The World Dominator Tournament

On that game I don't know what to say, yes it seemed gifted to me, I don't know how exactly bcoz I haven't even checked. I'm sorry for FightingDucks, but probably Robbit had a plan and that plan failed <this is my guess without checking the log> and when the failure is unintentional I don't call it a murder/suicide, maybe it was a bad move, maybe it was bad luck, I don't know... I would have been happy with a draw and finally I found myself in a winning position, that's all I know. @@dough_boy I think what you suggest is over complicated and I'm pretty sure Periwinkle is not going to change the rules now. Maybe next time. In my opinion I think we might try to use a larger [i]main map[/i] - W.Expanded for example - giving 2 or 3 spots to each participant, or starting with a lot of neutrals so that everyone can expand for free in the first round.

[quote=The_Bishop]@@dough_boy I think what you suggest is over complicated and I'm pretty sure Periwinkle is not going to change the rules now. Maybe next time. In my opinion I think we might try to use a larger [i]main map[/i] - W.Expanded for example - giving 2 or 3 spots to each participant, or starting with a lot of neutrals so that everyone can expand for free in the first round.[/quote] I was replying to FightingDucks putting a bounty out on Robbit.

AAh got it! Sorry, my misunderstanding!

No problem. I would agree, a tournament where you can be out in the first round can be really expensive.

yup....if we were playing on world expanded...this game would last at least 2-3 years. as it is we will be lucky if we get 50% by december 31st....so cut off with the most terts by dec 31 will be the winner...or earlier if 50% is achieved before then.

Yeah, this is not ending by 12/31 other than by whoever has the most. You should make it 50%+1 because what if you have two players end a round with 21 each? What happens if 12/31 and there are 2 or 3 (or more) that are tied? Next time I think there needs to be a limit on the number of attackers on 1 territory to 2 at most. So first 2 get it, any others have to target something else.

[quote=dough_boy]Yeah, this is not ending by 12/31 other than by whoever has the most. You should make it 50%+1 because what if you have two players end a round with 21 each? What happens if 12/31 and there are 2 or 3 (or more) that are tied? Next time I think there needs to be a limit on the number of attackers on 1 territory to 2 at most. So first 2 get it, any others have to target something else.[/quote] Nope. Tied winners split the prize....the pot is big enough to split and still be a fair large prize. Why complicate things? If a person wants to attack a territory, let them. The beauty of this set up is variety. Sometimes you get 1v1...sometimes it's 1v1v1v1. Otherwise who gets preference?...we all live in different time zones....I do not want to make this more complicated than necessary. You can host the next one with the parameters you like :)

[quote=periwinkle]Nope. Tied winners split the prize....the pot is big enough to split and still be a fair large prize. Why complicate things? If a person wants to attack a territory, let them. The beauty of this set up is variety. Sometimes you get 1v1...sometimes it's 1v1v1v1. Otherwise who gets preference?...we all live in different time zones....I do not want to make this more complicated than necessary. You can host the next one with the parameters you like :)[/quote] Sorry, you never said ties would split the prize. Now who is changing rules/parameters? ;) [quote=Prizes]There is a maximum number of players of 42. If there are less than 42 players, any unclaimed territories will be neutral on the main map. Own 50% of the map and you will be the tournament winner. If 50% of the main map is not owned by a single player by December 31, 2023, then the player with the most territories win. The winner of the tournament will get up to 70% of the rating points (1176 points) and tokens collected. Second place will get 20% (336 points) and third will get 10% (168 points).[/quote]

Ah yes, I neglected to write that. I will update it tomorrow. But yes if there is more than 1 person that is tied for first, then naturally they get to split the prize. After all 1176 rating points still splits nicely if there are more than 1 player. Enough to go around.

[quote=dough_boy] Next time I think there needs to be a limit on the number of attackers on 1 territory to 2 at most. So first 2 get it, any others have to target something else.[/quote] These were the parameters I was talking about. Nope. Not changing those. How the prizes are divided doesn't affect the parameters or the mechanics of the tournament of the final winners. ;)

4 tied for first is worth less than 1 finishing 2nd... Should it just be that if 2 tie for first, then they split 1st and 2nd prize, 3 tied for first, they split all 3? This is how normal ties are handled in the world isn't it? [b]Scenario 1:[/b] Player A - 7 Player B - 7 Player C - 6 Player D - 5 This would have 2 first place, 1 2nd, 1 3rd in your scenario. But it should be 2 for first and second (A & B ) with Player C getting 3rd. [b]Scenario 2:[/b] Player A - 7 Player B - 7 Player C - 7 Player D - 5 Player E - 4 This would have 3 first place, 1 2nd, 1 3rd in your scenario. But it should be 3 for first, second, and third (A & B & C) with Player D+ not placing.

[quote=dough_boy]4 tied for first is worth less than 1 finishing 2nd... Should it just be that if 2 tie for first, then they split 1st and 2nd prize, 3 tied for first, they split all 3? This is how normal ties are handled in the world isn't it? [b]Scenario 1:[/b] Player A - 7 Player B - 7 Player C - 6 Player D - 5 This would have 2 first place, 1 2nd, 1 3rd in your scenario. But it should be 2 for first and second (A &amp; B ) with Player C getting 3rd. [b]Scenario 2:[/b] Player A - 7 Player B - 7 Player C - 7 Player D - 5 Player E - 4 This would have 3 first place, 1 2nd, 1 3rd in your scenario. But it should be 3 for first, second, and third (A &amp; B &amp; C) with Player D+ not placing. [/quote] Wow...you do like to complicate things. Like I said, I will update the prize page tomorrow. Yes, the prizes are handled like how the "rest of the world" does it. If there are 4+ first place winners, then yes, the ENTIRE pot splits 4+ ways. That is it. There is no 2nd tier or 3rd tier. Like how the rest of the world does it. Why would I do anything different? Dont worry, the players that all tied for first will win their fair share...lol. To be honest I have ran many many tournaments in my life time. This site is quite amusing with many of your suggestions in this tournament and the previous ones. Also how players like to change parameters mid-way through my tournament so it's to their advantage. It's is understandable since this is a new format that you are not familiar with. But I can not and should not change the parameters once the tournament has started. This is standard practice elsewhere. These tournaments I am running has been through at least a few tries elsewhere. I am known to run a descent, efficient, mostly error free tournaments. (Hopefully my last 3 tournaments have been solid proof of that). So, sit back and just enjoy the tournament. Hopefully we will see you on the podium. Edit: parameters I was referring to is the ordering phases...how you want to limit that.

[quote=dough_boy]Next time I think there needs to be a limit on the number of attackers on 1 territory to 2 at most. So first 2 get it, any others have to target something else.[/quote] Umm...I clearly said next time. I know you don't make changes mid tournament and you shouldn't (unless it was unclear from the beginning). And I am not complicating things. You were not clear in your answer. Just that if two tie for first they get to split the prize...but it is two prizes. Had you said "if two tie for first they get to split the first and second place prizes" I wouldn't have said anything. I was trying to explain what we are talking about because I wasn't sure if that is what you thought.

[quote=The_Bishop]On that game I don't know what to say, yes it seemed gifted to me, I don't know how exactly bcoz I haven't even checked. I'm sorry for FightingDucks, but probably Robbit had a plan and that plan failed &lt;this is my guess without checking the log&gt; and when the failure is unintentional I don't call it a murder/suicide, maybe it was a bad move, maybe it was bad luck, I don't know... I would have been happy with a draw and finally I found myself in a winning position, that's all I know. [/quote] Looking at the log, they got great dice and still weren't any where close to attacking all my spaces and set you up with enough next to me to kill without issue. I'd love to hear from them how they were playing to win there or what their strategy was. I'll admit I'm also not biased since it knocked me out of this right away, but it was still an awful move.

[quote=dough_boy][quote=dough_boy]Next time I think there needs to be a limit on the number of attackers on 1 territory to 2 at most. So first 2 get it, any others have to target something else.[/quote] Umm...I clearly said next time. I know you don't make changes mid tournament and you shouldn't (unless it was unclear from the beginning). And I am not complicating things. You were not clear in your answer. Just that if two tie for first they get to split the prize...but it is two prizes. Had you said "if two tie for first they get to split the first and second place prizes" I wouldn't have said anything. I was trying to explain what we are talking about because I wasn't sure if that is what you thought.[/quote] I was referring to fightducks bounty on robit....the 1000 tokens to split it.