9th (and 10th?) Official Tournament -- D7 (and others?) Format Change?

[omega_grunt666]

Originally Posted by HalfStep

If your skillset is so imbalanced that you risk doing worse than half your division on a song, you don't deserve to win a tournament, even if you are the best at everything else.
(coming from someone with an imbalanced skillset)

And if that falls in the non-elimination rounds, you get DEAD LAST on a song because it was deviously designed to counter you and contains every pattern you have ever mind-blocked on. But you win every single elimination round and come in first. Or you get unlucky and its the first elimination round and you're out before it really began. Where as if everyone plays through every song, and you do better than everyone else 95% of the time you are very very clearly the winner by a large margin. Keep in mind throwing a song that hard is unlikely if you really are the best in your division, it was purely theoretical to point out the flaw with running the tournament this way. But it affects everyone even if the gap is really small.

Imagine you generated a list for every players strengths and weaknesses, Jump stream/Jacks/Speed/Tech/Poly-rhythms/etc every single conceivable thing you can measure that players skill by, and then place it on a scale. 1-10, 1-100, doesn't matter. Then you rate each of the songs in the tournament by each of those and give it a rating. If player [X] is a 9 or 94 at jacks and the song is a 90, they perfect it, maybe its a 98 and they have a little trouble and get some greats, maybe a boo. Chance are, you could generate completely different outcomes just by changing the order of the songs, hard jacks first and [X] is 1st, [Y] 2nd, [Z] 3rd. Put the same song last, maybe player [H] didn't get eliminated and he gets 2nd, [Z] 1st, and [Q] 3rd. Not every song is created equal and neither are the players, having everyone play every song and being compared to everyone else is the absolute best way to make sure the winner is the absolute best player and not just Tournament 9s lucky draw winner.


All switching from elimination to cumulative does is remove the luck factor, if you are a better player you win, simple as that. Or are you saying if two people play 10 games and P1 goes 9-1 they lose because the only one that mattered was the game they lost. I'm still not hearing a good argument for why elimination is better. The only possible thing I can see as a "positive" side to an elimination tournament is the feeling of progression you get when you are eliminated later in a tournament than in a previous one, but ultimately that just boils down to how close you came to the arbitrary line in the sand without crossing it. It would have an entirely different outcome if we dropped or gained a division, or even by changing the order of the songs in the tournament. But by having everyone play every song you get to see exactly how well you performed compared to everyone else in your division on a completely even playing field.

[reuben_tate]

I was going to post in here about how in elimination tournaments, you have the fact that simply just changing the song order could greatly change the entire outcome of the tournament but omega beat me to it. Anyways, it's for that reason why I don't fully enjoy elimination tournaments.

However, the thing to remember with elimination tournaments is that they create that feel of excitement, urgency, and a myriad of other feels that you just don't get with a cumulative tourney.

[omega_grunt666]

You lose the nervous pressure around the elimination line, that doesn't matter to people who are placed well above it, or to people who end up below it. But you get a constant feeling to do your best to improve your placement, and it can create healthy rivalries between evenly skilled players as they fight back and fourth for a higher seat in their division over the coarse of the entire tournament instead of only around the time they are in danger of being eliminated.

You aren't currently rewarded for doing any better than the elimination line, and you are basically labeled good or not good enough between rounds. Where if you constantly do better than everyone else you will have an easier time in the later rounds in cumulative, which could unfortunately lead to a stomp, but would improve placements as people who are very clearly above or below their current placement can be better placed next tournament. (Helps with the blurry lines in the lower divisions)

But I definitely understand it wouldn't be the same experience. For better or for worse. I wonder if it would be feasible or worthwhile to run a seasonal tournament that is elimination and have the official be cumulative, best of both worlds.

[xXOpkillerXx]

But that's like the many people who are good at a few skills (like speed and handstreams for example) and just practice that allllll the time so they're godly at it but their weakness is still reaaaally weak. I don't want to see a winner who can't out play most of the competitors in Every skill. You're saying someone with a major flaw should have a chance, sry no, Like I and other people said, this is a tournament, come again when you'll have practiced that skill enough. Also like reuben mentionned, the hype is much more present for eliminations than cumulative; I rather get eliminated than keep doing worse than the others, same for the opposite, better to have that feel when you make it to next round than just earning points.

[omega_grunt666]

If the player is only really good at a few skills, there is absolutely no way they will be able to place high enough on every song to win. The winner of each division will be the person who placed the highest on average mathematically. If you dumpster a song the next best player would have to do that bad on a song as well for you to beat them, or have done worse than you on several songs to make up the difference. (Imagine it was a par-like system just to make understanding this easier, and I threw a song and landed 7th and you're 1st, I beat you on the next song (1st to 2nd) it becomes 8-3, repeat on the next song 9-5, then 10-7, 11-9, 12-11, and finally in round 7 13-13, I would have to beat you 6/7 times TO TIE and 7/8 times to win by a slim margin. I think that would be a well deserved win, don't you? Thats a pretty extreme example, I don't expect the same person to place first every round. But it shows that if you aren't the best of the best in your division you aren't going to win no matter how well you do on the rest of the songs)

You can stop focusing on the one major skill flaw angle, that was just a theoretical example. The point is that in elimination, skill doesn't matter as long as you come in the top 50%, and get lucky with which skills will be showcased in the final few files. The entire tournament outcome is easily changed by changing the order of songs.

By making every song count for everyone, there is more pressure to do your best on every song. In the current system the only time you actually care about posting a good score is if it means you could be eliminated, and for most players that will be one or two rounds before they fall out of the tournament, or for one lucky person, they win.

Elimination basically says fuck-off to the bottom 80-90% of any given division, they don't get a good idea of where they stand compared to the rest, just that they aren't good enough at a single file. The benefit of a cumulative system is it gives you the straight numbers, you did X better than person A but X worse then person B. You can actually see relative skill gains, you can look back and see where your weaknesses are to work on them, or where your strengths really are compared to everyone else. Like I've said before, there is constant pressure to do your best on every file to place as highly as you can, not just to be adequate enough to cross the line and stop caring until a file comes along that puts you closer to the line.

Everyone but the #1 player is doing worse then somebody, big whoop. Nothing to quit over. Even that person probably has a few things they have more trouble with than someone else, some pattern, or a specific file. It doesn't matter if you're the last in your division, maybe you're actually the best of the previous division, you just ended up on a new ladder to climb at the wrong time. At the least you now have a good idea of exactly who is around your skill level and you can compete with them to help improve everyone involved. I'd much rather have that then 40, 16, 8 other people who did varyingly better or worse on a single file but didn't do well enough to cross the line.

If you have fun with elimination tournaments, you can feel free to host some or push others to host more. I'm not against them as a whole, it just doesn't fit here. For the official tournament we should be using the system best suited to finding the best players of each division regardless of song selection order or other BS factors. And making it an enjoyable experience for everyone, not just the ones who are closest to the cut-off lines.

[xXOpkillerXx]

Holy shit dude, I feel sorry right now, I Just realized you weren't talking about Raw score cumulative. Man tourney points would be cool too, yes. ._.

[HalfStep]

If you've ever played a cumul tournament (no matter the format), you'd know how much of a chore it is to play each week. It also removes all motivation to play the moment you fall a bit behind a player who already is better than you, you can't try to improve in order to have a chance in the final rounds.

I'm pretty sure if you take EVERY division last official, do the scoring to be cumul vs elim, and you'd have the same top 8, the same top 3, and the same winner. It won't change the results, and just makes the tournament less fun to play and less fun to watch.

The tournament is also clearly not about finding "the best player" otherwise we wouldn't even have divisions.

On top of it all, FFR is a game where upsets almost never happen, the "better player" will beat a slightly worse player 99% of the time, especially with unlimited tries on a song. Predictable results are boring and elim allows for comebacks and clutch last second victories.

[omega_grunt666]

It also removes all motivation to play the moment you fall a bit behind a player who already is better than you

If that is the way you feel, nothing stops you from dropping out in round 2, 4, or 5 because you didn't get the placement you wanted. Some (I would argue most) people want a chance to still give it their best and see where they end up. If you just didn't want to play through all the rounds, then why even enter? I don't see why someone scoring better than you is a deterrent to playing your best every round so that you can actually see how well you stack up against others. If anything its a challenge and you should be pushing yourself to do better, or isn't that what tournaments are about?

If the tournament isn't about seeing how far you can get, who is the top of their division, and recognizing players who have improved, then what is the point? Might as well just hold a raffle for the event tokens and release all the new songs like normal, let people fight it out on the leaderboards.

And even if the results were the same last tournament regardless of system, would they have been the same if the songs were in a different order? I highly doubt it, because in the current system your only pressured into putting yourself above the line, doesn't matter if you were the worst of the top 49% every round, as long as the final song plays to your strengths better than your opponents you win. If you don't even have to apply yourself and you're there because the division lines just so happened to line up that you weren't good enough to get into D-x-+1, so you stomp. Its really pointless.

If two players are actually even enough to allow comebacks and last second victories then it doesn't change no matter what system you use to score the player, it will still happen. So far the only thing I'm hearing for the elimination side is more Epeen stroking fake elitism bullshit because X players fall closer to the division lines so they get to actually participate. Why not just let everyone play, and let the numbers speak for themselves.

[Tim Allen]

elimination is cool

[SK8R43]

Elimination is how the officials should ALWAYS be. The point of it is competition. Why the hell do we need to change it now? All of the others have been very successful with elimination. Yes we added another division, yes people in that division will get eliminated in the first round but thats how it is for every division...
Its not like they wont get another shot in D7 next year or whenever they want to sign up again.

[TC_Halogen]

You guys are really taking this a bit too bluntly. Saying "why the hell should things change now" is extremely close-minded. Why should the tournaments have been changed from combo scoring to raw scoring? Why should we have added a seventh division? Why should we have dropped the tournament from 10 rounds to 8 rounds?

This thread is open for discussion, but there's absolutely no need to be rude about it.

[omega_grunt666]

Originally Posted by SK8R43

Elimination is how the officials should ALWAYS be. The point of it is competition.

Reasons?

How does switching the scoring system make it less competitive? If anything it would make it more competitive because even players who aren't fighting to get first in their division still have people to compete with (and form rivalries with) as well as making the first few rounds more interesting for the higher placed players because EVERY. ROUND. MATTERS. (You CANNOT snooze past the elimination line in the first few rounds without jeopardizing your final placement)

Why the hell do we need to change it now? All of the others have been very successful with elimination.

Its a system that has worked, I'm not arguing it doesn't. But there are systems better suited to the game format. Elimination tournaments are very much suited to VS style competitions. They work well for 1v1, Team vs Team, everyone competing on the same level. Because of the variance in skill between divisions and even within them a more ladder like system has much better results. Comparisons can be made to the way LoL or Starcraft handle bronze/silver/gold etc. There is a need for more than one goal however as very few people compete at the highest tier, so its similar to having a prize pool for top bronze/silver/gold players to make sure everyone in the competition has a reasonable goal to shoot for.

As for why now, you're posting in a thread discussing changing the format of the tournament. Obviously there are some people who think there are improvements to be made for people who aren't in the top 3 of their division. Which can be accommodated for without affecting the experience of the people competing to win in a negative way.

Yes we added another division, yes people in that division will get eliminated in the first round but thats how it is for every division...
Its not like they wont get another shot in D7 next year or whenever they want to sign up again.

The point of mentioning divisions is we could have 2, we could have one for every 10 players. Ultimately in an elimination tournament like this you are saying sorry, you can't play because our system places you at the bottom of D-x- instead of the top of D-y-.


What I'm really looking for is someone here to sell me on the idea of why an Elimination format is the best choice. Refute some of my points, give me some example scenarios. If I wanted to hear "because its always been this way" I would go start a religious debate.



Numbers

Though I doubt many people are still checking this thread, I had some numbers flying around in my head keeping me up all night. So for the sake of my own sanity I put them to paper.


I ran a very small tournament on paper, 5 players on 3 songs. I gave each of the players random ratings in four categories (Stream, Jump, Chaos, Speed) that totaled 100, and then gave similar values to the songs. (Two focused on 2/4 different attributes with 100 points, and a perfectly balanced finisher out of 120)

Each player could earn up to as many points in each category as the song would offer, If the player rating was too high they perfected the section and extra points were wasted potential (AAA), and if they were too low they lost points(Goods/Boos)

Players (Stream, Jump, Chaos, Speed)
A. (25, 25, 25, 25)
B. (18, 32, 27, 23)
C. (36, 14, 21, 29)
D. (17, 18, 33, 32)
E. (28, 19, 26, 27)

Songs (Stream, Jump, Chaos, Speed)
1. (30, 20, 30, 20)
2. (20, 30, 20, 30)
3. (30, 30, 30, 30)

I then tried with 3 different scoring formats and 4 different song orders.

Results:

Cumulative Scoring (All Song Order Variations)
(Each players best score is added up)

1st A 280
2nd E 275
3rd B 274
4th D 265
5th C 262

Result: Consistent regardless of number of players in the tournament, song order, etc. Gives a very clear meter on improvements and weaknesses.

Pros: Ties are virtually non-existent, Everyone gets to participate, Everyone can see where they stand in relation to everyone else precisely.
Cons: Less Exciting(?), More pressure to AAA early songs instead of just "doing well enough".

Golf/Par Scoring (All Song Order Variations)
(Just a simple stand in for a non-direct score based system. Players gain points by position on the leader board, 1st is 1, 5th is 5. In this instance I decided for the sake of simplicity to divide points for ties, a three way tie occurred between 3rd and 5th so everyone received 4 points. Lowest wins)


1st A 5
2nd E 6
3rd B 7
4th D 12
5th C 14

Pros: Everyone gets to participate, rough estimation of how well you stack up.
Cons: Less Exciting (?), Might have trouble with tie-breakers but ultimately depends on the final system, number of players/songs, and many other factors. Not very clear compared to cumulative scoring.


Standard Elimination
(Bottom two of round 1 eliminated, Then just the worst, and finally the winner in round 3. Ties were determined by which player would have scored the highest in the next round.

Song Order/Results

(1-2-3)
1st A
2nd B (Was in danger of elimination in round one, three way tie)
3rd E

(2-1-3)
1st A
2nd E
3rd B (Would have scored better than E in finals)

(1-3-2)
1st A
2nd E
3rd B (Could of beat A in finals)

(3-2-1)
1st A
2nd B
3rd E (Would of beat A in finals)

Keep in mind this was a very small sample size, and everyone had equal "skill". In the end the most well balanced player (Perfectly balanced) won, but everything else was a toss up dependent on which songs were played in what order. Also if a different method was used as a tie breaker, Second and third place might have ended up C or D, The least balanced players.

Pros: More exciting (?), Getting placed low in a division means you don't have to play through when you know there is no prizes for you.

Cons: Not every player/song match-up is utilized, outcome is determined by song order. An increasingly large portion of players are left out as rounds progress.



Now its fully possible that all this is garbled nonsense and the only reason it makes sense to me is because A. it reinforced what I had been thinking from the start and B. I haven't been able to sleep all night. But hopefully it was somewhat helpful or insightful to some one out there.

In any case its certainly not happening this tournament, that would be a headache for the staff. But it should definitely be something to look into for next years.

[reuben_tate]

Unofficial solution
http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...d.php?t=132600

[RARAWR]

The ideas of cumulative doesn't sound feasible for this game.

It reminds me a lot of my love for racing games and well, racing.
During my days playing Burnout Revenge. I would have to enter PvE "Grand Prixs". 5 rounds, 5 tracks. I hardly loss my competitive feel if i didn't nail 1st. There was always a chance to make up for it in future races and that fact made me end up winning all of them. Generally a consistent second place beats abrupt 1st's in cumulative scorings.

I also have frustrations with the scoring system at a place I go-kart. They go by Best Lap Time. Which is cool. Until I race 16 laps, consistently getting 20seconds and on the final lap someone doing 25's nails a 19. If it went by cumulative I would've won hands down.

I also play a game known as Track Mania, and I mainly play the mode Time Race. All the racers (it can vary greatly) are given a good amount of time to beat the course. We all have unlimited restarts, and none of us can physically affect an opposing player (we just phase through them). Most times I am introduced to a track I've never played before, but I give it a few goes, figure out my mistakes and end up passing with a decent time, or I end up hitting the same curb 15 times and I lose. This is mode is scored like elimination, best score in X amount of time wins. I like to call it perfection under pressure.

So I have won/lost/felt-utterly-cheated with both methods of scoring. Then there is FFR. Nothing in front of you but the keyboard, and the screen. You have 168 hours to achieve your best score, there is no variation out of your control, there is no force preventing you from achieving your best score other than you and your ability. You are up against an extensive number of opponents, but your ability isn't physically affect by any of them, so really if there were only 10 you'd play just as well if there were 110.

The Tournament should remain elimination because it isn't a on-the-spot one try event, with unpredictable factors in every individual play. It's an extended challenge that wants to know your best score possible in a week, you can restart (the song) as many times as you need. You can even lower the rate to practice, and view replays to see your mistakes. It's a lot different than almost every cumulatively scored game where the same mode can change extensively due to players and the additional factors they create. Not to mention said games goes by your rounds score, not your best one out of possibly hundreds of attempts.

To sum it up we are given too many attempts (and possibly handicaps) to require a cumulative scoring system.

[popsicle_3000]

only for d7 for reasons OWA mentioned. improvements at that level are a lot smaller