I fill you are right, Psymon! What's the problem with inviting player #13?
But I know there were some complaints about it in the past.
I try to resume things (correct me if I say something wrong).
If you scroll this long thread you can find the discussion on the Dominator Game reform began around page 12 an went on till page 21. The idea was to substitute that single massive game (8 players once then 9) with a mini-tournament that includes all top 12 players. A basic idea was to play two 6p games with a 2p final, but 2p is too much luck based. Another idea was to play three 4p games with a 3p final, but 3p is too much stalemating. Elysium suggested [at page 14] three 4p games and then a special 9p game among the losers to gain the 4th place in the final. It was a solution in three rounds and (probably) the first proposal without 2p and 3p games.
But Vexer was not a fan of the 9p game (and I agree with that) and he came up with a new idea that was two 6p games at the first round, two 5p games at the second round and then the 4 winners playing in the final game [page 15]. It was played that way but it was VERY long! Because three rounds take time, and above all, the final game never ended with a winner [page 18]. tontot, Joca, Matty and nikeboix69 were in that game. Well that's a problem of these super skilled players! They are pretty able to stalemate a 4p game, even if it doesn't happen so often with "normal" players. But it's true in that case one player left the game when it was in the final stage.
Anyway then Vexer proposed an improvement of his own idea that consists to play four 6p games all at once and then a 4p final game if needed [page 19]. "If needed" because if someone wins 2 games he's directly proclamed winner without the need of a final game. It can happen around 33% of times (if I calculated it right). And wait, this is simulating it randomly, giving all the players equal chances, but in reality some players are better than the others, so it can happen even more likey to have one who wins 2 games, let say maybe 35 or 40%. Vexer also suggested that in the very rare case of 2 players both winning 2 games (around 1% if I'm not wrong) they both will be proclamed winners [page 20]. It looks resonable. That's a great improvement because the Mini-Tournament was reduced from 3 rounds mandatory to only 2 and in some cases only 1. The experiment worked well with Villain191 gaining the title at the first round! [page 21]
To re-link to Psymon's comment. It was in that case that someone complained the presense of people without the black label (not in the top 12) in the Dominator Tournament. But the complaints came mostly from people really on the top and apparently they were interested to reduce the "circle" in order to have greater chances to win. Anyway at the next time Vexer ran a single game with 9 players because 3 of the top 12 refused the invitation [page 23]. And from there on the idea of the Mini-Tournament fell forgotten, probably also because in most of cases he had no time to organize it.
So my idea is to invite all top12 players to the Dominator Game(s):
- If 3 or more refuse we run a single game as it has always been the most of times;
- If 2 refuse we run the Mini-Tournament with 5p games instead of 6p;
- If 1 refuse we invite player #13 and we run the Mini-Tournament regularly;
- If no one refuse, we also run the Mini-Tournament regularly!
Since there is only one case in which we are forced to invite one person that is not in the top12. I can't see any special problem with that.
But things must be tested well before being implemented. Following the idea that Matty suggested me in private, I'm going to start a new thread in which we can elaborate and test and improve any ideas about a 12 player Mini-Tournament. Anyway I will put at the first place what I call the "Vexer's method" and I will describe it better if it is not clear from what I said here.
I fill you are right, Psymon! What's the problem with inviting player #13?
But I know there were some complaints about it in the past.
I try to resume things (correct me if I say something wrong).
[spoiler=HISTORY]If you scroll this long thread you can find the discussion on the Dominator Game reform began around page 12 an went on till page 21. The idea was to substitute that single massive game (8 players once then 9) with a mini-tournament that includes all top 12 players. A basic idea was to play two 6p games with a 2p final, but 2p is too much luck based. Another idea was to play three 4p games with a 3p final, but 3p is too much stalemating. Elysium suggested [at page 14] three 4p games and then a special 9p game among the losers to gain the 4th place in the final. It was a solution in three rounds and (probably) the first proposal without 2p and 3p games.
But Vexer was not a fan of the 9p game (and I agree with that) and he came up with a new idea that was two 6p games at the first round, two 5p games at the second round and then the 4 winners playing in the final game [page 15]. It was played that way but it was VERY long! Because three rounds take time, and above all, the final game never ended with a winner [page 18]. tontot, Joca, Matty and nikeboix69 were in that game. Well that's a problem of these super skilled players! They are pretty able to stalemate a 4p game, even if it doesn't happen so often with "normal" players. But it's true in that case one player left the game when it was in the final stage.
Anyway then Vexer proposed an improvement of his own idea that consists to play four 6p games all at once and then a 4p final game if needed [page 19]. "If needed" because if someone wins 2 games he's directly proclamed winner without the need of a final game. It can happen around 33% of times (if I calculated it right). And wait, this is simulating it randomly, giving all the players equal chances, but in reality some players are better than the others, so it can happen even more likey to have one who wins 2 games, let say maybe 35 or 40%. Vexer also suggested that in the very rare case of 2 players both winning 2 games (around 1% if I'm not wrong) they both will be proclamed winners [page 20]. It looks resonable. That's a great improvement because the Mini-Tournament was reduced from 3 rounds mandatory to only 2 and in some cases only 1. The experiment worked well with Villain191 gaining the title at the first round! [page 21][/spoiler]
To re-link to Psymon's comment. It was in that case that someone complained the presense of people without the black label (not in the top 12) in the Dominator Tournament. But the complaints came mostly from people really on the top and apparently they were interested to reduce the "circle" in order to have greater chances to win. Anyway at the next time Vexer ran a single game with 9 players because 3 of the top 12 refused the invitation [page 23]. And from there on the idea of the Mini-Tournament fell forgotten, probably also because in most of cases he had no time to organize it.
So my idea is to invite all top12 players to the Dominator Game(s):
- If 3 or more refuse we run a single game as it has always been the most of times;
- If 2 refuse we run the Mini-Tournament with 5p games instead of 6p;
- If 1 refuse we invite player #13 and we run the Mini-Tournament regularly;
- If no one refuse, we also run the Mini-Tournament regularly!
Since there is only one case in which we are forced to invite one person that is not in the top12. I can't see any special problem with that.
But things must be tested well before being implemented. Following the idea that Matty suggested me in private, I'm going to start a new thread in which we can elaborate and test and improve any ideas about a 12 player Mini-Tournament. Anyway I will put at the first place what I call the "Vexer's method" and I will describe it better if it is not clear from what I said here.
![[image]](http://www.dominating12.com/image/skins/1/dead.png)