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

Since the start of this tournament, I've been incredibly torn with how I want to run the D7 division. The concept of cumulative scoring was brought in the last official, and it did work pretty well. Initially, I opted into doing an elimination tournament if the number of players in D7 exceeded 16, and it has done so. However, this makes me feel terrible for the new D7 players/low D7 players that will likely bow out early and not have a chance to engage themselves in competition. While at work today, I did come up with an idea:

Concept: Have D7 play the first five rounds cumulatively, then take the top 8 for a playoff round and eliminate normally from round 6 and on.

How this would work is quite simple: D7 would play the tournament just as they would have last year -- however, cumulative score will be the determining factor for who plays the quarter-finals, semi-finals, and finals (top 8, top 5, and top 3, respectively).

---

I am interested in applying this particular concept to all divisions, but the rule would be applied at round 5, allowing the top 16 to move on (this is linear for all divisions).

Pros:
- everyone will be allowed to play a minimum of four rounds, regardless of performance!

- a weakness in skill may not spell elimination; for example: consider player A (strengths: speed, straightforward/stamina-heavy charts - weaknesses: technical charts/vast rhythmic structure) and player B (strengths: technical charts/strange rhythms; weaknesses: speedy charts). In this case, player A has a tougher time getting past the first few rounds because of the technicality involved in the lower-level charts, which don't present much in terms of speed, but do present structural challenges. This is frustrating for player A because they have a strength in speedier files, and would likely be able to put up scores that would keep them in the tournament -- if they could survive the easier level files. Player B will survive early on, but get slaughtered mid-game when faster files come in. In this differing structure, both players would the chance at both types of files, and their excellence towards their strengths would be coupled with their ability to fight against their weaknesses.

- competition is encouraged more firmly; skillful players may opt into being lazy early on just to make it by simply because they know that they can survive if the threshold nears them -- however, the first three rounds won't have any sort of definable threshold! Round 4 will put up a threshold that chops the field by a HUGE amount; in fact, it chops the field by x - (x -16), where x is the total number of competitors. D1 could see upwards of 200 people getting eliminated in a single round! However, all of those players would be able to play the four rounds that they might not have been able to play in the current structure, and results might be considerably more interesting, as players will actively have the opportunity to improve since they will be in the tournament for at least four rounds.

- tournament song structures would not need to be changed; for a structural change that is this vast, the song structures would not need to change at all -- they can gradually increase in difficulty like they always have, as round 5 will cut to 16 players for D6 and lower as it did before.

Cons:
- implementation; the dashboard would need a little bit of reworking so that it could add the scores of four rounds and seed based off of the total

- involvement; being away from the tournament for a round can be fatal (then again, this is true normally as well)

- I really don't have anything else, but it might be because I am proposing this idea and can't entirely assume impartiality?

EDIT: For the record, I only plan on implementing this concept in D7 for this tournament, but would consider the idea for the next official tournament if it received really well; it seems like a great idea to engage more community members.

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

I like this. More of a round-robin/qualifier type feel to the first half of the tourney.

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

i think cumulative scoring without elimination is the best

you guys have already decided to give prizes to everyone such as
"-Competitors that are INVOLUNTARILY placed in D7 and complete the tournament will receive Unconnected., as well as receive a custom forum title indicating that they are a D7 player."

so why not let everyone live until the very end?

ie) if some crazy 99 song comes up as round 8 and if somebody who was 18th place previously completely beasts the song and jumps up to 8th, then he/she deserves 8th place

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

Ah this is like a sport where you have the season and the playoffs, sounds really cool to me.

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

I like this idea but only for D7 tbh. I'd hate for there to be a situation where someone in D1, for example, really pushes himself to improve throughout the first four weeks of the tourney to the point where he's low SDG'ing the round four song, but his chances of getting through to round 5 is miniscule given really poor first and/or second round score(s). These scores would've barely made it past the elimination threshold for each round if the tourney had followed that format all along, but cumulative scoring up until that point destroys his chances of continuing to round 5 onwards. In a division like D7, everyone's already well accustomed with the game and has been playing for quite some time, so even though a similar situation could arise in any division, I think it's most unfair to be put in that position if you're a newbie to the game.

Just something to think about given the steepness of the learning curve for lower divisions.

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

Acceptable point for D7 -- that is the current requirement, and you will unlock it assuming that you don't drop out of the tournament via non-submission (or voluntarily quit). This would be for the other prizes/bragging rights to say that you made the cut. I don't agree with the last point, simply because it doesn't show balance in other aspects of the game (you have to be willing to admit that a level 99 is more than likely going to have some batshit insane speed somewhere in the chart, and someone who is physically fast but cannot balance that speed with other technical abilities doesn't deserve a better ranking if they did poorly in other areas. To me, that's almost like saying a 1-15 football team should go to the playoffs and fluke an opportunity of a lifetime, rather than being a good team that has proven themselves to be well-balanced on every front (this would be true for any kind of sport, honestly -- you can't win a long-distance race sprinting, and you can't win a short sprint pacing, you have to know how to apply yourself).

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

I disagree with only applying to D7. that seems like unfair treatment to players in the other divisions who barely miss the first cutoff and quickly find themselves waiting for the next official.

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

*cough staiain cough*

But personally, I prefer elimination. Sure, those people near the bottom of the division would be able to play the rounds, but they would know that they stand no chance of placing high. I know a significant number wouldn't bother to play on when the highest they could possibly finish is 33rd.

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

This idea and non-elim are both great ways in my opinion to run an official. the only argument against them really in my opinion is that officials "have always been elimination" which isn't really a valid reasoning anyway...

edit:
I can actually see this point to, so I guess I'm a tad bit more undecided than I thought

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

I really like this idea.

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

Great idea, I'd love to see it applied to all divisions.

Edit: Rob's example is possibly relevant but I disagree with the conclusion that only D7 is better suit for this format.

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

perhaps apply to only d4 and up, or something like that?

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

btw, i agree with others talking about being eliminated in round 1,2,3 etc..

a cumulative tournament non-elim style sounds amazing, because it's not always fun to see 160 people cut out in round 1

my suggestion is:

Round 1: Non Elimination, Cumulative Scoring
Round 2: Non Elimination, Cumulative Scoring
Round 3: Non Elimination, Cumulative Scoring
Round 4: Non Elimination, Cumulative Scoring
Round 5: Elimination to 16 (not 8) based on R1-5 cumulative scores (tiebreakers will probably happen here)
Round 6: Elimination to 8, Non-Cumulative Scoring
Round 7: Elimination to 5 or 3, Non-Cumulative Scoring
Round 8: Elimination to 1, Non-Cumulative Scoring

Prizes:
People from last place -> #17 will get small participation prizes for playing R1-R5 (X amount of credits for playing all 5 rounds), to encourage participation - I see too many people not play even in round 1..

People from #16 ~ #6 will get a slightly higher participation prize for playing R1-R7
, which matches up with
Competitors that place 16th or better in a division will automatically receive Fractured Sunshine.
Competitors that place 8th or better in a division will automatically receive Vertex Beta Vrofl.

Then #5, #4, #3, #2, #1 will get their respective prizes (tokens & bigger amount of credits)




that's just my 2 cents

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

If it's possible to determine with a certain degree of objectivity the divisions that should have this format applied and the ones that should stick with strictly elimination taking into consideration the example I posted, then yeah I'd be down for some sort of mixed formatting. I just disagree with cumulative scoring for the lower divisions, but at a certain point (D4/D5?) the issue isn't as prevalent.

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

The way i see it is that player in D7 are the players that have the ability to AAA every song in the game (In theroy). At least this is how i saw it last year. So whats the point in making it elim if everyone is going to AAA round songs?(Especially playing D6 songs) I though it was a way to make sure people were not lazy. Everyone knows that other divisions have players who 2g sightread make it to round 3, wut. It was a way for the top tier to play to their fullest.

Im indifferent on seeing it in D7, but would prefer not to see it in other divisions.
Also, about my AAA all comment, Im hoping to see at least a 97+ for round 8 because i want to see a spectacular final possibly where it doesn't end in a AAA.

Clasko

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

I think cumulative for the first few rounds could work in divisions 1-3 as well. just need to skillboost earlier if you want to make the eventual cutoff.

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

I really appreciate the comments that you guys have thrown out here. It seems like everyone is leaning towards the fact of putting this for higher divisions, and in retrospect, it does seem like a better idea since D6/D7 players tend to excel in all skills, but tournament songs push them to extreme levels.

Keep on with the discussion, I really appreciate it!

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

Especially within an hour or so of the final round being posted. *cough*

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

I almost feel like my opinion isn't called for because I am no where near a high level of FFR, but having played in both formats for DDR I have an opinion about it all the same.

Round Robin is great for one you are in a situation where you are competing with another person's scores. This is because of the weakness that you've stated in the OP and how it wouldn't totally apply to another opponent. However, this tourny is more of a free for all, with a set number of people advancing. Elim makes sense in this setting since the better players will naturally move up, while the lower players will be lower on the list; there isn't the excuse of "well that one guy had that one skill" when you are comparing to the whole.


Also---for me at least---I love the thrill of "OMG any round I could lose" and I always enter to see how far I can make it through. Shoot, I'll join a game I suck at just to see what happens. I could see where that isn't a proper reason to vote no for this, but that along with the above reasons is why I picked no

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

im definitely in the minority. I don't really care but ill say why I picked no: objectively it's a good idea and cant really argue against it.

personally: it seems a LOT less exciting and classic cutthroat elimination is what really motivates me to play and is what I love about the FFR officials. a lot more exciting to play and watch imo