The Dominating 12

im so close I can almost touch it....

I have a new idea based on 12 games all at once. Who wins most is the Dominator. I'm also going to suggest how to break the ties. I'm suggesting games with 5 players and every player would play 5 games. For example in this way: [spoiler]Game 1: 1 lifeinpixels 2 Spartakus 3 Matty 4 thaithai 5 Antonis_xania Game 2: 6 nikeboix69 7 Dferguson 8 suldam 9 copperbird 10 Fendi Game 3: 11 Joca 12 oliver 1 lifeinpixels 2 Spartakus 3 Matty Game 4: 4 thaithai 5 Antonis_xania 6 nikeboix69 7 Dferguson 8 suldam Game 5: 9 copperbird 10 Fendi 11 Joca 12 oliver 1 lifeinpixels Game 6: 2 Spartakus 3 Matty 4 thaithai 5 Antonis_xania 6 nikeboix69 Game 7: 7 Dferguson 8 suldam 9 copperbird 10 Fendi 11 Joca Game 8: 12 oliver 1 lifeinpixels 2 Spartakus 3 Matty 4 thaithai Game 9: 5 Antonis_xania 6 nikeboix69 7 Dferguson 8 suldam 9 copperbird Game 10: 10 Fendi 11 Joca 12 oliver 1 lifeinpixels 2 Spartakus Game 11: 3 Matty 4 thaithai 5 Antonis_xania 6 nikeboix69 7 Dferguson Game 12: 8 suldam 9 copperbird 10 Fendi 11 Joca 12 oliver This is just using the classification order but also a random matching can be fine.[/spoiler] 8, 9 or 10 starting territories are fair in my opinion, having 5 players it means to chose maps with 40, 45 or 50 territories. There are 14 maps that match this: Basket, Caribbean Double, East Asia, Eld World, Europe, Falkland, House, Korea-Japan, South Africa, Tor, United States, USA, World Classic, World Modified. Maybe World Classic (and its Modified version) can be excluded giving an advantage of the knowledge of the specific maps of the site. So we can set 12 games in 12 different maps, randomly chosen. [u]12 players, 12 games, 12 maps. Do you like the idea?[/u] All at once since it's like 1 round tournament: I mean they would take long like playing 1 game only. Being 5 games with 5 players the average result is to win 1. For example a common outcome can be like this (just an example): [spoiler]2 games won: -lifeinpixels -Spartakus -Matty -thaithai 1 games won: -Antonis_xania -nikeboix69 -Dferguson -suldam 0 games won: -copperbird -Fendi -Joca -oliver[/spoiler] In a context like this who wins 3 (or more) games will be probably the winner. And a player winning 3 games out of 5 can occur much more often than a player winning 2 games out of 2. But still there are several possibilities of a tie. I'm studying how to break the ties without playing a final game, which it would be weird in case of 2 players and stalemating in case of 3 players (but even 4...). And in any case it would take long. [spoiler]First I thought about the 'direct match comparison' (I don't know how you call it in English) that consists to compare the played games (of the tournament) where both the tied players were in. In case of 2 players is simple, in case of 3 or more still it can be done but it's a bit more complex. Btw I'm not a fan of this method. A second method that can be added or completely substitutes the previous is based on who (among the players tied with most games won) has those games faster, counting the rounds delayed to win. For example, let say, lifeinpixels wins 3 games and Spartakus too. Lifeinpixel have won a game in 16 rounds, another in 12 and another in 7, ok, totally are 35 rounds; Spartakus 12 rounds, 23 and 15, totally 50 rounds: lifeinpixels has been the player who won most games in less rounds, then he is the winner. A third method that can be used in case the previous fails or also always matched with that. It consists of counting how many rounds a players survived in the games he lost ('minus' how many rounds he delayed to win in the games he won).[/spoiler] In few words. Who win most games is the winner. In case of a tie it would be awarded the fastest winner (the least rounds to win) or the longest loser (the most rounds to die). Can be good?

I don't like the way to break ties - if you win shortly because someone else jumps too early, than you do not deserve to win, just because the other one had to fight hard and be really smart about his (longer) win. Also, you cannot always prevent to die first/early. Apart from that, for the non premium dominator participants, they cannot join any game when they participate in this tournament, as they are limited to 5 games (we can cheat by letting them in if they are not empty on games). This will, amoungst others, make sure the non premium dominators cannot play live games for a while...

@Matty, this is your comment on Vexer's proposal. [quote=Matty wrote]I am ok with it - it's the best plan I have heard so far, first player to get 2 wins takes all.[/quote] I have just proposed an alternate version with 5 games per player rather than only 2. But the idea of the fastest winner was already in place. About the 5 games limitation, I thought there was the way not to put them in count when they are Dominator title games, so I didn't consider that problem. But I'm thinking they still can refuse to participate if they prefers to play live games more than play for the Dominator title...

o_O If player A wins two games, and player B and C each win one, than there is no need for the third game, cause A is dominator - I think this is fair. However, there actually is a problem, what if player A and B both win both their dominator games :S (Cause I don't think it's fair to judge on how fast you win your two games). Not very likely to happen though.

Yes, you are right Matty, "not very likely to happen", but still we need a solution to solve that situation. Really the first case also is not very likely (I mean: A wins 2 games, B and C 1 game each), how often happens to win 2 games out of 2, with 6 talented players in? ...rare! Since with Vexer's proposal, the great most of the cases would be solved with the 4 players final game. But the Dominator is supposed to be a monthly title, since I'm trying to find a faster solution as a 1 round tournament. Matty you didn't say you don't like my proposal, you just said you don't like the way to break the ties... Another idea was to give the title, in case of tie, to the player with more points, I guess it's fair but it doesn't match with the idea of equal chances for everybody among the 12. Since what I have suggested it's the best I could find satisfying both purposes (fast match and equal chances) but if someone can find something better or suggest how to improve it, I'm ok. I just liked the idea of 12 games at once... Waiting for more feedback now, especially from Vexer, and from the 12 of course! :)

Setting up 12 games is too much work. If, in the future, we create an admin page for setting up these kinds of games then this becomes more feasible but still I think it's too many games. But I would be willing to do it once a year. I don't like the idea of the possibility of ties. I didn't think about it too long but it seems like they are more likely in your system. The way we are doing this months tournament there is a possibility of a tie if 2 players win their first two games but the chance is very small. If that happens then I think they both deserve the title of Dominator.

Ok, got it. It was just an idea. Now is better to set it up, people can't wait anymore... ;)

January 2014 Dominator Mini Tournament: Players: 1 lifeinpixels 2 Spartakus 3 Matty 4 thaithai 5 nikeboix69 6 Dferguson 7 suldam 8 Fendi 9 oliver 10 Villain191 11 MuzuaneAskari 12 bluebird005vis Here are the games: Mediterranean States Players 1-6 http://www.dominating12.com/?cmd=game&sec=play&id=245589 Players 7-12 http://www.dominating12.com/?cmd=game&sec=play&id=245598 Korea-Japan Players 1,3,5,7,9,11 http://www.dominating12.com/?cmd=game&sec=play&id=245574 Players 2,4,6,8,10,12 http://www.dominating12.com/?cmd=game&sec=play&id=245578

maby i have something for the tournament my english is to bad to explane but maby some body nows what i meen 5 players 5 games the one that win 2 or more games has the advantage beginning next game

This is a challenge between 12 players and there is no way to decide the turn order. Plus the title must be assigned in few games. Il s'agit d'un défi entre les 12 joueurs et il n'existe aucun moyen de déterminer l'ordre du tour. De plus le titre doit être attribué dans quelques jeux.

In my opinion, we should take a count of which players in the top 12 will be competing before we set up the games. If there are 9 or fewer (like it seems there were this time), we can skip the tournament altogether and just go with a single game.

yeah, i dont like that players not in the top12 are playing for the title. Getting lot of points for being a D12 is not only good luck, but 2 games maybe yes it is

Yeah, i didn't expect so many to not want to play. In the past it's usually only been 1 who didn't want to play.

i concur with oliver and LIP. ironically, two preliminary games (out of 4) have been won by non-D12 placers. which means, now odds are 50:50 D might be held by a untraditional player.