the times i saw double elimination the whole tournament (till finals) in any other game or amateur sport tournament was just awful. keep control of the amount of times a team played, amount of avalible servers, a ridiculous long ladle. just my opinion.Monkey wrote:I also thought that double elimination only applied to the initial round(s); to me it makes more sense that way. Is this not the case?
Ladle 99
Moderator: Light
Re: Ladle 99
Re: Ladle 99
An argument could be made to push forward the start of ladle by 45 minutes since Daylight savings has ended and the ladle now starts later for European players and can progress to late at night. Adding double elimination would only increase the time it goes on, so starting a bit earlier wouldn't be that bad of an idea in my opinion. As for available servers, that's not that big of a deal if we stick to our current average of 8 teams, 4 servers in use first round so availability shouldn't be a problem. As for keeping track of which teams have played what I think if we have one or two dedicated moderators floating around this should be easy to keep track, I try to do my best to update wiki for brackets as fast as possible for any tournament, for double elimination team leaders would need to make sure they check the wiki when it's been updated and post their results or find a global mod to tell them the results of their match, if they're uncomfortable with updating the wiki. I think it's certainly doable, but leaders need to be helpful.
bye
Re: Ladle 99
Long ago, Z-Man suggested two things that would help double-elimination run smoother. Our current Server Distributor tool will not be useful for the new bracket. To summarize, we need a server setup that allows teams to stay put and a label system to let teams know their path through the bracket.
Re: Ladle 99
It might seem slightly unfair in theory, but it's the format most esport-games are going for. THIS format has established itself over most of the online tournaments (that i know of) that are held and that aren't single elimination (if you ignore lower bracket round 1), and in my opinion it's the format that makes the most sense for us aswell.sinewav wrote:The biggest argument against double-elimination is that the winner of the upper bracket often has a long wait for the lower bracket to finish. Then, they might have to play two games to decide a winner. However, Ladle occasionally runs long anyway so I don't see how this would make things worse. And if it is we can change it back!Wikipedia wrote:The championship finals of a double elimination tournament is usually set up to be a possible two games. The rationale is that since the tournament is indeed double elimination, it is unfair to have the W Bracket champion eliminated with its first loss. Therefore, while the W Bracket champion needs to beat the L Bracket champion only once to win the tournament, the L Bracket champion must beat the Winners' Bracket champion twice.
Re: Ladle 99
Here is some instruction for Windows computers:jedi wrote:z-mans rec.:
how can i the videos fast forward?
http://wiki.armagetronad.org/index.php? ... g_.28XP.29
Re: Ladle 99
I think he means fast forward while the recording is running... (like in a video player)sinewav wrote:Here is some instruction for Windows computers:jedi wrote:z-mans rec.:
how can i the videos fast forward?
http://wiki.armagetronad.org/index.php? ... g_.28XP.29
Re: Ladle 99
Not possible. You can only do it from the command line at launch.aP|Nelg wrote:I think he means fast forward while the recording is running... (like in a video player)