2001 Players Tourney - Page 2

deity · June 6, 2001, 16:38

.. to be more precise

cavebear · June 6, 2001, 16:42

Quote:

Originally posted by deity
I agree that the Tourney needs a positive energy buzz to get going.

Cavebear has the track record for organising this stuff so count me in.

You know what they say: "Those who can't DO, TEACH; those who can't TEACH, ADMINISTRATE (organize)". That's me, LOL!

Quote:

Some of species ideas are good as a fall back position.

I think only use the pg AFTER a certain time period or number of sessions has lapsed - written into the rules up front.

I agree the PG could have a role at some point, but I am leery of it. A set year or session could cause an alteration of strategies just aimed at PG position. It WOULD be the deciding factor in a game that went to the end year with no clear winner, but I will try to avoid it if possible otherwise.

Quote:

Let's let anyone nominate, see who's keen and then break it up into two groups if necessary. So, to this end I think it's been a worthwhile exercise for everyone to grade each other to get a sense of our relative strengths.

Anyone can nominate, though I will draw a line if someone attempts to make this an "open" tourney by nominating just all and everyone. While most nominations are thoughtfully made and most are obviously valid choices, I would not include someone weaker than (or even only equal to) myself for example.

Quote:

Species, if interested, might be a good 2IC for Cavebear to help organise and communicate games info.

I don't anticipate requiring assistance, but I will keep my mind open to the idea.

Quote:

EASTHAVEN, drake and Zylka are good new players who I hope nominate for the Tourney and should certainly be in the top group.

Zylka is already on my list; I have now added EASTHAVEN and drake.

Quote:

I like cavebears new points system.

I learned a lot about that last time, plus several people had some very good suggestions about scoring afterwards.

Quote:

GMT 10pm Sat night might be a good time to get North Americans/Europeans and Aussies in the same game session.
IE, USA Sat afternoon/evening;
European Sat evening;
Aussie Sunday morning.

I'll try to remember that!

Quote:

My preferrred settings (much the same as last Tourney):
* 1x1x Deity - no huts or barbs??
* Equal map starts
* turn based but maybe simul till 1AD - turn based wars
* No alliances
* No tech trading
* No city bribe

I have some variation on the settings like last time (like no barbs one MP round and raging ones in the next). I like the idea about simul play. I've been trying to decide about that.

Quote:

It would be great to have maps though that no one has seen before nor revealed to anyone but I guess this is asking a bit much!

I plan to create a number of maps using the random map generator and then changing them slightly in several variations. I will, of course, be placing the starting positions fairly.

If there are enough players for 10 duels or something like that, I won't try to create unique maps for all of them. However, anyone depending on what they learned from someone in another game is apt some rude surprises.

SuperSneak · June 7, 2001, 00:26

Here's a link to a nice visual representation of world time. It is based on GMT and shows + or - depending on location.
It also talks about an "internet" time that seemed kind of interesting...doing away with local and international times--might be a good tool if someone can figure it out?

http://www.cnn.com/WEATHER/worldtime/

Deity Dude · June 7, 2001, 17:05

Quote:

Originally posted by cavebear

I would not include someone weaker than (or even only equal to) myself for example.

Does that mean I have to play you in a qualifying round.

Hydey · June 7, 2001, 18:35

I thought this was a comp for the best civ players but looking at the names it appears more like a comp for the biggest wankers.

deity · June 8, 2001, 03:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Hydey
I thought this was a comp for the best civ players but looking at the names it appears more like a comp for the biggest wankers.

Ok then, I nominate Hydey ...

Berzerker · June 8, 2001, 05:42

Quote:

I think only use the pg AFTER a certain time period or number of sessions has lapsed - written into the rules up front

Then we run the risk of the PG leaders "discovering" the inability to show up for scheduled continuation dates. And if this is a nomination basis tourney, thx Smartfart, I nominate:

Supersneak
Bravelaker
Hawkhunter
Barbarian
Boann
Slowhand
Maximus
Khanman
Tact
Hydey

Rasputin
Deity
Capo
Sun Tzu
Lowang
Smash
Barono
Bird
Brocher
Cornmaster
Matt
Crustacean
Dangime
Dankmaster
Darflex
Drake
Epik
Finbar
Jediscum
jes
Johan
Kengel
Kent-jo
Ming
RAH
War4ever
Makeo
Mercantile
Mindfields
Moker
Napolean
Nappy
Oedo
Suas
Smartfart
Ozzy
Thunderfall
Zylka

I missed a bunch of people, just ICQ/email me if I missed you and I will provide another list

I'd just like to see everyone who wants to play get the chance

SuperSneak · June 8, 2001, 11:06

This is a good reason to break it into three divisions, based on self analysis and group vote.
Put me in the novice category.

drake · June 8, 2001, 11:46

Yeah I agree breaking the field into divisions would be a good idea. Almost all tourneys are set up in that manner. It allows the players a chance to choose their level of challenge. While the trophy will only go to the "elite" class winner, the equivalent of a silver and bronze prize could be awarded to winners in the Intermediate and Novice divisions.....

I think its a good idea, but it might complicate things too much. I can't say.

Of course if no one wants to admit that they belong in novice or intermediate (like Sneak and certainly I), theres no reason to break the field into classes..........

deity · June 8, 2001, 19:10

Quote:

Originally posted by Berzerker
Then we run the risk of the PG leaders "discovering" the inability to show up for scheduled continuation dates......
edit...

HE HE

God you have a devious mind!

Didn't think of that but I guess you are right!

Takes a pg player to think of it, spose....

markusf · June 8, 2001, 20:22

PG is retarded, I was never beaten in a multiplayer PG game, when i played in the league....

If its a MUST, then i would say use civ the civ score, and everyone has to set luxeries to 100% when it comes time to counting everyones score. because different rates give you a different score

cavebear · June 8, 2001, 21:24

Quote:

Originally posted by SuperSneak
Here's a link to a nice visual representation of world time. It is based on GMT and shows + or - depending on location.
It also talks about an "internet" time that seemed kind of interesting...doing away with local and international times--might be a good tool if someone can figure it out?

http://www.cnn.com/WEATHER/worldtime/

Thanks. I've downloaded the files and will experiment with it.

cavebear · June 8, 2001, 21:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Deity Dude

Does that mean I have to play you in a qualifying round.

No. Just that I might only possibly not include someone that I knew for sure had no chance by direct experience.

cavebear · June 8, 2001, 21:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Hydey
I thought this was a comp for the best civ players but looking at the names it appears more like a comp for the biggest wankers.

This list is merely a compedium of all niminated players at the moment. It may be advisable or necessary to reduce it later.

cavebear · June 8, 2001, 21:42

Quote:

Originally posted by deity

HE HE

God you have a devious mind!

Didn't think of that but I guess you are right!

Takes a pg player to think of it, spose....

That's why these will not be PG games of a session or two.

cavebear · June 8, 2001, 21:47

Quote:

Originally posted by drake
Yeah I agree breaking the field into divisions would be a good idea. Almost all tourneys are set up in that manner. It allows the players a chance to choose their level of challenge. While the trophy will only go to the "elite" class winner, the equivalent of a silver and bronze prize could be awarded to winners in the Intermediate and Novice divisions.....

I think its a good idea, but it might complicate things too much. I can't say.

Of course if no one wants to admit that they belong in novice or intermediate (like Sneak and certainly I), theres no reason to break the field into classes..........

I appreciate the idea, and I like the thought behind it. However, this is a "Best" tourney. What you suggest is beyond my desire and ability to manage.

I think it should be suggested to Apolyton, though...

cavebear · June 8, 2001, 22:12

Berserker, I'm looking at your list carefully. There are some good suggestions. Thanks.

deity · June 9, 2001, 03:17

Go the Bear!

he he

He'd be difficult to live with, eh?
Lives in a cave, all on his own......

SlowwHand · June 9, 2001, 19:09

Make it real interesting.
No Wonders, or 1 Wonder, or no Happiness Wonders.

SlowwHand · June 9, 2001, 19:10

DP, sorry

cavebear · June 11, 2001, 17:37

Berserker -

I don't know, that's a lot of names... I think I am going to have to reduce them a bit. There are 69 names on my list now, with those. I guess I'll have to set up a poll. I had envisioned the top active 20-24 or so players.

Kuja · June 11, 2001, 22:05

so what are the settings for this tourney? i'm with eyes, if this is going to be one of those 1x1x, deity, large ass boards, count me out. if not, i'll consider it

Deity Dude · June 12, 2001, 01:00

Quote:

Originally posted by cavebear
Berserker -

I don't know, that's a lot of names... I think I am going to have to reduce them a bit. There are 69 names on my list now, with those. I guess I'll have to set up a poll. I had envisioned the top active 20-24 or so players.

This is just a suggestion so dont everyone shoot me but with 64 players you could do this reasonably quick under the following format

A) Play under a bracket system where every player is placed in 1 of 16 first round games.

B) 4 players in each game with the winner and 2nd place finisher advancing (except the championship game where the winner is champion) Thus, there would be 16 first round games in which half the players would be eliminated. Then 8 second round games and so on leading eventually to a championship game

C) Assign players at random or some other method (perhaps each first round game would have a top 16 player, a 17-32 player and 2 other players totalling 64 for the first round. Seeding/Ranking could be based on some sort of poll or whatever. This would stop top players from eliminating themselves early.)

D) If there is a debate about settings each round could have predetermined settings which differ by round - or if a consensus on settings can be reached use the same settings each round.

Benefits - It would allow for 64 players - even more if you wanted to spread extras thru the first round (i.e. some first round games could have a top 16 player, a 17-32 player and 3 unranked players) yet the tourney would be done in 5 rounds. This would lessen the time commitment (noone would have to play more than five games and that would only be the final four contestants, in fact half the players would only play one) In addition, it is my understanding that under the other system you earned points for your final standing which could lead to players knowing they don't have a chance of winning yet still being committed to playing games. (If I am wrong about this statement I apologize because I didn't play last year. Its just what I've interpreted from what I've read) In this method you either have a chance of winning

or you don't have to play anymore.

SuperSneak · June 12, 2001, 02:45

CB--another good timezone link...this one has separate maps for all world continents with very simple, colored time zones.
For a technoboob like myself, this is very clear and easy to follow.
And, frighteningly enough, it is Australian in origin!

http://www.koalanet.com.au/world-time-zones.html

Robert Plomp · June 12, 2001, 04:15

Some time ago I used to play civ2 mp game a lot,
but I guess most of you (all

) have forgotten about that.

BUT I would like it to rejoin the mp sociaty again,
pherhaps someone wants to nominate me to participate in this tourney ?
Of course you guys run the risk to be beaten in that case

CyberShy

Berzerker · June 12, 2001, 08:22

I nominate Kuja and Cybershy.

Cavebear, not all those people on your list will want to play. Can we try asking people to throw their hats in the ring and see how many want to play before you start knocking people of the list?

Kuja · June 12, 2001, 09:57

again, before i commit to playing in anything, i need to know the settings, etc. of this tournament. i'm really not in the mood for 1x1x, deity, games last 2 months kinda thing...

SuperSneak · June 12, 2001, 11:00

Oh, gee, maybe we can entice you with a nice Merlot and a light romantic comedy?

SmartFart · June 12, 2001, 11:07

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberShy
Some time ago I used to play civ2 mp game a lot,
but I guess most of you (all

) have forgotten about that.

Hi Robert. Long time no see. Cavebear,please put this guy on the list.
I haven't seen you online perhaps a year or something. Did you changed your ICQ#?
If you haven't played all this time you'll be surprised how many new tricks and strategies are developed.
See you in the tourney.

SF

Kuja...what are you talking about? Deity x1x1 games takes no longer than 3-4 sessions. Duels are done in one or two. Have you ever actually played such a game? I think not.

Eyes_Of_Night · June 12, 2001, 11:14

I have and I would rather gouge my eyes out than sit there and do nothing for hours on end. Although I guess to you Apolytoners that's the "real game". I think that setting is borne of a low intelligence level. I can't think of any other reason why someone might want to play it.