• Announcements

    • rei

      Battle of the Anime Characters   02/10/17

      THE BATTLE OF THE ANIME CHARACTERS HAS BEGUN   Find it here http://duelistgroundz.com/index.php?/forum/615-battle-of-the-anime-x/
vig=scum

On optimal tournament structure

14 posts in this topic

So as I've been talking to Frogman about optimal tournament structures, talking about how double elim is probably better than most structures, I had some ideas such as:



- Skill vs Excitement is a real thing, you can't have 100% skill because it will become boring and bad players won't enjoy it, you can't have no skill either, so there should be 70-80% skill 20-30% luck (good player vs mediocre player) so that skill gets rewarded enough for the good players to be rewarded yet for the bad players to win 'some' /stand a chance. Note that a benefit of a 70/80% skill format over a 90/100% skill one is that in a 90/100 you will always win when you're only slightly better than your opponent, but in a 70/80 you will be encouraged to always play optimal, because you're not only fighting your opponent, you're fighting luck as well. Also once you're the best you can still improve, in contrary to a 100% skill game where the game is just solved if you're the best.

- Because we cannot have 90/100% skill, a problem that arises is when 2 good players face each other, it will be a coin flip. Im talking patrick hoban vs billy brake, good luck winning a 2 out of 3 match right there with your max. 55% winratio over the other. I think to add more 'depth' into the game, given that the tournament structure is properly constructued to the point where good players reach the final to begin with, these 'good' players should either: play best out of 7, or, play a different format (draft etc.) to compensate for the smaller skill gap. This worked out because when Patrick Hoban won 7 tournaments in a year it was only because of best out of 5 matches ARG and Draft in YCS. Also Barret only won because of draft, therefore this structure was definitely superior imo. This also has the benfit of being able to play a deck to beat swiss, then play something different in top cut. Imo its rediculous to have to play to beat topcut yet scubbing out in swiss, or alternatively building to beat swiss then have top cut being a few coin flips.

- Give players the illusion they stand a chance by making games longer, which means I'm against current yugioh. Not because it supposedly requires more or less skill, but because people feel like they 'cant play'.

- Superior strategy is to combined both skill and excitment, this can be done by adding different formats such as Draft, Goat format, Turbo duel, good players will win and bad players will still enjoy it because its new.

- Everyone hates losing the dice roll. I say we cut it altogether. Have 4 duels, 2 pre-side 2-post side, and have each player decide who goes first once pre and once post.

- This is maybe more for warring but possibly also for tournaments. I see no reason why matches should exist. Just count the amount of duels won and be done with it. 2-0 2-0 2-0 is better than 2-1 2-1 2-1 end of story. Only reason against this is 'but my strategy is to intentonally lose g1 or 2 then 2-1 everyone' to which I respond 'well then don't have that strategy anymore.' it literally doesn't matter.

- Make swiss so that everyone has 2 'lives', and you lose the tournament if both lives are gone. Lives represent matches, but if we cut matches altogether we could make it so that everyone has 7 lives in duels or whatever. Then just keep it swiss untill top cut, which should be small, and change format or increase sample size such as suggested above alright there's more and I do think double elim is alright although not perfect.

- For online tournaments, also as a way to combined skill (higher sample size) and excitement ('new' format), I had the idea of multi tabling. Let's say I have to face ACP in a tournament, we both open our Dueling Book program, open 2 tables and start to have 2 duels at once multi tabling. In once I begin, in the other he does. This allows to play a lot of duels quite fast, and while it may be difficult to keep track, that's something both players have to deal with. I think multi tabling yugioh tournaments are the future, it literally solves everything at once: time, skill, excitement and fun. 


Input as to what do you guys think would be the best tournament structure? For tournaments and/or warring. With regards to skill, keeping the most players attending/happy, or what you would prefer to play in yourself. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh and while double elim > regular swiss / top cut, if you're going to do regular swiss / top cut AT LEAST have players switch decks in between, this entire building to beat swiss + top cut is stupid, they're 2 different things and no one wants to play the same deck 2 full days in a row

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

double elimination is awful for card game

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, RZR_DigbickThePickleMan said:

double elimination is awful for card game

why?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah multi tabling doesn't work because there's too much going on at once.

 

I'd be interested to see what the ramifications would be of having a tournament structure using these ideas:

 

4 hours ago, mark said:


- Everyone hates losing the dice roll. I say we cut it altogether. Have 4 duels, 2 pre-side 2-post side, and have each player decide who goes first once pre and once post.

- This is maybe more for warring but possibly also for tournaments. I see no reason why matches should exist. Just count the amount of duels won and be done with it. 2-0 2-0 2-0 is better than 2-1 2-1 2-1 end of story. Only reason against this is 'but my strategy is to intentonally lose g1 or 2 then 2-1 everyone' to which I respond 'well then don't have that strategy anymore.' it literally doesn't matter.


So that each win gives you a point in the tournament overall - i.e 4 wins against one player then 2 wins/2 losses round 2 gives you 6 points in Swiss . I think it would be good for a larger number of players since it means you could more realistically do worse at the beginning of the tournament yet still have some incentive to carry on playing as later on you might 4-0 three people in a row and that could get you to top cut. I also think that with the larger variety of points that each player could get would mean that not topping on tiebreakers would be less of a thing.

 

I imagine that if you had issues with this structure taking too much time, we could even play one or two fewer rounds than we do now. (In theory, as far as keeping as many people as possible happy, isn't it better to have everyone play 7-9 rounds rather than have some people play 11 and some people play 3?

 

The biggest concern might be that while intentional drawing wouldn't be a thing, it might be difficult to, in the later rounds, stop players from saying to each other "Oh how about we just split the wins" so that it works out favourably between them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intentional drawing would or would not be allowed but you take your 'lives' to 'top cut' same as with double elim. It heavily depends on amount of people and how you're going to make the structure etc. But the idea is that if, say, you're X-5 and I'm X-4, and both of us are in the final (everyone else is eliminated), then we'd play untill someone is X-7. (If losing 7 duels is the amount of duels necessary of being eliminated), unless if you're going to do more rounds in top cut, but you still keep your lives and keep an 'advantage' for going X-0 in swiss rather than intentional drawing etc. The idea is that going X-0 than losing first found in top cut is a very real thing (in regular swiss top cut formats), or going X-2 then winning entire top cut, so the X-0 player should be rewarded more for doing better in swiss. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RZR_DigbickThePickleMan said:

double elimination is awful for card game

great argument

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ygo duelist bodan said:

u cant sustain multi tables in trading card games

MTGO pros do it all the time. There it's even less viable than in YGO, because they use a chess clock system, and thus multi-tabling increases your odds of losing due to timeouts. In other words, if it's viable for MTGO, then it's definitely viable for YGO.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea behind multi-tabling is that a lot of yugioh nowadays is 'auto-win unless if you have out and didn't brick' etc. Also I don't think someone should ever have to wait 20 min just for their opponent to finish their turn. Basically with 2 duels going on between 2 players, each going first and second in one duel, you don't have to wait on your opponent. You would also be able to play more games in a smaller time frame, making one bad beat not that much of a deal because you'll just play the next duel anyway, rather than investing 50 min in 1 match then losing and feeling like shit because you couldn't play from the start. I also think konami could legit go the route of keeping the explosive/short duels (because thats what new players like I guess), while making them simpler (honestly, for example burning abyss gives you 10 trillion options each turn but it 9/10 it doesn't matter what you do, it just takes time for no reason), so that you could have people play more duels (with multi tabling) with each 2 duels only taking 10 min or something. (But that's talking about card design itself, it doesn't have much to do with tournament structure, I really don't understand why they make cards such as the Zoodiac ones where you can overlay on the same XYZ monster 8 times, or decks where you can search 20 times each turn, doesn't make sense to me.) It's just increasing sample size within a smaller time frame, but as I said I think it's something both 'competitive' players and 'recreational' players would like.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly people need to just get over the dice roll thing, at a certain point you just have to accept the game for what it is and stop trying to make it something its not. none of the possible solutions (other than top seed goes first in top cut) are worth it imo. if you're playin yugioh right now, that's what you're playing. i welcome anyone that hates this to play melee with me instead, you don't even have to keep buying cards every time there's a ban list!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mmf said:

honestly people need to just get over the dice roll thing, at a certain point you just have to accept the game for what it is and stop trying to make it something its not. none of the possible solutions (other than top seed goes first in top cut) are worth it imo. if you're playin yugioh right now, that's what you're playing. i welcome anyone that hates this to play melee with me instead, you don't even have to keep buying cards every time there's a ban list!

Tl;dr optimal yugioh structure is play melee instead. Nice argument 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ive presented plenty of arguments, they just don't involve trying to accommodate people who cry about the dice roll mattering too much because i genuinely dont care about that as either a player or a TO and neither should you

 

multi tabling is fine but only works online with our uhh... SUBOPTIMAL sim programs lol... im happy that salv is trying to do the tournament thing but i wouldn't trust that shit for a tournament of my own so we prob just have to shelve online tournaments for now

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.