming up to the idea of a universal Entry Level limit of 24, however this lower limit for 3 tournaments may put people off of running that many, but then 2 just feels a little low.
3687
« on: October 11, 2013, 09:25:49 AM »
I think he was suggesting a maximum number, even so, I think 48 may be too high. I like the 32 limit, with a lower limit for the first. And these aren't per bracket, this should be made clear in a new ruleset, this is a total number - so for example your second tourney couldn't have 32-bot-brackets for all LW/MW/HW.
3688
« on: October 11, 2013, 09:13:57 AM »
I like that set, although I am hesitant about letting someone's first tournament be that large, as many don't realize the workload.
3689
« on: October 11, 2013, 09:06:51 AM »
Okay, we could completely reverse it and have no interest polls at all and completely leave it up to the host to see if they think it's viable to proceed, and then just have the topic approved and moved to signups like a Major League tournament.
It could also be possible to add a clause where if the tournament doesn't receive half of the bracket size the host decided, the host can cancel incurring no penalty or a lower penalty than usual.
Again these are just ideas, I'm by no means suggesting that these will be implemented, just looking for reactions...
3690
« on: October 11, 2013, 08:19:25 AM »
Or maybe restrictions on new hosts could be progressively lowered up until they hit their 3 completed tournaments?
For example Tourney 1 and 2 stay where they are (16/32 bots respectively, with a 3 month limit) and then Tourney 3 could have a 48 restriction with 3 months, or something. This would help ease hosts into the ever more popular multi-bracket tournaments being run.
I still think there needs to be some way of gauging interest - or even a rule that states if a tournament doesn't get all the entries it should, the bracket size should be reduced if viable (eg 7 entries to a 16 bot tournament -> an 8 bot bracket) to prevent the byebot filled examples previously mentioned.
3691
« on: October 10, 2013, 02:18:16 PM »
Yeah, I agree with speeding the process up (hence we need to ditch the periodic vote for something easier and more frequent) and also with the fact that we need enough restriction to stop tournaments going through that won't work/don't have interest - most suggestions would be quicker than the current system, we just need to agree on one.
3692
« on: October 10, 2013, 06:46:04 AM »
I agree, however there may be an issue with people taking a display tournament as a serious, official tournament - I'm not sure what could be done to differentiate the 'winner' of a DT from a real tournament winner.
3693
« on: October 10, 2013, 03:06:43 AM »
EDIT: And as another idea - what would people say about a +1rep or something after a successful tournament?
People already do that. If you want to, you can just do it yourself. I don't really think it needs to be a rule.
Oh okay smartypants, have you got any better ideas for encouraging people to run tournaments? Because that's what I'm asking for. It wouldn't be a 'rule' anyway, as I said, just encouragement.
3694
« on: October 09, 2013, 04:49:50 PM »
Putting this here cause this thread gets more traffic than the YTP thread.
I died at the Andy section, and also lold to hear my new home city in there just before too.
Thanks man. Didn't know you're from where Demolition Demon is from.
I'm not, but Marty and I live in Portsmouth right now :P
3695
« on: October 09, 2013, 04:31:04 PM »
Just to revive this, a quick thought.
Maybe, if possible, we could utilize a new section between Discussion and Signups under the name 'Polls', where the above poll thread could be put. When the host is ready to move onto signups, they can submit a Poll thread in the same way Discussion threads are currently done, at which point the rules are checked.
Major league hosts could bypass this system completely, possibly.
As a secondary idea, as I know Display Tournaments get a little overlooked, what would be people's thoughts on running a Display Tournament adding 1 (at maximum, even if you run 20) to your Tournament Hosting number
EDIT: And as another idea - what would people say about a +1rep or something after a successful tournament?
3696
« on: October 09, 2013, 04:27:26 PM »
Just dropping a quick reminder that this tournament has 27 days left until it expires - good luck :)
3697
« on: October 09, 2013, 04:26:07 PM »
Just dropping a quick reminder that this tournament has 27 days left until it expires - good luck :)
3698
« on: October 09, 2013, 03:40:55 PM »
Putting this here cause this thread gets more traffic than the YTP thread.
I died at the Andy section, and also lold to hear my new home city in there just before too.
3699
« on: October 06, 2013, 06:22:41 AM »
The way things are going, I'm willing to bet I could get this through signups and SBV before Craaig even makes his SBV thread. 
Delaying another month. You did this. 
3700
« on: October 02, 2013, 01:49:59 AM »
Does the spinning shell have to be horizontal, like Ziggo/Typhoon?
|
Show Posts