Fortress-For-All - Discussion

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

Moderator: Light

Post Reply
User avatar
Titanoboa
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1791
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:07 pm

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by Titanoboa »

gm Sain's and and DGM's, and gz DGM's superheroes

User avatar
orion
Match Winner
Posts: 782
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by orion »

Wasnt it like a bigger spoon?
Image

User avatar
DaGarBBaGeMAN
Core Dumper
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 9:22 pm

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by DaGarBBaGeMAN »

Pr3 wrote:Going to pick 5 unreliable players next time. Gm(s) from the only team with original members :|.
We were also a team with all our original members, and we ended up winning the whole thing, so you don't have to pick 5 unreliable players next time. :P

GM's everyone - agreed that the rules weren't perfect, but that's why this was only the first FFA. Look forward to more in the future. Thanks for your organizing, Ratchet.
Image -made by az95

Image

User avatar
ElmosWorld
Match Winner
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:38 pm

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by ElmosWorld »

How about draft the players 30 minutes to an hour before the tournament starts? Then you know who is going to be there and this won't happen next time?
Image

Zenith
Average Program
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 5:17 pm

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by Zenith »

Ratchet wrote:
Zenith wrote:Piece of **** tourney, work out the ******* subs
Too underdeveloped
I won't be playing in this again if major changes aren't made
Thanks
you didn't even sign up, noob

GZ DGM's team
Suck me nube :x
Honestly I didn't have a clue about FFA until today.
Gazelle asked me to sub so I went.
If there was something in the rule books restricting subs or something, it would probably have been better. Gz to DGM though.

Also elmo, that would have helped.

User avatar
orion
Match Winner
Posts: 782
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by orion »

orion wrote:Wasnt it like a bigger spoon?
ElmosWorld wrote:How about draft the players 30 minutes to an hour before the tournament starts? Then you know who is going to be there and this won't happen next time?
Image

User avatar
Gazelle
Match Winner
Posts: 651
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:06 am

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by Gazelle »

Im so so sorry guys, my internet gave out during the finals! Wish i could've been there to try and help us win!

Next time!

Sorry again..

And Congratz to DGM's team, very well deserved, you all put on one hell of a show!

User avatar
Renegade
Core Dumper
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 7:44 pm

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by Renegade »

Gm's all, was fun!

Big thanks to Ratchet for hosting this.
Image

User avatar
Fippmam
Round Winner
Posts: 392
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 10:54 am

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by Fippmam »

Asked you to sub for us Apple and you said no -.- Good thing we didn't need subs though.

Gms everyone, was fun

edit: and ofanxxx Joshie for hosting this <3

User avatar
Bytes
Round Winner
Posts: 220
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 12:13 pm

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by Bytes »

Yeh, drafting half an hour before would probably be best
Image

bilbo baggins
Round Winner
Posts: 214
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 6:05 pm

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by bilbo baggins »

awsome fun, we got smoked by DGM's nubs but still gm's, next time i rq if i have titan on my team :D

im intruiged to find out how the newer fort players found this, since it was supposed to bring new players into fort?

J Dawg
Round Winner
Posts: 207
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 12:57 am

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by J Dawg »

I honestly thought this tournament was great! I thought ratchet put a lot of time and effort to organize this along with server tech too. I was very pleased with the outcome, even though my team did not win, I still really enjoyed the experience and I look forward to the next one too, please have it!

@bilbo: I am sorry that bilbo kicked you out of phoenix ;)
ImageImageImageImageImage

Overrated
Match Winner
Posts: 483
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:32 am

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by Overrated »

Yeah, it was a good tournament given everything. Sorry, just got really frustrated and annoyed that stereo decided to take over 20 minutes to take a dump and I don't like how it was assumed we would find time to get a sub from somewhere. Too busy trying to play to focus on getting another player. Other than that ggs, gms.
BRAWL dead. RIP.

Fort is like a box of knives, you never know when you're going to be cut.

User avatar
ppotter
Match Winner
Posts: 451
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 12:45 am

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by ppotter »

Yeah, nice tourney Ratchet. Only to be expected there are some kinks to work out after the first try. Perhaps next time limit the number of teams to a "round" number so there are no byes. 8 probably, unless there is a lot of interest and you can bump it p to 16. With 8 teams, if you had 56 players that would be 6+1 so each team has an assigned sub, or possibly have 64 players, and if you pick 8 people and only 4 showed up, it's your won fault for picking unreliable players. :P

User avatar
Ratchet
Match Winner
Posts: 780
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:55 am
Contact:

Re: Fortress-For-All - Discussion

Post by Ratchet »

ppotter wrote:Yeah, nice tourney Ratchet. Only to be expected there are some kinks to work out after the first try. Perhaps next time limit the number of teams to a "round" number so there are no byes. 8 probably, unless there is a lot of interest and you can bump it p to 16. With 8 teams, if you had 56 players that would be 6+1 so each team has an assigned sub, or possibly have 64 players, and if you pick 8 people and only 4 showed up, it's your won fault for picking unreliable players. :P
I do think that byes should be done away with. The next tournament (assuming I do one next month) will definitely have 8 teams and a shorter sign up period.

This aims to bring down the number of people we have to rely on to show up. Additionally, by giving a two-week signup period people are more likely to remember they signed up and need to show up than if they sign up a month ahead.

Perhaps 8 teams of 6 (48) with two subs on each team (people who signed up late but are still willing to show up and play if possible) (54 total players) we can minimize the need for substitutes that aren't signed up. That system would have probably been effective given the current tournament procedures, but we didn't have enough substitutes signed up to assign them to teams this time. We had 6 subs and 10 teams.

Next time we will aim to have 8 players dedicated to each team - hopefully that'll be enough.
Image
"Dream as if you'll live forever,
Live as if you'll die today." -James Dean

Post Reply