Intrest in team tournament ?

[MarcusAureliu#s]

 

This is more discussion thread, sign up here please

 

As due to corona i had some time to think lately and also there are many players in lobby, i was wondering wether it could be a good time to set up a team tournament.

I thought about a league system, to have a result reflecting real player strenght the best. As there might not be many 4-player teams there could be variable team sizes, and the teams would be reduced to the size of the smaller team, or various matches could be played. This would allow more flexibility in time ( there should be timeframes as large as possible anyway). Ofcourse there would be a mechanism to have all team members participating. Still larger team battles could be encouraged by higher reward for example: win 4 vs 4 = 4 points, while win 2 vs 2 = 2 points for team. For balancing there could be maximum average ratings (with exemptions for obviously underrated players like faction02.  I dont believe making teams artificially would raise intrest in participating, and personal sympathy might allow more advanced team strategies which would add to the entertainment value and the level. It would highlight a different set of skills also like communication and encourages beeing a team player.  Also banning civs and making rules to choose different civs within team or both teams even ? might be a enriching concept. Also there could be 2 leagues of lower and higher level including something like a promotion system ( depending on the amount of teams. I would enjoy to organize something along those lines, but i want to see wether there is intrest first and encourage further discussion on the matter.  There could also be a thread to find teammmates in forum. Obviously the succes of such an endevour also greatly depends on promotion and people encouraging other people .

For now i propose the following rules, which are open for discussion. For making it  more easy to find teams and let friends play with each other i have tried to make the tier system not too complicated, but you may suggest otherwise.  I will make a more nice graphic if the version is final

A. Team making rules.

§1. You must register a team of at least 2 but optimally 4 players by teamname and players.

Participating with fake accounts is not allowed and causes disqualification of the player

aswell as loss of all point of the team acquired from games involving the player in question

 

§2. I.Your team must have not more than one tier 1 player and two tier 1 and 2 players or 3

tier 2 players

II.Your team can not consist entirely of tier 1 and 2 players

 

§3. During the tournament you can add players to your team by official announcement and without

violation of §§ 1,2. Also players can leave, but not join another team during the tournament.

 

B. Points

§4. For a victory a team gets 3 points.

1. 1. For each player less then 4 the team gets 1 point less ( 3 Players = 3-1 = 2 points)

   2. 2 Players is the minimum Team size

 

C. Matchmaking

§5. The games take place at Sunday19.00 CET. You can agree with the weekly

opponent to an alternative time. The time has to be posted to forum and both

teams have to show agreement.

 

§6. If a team shows up with less then 4 players the other team must choose players amongst

their team to play a 2v2 or 3v3. The team that showed up with all 4 players does not

get reduced points as described in §4.I. ( Best to provide screenshot in case of argument).

If a team is registered with less then 4 players the opponent team is only required to show

up with a matching number of players.

 

§7. Each team can ban 2 civs for the enemy team. All team members must chose different civs.

Teammates are allowed as specs. Otherwise no specs are allowed. Exemptions can me made

for the purpose of streaming or recording the match for commentary

 

D. Tournament System

§8. The tournament has the format of a league System. Each team plays against each other

team once. The team with the most points wins.

 

E. Gameplay Rules

 

§9. The matches are played on: (balanced) mainland, lake, river, continent, fortress, Latium (XXX)

The map size is medium for 2v2 matches, otherwise normal. Starting ressources are set to low

 

§10. Hero dancing/luring units as well as formation dancing is not allowed. Dancing single

units during fight is also not allowed. Dancing in this context means to make focussed

units move extensivly by spamclicking or other methods to avoid getting hit. A violation

of that rule means victory for the opponent team.

 

F. After the game

 

§11. The winning teams reports the results to the forum, by stating who won, how many players

have participated on each team and the missing players of each team.

 

§12. Tier list:

Tier 1 players are: borg, ValihrAnt, Feldfeld, (Stockfish?)

Tier 2 players are: chrstgtr, jc, fpre, Phyzic. Boudica, Rauls, Unknown Player, ffm, nani, 90

Decger, faction02, Schweinepriester, wendy, or players of clearly at least

similiar play strenght. ( make suggestions for this list if you want, but dont

extend it too much)

Edited May 16, 2020 by MarcusAureliu#s
New ideas

[MarcusAureliu#s]

@HMS-Surprise @Stockfish @ValihrAnt @Feldfeld @borg- @JC (naval supremacist) @badosu @kizitom @ffffffff @PhyZik @Dakara@Dizaka@faction02@carthage@Pudim@Boudica@chrstgtr@randomid@rauls @ffm @go2die @elexis@Wendy22@90 (2 char. names unallowed..)@Unknown_Player and all others

[Lord_Commander]

I like the concept
 

specially of different civs for different players 

We can also have two leagues for 2v2 teams n 4v4 teams 

 

[MarcusAureliu#s]

I think the main challenge will be to finde a good way to schedule games

[badosu]

I'm in!

Applications open to join my team: "Embrace Nubness"

I think tiers might be applicable y, my suggestion:

Tier 1: Feld, Vali, Borg
Tier 2: Stock, Phyzic, chrstgtr, Rauls, fpre, .. (others?)
Tier 3: Boudica, faction02, Edwarf, Christmas, Saidrdz, etc..
Tier 4: Dizaka, andy_beauty, xtreme22, etc...
Tier 5: Woodpecker, ross_bolobon, etc...
And so on...

Tier 1: 5 points, Tier 2: 3 points, Tier 3: 2 points, Tier 4: 1 point, Tier 5: 0 points?

Each team can only have max 10 points. So for example you could have Feld and Vali same team but then have two players from tier 5. Tier determination might be controversial though... (above is just an idea, don't be offended folks)

Interesting team combinations:

1: Boudica, faction02, Stock, Phyzic
2: Feld, Saidrdz, andy_beauty, Dizaka
3: fpre, Edwarf, chrstgtr, Christmas

Seems balanced to me (or maybe i'm nub balancer XD)

Edited May 12, 2020 by badosu

[Issh]

4 minutes ago, badosu said:

I'm in!

Applications open to join my team: "Embrace Nubness"

I think tiers might be applicable y, my suggestion:

Tier 1: Feld, Vali, Borg
Tier 2: Stock, Phyzic, chrstgtr, Rauls, fpre, .. (others?)
Tier 3: Boudica, faction02, Edwarf, Christmas, etc..
And so on...

Tier 1: 5 points, Tier 2: 3 points, Tier 3: 2 points, Tier 4: 1 point, Tier 5: 0 points?

Each team can only have max 10 points. So for example you could have Feld and Vali same team but then have two players from tier 5. Tier determination might be controversial though... (above is just an idea, don't be offended folks)

eae op team name

[MarcusAureliu#s]

1 hour ago, badosu said:

I'm in!

Applications open to join my team: "Embrace Nubness"

I think tiers might be applicable y, my suggestion:

Tier 1: Feld, Vali, Borg
Tier 2: Stock, Phyzic, chrstgtr, Rauls, fpre, .. (others?)
Tier 3: Boudica, faction02, Edwarf, Christmas, Saidrdz, etc..
Tier 4: Dizaka, andy_beauty, xtreme22, etc...
Tier 5: Woodpecker, ross_bolobon, etc...
And so on...

Tier 1: 5 points, Tier 2: 3 points, Tier 3: 2 points, Tier 4: 1 point, Tier 5: 0 points?

Each team can only have max 10 points. So for example you could have Feld and Vali same team but then have two players from tier 5. Tier determination might be controversial though... (above is just an idea, don't be offended folks)

Interesting team combinations:

1: Boudica, faction02, Stock, Phyzic
2: Feld, Saidrdz, andy_beauty, Dizaka
3: fpre, Edwarf, chrstgtr, Christmas

Seems balanced to me (or maybe i'm nub balancer XD)

I like that idea, as it allows good balance and relativly free team choice

[MarcusAureliu#s]

1 hour ago, PhyZik said:

My Proposal for 4vs4 rankings:

Category A (+/=/-): FeldFeld(+), ValihrAnt(=), borg-(-)

Category B (++/+/=/-/--): Stockfish(++), Camelius(++), chrstgtr(+), fpre(-), PhyZic(=), faction02(=), Boudica(=, but rusty), Wendy(-), Rauls(-), JC(+)

Category C (++/+/-/--): Edwarf(++), Dizaka(+), xtreme22(++), Lodbrog(=), Issh(=), Unknown_Player(++), bbleft(+), Pudim(+), randomid(++), ffm(+), kizitom(++), badosu(+), Palaiogos(=), Dakara(+), go2die(-), MarcAurelius(=), Obi(=),

Category D: ...?

 

Only some examples. You can name players, I will rate them then.

you might be the judge in case of tier dispute if you pledge to be just

[Lord_Commander]

We need two moderators who know all players 

 

and these will not compete in any game or be part of any team

 

they will decide on players category 

[Dakara]

 

We can try, if there are some imbalances it's ok

I trust in phyzik

 

 

[Stockfish]

9 hours ago, PhyZik said:

Mi propuesta para el ranking 4vs4:

Categoría A (+ / = / -): FeldFeld (+), ValihrAnt (=), borg - (-)

Categoría B (++ / + / = / - / -): Stockfish (++), Camelius (++), chrstgtr (+), fpre (-), PhyZic (=), faction02 (=), Boudica ( =, pero oxidado), Wendy (-), Rauls (-), JC (+)

Categoría C (++ / + / = / - / -): Edwarf (++), Dizaka (+), xtreme22 (++), Lodbrog (=), Issh (=), Unknown_Player (++), bbleft (+), Pudim (+), randomid (++), ffm (+), kizitom (++), badosu (+), Palaiogos (=), Dakara (+), go2die (-), MarcAurelius (=) , Obi (=), Wollolow (-)

Categoría D: ...?

 

Solo algunos ejemplos. Puedes nombrar jugadores, los calificaré entonces.

Hi PhyZik, what you mean with ++ = ...??

I like the idea.

[nani]

Im in

[borg-]

im in

 

[MarcusAureliu#s]

10 hours ago, Stockfish said:

Hi PhyZik, what you mean with ++ = ...??

I like the idea.

What do you suggest for team making rules ? How many players of category A, B, C, D would be allowed to be inside a team ?

[MarcusAureliu#s]

Also i think we can try the more advanced tier system first, and open for registration, and if we see there are too many difficulties to get a decent number of teams participating we could adapt the rules. For example we could say : not more then 1 player of category 1 in team, not more than 2 players category 1, 2 not more than 3 players 1,2,3, not more than 2 players of category 2 and not more than 3 players of category 3. Also a team can not entirely consist of tier 1 and 2 players  tier 1 = A here and so on

[badosu]

Any issues with 5-tier point system? I think it provides a decent solution

Edited May 14, 2020 by badosu

[vinme]

ok im @#$% ed up rn ill be fine eventually i guess but not today rn im barely absorbing information so bear with me pweasu i missed some stuff forsure. i think its  a great idea to do team tournaments, option of choosing different tgs (2v2 3v3) if some player is absent(which will happen several times for sure) seems like it adds more wiggle room before the @#$% hits the fan but it does fuc over the players who wont get to play becuz of this worthy sacrifice tho atleat the tournament goes on.do different total point allowance per tg type so if 4v4 total 10 points allowed per team then 2v2 total 5 id say thats an ez solution. the core part of your idea with the rating system to make the teams evenly matched for more challenging interesting matches is really really good.if not 4v4 make team pick their players for that round AFTER civs are banned so doenst seem unfair to kick random players but more based on who plays avalible civs best with rome iber and tier 1 civs(from valis video) being chosen most often (altho wont be many options usually id assume with the points system ud just wanna fill it up).perhaps raise banned civs up to 3 to make things even more interesting altho maybe not.

 

19 hours ago, Lord_Commander said:

We need two moderators who know all players 

 

and these will not compete in any game or be part of any team

 

they will decide on players category 

lets not waste random players times and lets not allow them (possibly another) job that they dont get paid for.(communism is evil,it breeds corruption as it deservedly should(stupid commies get what they fucing deserve),absolute authority or anything that gives any advantage in power/status to people based on some rough sketch that the general population would find appealing without detailed reasoning on as many things as possible attracts parasites with inferiority complexes charity is fundamentally immoral insofar as you are ignoring the laws of human nature and ignoring reality is delusion delusion causes sickest awful things. just saying its an immoral way to think).its not necessary to have ppl rated by @PhyZik either ->_-> or is it @PhyZic. anyway dictatorship with phyzix is not good at all (altho arguably a dictatorial society is the theoretically only perfect one but solely dependent on who is the dictator so dont think im dissing dictatorships).im getting off point..ill make a thread with a system in place that feeds upon itself for electing judges and judging players to give them "their V(inme)rating aka true rating.i require no acceptance right now for it as when i do it you will see its design and all come on board .phyzir's extreme accuracy system is unnecessarily wierdly designed (im not even gonna mention the players balance in there -_-) see my plan on forum when i upload it ill call it "Vrating true player rating revealing system" or something with "Vrating" in it itll be classifying players based on actual rating(example 1300,1400 ect) not some wierd new language  then you can decide what to do with that it should be really useful for these things since rating can often but not usually be inaccurately depicting players skill level.

 

VERY IMPORTANT:

 

On 5/12/2020 at 4:40 AM, MarcusAureliu#s said:

The games take place at Sunday19.00 CET. You can agree with the weekly opponent to an alternative time.

 

its good to be using an universal(or any specified) time that you already set but i still recommend really putting in effort into this part.most important thing you must do is make sure to minimize issues getting in the way of the matches being completed every round. by 19:00 what do you mean? specifically then everyone has to play or agree otherwise so an excuse to ban both teams if they cant agree as ull say "well u shouldve played at 19:00? thats not a good way to do it as thats a completely worthless thing to mention as its 1 specific time that id guess most(like 90% maybe even) teams wont even be compatible with and players will be signing up in hopes of setting their own time then players will have to be dealing with the same old issue of arranging the games thats already a supreme @#$% show with 1v1 tournaments as time  zones(sleep), work ect(even with corona many have stuff to do) most players have less than 6-8 hours of optional play time available a day and theres a great chance that those times dont overlap for plenty of players IN 1V1's let alone in tgs where if you were to go with your plan you'd create a logistics @#$% show imagine at least 4 players have to agree on a same time now not 2 so its 6 times as hard as hard for 2v2 as it is for a 1v1 let alone more.1 week WILL NOT be enough for this idk what will anyway bad idea period. im assuming most teams wont be able to do any 4v4s or 3v3s maybe some 2v2s might work but tournament would be ruined youd just be rewarding teams with players with more free time and better time zones as they can get more points(0ad tournament? more like tournament for most free time and thats why as i wrote on stockfishes rant "i blame stockfish" altho im assuming highly incoherently(sry) from what i recall and i might not remember well (my past self prob knew better so trust that source over this(correction..i re read my rant and i dont think i wrote even half of what i remember wanting to write in there and rest was very incoherent)).

TLDR: you have 2 options to manage this from what i recall 

option 1: set a time bracket 6 hours or less(yes many wont make it but make another one opposite from this one so others can play). preferably based on a timezone out of where most 0ad players are from and add several requirements for application for the tournament that i will list below.lets say you do 6 hour open time bracket tournament say 2pm-8pm window. now this is a great method because it also reduces the total amount of days you need per round.you wont need 1 whole week to complete the rounds. 

how id set the conditions as an example:

condition :THE TEAM must have free available time of at least 3 hours per day and at least 12 hours total sum of time in the 3 days within this time bracket. for example some team might have 2-5pm for 2 days and 2-8pm for 1 day total 12 at least 3 per day.

you will match up teams based on their time availability.very unlikely that there will be teams you cant match up if there is 2 players you cant match up then you can improvise by asking people on forums for flexibility with time(ofc more you raise the conditions less likely it is for some teams to not get matched up)but extremely unlikely with my conditions above.also i just realized since the teams are evened out by your great points idea you dont even have to match them up yourself! this is great you can just let teams find opponents to match up with this way no work for you they will find their opponents till everyone available goes away.yes it wont be perfect with ppl having preferences to fight their nemesis..es and many players with a lot of available time who shouldve matched with someone who only has time they can match up with(very unlikely this happens like 1% maybe) will choose some other team. but heres where the improvising comes in if this happens youll have to manually figure out a way to fit them in maybe change matchups if that helps ask for teams if they have some extra time available but since even amount of teams will have no opponent(prob 2)  consider disqualifying them if they cant arrange a game.(yes its unfair because its based on luck but its extraordinarily unlikely that they first get left out and then cant find a matchup even outside their stated hours for 6 total days as youll give them an option to find time to matchup even during round 2 as long as the winner can matchup with the second round available unmatched enemys hours on the last day enemy has privliges tho and his hours have to be used or the other team is disqualified ofc enemy can be polite and try to be more flexible. 1 day matchup/rest day after every round btw.

if the team later on refuses to play within the time bracket they have offered they lose the round automatically ofc if both teams wanna play on different times of both of their avalible time for some wierd reason you flip a coin for them.

you repeat this for every round. this option is good for quick tournaments but has mild flaws and risks that it makes up for with simplicity and fast paced system.

option 2:set a time bracket 12 hours or so and then 

make teams have like 2 hours free time within 14 hours each day(dont make them specify on the bracket like 6-8 or somehthing jsut tell them that the amount has to be within the bracket) with total of average 3 hours per day for 2 weeks or something like that so you know they have free timeand over 8 hours a day wont count lets say altho im assuming most matchups wont happen with times overlaping . then have a long @#$% matchup time maybe week and a half where everyone agrees on a matchup of round 1 and all other theoretical rounds so no one is left behind.in this option everyone must agree with every future opponent. easier with your evening out system as with 1v1 it wouldnt be fair to allow players to choose each other as many good players can choose weaker players to advance more easily ect with 1v1 i would allow players who couldnt agree even after trying hard to reenter the random shuffle given enough others are in it for randomness so they roll someone else.but with your system it works tho. so if team 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 are in a  tournament  with 1 2 matched up 3 4 matched up 5 6 matched up and 8 7 matched up for round 1 they all have to agree with 1 other matched up pair and set a time and same with every other future round as well so lets say 3 4 guys agree with 5 6 guys with 3 agreeing with 5 ,6 and so on so literally all rounds  4 for 16 teams  3 for 8 teams  ect will be filled in so there is literally no way in this method for things to go wrong after the tournament begins. things go wrong by ppl never agreeing fully as there is so much to plan and many will have not alot of time but eventually within week and a half hopefully it completely maps out solid and everything will be set.

option 2 gives advantage in making larger time bracket flexibility you can even remove mandatory time availability per day but i dont recommend,total time needed to gather players and then start is much harder here because of lax rules but with guaranteed map of everything it wont have any issues whatsoever when it starts.

much slower but much more secure and a lot more players can get in it as there arent as many conditions as in option 1.maybe good for huge tournaments with 64+ players as more room for error in those and you wont wanna resort to pausing the tournament for players to catch up ect.

also if you have lets say odd number of teams in finals like you dont wanna do a factor of 2 amount of games you can figure stuff out with odd final numbers you get like with 20,26 ect where you might get 3,5 players just make everyone play 2 other players(or teams).for example with 5 teams draw is extremely unlikely with everyone getting 1 point.if it happens just repeat again. more likely is only 1 getting 2 points or 2 getting 2 points.either it ends in 1 round or you make the 2 2 pointers play eachother.if this is confusing draw a circle and put 5 dots on it then put arrows connecting adjacent dots so you see who plays who. then put 1 2 or 0 on one dot and see what possibilities you can fill in for the rest. very very unlikely for this to draw but if it does no biggie just re.

 

On 5/12/2020 at 4:40 AM, MarcusAureliu#s said:

Teammates are allowed as specs. Otherwise no specs are allowed. Exemptions can me made

for the purpose of streaming or recording the match for commentary

teammates shouldn't be allowed to spec for obvious security reasons.preferably nobody should spec but if both teams agree to let someone spec then let them spec whats the problem? ofc even if 1 player wants spec(s) out for whatever reason be it lag,annoying messages or mere existence of someone watching then specs should be kicked.

 

On 5/12/2020 at 4:40 AM, MarcusAureliu#s said:

§9. The matches are played on: (balanced) mainland, lake, river, continent, fortress, Latium (XXX)

 

so who decides which it is? im really hoping your not planning on making each matchup 5 games. maybe let each team pick 1 if your gonna have more than 1 game.both can pick same map then it goes twice.or just have 1 game per matchup id recommend to make things simpler.or even 1 different map per round.

 

 

 

 

 

if anyone wants to give me a payment for writing this it would give me an incentive to do more stuff like this.

bitcoin: bc1qr5kl85x0d6cu30ax7l4h09nlp7zv9dzcceggcu

monero: 8AhJ5i8kq9RBoJqvtDbgbibWypw652Adg9bghGgxm4D48JVZaU4zCsvjQ3N7DFn28X84Y3icPCrXCLxBbqPpGGqYEfTMPPY

every dollars worth gives me 1 more can of coconut milk .i'm drinking too much of that stuff each one has 250 calories.i drink 2 cans a day average

every 4 dollars worth gives me 4 dollars.

every 10 dollars gives me 1 600 gram steak cooked either rare or medium rare with some garlic butter maybe def with mashed potatoes or spinach or some side like that and eggs if i'm still hungry after that

don"t send more than that because i don't know what to do with it and you'll only stress me out with the extra responsibility.more stress>less new stuff so don't do it if you want me to do more of these.

 

 

[vinme]

its very clear.as short as possible given the info.

[soshanko]

I am IN

 

[vinme]

ok its way clearer than my last post. but i did well.

[soshanko]

make a country vs country tourna ment too

 

[MarcusAureliu#s]

1 hour ago, badosu said:

Any issues with 5-tier point system? I think it provides a decent solution

I see the issue that it makes team finding to complicated  and it needs extra rules for  3 player teams and so on. If not all the teams have the exact same strength i dont see a huge problem. Its basically that way in every sports league. As long as some level of competitiveness is given and there are some close matches its fine in my opinion.

[vinme]

@Marcus Aurelius not rly complicated. half the players half the points third the players third the points just have to make max for 4v4 something that divides by 3 and 2 like 12 . so in 4v4 12 is limit , in 3v3 8 in 2v2 6 ez.please dont give up on even teams idea itll be great and make things really interesting with every match being balanced.

[MarcusAureliu#s]

1 hour ago, vinme said:

ok im @#$% ed up rn ill be fine eventually i guess but not today rn im barely absorbing information so bear with me pweasu i missed some stuff forsure. i think its  a great idea to do team tournaments, option of choosing different tgs (2v2 3v3) if some player is absent(which will happen several times for sure) seems like it adds more wiggle room before the @#$% hits the fan but it does fuc over the players who wont get to play becuz of this worthy sacrifice tho atleat the tournament goes on.do different total point allowance per tg type so if 4v4 total 10 points allowed per team then 2v2 total 5 id say thats an ez solution. the core part of your idea with the rating system to make the teams evenly matched for more challenging interesting matches is really really good.if not 4v4 make team pick their players for that round AFTER civs are banned so doenst seem unfair to kick random players but more based on who plays avalible civs best with rome iber and tier 1 civs(from valis video) being chosen most often (altho wont be many options usually id assume with the points system ud just wanna fill it up).perhaps raise banned civs up to 3 to make things even more interesting altho maybe not.

 

lets not waste random players times and lets not allow them (possibly another) job that they dont get paid for.(communism is evil,it breeds corruption as it deservedly should(stupid commies get what they fucing deserve),absolute authority or anything that gives any advantage in power/status to people based on some rough sketch that the general population would find appealing without detailed reasoning on as many things as possible attracts parasites with inferiority complexes charity is fundamentally immoral insofar as you are ignoring the laws of human nature and ignoring reality is delusion delusion causes sickest awful things. just saying its an immoral way to think).its not necessary to have ppl rated by @PhyZik either ->_-> or is it @PhyZic. anyway dictatorship with phyzix is not good at all (altho arguably a dictatorial society is the theoretically only perfect one but solely dependent on who is the dictator so dont think im dissing dictatorships).im getting off point..ill make a thread with a system in place that feeds upon itself for electing judges and judging players to give them "their V(inme)rating aka true rating.i require no acceptance right now for it as when i do it you will see its design and all come on board .phyzir's extreme accuracy system is unnecessarily wierdly designed (im not even gonna mention the players balance in there -_-) see my plan on forum when i upload it ill call it "Vrating true player rating revealing system" or something with "Vrating" in it itll be classifying players based on actual rating(example 1300,1400 ect) not some wierd new language  then you can decide what to do with that it should be really useful for these things since rating can often but not usually be inaccurately depicting players skill level.

 

VERY IMPORTANT:

 

its good to be using an universal(or any specified) time that you already set but i still recommend really putting in effort into this part.most important thing you must do is make sure to minimize issues getting in the way of the matches being completed every round. by 19:00 what do you mean? specifically then everyone has to play or agree otherwise so an excuse to ban both teams if they cant agree as ull say "well u shouldve played at 19:00? thats not a good way to do it as thats a completely worthless thing to mention as its 1 specific time that id guess most(like 90% maybe even) teams wont even be compatible with and players will be signing up in hopes of setting their own time then players will have to be dealing with the same old issue of arranging the games thats already a supreme @#$% show with 1v1 tournaments as time  zones(sleep), work ect(even with corona many have stuff to do) most players have less than 6-8 hours of optional play time available a day and theres a great chance that those times dont overlap for plenty of players IN 1V1's let alone in tgs where if you were to go with your plan you'd create a logistics @#$% show imagine at least 4 players have to agree on a same time now not 2 so its 6 times as hard as hard for 2v2 as it is for a 1v1 let alone more.1 week WILL NOT be enough for this idk what will anyway bad idea period. im assuming most teams wont be able to do any 4v4s or 3v3s maybe some 2v2s might work but tournament would be ruined youd just be rewarding teams with players with more free time and better time zones as they can get more points(0ad tournament? more like tournament for most free time and thats why as i wrote on stockfishes rant "i blame stockfish" altho im assuming highly incoherently(sry) from what i recall and i might not remember well (my past self prob knew better so trust that source over this(correction..i re read my rant and i dont think i wrote even half of what i remember wanting to write in there and rest was very incoherent)).

TLDR: you have 2 options to manage this from what i recall 

option 1: set a time bracket 6 hours or less(yes many wont make it but make another one opposite from this one so others can play). preferably based on a timezone out of where most 0ad players are from and add several requirements for application for the tournament that i will list below.lets say you do 6 hour open time bracket tournament say 2pm-8pm window. now this is a great method because it also reduces the total amount of days you need per round.you wont need 1 whole week to complete the rounds. 

how id set the conditions as an example:

condition :THE TEAM must have free available time of at least 3 hours per day and at least 12 hours total sum of time in the 3 days within this time bracket. for example some team might have 2-5pm for 2 days and 2-8pm for 1 day total 12 at least 3 per day.

you will match up teams based on their time availability.very unlikely that there will be teams you cant match up if there is 2 players you cant match up then you can improvise by asking people on forums for flexibility with time(ofc more you raise the conditions less likely it is for some teams to not get matched up)but extremely unlikely with my conditions above.also i just realized since the teams are evened out by your great points idea you dont even have to match them up yourself! this is great you can just let teams find opponents to match up with this way no work for you they will find their opponents till everyone available goes away.yes it wont be perfect with ppl having preferences to fight their nemesis..es and many players with a lot of available time who shouldve matched with someone who only has time they can match up with(very unlikely this happens like 1% maybe) will choose some other team. but heres where the improvising comes in if this happens youll have to manually figure out a way to fit them in maybe change matchups if that helps ask for teams if they have some extra time available but since even amount of teams will have no opponent(prob 2)  consider disqualifying them if they cant arrange a game.(yes its unfair because its based on luck but its extraordinarily unlikely that they first get left out and then cant find a matchup even outside their stated hours for 6 total days as youll give them an option to find time to matchup even during round 2 as long as the winner can matchup with the second round available unmatched enemys hours on the last day enemy has privliges tho and his hours have to be used or the other team is disqualified ofc enemy can be polite and try to be more flexible. 1 day matchup/rest day after every round btw.

if the team later on refuses to play within the time bracket they have offered they lose the round automatically ofc if both teams wanna play on different times of both of their avalible time for some wierd reason you flip a coin for them.

you repeat this for every round. this option is good for quick tournaments but has mild flaws and risks that it makes up for with simplicity and fast paced system.

option 2:set a time bracket 12 hours or so and then 

make teams have like 2 hours free time within 14 hours each day(dont make them specify on the bracket like 6-8 or somehthing jsut tell them that the amount has to be within the bracket) with total of average 3 hours per day for 2 weeks or something like that so you know they have free timeand over 8 hours a day wont count lets say altho im assuming most matchups wont happen with times overlaping . then have a long @#$% matchup time maybe week and a half where everyone agrees on a matchup of round 1 and all other theoretical rounds so no one is left behind.in this option everyone must agree with every future opponent. easier with your evening out system as with 1v1 it wouldnt be fair to allow players to choose each other as many good players can choose weaker players to advance more easily ect with 1v1 i would allow players who couldnt agree even after trying hard to reenter the random shuffle given enough others are in it for randomness so they roll someone else.but with your system it works tho. so if team 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 are in a  tournament  with 1 2 matched up 3 4 matched up 5 6 matched up and 8 7 matched up for round 1 they all have to agree with 1 other matched up pair and set a time and same with every other future round as well so lets say 3 4 guys agree with 5 6 guys with 3 agreeing with 5 ,6 and so on so literally all rounds  4 for 16 teams  3 for 8 teams  ect will be filled in so there is literally no way in this method for things to go wrong after the tournament begins. things go wrong by ppl never agreeing fully as there is so much to plan and many will have not alot of time but eventually within week and a half hopefully it completely maps out solid and everything will be set.

option 2 gives advantage in making larger time bracket flexibility you can even remove mandatory time availability per day but i dont recommend,total time needed to gather players and then start is much harder here because of lax rules but with guaranteed map of everything it wont have any issues whatsoever when it starts.

much slower but much more secure and a lot more players can get in it as there arent as many conditions as in option 1.maybe good for huge tournaments with 64+ players as more room for error in those and you wont wanna resort to pausing the tournament for players to catch up ect.

also if you have lets say odd number of teams in finals like you dont wanna do a factor of 2 amount of games you can figure stuff out with odd final numbers you get like with 20,26 ect where you might get 3,5 players just make everyone play 2 other players(or teams).for example with 5 teams draw is extremely unlikely with everyone getting 1 point.if it happens just repeat again. more likely is only 1 getting 2 points or 2 getting 2 points.either it ends in 1 round or you make the 2 2 pointers play eachother.if this is confusing draw a circle and put 5 dots on it then put arrows connecting adjacent dots so you see who plays who. then put 1 2 or 0 on one dot and see what possibilities you can fill in for the rest. very very unlikely for this to draw but if it does no biggie just re.

 

teammates shouldn't be allowed to spec for obvious security reasons.preferably nobody should spec but if both teams agree to let someone spec then let them spec whats the problem? ofc even if 1 player wants spec(s) out for whatever reason be it lag,annoying messages or mere existence of someone watching then specs should be kicked.

 

so who decides which it is? im really hoping your not planning on making each matchup 5 games. maybe let each team pick 1 if your gonna have more than 1 game.both can pick same map then it goes twice.or just have 1 game per matchup id recommend to make things simpler.or even 1 different map per round.

 

 

 

 

 

if anyone wants to give me a payment for writing this it would give me an incentive to do more stuff like this.

bitcoin: bc1qr5kl85x0d6cu30ax7l4h09nlp7zv9dzcceggcu

monero: 8AhJ5i8kq9RBoJqvtDbgbibWypw652Adg9bghGgxm4D48JVZaU4zCsvjQ3N7DFn28X84Y3icPCrXCLxBbqPpGGqYEfTMPPY

every dollars worth gives me 1 more can of coconut milk .i'm drinking too much of that stuff each one has 250 calories.i drink 2 cans a day average

every 4 dollars worth gives me 4 dollars.

every 10 dollars gives me 1 600 gram steak cooked either rare or medium rare with some garlic butter maybe def with mashed potatoes or spinach or some side like that and eggs if i'm still hungry after that

don"t send more than that because i don't know what to do with it and you'll only stress me out with the extra responsibility.more stress>less new stuff so don't do it if you want me to do more of these.

 

 

Thanks for putting in all the thought. Every player who is willing to get involved in setting tiers is welcome to join Phyzic in doing so. It is good though to have a authority on this to prevent endless arguments.

For the issue of finding time i had the following concern doing something like you proposed: If you give a large timeframe and every team has to select like 2 hours within it is rather unlikely at some point that the time frames matches the opponents, same as when you define time zones ( as each team has to play against each team) and it will be alot of work to organize it that way. I chose 19.00 CET Sunday bc it was the time when Sunday Pro Games took place, and also Sunday is when most people are free. Also it kinda sucks to wait like 3 hours for the opponent team to show up. It also serves the purpose of not punishing the teams that actually have time, but their opponent cant find any time frame. I see endless arguments incoming without a basic rule. I admit that making the individual agreement work involves good will by all teams and a competitive mindset of players to find a solution that provides the biggest game. Maybe we could encourage using tools like doodle for finding out what is the best time for both teams. I thought about punishing both teams for playing a 2v2 to encourage finding a compromise  but it seems a bit unfair for the larger team members who freed up time to be able to play when other team players just dont show up. Also it encourages 4 player teams.

Edited May 14, 2020 by MarcusAureliu#s

[MarcusAureliu#s]

17 minutes ago, vinme said:

@Marcus Aurelius not rly complicated. half the players half the points third the players third the points just have to make max for 4v4 something that divides by 3 and 2 like 12 . so in 4v4 12 is limit , in 3v3 8 in 2v2 6 ez.please dont give up on even teams idea itll be great and make things really interesting with every match being balanced.

Right now we have 3 tiers and the system is kinda the same, wheter with points or player limits. I think with 4 tiers it will get even more difficult to classifie players as there will be many, maybe also relatively new players. Also i dont really see the point in  limiting tier 4 players as most players who can play on somewhat competitive level and are intrested to join the tournament will be like tier 4 anyway i guess