Bowl 2 Discussion

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

Moderator: Light

Post Reply
User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6348
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Bowl discussion

Post by sinewav »

þsy wrote:How can we suggest, even for a second, that the rules have worked if we are now proposing a competition in which one of the teams is not allowed to even enter a full team?
Actually, this is proving the rules work correctly. The Bowl is a small competition to determine who was the best Ladle team all year. If the 8th seed was so inactive they came up short of players, well damn, they don't deserve to be the best now do they? I don't want this next comment to sound like a snub, because it isn't, but if there is any adjustments to the rules it should be to let Phoenix play instead of Speeders since they have the roster for it. Maybe something like "if you don't have 6 valid players at the end of the season you forfeit to the next team." Again, I like both Speeders and Phoenix. Months ago I complained to mYm members that I wanted SP to get back in the game more. But hey, your records stand for themselves.

Loyalty to the clan/team isn't the best word, maybe enthusiasm is better? Commitment to Fortress?
þsy wrote:And as I said, there are many players who are as active as real life allows them. There's being loyal to a team, and then there's having limited time to play video games - the two are very different, but these rules punish both groups.
It's not any kind of punishment. If you don't have time to commit to the game, how in the world do you expect to be the best? Also, the Bowl season is based on a healthy discussion of peak activity in Arma. It is based on when the most people play, when their school finals are, and it also considers international holidays like Christmas and Easter.
orion wrote:Well then Bowl shouldnt be entire right because the ladder scores you count are based on teams that changes players and roster.. (clear example: unk won last ladle with new players)
Yes uNk won with new players, but they are seed #7. In fact, they would probably be seed #7 even without the new players. The formula for Bowl isn't about Ladle wins. It is about how much winning you do over the season. (Ladle Wins + Rounds Won) * (Match Wins / Match Total) ...Works pretty good if you ask me.

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6348
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by sinewav »

For those of you still in doubt, I want to show you what the Bowl would look like if we forgo the rules about 5 showings per team and per player. The following is based purely on this season's scores:

Code: Select all

Rogue Tronners  16.32
Revolver        10.46
Redemption      10.15
Meet Your Maker  7.56
Unknown Team     5.69
RoadRunnerZ      5.63
Crazy Tronners   5.00
Team Unknown     1.97
It's just another Ladle, but fully seeded. This put the 1st seed "Rogue Tonners" against the 8th seed "Team Unknown." Well, we all saw how that ended 2 days ago. Would it make sense to remove Speeders completely and allow uNk two slots to put whomever they want in those places? In two weeks, if uNk beats ~R~ in the first round then wins the Bowl, would you feel satisfied that uNk was the best team of the year? I hope the answer is a resounding "no." However, if uNk wins the Bowl with the roster on page 1 of this thread, they definitely deserve everyone's respect because it will be hard, hard, hard.

Gaz
Round Winner
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2011 11:38 pm

Re: Ladle 68

Post by Gaz »

Cody wrote:Sine is the one taking his time organizing this, so his rules should be followed. Gaz you don't get to play in bowl, you should of played with mym for 5 ladles. If we take "well Im not on the roster but I'm playing in semifinal" , why didnt your teamleader add you to the roster? You just look like a sub if you're not on the roster. Sine's tournament, Sine's rules.
No thats understandable, im not bitching at sine, i respect his rules, just some people had problems with the clans they were in, and that caused them to leave said clan, like for me i had problems with mym and left, im not going to stay there for one more month if i dont feel comfortable just to be eligible for the BOWL and then have to come back to a team i wasnt on good terms with to begin with.

And some of the better players have to not play in a (what i would like to call "big tourney") because they possibly had problems with a clan or two?

Just seems like some good players that may make matches more intense or interesting, may have to sit out..

Me on the other hand idc either way, ladle is a week after that so im fine not playing and playing in ladle, so w/e.

User avatar
þsy
Match Winner
Posts: 440
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 8:52 pm

Re: Bowl discussion

Post by þsy »

sinewav wrote:I don't want this next comment to sound like a snub, because it isn't, but if there is any adjustments to the rules it should be to let Phoenix play instead of Speeders since they have the roster for it
Yeah I agree with this
sinewav wrote: Loyalty to the clan/team isn't the best word, maybe enthusiasm is better? Commitment to Fortress?
þsy wrote:And as I said, there are many players who are as active as real life allows them. There's being loyal to a team, and then there's having limited time to play video games - the two are very different, but these rules punish both groups.
It's not any kind of punishment. If you don't have time to commit to the game, how in the world do you expect to be the best?
Past ladles show that a lot of the best players are consistently better no matter how often they play, so there really isn't a strict correlation between consistent hours put in and who is the best

I think this whole "Sine's competition Sine's rules" thing is ridiculous. Sine puts in an extraordinary amount of effort and is a great credit to this community - truly - but the Bowl does not belong to Sine, it is a public tournament. So we shouldn't be responding to posts in such a manner, we all get an equal say in this right? If this was Cody's single bind cockpit TST then it would be a different matter, but the Bowl is an annual event scheduled into the fortress calender

For me, the number one problem is that the principal criteria for this tournament is consistent play. That doesn't mean your the best, it just means you've got more time on your hands than other players, and excludes a lot of players who can't make ladles every month - and has resulted in one team having too few to compete

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

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by -*inS*- »

Let me preface this by saying I realize it may not be feasible to change things this season, that's fine.

I have figured out the problem! Ok so the goal of the bowl is to determine the best team of the year. So why are there 8 teams in it?

SP sucked the whole season and we somehow get a spot? This is akin to having every team from a league make the playoffs. We didn't even win anything. What is the point of the regular season then? Unk has to be the strongest team going into this thing when they didn't have that great of a season either. Instead of trying to punish people switching teams, I think only the top 4 teams should play in the bowl.

That way the "regular season" so to speak is actually important! It would solve the whole clan hopping problem because if you switch clans mid season, you lose all the work you had done with your previous team. Maybe lower the barrier from 5 ladles to 3 ladles to prevent ringers. This allows people like dreadlord to actually play (playing rd without him wouldn't feel like a true win anyways).
sine.wav wrote:
-*inS*- wrote:In my head I always assumed the bowl would be some grand yearly event. At the moment it looks exactly like a ladle with handicapped rosters. (Aka no one will remember it apart from any other ladle).
It's not a handicap for the hard-working, stable teams at the top who kept this event in mind over the last nine months. And they will remember the event as bloody brutal because they will sweat in the semi-finals, and the final will be hard as hell.
This is actually a very interesting subject. What are peoples most memorable matches? Personally playing vs unk sans gaz or rd sans dreadlord would feel hollow to me. Out of all my experiences in fortress, two matches really stand out to me:

1. Ladle 32 finals SP vs CT: Wow this one was crazy, back and forth game, server full etc. It was a brawl that CT eventually won, it was my first loss with SP in a ladle one that i will always remember. Just a really intense good fought match. Still to this day I have never seen spec chat go so crazy at the end of the ladle.

2. Ladle 57 sweet 16 Baylife vs Revolver: This matchup was the great unknown, containing 7-8 of the top 10 players at the time. Of course no one knew it was coming so there was literally no one watching, which somehow made all the better. It was similar to the fight at the end of Green Street Hooligans, or the Series Finale of Blue Mountain State, just 12 guys playing their minds out for the love of the game. I think both teams knew the winner would ultimately win the ladle and anything could have happened, fortunately we came out on top.

If one player had been missing from either side, the match would have been ruined in my mind. In this fashion I don't think anyone reasonably competitive could take the bowl seriously.

Personally I dislike clan hopping, infact being in one clan my whole tron-career, I detest it. However banning these players because of that is the wrong way to go about this. If we eased up on the guidelines + made the bowl 4 teams it would look something like:

R
Rd (with dreadlord)
Revolver
Mym (with gaz)

I don't see any easy games between these 4. Play those 4 teams round robin, then the top 2 meet in the finals for a best of 5. Sounds a bit better than the current idea don't you think?

As always feel free to x-post to WJG
Last edited by -*inS*- on Wed Apr 10, 2013 1:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image

User avatar
Titanoboa
Reverse Outside Corner Grinder
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:07 pm

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by Titanoboa »

-*inS*- wrote:Play those 4 teams round robin, then the top 2 meet in the finals for a best of 5. Sounds a bit better than the current idea don't you think?
This sounds like a very appealing setup. Maybe something to discuss for next season?


Also, I also agree that giving the 8th spot to the next team with 6 eligible players should be the best thing for the competition. A 3-5 player team doesn't belong in the Bowl! I think the 5 ladle minimum rule is fine.

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

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by ppotter »

These rules have been in place for a year or so, it's not like they were sprung upon you. It was meant to reflect the whole 'season', not just the last month. Unk for example, are obviously stronger with recent additions, we've only played 3(?) ladles together.

It's too bad if you end up not being able to play, but as Gaz said the ladle is not long after, and there's always next year :p


Also, having a league, then usurping the league with a "final" between the top two teams is stupid. It means a team could dominate all season yet one piece of bad luck could throw the final game for them. It's less applicable in tron (particularly with only 4 teams as proposed) admittedly, the point still stands.

User avatar
orion
Match Winner
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by orion »

Bowl should be like sine propose 1 year ago and everyone agreed, nuff said.
Anyway we should discuss for futures Bowls, this format look unfair for players who made great performances as example, Gaz.
I wont look whole year results and changes but as another example, Mym best results were with atleast 5/6 player who are actually out of the team.

This could be a great tournament but you could not see the best teams who played around the year and you could not see some of the better players who played around the year.
Last edited by orion on Wed Apr 10, 2013 1:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image

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

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by -*inS*- »

ppotter wrote:These rules have been in place for a year or so, it's not like they were sprung upon you. It was meant to reflect the whole 'season', not just the last month. Unk for example, are obviously stronger with recent additions, we've only played 3(?) ladles together.

It's too bad if you end up not being able to play, but as Gaz said the ladle is not long after, and there's always next year :p

Also, having a league, then usurping the league with a "final" between the top two teams is stupid. It means a team could dominate all season yet one piece of bad luck could throw the final game for them. It's less applicable in tron (particularly with only 4 teams as proposed) admittedly, the point still stands.
I'm confused at what you're trying to say. The first half seems to support the bowl, then in the second half you say the bowl is stupid and pointless. Could you maybe try reiterating your point?
Image

Hoax
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 892
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 5:24 pm
Location: UK

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by Hoax »

Sine out of interest why on earth did you call this a Bowl when there already is one, which is just a big ladle iirc

+1 ppotter & ins he's talking about the league suggestion in the second half of the post

User avatar
Rudycantfail
Average Program
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 4:17 am

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by Rudycantfail »

I have always wanted a yearly fortress championship for the community that amounted all the work we've done all year. So naturally I am extremely disappointed to see that I am disallowed to play in this one, because I would have had to play in a minimum of 5 ladles.
You speak of clan loyalty however what about my situation where I wasn't able to play this game for the beginning of the year due to travels, and once returned I only played ladles with one single new team because my former one had disbanded.

The main arguments I see for keeping the rules the same are because:
1) The rules have been in place for a year and so they should stay that way.
2) To prevent teams stacking "really good" players for the final tournament.
3) Because this is Sine's tournament and only he should have the final say.

If anyone where to look at these reasons logically, they would see that they just don't make sense.

1) If humans lived by this rule, nothing would ever be accomplished, society would have never evolved and we'd still be stuck in the caveman era. Obviously people did not take the time, simply did not care, or could not foresee the repercussions of the original rules when they where posted a year ago. Yet now that the consequences are right in front of us, refusing to change because of what people have agreed on a year ago is just plain ignorant.

2) If anything has been proven by the RoadRunner's surpise ladle win this year, its that teams with solid organization and coordination will always surpass teams of uncoordinated "very skilled" players. Therefore teams that have been playing together for a very long time, will naturally have the advantage of knowing eachother's play styles and being more coordinated with one another. A coordinated team will always be far superior then a "stacked" one. This is why I believe the 5 ladles per player rule is not even needed.

3) This is by far the most ridiculous argument of them all, as Psy stated, the ladle chamiponship, or "Bowl" as it is named, is not Sine's tournament, it is the community's. Yes Sine put in a lot of work to make it happen, however why should this trump all the work each of us has individually put in to make each and every ladle happen, or the time I myself spent on creating new tactics and strategies with my team to try and evolve the way the game is played.
To decide that one single person should have the final say over the community's tournament is truly appalling, therefore I believe the only right way to go about this is through a vote.


To sum up; 1) nobody saw the consequences of the rules when they where imposed a year ago, and now that we do they should be changed. 2) A team that has been playing together for a long time will naturally gain the advantage of being more coordinated then a team stacked of "very good" players, therefore the 5 ladles per player rule is not needed at all. 3) This is the community's championship tournament so it doesn't make sense that sine should have the last call.

I don't see any other way of going about this other then a community vote. I personally think the 5 ladles per player rule should be abolished completely, but perhaps lowering it to something more reasonable, like 2 or 3 is more realistic. All the other rules of the tournament seem perfectly sound to me.
-Just another fortress nerd.

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

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by ppotter »

Rudycantfail wrote:To sum up; 1) nobody saw the consequences of the rules when they where imposed a year ago, and now that we do they should be changed. 2) A team that has been playing together for a long time will naturally gain the advantage of being more coordinated then a team stacked of "very good" players, therefore the 5 ladles per player rule is not needed at all.
Ladle 57 was the easiest ladle I've ever played; I'd played with just 1 of my teammates with any regularity.


And yeah Hoax, insa l2read

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6348
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by sinewav »

I'm glad most of you realize this is not my tournament. I am also glad about the vibrant discussion. We shouldn't make any rule changes now simply because we would be literally changing the rules while the game is in play and that is unfair to everyone. One thing the Bowl does differently than Ladle is it puts the emphasis on the team, not the players. It's too bad some great players are not eligable, but all the best teams are! And again, looking at the rosters and the standings, the Bowl looks exactly as I think it should with the top 3 teams most likely to win.

I like the idea of restricting Bowl to the top 4 teams. Originally we discussed the number of eligible teams being a percentage of average participation, but made it 8 because the bracket would be full (more players).

@Hoax: we picked the name Bowl because we like recycling! Let's face it, we are not going to have a 64 team Fort event. Might as well reuse the nomenclature.

Cody
Shutout Match Winner
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:43 am

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by Cody »

Oh, if its not your tournament then I retract what I say about your rules your tournament, I don't see why we as the fort community cant change the rules that are currently in place if the majority is unhappy.

Open a vote for team leaders for this season of ladle (60-68, 68 yes?)
þsy wrote: Cody's single bind cockpit TST
Sign-ups open soon xoxo

User avatar
sinewav
Graphic Artist
Posts: 6348
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:37 am
Contact:

Re: Bowl 2 Discussion

Post by sinewav »

The majority is happy. It's only the clan hoppers and the inactives that have a problem.

Post Reply