The time has come: Ladle 100 [HYPE]

[Soul]

daddy's home

[sinewav]

There are great arguments for and against double-elimination in L-100 and it's hard to decide how to proceed. One issue is the amount of time the event will take. To stay on schedule, the loser bracket should be restricted to a single match instead of three. This will make up for the fact that a total of seven (7) finals need to be played for a 16-team bracket. There will be a lot of server switching. Do we have enough servers?

If we want to go through with this, I can write up detailed instructions with an illustration to help players understand the new procedure. I know double-elimination is easy for some of you to understand, but I guarantee that many of your fellow Tronners are baffled by it.

Below is a rough drawing of the tournament flow. The exact details will follow if we move forward with this plan. Again, I propose that we restrict the loser bracket to one (1) match per final to stay on schedule.

[Pre]

I agree it should be a 'best of 1' in the lower bracket, with the exception of the lower bracket finals..
the amount of servers we need should be the same as if we would go with normal brackets, or am i mistaken?
shouldn't be more than 8 if we have a 16-team bracket, and as of now there are already 9 signed up..

[Magi]

shouldn't be more than 8 if we have a 16-team bracket, and as of now there are already 9 signed up..

Note that at least 3 of those servers aren't actually up and haven't been up/used in a while. Not often that the server part of the brackets get edited anymore, nor does server quality really get tracked either.

As for double elimination server requirements, we'll still have the same amount of teams in round 2 as 1 so as long as there's enough for round 1 it shouldn't be a problem

[sinewav]

Since we are short servers I am willing to pay for a couple, but I don't have any hosting lined up. Any suggestions?

I removed the servers that did not respond to ping requests. We are short two. I'm going to edit the Challenge Board later and remove the "permanent server" pages because their creation makes no sense. I'm sure someone thought they were saving time by doing it, but it's actually messier and wastes time.

[compguygene]

I can add a Ladle server on my Texas server which has proven to be decent.

[kyle]

Since we are short servers I am willing to pay for a couple, but I don't have any hosting lined up. Any suggestions?

I removed the servers that did not respond to ping requests. We are short two. I'm going to edit the Challenge Board later and remove the "permanent server" pages because their creation makes no sense. I'm sure someone thought they were saving time by doing it, but it's actually messier and wastes time.

It was saving time when every month my servers were removed from the list on reset.

[sinewav]

It was saving time when every month my servers were removed from the list on reset.

Kyle and I talked about this we determined that the Permanent Servers template serves a purpose because managing servers on the Challenge Board has proven to be tricky, mostly because of inattention from Ladle Enthusiasts and our collective failure to define what is "permanent," how that template should be used, and by whom.

I have taken it upon myself to return the Permanent Servers template and add usage instructions in an effort to define it's purpose (revisions pending). The following should be self explanatory. If you don't understand it, then that's your clue you shouldn't be editing the page.

Code: Select all

<!--
# These servers are not to be removed except by the owners.
# If a server goes missing for an extended period of time
# make an effort to contact the owner. Leave a note below
# with the server's name and date it went missing. Servers
# missing for more than two months should not be considered
# "permanent" and removed completely.
#
# Do not add servers here unless you can guarantee a commitment
# of no shorter than six months.
-->

I also went through and cleaned up the old non-permanent servers commented out on the Challenge Board. Most have been missing for months (or years) and did not respond to ping requests, of if they did, they were not Arma servers.

[Z-Man]

I'm looking for a new hosting service that better fits our needs, so I have a couple of new and maybe not too longlived servers set up.
The first is Z-Man's FR, the designated replacement for the current main server.
As a test, I'll also run a couple of cloud servers; the first one is public and will be named Z-Man's Cloud US.
I'll also set up two secret servers as hideaways from attacks. Connection details will be sent to team leaders as they get available.
Because of reasons, all servers start out with authentication only happening between rounds. When those reasons are gone, I'll switch them over to the regular, more convenient mode.

[aP|Nelg]

Yes, the "reasons" being that you haven't installed z-thread... You could have just said that...

[Z-Man]

Nope, a different reason

[SixZero]

Hi all!
Could someone help me to get in contact with Xyron? I wrote him a message in this forum, but he still hasn't come online. I am afraid I won't be able to reach him until laddle 100 start.
Every help is appreciated!

[Magi]

Hi all!
Could someone help me to get in contact with Xyron? I wrote him a message in this forum, but he still hasn't come online. I am afraid I won't be able to reach him until laddle 100 start.
Every help is appreciated!

I think a few people might know his facebook, not sure, I would still recommend signing up a team sooner rather than later though if you plan on it, I will probably be making brackets sometime late friday or early saturday to give enough time for Server owners to set their servers up and enough time for last minute teams to form.

[Word]

Yeah, maybe the CTers can help.

[Pre]

if nothing else you can sign up an open team, i know a lot of players that are still searching for a team