Forums › English Language Forums › General › The Coliseum

Search

A better way to conduct 1v1 tournaments?

5 replies [Last post]
Sat, 10/06/2018 - 19:44
Deleted-Knight's picture
Deleted-Knight

Not sure if anyone remembers me anymore, but whatever. I'm back from the dead with another proposal for quantifying Lockdown skill.

How the tournament works
(I'm assuming guns and sword fighting only)

1. Instead of tracking wins and losses, players compete to get the most score. They win score by engaging in 1v1 battles.

2. Every person fights every other person exactly once. A matchup can consist of several battles and be on different servers, you pick the format. For large tournaments, you can eliminate people that have a score lower than some threshold after some number of matchups.

3. After all the fights have concluded, the winners are determined by ranking the scores. Ties can be broken by having a mini-tournament with only the tied players.

How the actual fighting will work
1. Both players start off with 100 "battle points" (BP).
2. Every time a player swings or fires, they lose 5 BP until they have 0 BP in which case they lose nothing.
3. Every time a player's swing or bullet hits, they gain 20 BP.
4. After the battle ends, both player can earn scores base on their BP.
6. The winner gains 100 score plus the difference between their BP and the loser's BP, which could be negative. So if the loser ends up with more BP, the winner gains less than 100 score.
7. The loser gains the number of BP they have in excess of 100. If they have 100 or fewer BP, they don't gain any score.
8. BP can be tracked by spectating judges and or verified in post via videos.

Why is this method better for 1v1s?
1. It penalizes spamming. A spammer earns a lower score when they win battles than someone who has better aim or timing.

2. It encourages using underpowered gear without making it mandatory. If a person is confident in their skill, they can choose to use weaker weapons so they can land more hits before making the kill. Since every landed hit increases their BP, this will boost the score they earn.

3. It gives credit to people who put up good fights. Sometimes a person is just completely outclassed in terms of their ping or gear. They should be able to earn some points for whatever hits they do manage to land. (The only way for a loser to earn more BP than the winner is if they somehow landed many more hits than the winner with a better accuracy than the winner. In this case, it's pretty easy to see the loser is actually more skilled and the winner just won due to being able to tank more or deal more damage per hit.)

4. It makes it faster to run tournaments. One matchup being delayed doesn't prevent other matchups from continuing.

BONUS
A variation of this method lets you put a score on the "average skill" of a player by looking at their random Lockdown matches.

1. They start a RLD match with 100 BP
2. -5 BP for every swing/gunfire, +20 BP for every landed hit. A hit that damage several people count as one hit. Ignore swing/gunfire that happen when they are clearly not trying to hit anyone.
3. -10 BP when they are hit by anything on enemy team.
4. +20 BP when they KO another player.

Try it on Lockdown videos people post on Youtube! Are there any high damage players that actually end up with 0 BP at the end of the RLD match?

If anyone wants to host a tournament based on this format, I can contribute some prize money (2k energy?). Otherwise feel free to post videos on this thread bragging about your high BP score in a RLD match.

Sun, 10/07/2018 - 13:59
#1
Forums-Bleyken

sois unos pesados de los putos cojones

Tue, 10/09/2018 - 00:43
#2
Skeptics
In response

In response to section "How the tournament works":

I did something similar, if not the same, in my pre-tournament qualification event. It is a fun idea. I did have to input motivational factors to boost activity though. The problem here in relation to your scope for quantifying lockdown skill is that this prioritizes measuring activity rather than combat strength if it's a point-based system.

In response to section "How the actual fighting will work":

I sympathize with the need of less spam; however, skill doesn't only factor precision, but decision making as well. Limiting variables such as movement and controlling your opponent into a favorable action for counter helps demonstrate fighting ability. For this reason, I find it inconvenient to make accuracy the decisive factor.

Also, monitoring BP is more hassle than its worth.

In response to section "Why is this method better for 1v1s":

The option to downgrade gear to acquire more BP is going to be abused for farming BP in both scenarios. Shoot someone 5 times with a proto gun and die in 2 hits because you have no trinkets means you won the match anyway.
Higher ping means higher accuracy issues and a way harder time registering hits regardless - it seems counterproductive in relation to "skill".

Lastly,

My proposal for making tournaments run faster is not lock players into specified brackets until the semi-finals. Just make pre semis a knockout format where people just take out the contestants.

Thu, 10/11/2018 - 21:34
#3
Deleted-Knight's picture
Deleted-Knight
Skeptics, I agree it's more

Skeptics, I agree it's more work and don't expect people to be bothered enough to implement this. However, I think your responses are pretty knee-jerk.

Limiting variables such as movement and controlling your opponent into a favorable action for counter helps demonstrate fighting ability.

To me, this is an excuse for spam*. Intentional, strategic misses that can drive your opponent into unfavorable positions would face no problems in the proposed system. A few intentional misses are not so bad if they can lead to a decisive victory because you get +100 point advantage just for winning and each miss only yields -5 from that offset.

Shoot someone 5 times with a proto gun and die in 2 hits because you have no trinkets means you won the match anyway.

Why should people be penalized for not using trinkets and underpowered weapons? In what way does that factor into skill? The fact that you could land 5 hits before getting hit twice means you are more skilled. If your Protogun was swapped out for an Arcana and they also had no trinkets, you would have won the match. Don't conflate skill with being able to defeat your opponent quickly. See below.

Higher ping means higher accuracy issues and a way harder time registering hits regardless - it seems counterproductive in relation to "skill".

(People have a bad understanding of how ping works in a decentralized network like Amazon Web Services, but that rant is for another day...)

You just made a true statement about measuring Lockdown skill in general, but I don't see how that is specific to what I proposed. The way tournaments are being run now do not address the issue any better. There's nothing stopping people from playing multiple rounds on different "servers" using a new scoring system. If you are advocating people stop worrying about skill and just accept that ping decides everything, I'm 100% with you. However, if you actually want some metric for measuring skill, I think this method is more accurate than whatever it is people have been doing with their tournaments.

*Spam = Making many hit attempts in quick succession without any regards to the result of previous attempts. Spam is a very viable strategy because it maximizes your chances of landing a hit. However, the execution requires very little real-time decision making and adaptation. More generally, spam is any strategy which can be greatly optimized with the use of macros.

Fri, 10/12/2018 - 14:46
#4
Skeptics
I didn’t see the +100 for

I didn’t see the +100 for winning, my bad.
In a 1v1 situation, reducing the amount of openings is a good strategy when you consider ping and style preference. Ping is self explanatory; if you know the range, you’re able to time the distance, and you can achieve a faster draw (which works stupid as shit now) means you’re fucked anyway because HAH. Style preference just says you either prefer gunning or not. Now, if you gun at close range it has more risk since BK set stats are available. More distance gives gunners better decision making.

P.S. when I mention gunners, I do not only mean pure gunners, but also people who just prefer to use guns over swords. E.g. Manlet.

In a place where you wouldn’t get +100 for winning:
I mean if you wanna battle it out with a proto gun instead of bursting in and moving on, then go ahead.

Tue, 10/16/2018 - 11:05
#5
Theirillusion's picture
Theirillusion

The behavior of players that arise during the pressure that comes from 1v1s has its charm. Why complicate things?

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system