The thing I find useful about the vote is it gauges interest in the tournament - if any tournament goes through to signups and then isn't supported by the community, it'll end up lapsing and a possibly unnecessary black mark is left on their name.Yeah, I thought about that afterwards as well. I got nothing else to say about the rules though
Is the minor tournament host vote really needed? There isn't going much around in GTM right now and so on.
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.
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.
I don't know how many times I've seen Badnik (just an example) running tournaments, mods, AI packs and crap in Other Games all at once. I just feel that things would get in the way of each other.
Originally it wasn't a rule for Display tournaments.. the problem we found was people who got banned were using it as a loophole to run more tournaments.
Wow, I was just stating my opinion. Why does that get me downrepped.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.
IIRC Fotepx never got banned? And Sparkey could never AI in the first place XD
TBH I don't like the interest poll. While we've had a few tourney flops in the past (Wolfsbane's Twisted Metal tourney and Lightning S' two tourneys, where half the entries were byebots), we barely have enough tourneys now to justify the current poll, so while an interest poll could have worked well back when the minor league poll was introduced, I don't think it's a good idea now, as it just slows down tournaments even more.
Wow, I was just stating my opinion. Why does that get me downrepped.There is a difference between stating an opinion and being a dick about it.
TBH I don't like the interest poll. While we've had a few tourney flops in the past (Wolfsbane's Twisted Metal tourney and Lightning S' two tourneys, where half the entries were byebots)to be fair, his tourneys werent actually failures. those just suffered from a lack of entries.
How was I being a d*** about it?Wow, I was just stating my opinion. Why does that get me downrepped.There is a difference between stating an opinion and being a dick about it.
How was I being a d*** about it?
If you want to, you can just do it yourself
TBH I don't like the interest poll. While we've had a few tourney flops in the past (Wolfsbane's Twisted Metal tourney and Lightning S' two tourneys, where half the entries were byebots)to be fair, his tourneys werent actually failures. those just suffered from a lack of entries.
and really, the number of tourneys required to become major league should be reduced to 1 instead of 3 IMO. i dont see how 3 tourneys proves your worth as a host any more than 1 does. like it shows that you can at least AI, make a basic splash, use FRAPS/another screen recorder and then paste the matches onto youtube.
It should be the host's decision if they will lower the bracket size.
Joe, thats a good idea, but tourney 1 should be 24, 2 should be 32 and 3 should be 48
TBH I'll just put a limit on entries for tournament newcomers:
1st tourney-16 max
2nd- 32 max
3rd -48 max
and no limit from the fourth and so on. It's not like you can have 50 different entrants in a tourney anyways.
No minimum bracket size.
TBH I'll just put a limit on entries for tournament newcomers:
1st tourney-16 max
2nd- 32 max
3rd -48 max
and no limit from the fourth and so on. It's not like you can have 50 different entrants in a tourney anyways.
No minimum bracket size.
Minimum is another problem all together.. run 2x 4 robot tournaments and suddenly your allowed 48? :/
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.
But yeah, we should enforce a minimum tournament size: 8 entries. That's not hard to reach.
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.
Still seems complicated.
I'll think of a very simple but clean system...
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.
Yeah just to clarify:
How would i submit a tourney for approval?
Is the limit 3 months for all or just minor?
So what're the new and/or updated rules planned for Display section?
For Display, as long as the "no help/bots from anyone" rule is gone, I'm happy.
Get rid of the interest part?
tl;dr people need to enter things rather than just say they will and do nothing about it.
Thinking about reducing Major League Tournament Time to 6 months (for ones that start in the future, not gonna cut it down for current ones :P). What do people think?Why though? If I may ask.
Well, as has been suggested before, we could start timing tournaments from when signups end. I'd be tempted to drop Entry Level tournaments down to 2 months in this case and maybe Major to 4?That sounds pretty reasonable. :bigsmile:
Well, as has been suggested before, we could start timing tournaments from when signups end.I like this. This way, there could never be another original Mutations, where the host runs out of time simply because there aren't enough entries after three months.
If you did just 1 video a day for 10 months, that's what, 300 videos? Seems a bit much to me.uhhh but what if round robin? :dumb)
Okay.
How about Signups and Videos being timed separately.
Signups for both classes get a 3 Month limit - if this expires without moving forward, the tournament is cancelled and a 1 month ban is incurred, but there is no host score penalty.
Videos have a separate timing, Minor League gets 2 months for videos and Major League gets 4, which is extendable in certain circumstances (eg massive, like BattleBots). Ban for these lapsing will be the same as before, 3 months and a host point.
I agree, but there's no way to tell if someone hasn't got enough entries or if they're lying about not having enough entries and just don't want to proceed :PWell, people who sent in entries could complain.
I don't think the host should be banned if they don't get enough entries to move the tournament forward, personally.Literally what are you talking about.
I don't think the host should be banned if they don't get enough entries to move the tournament forward, personally.Literally what are you talking about.
There have been tournaments that recieved a grand total of 4 entries but have still gone through and finished their tournies, cases in point (https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=13652.0 (https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=13652.0) and https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=14291.0 (https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=14291.0)). There's no excuse not to finish a tourney because "hurf durf i dont have enough entries so i give up".
There have been tournaments that recieved a grand total of 4 entries but have still gone through and finished their tournies, cases in point (https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=13652.0 (https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=13652.0) and https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=14291.0 (https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=14291.0)). There's no excuse not to finish a tourney because "hurf durf i dont have enough entries so i give up".
When only 4 of the 16 or so who put that they would enter in the poll actually bother and send in last minute bots/re-entries despite signups being open for 1-2 weeks already, there is literally no point. It's demoralising.A 4 bot tourney is better than a no bot tourney.
what about the silly soul who decides to run an UHW tourney?
We know how those tend to go :P
You'd think after all this time we'd have someone "brave" enough to try this. Or have we?what about the silly soul who decides to run an UHW tourney?
We know how those tend to go :P
I'm still waiting on one of those.
You'd think after all this time we'd have someone "brave" enough to try this. Or have we?what about the silly soul who decides to run an UHW tourney?
We know how those tend to go :P
I'm still waiting on one of those.
Okay. To bring this back up, some new ideas.Make running time equal to ban time.
No changes to Minor League rules.
Major League running time reduced to 9 months, tournament ban if deadline lapses extended to a year.
Thoughts? It's pretty brutal but if people want to run big tournaments, they should deliver surely.
Damn lol that'd be ruthless but efficientOkay. To bring this back up, some new ideas.Make running time equal to ban time.
No changes to Minor League rules.
Major League running time reduced to 9 months, tournament ban if deadline lapses extended to a year.
Thoughts? It's pretty brutal but if people want to run big tournaments, they should deliver surely.
get rid of tourney rules forever
We've already got that kind of system in place, as 'conditional extensions' which are generally given week by week as long as a set quota of videos are posted.I'm thinking of situations where you'd gladly finish but couldn't do so even if you forewent food and sleep
Tournament Bailing Will NOT Be Accepted
Tournament Bailing will result in a temp ban from starting further competitions for 3 months from the moment your next Discussion topic is ready for signups.
You may not start another Discussion topic for 9 months after the expiry of your previous tournament, unless you complete the expired tournament after expiry (at which point the remainder of the 9 months is removed).
And your Hosting History will also be reduced by 1.
Major League Tournament hosting time has been reduced to 9 months for any tournament that goes into signups from now.
This is due to the fact people do not hold interest for a full year and it is unfair to make them wait so long.
With 0 Entry Level tournaments being run, and many Major League tournaments finding themselves dead/abandoned (see: RWS8(pre-yugitom)/RWS9, Hells Arena 2, Clash Cubes Anniversary), I propose we increase the criteria for becoming a Major League from hosting 3 tournaments to 4 or 5.so basically you are suggesting that we make it harder for new people to become major league hosts because of how people that are already major league hosts messed up (all those tournies you listed would have still been considered major league tournies under the new rules you are suggesting).
What about the other suggestion which you ignored? :Pi assume you are saying there would be a new league added if major league is increased, which is still pointless and unnecessary for such a small community.
I disagree, i think we should keep it as it is, joeblo and freeziez (iirc) disappeared, and jonzu and badnik were just being lazy, and if they keep on doing this they will lose their major league status anyway. I think it may discourage some people if we make it harder to become a major league host.I actually agree. I think it was just coincidental that these tournaments failed and it was the host's fault, not the difficulty of hosting a major league tournament itself.
I disagree, i think we should keep it as it is, joeblo and freeziez (iirc) disappeared, and jonzu and badnik were just being lazy, and if they keep on doing this they will lose their major league status anyway. I think it may discourage some people if we make it harder to become a major league host.
a few points:
-pinning is the main tactic for rammers/wammers, hammers and quite a bit of gutrippers. does the fair play rule bans them outright ? that seems unreasonable.
Rammers don't pin, they just ram people into walls. If they decided to stay and keep the opponent pressed up against the wall, I imagine there'd be no sport or fun in that at all.
-equally, hit and run should be a valid tactic for fast bots. isn't back-and-forth what rammers do ? (May not be exactly hit and run, though)
When I say hit and run, I suppose I mean more end game to secure a win (however, that may be tolerable) or constantly having small jabs at the opponent and quickly avoiding them for the rest of the match intentionally. Rammers hit and then reverse but then they come back for more, they don't run. A robot may hit the opposing robot and run around and try to find an opening, but avoiding the opponent for the entire match, in my opinion, is not a good display of sportsmanship and makes for a rubbish video.
Besides, hit and run has no point unless you are very fast and agile and your enemy isn't. also there are no ranged weapons, apparently, so it makes it even less worth. Not to mention that hit and run tactics will just let the opponent being rammed if you follow him closely.
-entrant liability seems quite harsh. besides i think if someone is always late, people will become aware of it and stop wanting him in tournaments, so it will be an unspoken rule.
I don't think it's harsh if someone is continues to halt progression of the entire tournament(s) due to their tardiness. Also, it's not a case of just avoiding people like that because, to be fair on entrants, tournament hosts must work on a 'first come, first served' basis, so anyone new to the forum wishing to start their own tournament won't know about their history of tardiness.
Hey, here's a dumb idea, maybe have a little "In Signups:" box on the homepage? Like between the Recent Posts and Who's Online boxes?
Hey, here's a dumb idea, maybe have a little "In Signups:" box on the homepage? Like between the Recent Posts and Who's Online boxes?That actually sounds pretty neat, although I don't think it's necessary.
Hey, here's a dumb idea, maybe have a little "In Signups:" box on the homepage? Like between the Recent Posts and Who's Online boxes?I think that's a really good idea, please put it in Trov
Hey, here's a dumb idea, maybe have a little "In Signups:" box on the homepage? Like between the Recent Posts and Who's Online boxes?I do think that would be nice, so people know what's currently happening, maybe also one for Tournaments that have started?
Offtopic: what happened to your avatar?image rotator kurt and me use got it's domain suspended for like a day and it needs to be reverified now.
As for the time limit, I'd personally rather go into the other direction of removing limits and instead asking people if the Tournament was still going on and then deciding if a thread should be locked/time limit given, think it just scares away members.
I didn't mean completely removing them, but hosts shouldn't feel stressed by time or not get a host point just because something was one or two days too late because of personal stuff that happend, the people that have been around here recently didn't look like ones that would never finish a tournament, however now that new members start to appear again, I think it's better to have the limit.As for the time limit, I'd personally rather go into the other direction of removing limits and instead asking people if the Tournament was still going on and then deciding if a thread should be locked/time limit given, think it just scares away members.
Not a good idea. Removing limits is removing any reason for the host to finish the tournament in a timely matter.
It kinda comes down to who you want to treat better. The hosts, or the many many members who enter. If you remove limits and tournaments don't finish in a timely matter the members who entered are honestly wronged. We have many hosts and the hosts are made aware they are doing this off their own back in accordance with the rules, they shouldn't be letting entrants down if they have agreed to host a tournament.
2 Week Technical Extensions can be granted on proof that the host has experienced technical issues while running the tournament.
Discretionary Conditional Extensions may also be granted, on proof that the tournament has been making progress closely previous to the deadline. This will mean you will have to upload at least 6 videos a week until the tournament is complete, and will not gain a Host Score point, however will mean you do not lose 1 from letting the deadline lapse.
We introduced a clause to allow conditional extensions depending on circumstances long ago to remove that sort of panic stress.True, I've read about this before, still think it would be better if a Tournament Host got a host point if everyone was ok with a little delay and if he did everything great otherwise/doesn't delay tournaments all the time, however I know it's a difficult decision between making sure that stuff goes right and making it as user friendly as possible, so I understand.2 Week Technical Extensions can be granted on proof that the host has experienced technical issues while running the tournament.
Discretionary Conditional Extensions may also be granted, on proof that the tournament has been making progress closely previous to the deadline. This will mean you will have to upload at least 6 videos a week until the tournament is complete, and will not gain a Host Score point, however will mean you do not lose 1 from letting the deadline lapse.
You must not edit any entry you receive unless it is a necessary addition, or edit, to their smartzones (wiring is, also, an obvious exception). Any and all edits to problematic entries MUST be left to the entrant. Any failure to not abide by this rule will result in all matches in which the bot took part in being redone (and any subsequent matches it affects) in order for the entry which was unjustly edited to be represented correctly. If the original entry is problematic and is against the rules of the tournament, the builder must be contacted and be given at least 24 hours to fix the issue, assuming they were not contacted before signups closed. If the builder does not respond or does not wish to edit their entry, the bot must be removed from the tournament and the tournament restarted. If a host breaks this rule and does nothing to remedy the situation, their thread will be locked and a hosting ban of 1 month will be applied. This rule is for both entry level and major league tournaments.
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)
Once signups start, the host will be given a grace period of 14 days before a 3 month time limit begins in order to complete their tournament. This grace period is also given in major league tournaments.
Its so weird seeing all these quotes from me when I didnt write any of that lolYeah, and it's also weird to see that new rule in place.
Major League Tournament Rules
No limits to amount of active tournaments at 1 time
What not to do list:
- Please don't start a new discussion topic before signing off.
3) If you cannot AI, do not start a thread until youhave found someone who is willing to AI for youlearn how to! The best place to ask for help is the General Tournament Discussion Thread.
A long overdue change to the tournament guide:I don't see the point of this. Is it just because of the host point?3) If you cannot AI, do not start a thread until youhave found someone who is willing to AI for youlearn how to! The best place to ask for help is the General Tournament Discussion Thread.
Major League Tournament RulesIf you didn't read about this when I brought up a page back, the reason this rule has been put in place is so that major league hosts don't have more time to do a tournament that is exactly the same as a minor league host's. Obviously, as stated, exceptions can be made, you would just have to ask if it's alright in the 'move to signups' pm.From the day your sign ups are approved you have 9 months to complete your tournament
From the day your topic is moved into signups, you will have 3 months to complete your tournament. However, if a major league host wishes to have more time to host their tournament (maximum of 9 months), they may apply for more time by pm'ing yugitom (https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?action=profile;u=6509). The amount of time they get allocated will be judged based on premise and intended size. For example, a tournament like this (https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=1672.0) would be allowed to run for 9 months, whilst a tournament like this (https://gametechmods.com/forums/index.php?topic=19385.0) would not be able to have any deadline extension.
Idea for you guys: how would you feel about getting rid of the 3 week grace period and extending tournament time limits from 3 months to 4 months? This would hopefully make things easier for staff to organize, give hosts an extra week, and make the system possibly less confusing.I don't see why all tournaments get basically the same time limits. Shouldn't a "beat the X" tournament get less time than an 8-bot, which gets less time than a 16 bot etc?
I've already talked with Thacker about it, and he seems pretty positive about it, so I'm wondering if anyone else has anything to add before it gets finalized.
All current tournament will also get a 1 week extension if the time limit is changed to make up for lost time.
Idea for you guys: how would you feel about getting rid of the 3 week grace period and extending tournament time limits from 3 months to 4 months? This would hopefully make things easier for staff to organize, give hosts an extra week, and make the system possibly less confusing.I don't see why all tournaments get basically the same time limits. Shouldn't a "beat the X" tournament get less time than an 8-bot, which gets less time than a 16 bot etc?
I've already talked with Thacker about it, and he seems pretty positive about it, so I'm wondering if anyone else has anything to add before it gets finalized.
All current tournament will also get a 1 week extension if the time limit is changed to make up for lost time.
It's just a base time limit, people can ask for more time if they need it.Idea for you guys: how would you feel about getting rid of the 3 week grace period and extending tournament time limits from 3 months to 4 months? This would hopefully make things easier for staff to organize, give hosts an extra week, and make the system possibly less confusing.I don't see why all tournaments get basically the same time limits. Shouldn't a "beat the X" tournament get less time than an 8-bot, which gets less time than a 16 bot etc?
I've already talked with Thacker about it, and he seems pretty positive about it, so I'm wondering if anyone else has anything to add before it gets finalized.
All current tournament will also get a 1 week extension if the time limit is changed to make up for lost time.
The whole ruling on Hosting more than 1 tournament has always confused me though...gotta prove yourself somehow before trying to do something bigger, thats all.
2. Because of this, host scores have been removed.I don't see a reason to get rid of them, it's kinda cool to have the score leaderboard.
Less work to do.2. Because of this, host scores have been removed.I don't see a reason to get rid of them, it's kinda cool to have the score leaderboard.
This. Also, how hard or time-consuming is it really to edit a simple list once a tournament finished?2. Because of this, host scores have been removed.I don't see a reason to get rid of them, it's kinda cool to have the score leaderboard.
I don't see a reason to get rid of them, it's kinda cool to have the score leaderboard.because geice and me don't care enough to update it and it hasn't been updated in like a month or two now :mrgreen:
This. Also, how hard or time-consuming is it really to edit a simple list once a tournament finished?You can make a topic and do it yourself then, as I said earlier.
If you wish to keep track of the number of tournaments people of host, go ahead. (Here's a list of the host scores before removal (https://pastebin.com/6XHCSESQ)