• Play Triple Triad
  • Inscription
  • How to play
  • The cards
  • Community
  • Forum
  • 4 games to qualify

    The lobby, the championships, the point system... You have a question? A suggestion? You want to organize something? come and talk here!

    Re: 4 games to qualify

    Postby SpenceKwon » Mon Nov 11, 2013 12:43 pm

    I think 4 is still too many for first 3 phases.
    the requirement has quantified by 4.
    smaller increments would have enable us to see effects it might have.(PHASE 2-3 will stress test 4).

    it has to be dynamic number to suit championship format, rules etc

    [SRM] Founding Member of the Selective Random Movement-
    *join now to help bring peace and balance to the ongoing war between
    random vs choose

    Also Check out all my videos here:
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxLT1D ... LmfeWNXWeQ
    User avatar
    Posts: 541
    Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:11 am
    Location: Melbourne-Australia

    Re: 4 games to qualify

    Postby MukuroY » Mon Nov 11, 2013 4:20 pm

    Sir, I agree that 4 games isn't really much too play in this championship, but I (and I can say everyone here too) am worried about championships with death match in rules. 4 games can be faster to do sometimes even with death match, but if it's in a game between two players who have good skills it can be very long. Its not a problem at the first and Final phase that happens at weekend, but the in rounds 2 and 3 it will be very exhausting :(
    Wild MUK appeared!
    User avatar
    Posts: 558
    Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:44 pm
    Location: Brazil

    Re: 4 games to qualify

    Postby Jack Daniels » Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:48 pm

    CbbK wrote:4 games isn't really that much, is it?
    I thought you wanted more challenge, having only players who truly played and not those who got lucky on a single game, was I wrong?

    The issue was originally brought up regaring the Final round, which is obviously the most critical. I think 4 games is very fair as a requirement for the FINAL. I don't know if its too difficult to code, but ideally there would be different required values for the different rounds. Some options discussed in the last thread:

    1 1 1 4
    1 1 2 4
    1 2 3 4

    The numbers listed above are the required amount of games to be played to qualify past the "Hasn't Played Yet" for each round, in order. R1 R2 R3 R4 ==> 1 1 2 4, etc.

    And yes, 4 games is actualy quite a bit for Round 3, which is notoriously the absolute worst round to try to find and get people to play! I like the 1 1 2 4 option, personally...but thats just me.

    And yes, this system must absolutely be reviewed carefully for a DeathMatch tourney, when that time comes. The system MUST count draws as games...or remove the requirement completely for DM tournies (1 1 1 1). As we all know, depending on teh card levels, rules and opponent skill levels, there can be many MANY draws before someone finally wins/loses in many cases.
    Jack Daniels
    Posts: 651
    Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 4:13 am

    Re: 4 games to qualify

    Postby Cactilión » Wed Nov 13, 2013 3:23 am

    4 games to qualify is totally insane specially in the 3rd round and/or the final, will not be easy find people to play enough games, then I disagree with that ... This can be unfair too, let's do the next example:

    PLAYER A: Do 4 games vs differents players and loses the 4 games ==> Aprox. 65vPts + 10 bonus vPts = 75vPts
    PLAYER B: Do 3 games vs differents players and win the 3 games ==> Aprox. 135vPts + 5 bonus vPts = 140vPts

    PLAYER A: Can be classified
    PLAYER B: Eliminated!! ("Hasn't played enough yet")

    Is this fair? I don't think so... Definitively this should reviewed.
    User avatar
    Posts: 242
    Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 3:14 am
    Location: Caracas - Venezuela / Lima - Perú

    Re: 4 games to qualify

    Postby Jack Daniels » Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:07 am

    lol, and mate, think about PLAYER A in your scenario...

    He will look at PLAYER B, who has 135 vpts, but needs to play 1 more game. What do you think PLAYER A will do when PLAYER B challenges him to a game?


    The guy with (4 games, 65 Vpts) will be smart, and will reject the guy's game who has (3 games, 135 Vpts), because he KNOWS if he accepts, then the guy with 135 will get his 4 games and pass him up. THINK ABOUT THIS EVERYONE

    As I've said before, we need things that PROMOTE people playing more games, and against multiple players...but NOT to "Require" it, as you will have many many undesired outcomes happen. If you think the scenario above won't happen (where the guy with low Vpts will purposefully reject games so players can't get their 4 games in)...think again, cause it WILL happen. Especially in Round 3, which is notoriously terrible of people not wanting to play, and doing anything as crafty as possible to ensure they move on, and others dont.
    Jack Daniels
    Posts: 651
    Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 4:13 am

    Re: 4 games to qualify

    Postby Jack Daniels » Wed Nov 13, 2013 5:50 am

    when you force requirements like that, you can and WILL get really stupid scenarios, like the guy with 65 Vpts moving one, but the guy with 132 Vpts NOT moving on. Etc etc...the amount of stupid possibilities are...great. THats why instead of forcing / requiring things like that, better gameplay should be PROMOTED via bonuses. From the other thread...

    Jack Daniels wrote:
    reakq wrote:All I want is a system that encourages everyone to play against EVERYONE. This is the principle of a championship.

    OK, I couldn't agree with you MORE on this one, mate!! Yes, YES, YES!!!!
    but I really, really want to emphasize the word you used: encourages

    Yes, I couldn't agree with that MORE! Yes! The system should ENCOURAGE more games played against more players...yet it should not "Force", or "Require", or somehow not even allow the players score to even be considered, just because they did not play many games against many players. As you said, the system should ENCOURAGE it. If we can all agree to that, then we're back on the same solution I have been promoting, combined from CbbK and Spencekwon ;)

    While I definitely do not agree that playing many games = Being the best...I do feel that if we want a system to promote playing many games against many players (encourage!), then the system should do just that :D So, let me present to you my revised proposal:

    0-2 players: 0 Vpts
    3 players: 5 Vpts
    4 players: 10 Vpts
    5 players: 15 Vpts
    6+ players: 20 Vpts

    0.50 Vpts for every 1 game.
    MAXIMUM bonus = 10 Vpts
    (20+ games = maximum, 10 Vpts...does not go higher)

    Round 1: must play at least 1 game
    Round 2: must play at least 1 game
    Round 3: must play at least 2 games
    Round 4: must play at least 4 games total, against minimum 2 different players
    (4 games is a TOTAL amount. examples: 3 games vs Player A + 1 game vs Player B; 2 games vs Player A + 2 games vs Player B, etc)

    This is a great system that PROMOTES / ENCOURAGES players to play many games against multiple players, as it rewards them to do so :D How do you like it? Please...everyone...think of these 3 items all working TOGETHER. I like it a lot :mrgreen:

    Note: item #2 revised per latest post in that thread, for a maximum of 10 Vpt bonus (multiple game bonus...0.50 Vpts per game...10 Vpt bonus max). Item 3 revised back to my original suggestion which was 1 1 2 4. Altho the (4) games required in round 4 could be reviewed possibly revised down to 3...either way, there are bonus Vpts awarded to players who play more games as it stands.

    ITEM 1 (Bonus for playing against multiple players): REWARDS players who play against multiple players!
    ITEM 2 (bonus for playing many games): REWARDS players who play many games!
    ITEM 3 ("Hasn't Played Yet Lock") Does REQUIRE a certain amount of games to be played to count as active.

    Instead of requiring (4) games for every round, which is crazy and leads to very bad scenarios as mentioned, simply reward players who play multiple games with a nice little bonus. ITEM 2 does that nicely, without the odd/strange/dumb secondary-effects that the (4) game hasn't played yet thing results in.

    Round 4 is different from all other rounds, as its on the weekend, and there is more of a "nothing to lose" when players are not in the podium -- they will play. However, the 4 games required against 2 opponents is still kinda risky....maybe 3 games against 2 players total...or 2 games against 2 players total minimum. remember, these are MINIMUMS. the player will still get bonus Vpts if they are active and playing
    Jack Daniels
    Posts: 651
    Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 4:13 am

    Re: 4 games to qualify

    Postby SpenceKwon » Thu Nov 14, 2013 9:08 am

    Was extremely disappointed to not make phase 3 this champ.
    Was stuck 2nd last on bottom of green last night with no one to play and 10 hours to go.
    logged in many times to check for opponents too.

    so being at 127-5 , with 10 people above you (8 of which i never saw online in my play times.) that will not log in or even risk playing leaves the same old problem. your next rival on mabye 90-100 ish plays a low vpts player and you get jumped in your sleep.
    Players wont play there vpts peers, just someone on 35 who will not make next phase anyways.

    So its back to the question of quality over quantity.
    In my 4 games I played 2 opponents both around or above my vpts.
    To many phases are decided by 1 player or 2 just qualifying everyone by playing .
    Junk games

    This happens way to often for people in my position(timezone-PLaytimes) just feels extremely amplified due to new requirements

    The four game limit gives you no reason to play again
    Championships have just become about everyone cutting each others throat to get to the final.
    So you play early and select your opponent. Utter crap.
    [SRM] Founding Member of the Selective Random Movement-
    *join now to help bring peace and balance to the ongoing war between
    random vs choose

    Also Check out all my videos here:
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxLT1D ... LmfeWNXWeQ
    User avatar
    Posts: 541
    Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2011 7:11 am
    Location: Melbourne-Australia

    Re: 4 games to qualify

    Postby CbbK » Thu Nov 14, 2013 9:57 am

    I'll lower the number of required games to 2 for the next championship.
    User avatar
    Site Admin
    Posts: 984
    Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 11:58 am
    Location: Marseille, France

    Re: 4 games to qualify

    Postby Jack Daniels » Thu Nov 14, 2013 5:06 pm

    Its a process, for sure. Some ideas sound good in theory, but then negative un-desired consequences appear when its actually implemented, etc. Thank you very much for all of your efforts to improve TTFO and the championships and such, CbbK. I realize it must be tough to put up with the "rabbling" masses when it comes to these things :oops: :P :?

    so BIG THANK YOU!! :D

    2 games sounds very reasonable imo. Altho I still hope there would be some type of a minor Vpt bonus for people playing more games...we need something to promote people playing more games. The 0.50 Vpt bonus per game, with a maximum of 10 Vpts, seems very reasonable to me. 10 Vpts (if you played 20+ games) isn't such a huge bonus that it will "kill" the results or change them completely, especially since it is slowly cumulative (0.50 Vpts per game)...but at the same time will REALLY make people want to play more. Think about this:

    There are a bunch of people towards the bottom of the Green Moving on (or people right below them) all with VERY CLOSE Vpt ranks...well, if there was a 0.50 Vpt bonus per game to play, that would really promote them to want to "try their luck", simply for the tiny bonus. The result? More people playing more games. Which is the goal! Please consider it and think about it :)
    Jack Daniels
    Posts: 651
    Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 4:13 am


    Return to TTFO

    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests