| Cooler | 2013-04-07 07:42:20 |
John won the 3rd global tournament. Congratulations!His "ProSpectroTEAM" is second, and "Europe" (GrimJ0ker, KingInTheNorth, filip...) is first! Thanks to all the participants, welcome back in a month! If you encountered game bugs during the tournament - please describe it here, so I'll know what should be addressed in future. Modified by Cooler on 2013-04-07 13:58:14 | Cooler | 2013-04-07 07:57:10 |
Questions for the future tournaments:1. Switch back to "5 rounds + top-8"? Yes / No / Other schema?
2. Class restriction rule: a) keep as is; b) no restriction at all; c) "enforced random"; d) other?
3. Other changes or improvements you want? | Cooler | 2013-04-07 08:01:31 |
I'm sorry for the issue with initial seed. It was random first time, but then (after being updated) it wasn't. I'll fix the algorithm to prevent this in future.
| suckstobehere | 2013-04-07 08:29:36 |
Hello All, SuckstobeHERE!
Thanks to cooler and all people involved in the whole Tournament thing.
Quick answers to Coolers Questions:
1. Yes
2.c) enforced random
Here's my personal Feedback:
1. CONNECTION ISSUES:
Due to my connection problems I couldn't totally enjoy the tournament experience. REALLY Playing only 8 or so matches over 4-5 hours is not really motivating.
I got disconnected at least four times during or before games( dont remember exactly and not counting disconnections while in lobby...), which is not the organizers fault, but still annoying for me as a player.
Out of the first 6 matches i won 4 and lost 2 because I got disconnected. Now I am not saying I would have won both of course. But obviously you want to find out if you had or not, frustrating!
In general i would suggest a fixed rule how to deal with disconnections.
If u get disconnected before both played one card, the game shouldnt be counted and replay should be mandatory.(Drawback is, tournmanet might get even longer if too many connection problems) OR If u get disconnected at any time and cant reconnect you lose. Always asking your opponent whether he or she is willing to replay the match takes too much time and can get annoying.
Also: Whichever rules get chosen, we should make sure that all players of all nationalities know the rules. Otherwise communication problems will occur like with Admin / me / bluedawn.
I suspect that its got to do with me living in China. Outside of Spectromancer im having connection issues as well. For my chinese friend:
ä½ ä»¬ç©spectromancerä¹å¸¸å¸¸ææå¼åªç§çé®é¢åï¼å¾æ£å¸¸åï¼æä¸è½äº«åæ¨å¤©Â·spectroæ¯èµÂ·çåå å°±æ¯è¿ä¸ªé®é¢! 讨åï¼
2. CLASS SELECTION/ENFORCED SELECTION:
As Cooler said, the autmated class lock caused some problems. Apparently its not possible to "re-unlock" a class thats been used in a duel that gets repetad due to disconnection. Which means players who had technical problems like me,
cant use some of ther favorite classes.
I like Forestrys Idea, if technically doable, to have an automateic "random all" function. If not, then it shouldnt matter how many classes u have, within one round u can only play each class one time. Once u r through with all your classes, all of them are unloced again.
3. GENERAL SYSTEM
Apart from all connection issues:
I think the swiss system is not a bad choice, cannot think of a better solution for that many participants, if you want to have as many people involved for as long as possible.
However maybe the number of round should be redeuced somehow and then have (at least)the top 8 compete in a KO-System. Play best of three till the final and in the final its best of 5.
Final was too short IMO
Another option would be to split the tournament over two days, however thatrs probably a bad idea. (Too many different people from different parts of the world)
4. TEAM RANKING:
I am glad I was part of the winning Team, however as my Teammates were so strong I didnt really contribute to our victory. So maybe there is a way to include all scores and not just the TOP three in the future? Average Points or something.
In general a great Idea and adds to the tournament experience!
5. OVERALL ATMOSPHERE
I thought it that was one of the most positive things about the tournament. Nice chatting with most of my opponents and also in the Lobby. Good communication by the admins! GOOD JOB!
I know this is a communication/language problem. SO ideally, we would need at least one person that can translate properly from English for each language. One of my opponents got disconnected( no need to name the person) before the game screen, which happended to me twice before that. THen he kept complaining in the lobby about it and why the ranking said 1-0 lead for me. Due to his english skills it was not very clear what he meant, which is fine. BUt you dont have to flood the lobby with the same complaints over and over again. 1. it´s just a game 2. nobodys trying to swindle you, for sure not the organizers so relax
For that reason i believe we need some fix rules for disconnections and also have to communicate them cleary beforhand (See 1.)
6. START OF TOURNAMENT
No matter what system we choose, the Tournaments will alwys be a many hours long event. So in my opinion, if the tournament is to start at 1pm. Everyone who is not in the lobby by 1.10 is out. No exceptions.
-----------------
Overall I think its great we have international Spectro-Tournaments, so thanks to Cooler and all the others. Also thanks to all the players who participated, even with the connection drama it was fun nevertheless. NExt time the organization will be even smoother I am sure.
GrimJoker your clumsiness cost Europe the title!!  congrats to John!
Cheers,
Suckstobehere
| bluedawn | 2013-04-07 10:21:38 |
I do not speak English. I will not participate in the next tournament. Congratulations! John and Europe team | SeaLeta | 2013-04-07 10:54:11 |
1. not interesting. if top-4? After the end of the 5 rounds, changing it to top-8... 2. 'a)'??......i don't understand 'a)'. this is Arbitrarily change it.(because Unfair) 3. Every time the rules change...this is Unfair. Stop wasting my time.(and all users)
p.s.1. shut up suckstobehere. bluedawn re match was fair. p.s.2. every protest, I'm tired. I will boycott the next all tournament. because do not want to waste time. p.s.3. I have no complaints for users. Do not get me wrong. Modified by SeaLeta on 2013-04-07 10:59:17 | suckstobehere | 2013-04-07 11:21:49 |
p.s.1. shut up suckstobehere. bluedawn re match was fair.
SeaLeta I know this is a language problem, but just because you are arguably the best player around still no need to behave like this...
I never said it was not fair i agreed immediately to replay. ALL I SAID IS: It doesnt help to bombard the lobby with the same remarks over and over again:
"I computer, down, error, rematch? i first match lose? computer down, no, no start, no game start, down, duel not start down, I lose?, i dont look screen, no start down, not start down, no replay, i play down, and replay nothing, not start down"
I know this is because bluedawns english is not good enough, but we understood, so no need to repeat it over and over....just my two cents,
as I said I had the same trouble with being disconnected and auto-lose, It seems you guys suspect the "english-speakers" trying to trick you or something...grow up | GrimJ0ker | 2013-04-07 11:23:15 |
Cooler, my nick is J0ker not Jocker ahuahu
1) Absolutly yes. 2) a or c
SL & BD... this time I do not understand why you're so angry. The tournament will improve more and more. And having experienced players like you definitely makes more beautiful the tournament. I hope you will be there.  Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2013-04-07 12:45:18 | bluedawn | 2013-04-07 12:16:26 |
Modified by bluedawn on 2013-04-07 13:32:50 | suckstobehere | 2013-04-07 12:24:25 |
so use the message chat
anyways, that was just 10% of my post and not a big deal, I said tehre should be rules for that kind of situation, thats all
Modified by suckstobehere on 2013-04-07 12:27:00 1) yes (although i liked the extra swiss round as well) 2) a (keep it) or c (enforced random) 3) i like the idea of making the final best of 5 (to make it more fair, since it's the most important match of the tournament)
ps: BD - please don't be offended. sucks is simply saying that you should not spam the main channel in this way. since you were talking with admin, you should use the "private message" function. perhaps there should be an easier way to chat with admin? perhaps another (private) channel where people could talk to admin one-on-one without needing to click on "pm" for every sentence? dunno, just brainstorming
ps2: SL - you do not understand what sucks is saying (which is not your fault), and you are being rude to him (which is your fault). sucks said it was fair to rematch, but it was not nice to fill everyone's chat with comments/shouts. anyway, overall i'm getting the feeling that you're not enjoying the tournament as a whole (you had complains every time). i would love to see you participating and having a good time along with us, but i think the only way to do it is to relax a bit and take it easy | SeaLeta | 2013-04-07 13:38:55 |
In the first tournament, I was disappointed. but we all make mistakes. i know. So, I tournament join two more. However, every time there was a problem. Of course, this is(Tournament) only for fun.(for users) but, I participated three times(one time is Tournament I before) during the tournament, I was always a disadvantage. because I do not feel fun. So I'm not join tournament. Is there a problem?
2. Class restriction rule: a) keep as is; b) no restriction at all; c) "enforced random"; d) other?
......-_- I do not care. Just Do not change the rules during the tournament. Modified by SeaLeta on 2013-04-07 13:59:08 | Cooler | 2013-04-07 14:03:20 |
In the first tournament, I was disappointed. but we all make mistakes. i know. So, I tournament join two more. However, every time there was a problem. Of course, this is(Tournament) only for fun.(for users) but, I participated three times(one time is Tournament I before) during the tournament, I was always a disadvantage.
By disadvantage you mean "class unlocking" or something else? What disadvantage was in previous tournaments? I just need to know to ensure that I don't miss anything.
BTW, I completely agree that we should strictly follow the rules and don't change them. When I found that some players has extra classes locked because of replayed games, I asked if there are people who have only 12 classes and if anyone is against class unlock.
Anyway, whatever you decide, I hope that both me and my programs will make less mistakes in future and then tournaments will be fun and fair enough so you will return. Modified by Cooler on 2013-04-07 14:12:12 because I do not feel fun. So I'm not join tournament. Is there a problem?
i respect that. you can do whatever you prefer of course
Just Do not change the rules during the tournament.
i agree
Modified by filip on 2013-04-07 14:08:48 I suspect that its got to do with me living in China. Outside of Spectromancer im having connection issues as well. For my chinese friend: ä½ ä»¬ç©spectromancerä¹å¸¸å¸¸ææå¼åªç§çé®é¢åï¼å¾æ£å¸¸åï¼æä¸è½äº«åæ¨å¤©Â·spectroæ¯èµÂ·çåå å°±æ¯è¿ä¸ªé®é¢! 讨åï¼
I dont have connection problems. But I think there's one thing you need to know that chinese north internet company - China Netcom (CNC) is well known for their bad service. so if u got connection problems frequently, just try another internet service provideror use vpn.
| FORESTRY | 2013-04-07 17:39:50 |
Cooler, im just happy that tourneys are organized officially, and it annoys me how people complaining feel entitled when it would simply be more easy not to do them at all, good job!
| HeadphonesGirl | 2013-04-07 18:51:35 |
I agree with Forestry. For a long time there were no tournaments at all. Major props should go to Pinke for starting it, and to Cooler for making it official and continuing it. Cooler always asks for feedback and that's awesome but it sucks when the feedback sounds entitled because he seems to be running this all on his own and trying to make it work as well as he can for everybody's different wants and needs... if there are technical difficulties that's just a natural part of trying to find the best fit for the community and get the format right. Nobody else here could put a tournament on without any problems arising so let'snot act indignant about what we perceive as flaws in Cooler's tournament when he's making such a great effort for the Spectro community. The tournaments are making it more interesting than ever to be a Spectromancer player and I'm looking forward to seeing how they continue to develop in the future. :)
| FORESTRY | 2013-04-07 19:16:34 |
Pinke probably used up 2 weeks of her life just organizing, setting up the website and compiling the replays of the tourney.
| Jeronimo | 2013-04-07 20:37:55 |
System: I prefer 5 swiss + 8 top forever. More speculations. Starting time is fine, since they wait up to 10-15 minutes before starting (I appeared 12 mins late).
Classes: [A] I think is best, you pick your class, but up to 10 choices (5 rounds). Players with 1st expansion only +Warrior Priest will be able to participate as well.
| lokiii | 2013-04-07 20:42:42 |
1.I prefer 8 rounds and no elimination.It's very tired to play 5 hours continously.It was almost 2 a.m here in china when elimination round began.I think it not fair to decide the winner through the last few games instead of over all performance. 2.a) or b) ."Enforced random" rely more on luck. 3.Top players in tournament shall be awarded!Global experience or glory points are both good. 3.Top players in tournament shall be awarded!Global experience or glory points are both good. i agree! also, a star beside their name (or in their stats/profile page) for the tournament winner would be extra cool ! Modified by filip on 2013-04-07 21:03:15 | roycelin3 | 2013-04-07 21:21:41 |
1. I have no idea of the choice of schema. It seems that each has its own pros and cons. I agree with lokiii's opinion that it is unfair to decide the winner by the last few games. To compromise, I suggest: a) Several Swiss round as usual. Players gain 1 points for each win. b) After a), Select top N players. Use single round-robin schedule among the top N players. Players gain x points for each win. c) After b), add the scores in b) to the points gained in a) to obtain the total points in the tournament. Determine winner according to the total points. We can determine the x to have different weights on a) and b), and to reduce cases of ties by using a irrational number, say x=Ï/2 . It is half-serous because Ï/2 is a little bit greater than 1.5, which means 2 wins in b) is a little bit more important than 3 wins in a).
2. As to luck-related issue, I think that it is not a big issue since luck is essentially embedded in the Spectromancer games. As far as I know, some of my friends actually used random classes in the tournament, and we unchecked the classes in the option once used. Therefore we were essentially following c) "enforced random." 3. Is there any way to reduce the time? It was already a big issue to determine the starting time to satisfy most of the players all over the world, and now that it last for 5+ hours, it is really discouraging. It is possible to set a time limit for each round, say 15min or 20min? | Jeronimo | 2013-04-07 21:35:10 |
Just thinking of a proper reward for the finalists... 1st place: +1000 EXP / 2nd place: +500 EXP Extra Glory comes from the extra Levels gained.
cool stuff !
i especially agree with the issue of time for each round (but it's difficult to implement/enforce - see my proposal below) and i love the various ideas for awards!
it's nice people are contributing with ideas (and participating) - it seems this is going to become a big thing!
ps to cooler: how about you measure the average time we spend right now for each tournament round (or make an approximation from your experience). compare that to a reasonable time limit that we would like to have per round (let's say 20 minutes). would it be possible then to set the maximum allowed time per move (in game) lower than normal (by the above percentage) just for these tournament duels? i understand this is probably not possible technically, but blitz duels seem to be a different kind of game - perhaps it would be feasible to implement a third kind of game ("tournament duel") that players could propose to each other (but only in the "battlegrounds" channel) and would have a somewhat lower time limit per move? perhaps you could even incorporate some of the aforementioned tournament logic in the game type (class selection, disconnection handling, etc - other restrictions/modifications) Modified by filip on 2013-04-08 00:05:06 | GrimJ0ker | 2013-04-08 01:18:55 |
... i agree! also, a star beside their name (or in their stats/profile page) for the tournament winner would be extra cool !
I agree about a star for a victory or something like it and about reward for 1st 2nd maybe also a match 3rd -4th? Great advices! I think also something like this to winning team.
The playing time will be reduced when the problems will be reduced and also the time lost by the players. We must remember that occore a problem in a single match to slow everyone.
Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2013-04-08 01:19:19 | Cooler | 2013-04-08 12:37:35 |
Replays uploaded! 3.Top players in tournament shall be awarded!Global experience or glory points are both good.
Agree, will add such bonus next time.
i agree! also, a star beside their name (or in their stats/profile page) for the tournament winner would be extra cool !
Yeah, that's also reasonable! | navdfool | 2013-04-08 13:07:14 |
When the class thing came up, I suggested that Warrior priest being the default class should be allowed to the users who had problems selecting other classes, while I understand it was not there fault, It did not feel fair because I had saved class-time for the last match, I think Sealeta too had saved a strong class and I can understand why he is angry.
| Cooler | 2013-04-08 13:19:13 |
When the class thing came up, I suggested that Warrior priest being the default class should be allowed to the users who had problems selecting other classes, while I understand it was not there fault, It did not feel fair because I had saved class-time for the last match, I think Sealeta too had saved a strong class and I can understand why he is angry. Yes, and Kroma (who played against SL in round 6) was also dissapointed because of that. All players were affected, thus most of them gained no advantage.
| GrimJ0ker | 2013-04-08 14:12:07 |
Well said Cooler. I am very happy for award and star approval!
Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2013-04-08 15:20:00 | Cooler | 2013-04-08 19:50:19 |
Something like this (experience / glory): 1 - 2000 / 200 2 - 1400 / 140 3 - 1000 / 100 4 - 700 / 70 5 - 500 / 50 6 - 350 / 35 7 - 250 / 25 8+ 200 / 20 (for all players who played all rounds)
| roycelin3 | 2013-04-08 22:52:54 |
Something like this (experience / glory):1 - 2000 / 200 Wow! The glory looks tasty Now I can somehow foresee severe fighting in game and outside games
| GrimJ0ker | 2013-04-08 23:54:46 |
Cooler I think that you are too generous!!!
2000 exp ----> 4 lvl. Up  | FORESTRY | 2013-04-09 00:17:39 |
Will there be a page for team rankings? Or will it be implemented in the future? How can we prevent the team from getting disbanded if the leader leaves? Modified by FORESTRY on 2013-04-09 02:36:22 In the first tournament, I was disappointed. but we all make mistakes. i know. So, I tournament join two more. However, every time there was a problem. Of course, this is(Tournament) only for fun.(for users) but, I participated three times(one time is Tournament I before) during the tournament, I was always a disadvantage. because I do not feel fun. So I'm not join tournament. Is there a problem?
2. Class restriction rule: a) keep as is; b) no restriction at all; c) "enforced random"; d) other?
......-_- I do not care. Just Do not change the rules during the tournament.
I didnt join any Touraments , because it would consume many time. But i Think the game(not Tourament) is fair , and the Tourament need some randomness. Modified by joy on 2013-04-09 01:40:41 | Cooler | 2013-04-09 05:39:43 |
2000 exp ----> 4 lvl. Up
Yes, but winning the tournament is not easy! (you know :) Isn't it worth +4 lvl? I'm not sure if it is fair to gain significant level up in the global ranking because of tournament, but I'm sure that significant glory bonus is good thing!
Modified by Cooler on 2013-04-09 05:42:07 | dimurel | 2013-04-09 06:10:25 |
... Yes, but winning the tournament is not easy! (you know :) Isn't it worth +4 lvl?I'm not sure if it is fair to gain significant level up in the global ranking because of tournament, but I'm sure that significant glory bonus is good thing!
This is precisely the meaning of play reduces bogus new accounts. They are easy to get 2000. | roycelin3 | 2013-04-09 08:26:01 |
... Yes, but winning the tournament is not easy! (you know :) Isn't it worth +4 lvl?I'm not sure if it is fair to gain significant level up in the global ranking because of tournament, but I'm sure that significant glory bonus is good thing!
I think +4 lvls is still too huge compared with reward for other players. Playing in the tournament is still much based on luck, especially winning the tournament. I guess the top 4 players (in a top-4 schema, say) should gain much higher reward than the rest but not much difference within the top-4. For example: (modified from your original suggestion) 1 - 1600 / 160 2 - 1400 / 140 3 - 1200 / 120 4 - 1000 / 100 5 - 500 / 50 6+ ...... In fact, I have also another reason for this, but... | dimurel | 2013-04-09 08:29:14 |
Minus of this approach is that not all players play in tournaments. In the end, it's a little distort the global ranking.
| Cooler | 2013-04-09 09:52:02 |
Yes, maybe ranking distortion is too high and it makes things worse. I'll think about this more.
| Cooler | 2013-04-09 09:53:43 |
I think +4 lvls is still too huge compared with reward for other players. Playing in the tournament is still much based on luck, especially winning the tournament. I guess the top 4 players (in a top-4 schema, say) should gain much higher reward than the rest but not much difference within the top-4. For example: (modified from your original suggestion)
I agree, but I think that advance to the play-off stage is a good thing itself, so don't need additional gap in reward.
| GrimJ0ker | 2013-04-09 13:02:26 |
... This is precisely the meaning of play reduces bogus new accounts. They are easy to get 2000.
It's true. I'm agree.
But I think It's better 1000 p. Glory points are good in my opinion.
In any case, I think these tournaments are the top of the game and therefore there should be a reward even symbolic. Modified by GrimJ0ker on 2013-04-09 13:53:31 | Cooler | 2013-04-09 14:23:36 |
But I think It's better 1000 p. Glory points are good in my opinion.
We've discussed this with Estarh and decided that high experience bonus is bad. So experience bonus will be much lower (500) and glory bonus - higher (250). | GrimJ0ker | 2013-04-09 14:33:47 |
... We've discussed this with Estarh and decided that high experience bonus is bad. So experience bonus will be much lower (500) and glory bonus - higher (250).
Perfect! ... We've discussed this with Estarh and decided that high experience bonus is bad. So experience bonus will be much lower (500) and glory bonus - higher (250).
i agree
| Snotwad | 2013-04-09 17:18:15 |
I would love to play but I have a problem with the install. I posted it in the bugs/problems a few days ago, but it seems no one has seen it. When I downloaded the file and tried to run it a message popped up saying that it could not find the file in the file path, but I was looking right at it, at the right location.
you mean you already have the game installed but you have problems with updating? if so, you can try downloading the latest version from here ( http://spectromancer.com/index.cgi?p=3) and installing over your existing game (make sure you keep a copy of lookup.dat and restore it after installation) | Wavelength | 2013-04-09 22:39:17 |
Congrats on your tourney win, John! Questions for the future tournaments:1. Switch back to "5 rounds + top-8"? Yes / No / Other schema? I'll still advocate for 12 rounds (1 game per round) with completely random matchups, using the Points system you implemented in this past tournament, plus a Top 8 knockout. Second best would be the old style, 5 rounds (2 games per round) plus a Top 8. 2. Class restriction rule: a) keep as is; b) no restriction at all; c) "enforced random"; d) other? I like it as is - very good system. Enforced random would be very problematic from a fairness/balance standpoint. The only thing I'd change is to have the list of "classes you have used already" be public to everyone, and easily available from the tourney status window. | Cooler | 2013-04-10 17:24:10 |
Heh, nostalgia....  I remember how I was looking at the server log for duels and filling/uploading these pages during the event :)
I was very glad and happy to meet Shablula and Vallor again in Spectromancer :) Modified by Cooler on 2013-04-10 18:44:59 | dragonoiddest | 2013-04-10 18:02:36 |
John you all broke. Train all
John you all broke. Train all I do not regard this victory as a "break all". This achievement is all.Yes, we are brothers ... But it's a pity that we think differently.
| LaoTse | 2013-04-11 18:10:02 |
Congratulations John! 
Grim is the better player, which does not mean that he wins, because in a stress situation all is different...(Btw, what was the big mistake in the first game Grim?)
John you all broke. Train all It´s a joke I think, or not? | GrimJ0ker | 2013-04-11 18:52:05 |
I had good def for his geddon like e4 and I was wrong to calculate the damages after his geddon because I forgot the sea sprite's malus.
| ddubois | 2013-04-11 22:28:36 |
I read above: "replays uploaded". Where do I download them?
I read above: "replays uploaded". Where do I download them? click "tournaments" from the menu at the left in http://www.spectromancer.com, then scroll down ("replay files" link) but: cooler, are the replays visible in version 1.32 ?
(Edited this post and the one below to try to remove a problem with underlining - Wave)
Modified by Wavelength on 2013-04-12 07:15:00 | LaoTse | 2013-04-12 00:10:56 |
Yes, all replays work without any problem. Modified by Wavelength on 2013-04-12 07:13:57 | 
