Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

A place for threads related to tournaments and the like, and things related too.

Moderator: Light

Post Reply
User avatar
INW
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1949
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:10 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC, USA

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by INW »

Does anyone disagree with the current system (besides concord)?

Do we really need to put a vote in like one of previous posts illustrates?

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6214
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by sinewav »

Hoax wrote:Also I don't think seeding was ever supposed to make the brackets even ?
Recursion!

Concord
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:24 pm

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by Concord »

I'm not saying good teams wouldn't match up against bad ones in the opening round, I'm just saying the obvious following of a bad team around the challenge board makes the GreatTeam out to be jerks without much confidence. Doesn't sound all that great to me.

There's no logic behind randomizing. The only reason we did it was because of that conflict.

syllabear
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 984
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 1:37 pm
Location: UK/HK

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by syllabear »

Concord, although maturity may have gone up (I doubt it), competitiveness of ladle has also skyrocketed.

Nobody wants to play just 1 game in ladle, making it to the second round is an aspiration of many of the teams, and self assignment will almost definately kill the chances of most worse teams getting past the first round... which means they'll get less eager to play, and you'll end up with a few good teams. Thats what you want? Fine.
The Halley's comet of Armagetron.
ps I'm not tokoyami

User avatar
compguygene
Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 2333
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:09 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by compguygene »

syllabear wrote:Concord, although maturity may have gone up (I doubt it), competitiveness of ladle has also skyrocketed.

Nobody wants to play just 1 game in ladle, making it to the second round is an aspiration of many of the teams, and self assignment will almost definately kill the chances of most worse teams getting past the first round... which means they'll get less eager to play, and you'll end up with a few good teams. Thats what you want? Fine.
QFT

If you listen carefully to the discussion here, its mostly about the "top 5" teams and what affects them. However, I would submit to you that the "noob" teams are the lifeblood of the Ladle. When "second tier" team gets to the second round, or heaven forbid, the semis, it motivates that team that only played in the first round of the last 8 Ladles to keep trying and they just might make it the whole way! However, I would be willing to bet, that any "second tier" team that either never, or very rarely gets past the first round will stick with it. Personally, I think it kinds stinks that we just don't do full randomization. So what if every once in a while you end up with "lopsided" brackets. The real positive benefit of that is simple. Some "second tier" team gets the chance to play in the semifinals which might not have otherwise happened. Yes, said team knows that the bracket was part of the reason that they were there, but darn it, SO WHAT!
I really thought this whole thing was supposed to be about fun anyways! If you really want to grow this game mode and encourage more teams to form and participate, then you really need to look at things from the "lesser teams" perspective as well. If you don't, you may end up with a tournament that only the top teams care about. Do you want to have a ladle of only 6-8 teams?
Armagetron: It's a video game that people should just play and enjoy :)
https://bit.ly/2KBGYjvCheck out the simple site about TheServerPharm

dariv
Round Winner
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:24 pm

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by dariv »

Concord wrote:and just for dariv, I have evidence.
Oh, now your post in the other forum makes sense to me. I didn't realise you were this childish.
pLxDari - Challenge us!

User avatar
-*inS*-
Round Winner
Posts: 320
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 10:31 pm

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by -*inS*- »

Just wondering who is now allowed to challenge who and stuff. I mean I didn't think Tx could beat CT and they did, I didn't think Liz's team would win it all and they did.

Seriously it's not black and white, ID won a match against SP should that make it okay for SP to sign it up next to them again deliberately? What about Tu who won a match vs us in ladle 38? What about Oracle, they beat us twice before losing 2 players.

People need to chill out and stop assuming the worst, at the end of the day the best team wins and that's that. I might want to rematch Liz's team so I'd put SP facing them the first round, so what?

I think most people think their team is capable of beating anyone on any given day so I'm not going to intentionally hunt weaker teams, but I'd like to think CT vs SP would a match reserved for the finals. Another senario that could play out would be maybe some bad blood between two teams might result in a first round matchup a la ladle 36 IB vs SP, ie two good teams out of the way for the weaker teams

If teams want a good first round match up then what's to prevent you from arranging that with a clan you think is even with you? Hell I want SPb vs CTb, and that has a good chance of happening with this new system.

Maybe people should try looking at the advantages of the system rather than assuming the worst all the time. Of course someone might try to take advantage of the system, well they will probably get hunted next ladle by a better team, just karma.
Last edited by -*inS*- on Wed Jan 19, 2011 6:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6214
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by sinewav »

Ok, let's put an end to this. We'll vote on a measure regarding brackets, like so:
Current Seeding | Full Randomization | Concord's Method

The problem is, Concord, I really have no idea what you want after looking over the last few pages. Write something down, in a simple to ingest proposal, and I'll hyperlink back to that post when I make the voting thread.


:lol: I also know not to start discussion threads with the phrase "little or nothing to discuss."

User avatar
apparition
Match Winner
Posts: 628
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:59 am
Location: The Mitten, USA

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by apparition »

Yes, please. Start a vote topic specifically for this with each method's methodology concisely stated once we're ready. No discussions should be in that thread per usualness.

Concord
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:24 pm

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by Concord »

no, it's not my method. It's the original method.

and again it is not something that should be voted on, but something we should discuss and captains should come to some sort of an agreement on. No one person has the authority to control the ballot and timing of the vote (though someone has certainly tried).

compguy, there's no troll in this thread first of all. Your socialist take on the Ladle, if I may label it as such, has some definite merit. I agree that we have to recognize that half the teams in every Ladle only play one game, and three quarters of them are gone after two. It's therefore in our interest to make those matchups as good as possible, but we must also balance the evenness of the brackets such that the Final is the true final. We can't do this randomly. Full randomization doesn't do the eight teams that lose any favors, and it doesn't do the 8 teams that win any favors, and neither does partial randomization. Randomization doesn't do anyone any good, other than ensure them that everything is fair. It's not at all efficient. Teams should be able to essentially trade spots so that they play in servers that work for them and against opponents that work for them.

Since sine.wav seems to really want to label whatever idea I advocate as mine, I'll suggest an adjustment to the original method. Teams are randomized a week before the Ladle and placed on the brackets. They are then free to trade spots with any willing trading partner. Additionally, a match up of teams can trade opening round server assignments with another match up of teams.

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6214
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by sinewav »

Concord wrote:and again it is not something that should be voted on, but something we should discuss and captains should come to some sort of an agreement on.
That's how our voting system already works, unless you are talking about some sort of unanimity (which is unlikely to happen by the look of this thread, eh?).
Concord wrote:Teams are randomized a week before the Ladle and placed on the brackets. They are then free to trade spots with any willing trading partner. Additionally, a match up of teams can trade opening round server assignments with another match up of teams.
Ok that's the kind of thing I'm talking about. You went from looking for a 3rd-place match, randomization of seeds 3 & 4, full randomization, the original method, and now this - which is completely new. It has major complications too.

Ladle teams now have a tighter deadline, having to be ready 4 days earlier. And of course you would want to sign up early because that might leave you with an open spot (a bye, really). And, if I signed up early and got an open spot, I certainly wouldn't let some late team just join in unless I thought I could beat them easily; new team are now screwed more than ever.

I'll add it to the vote. But in the meantime you should write up a section on the wiki with airtight rules on how to proceed with this. And I don't even want to think about how to manage super-teams with 2 entries (CT, SP, uNk).

Concord
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:24 pm

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by Concord »

teams sign up by a week before the ladle, the brackets are randomized and teams are put on them. They can then trade spots. There's no advantage to signing up early.

and there's a big difference between voting and having captains discuss and choose a method. The former, which you suggest, comes with no assurance that the voters even understand the options on the ballot.

I'm just trying to get the ideas on the table for discussion, I'm not saying we've got to do this or should do that, I'm saying we have to discuss them and come to a decision.

User avatar
compguygene
Adjust Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 2333
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:09 pm
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Contact:

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by compguygene »

Concs, with this more succinct explanation, you have sold me on the idea, and as a member of ID clan I will present it to them as a possibility to give strong consideration to. From you longer post I didn't quite catch the idea of teams being able to trade spots etc. Personally, I can see were this would be very beneficial to everybody. Perhaps the original way was the best! Thank you for fully explaining it.
Armagetron: It's a video game that people should just play and enjoy :)
https://bit.ly/2KBGYjvCheck out the simple site about TheServerPharm

gawdzilla
Liz of the many names
Posts: 1124
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 11:13 am

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by gawdzilla »

this is stupid, i'm against everything concord is saying

don't change anything, it's fine as it is right now

Magic
Core Dumper
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 2:33 pm

Re: Ladle 42 Voting Discussion

Post by Magic »

I like the seeds and I would love a 3vs4 match but your new proposal concord does give teams more of a reason to put up multiple teams maybe combine the three?

Post Reply