User avatar
Argentina Riotcoke
Jaeger
Donator 01
Posts: 2236
ESO: Riotcoke
Location: Best County in the UK

24 May 2019, 12:48

Imperial Noob wrote:
Riotcoke wrote:Why are you two talking to each other through a forum?

What sort of peanunt brain comment is that?
Have you never had anyone that you know irl on the same forum?

I was just asking a question, no need to be militant
Islas Malvinas son Britanicas
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
EPL Reigning Champs
Posts: 8303

24 May 2019, 13:06

Kaiserklein wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:Imo he was easily a top 8 player this tournament, out of the people who signed up and didn't get DQ'd. That's what I mean by people not giving him enough credit. When you say it's undeserved, you imply that he's not a top 8 player. I think he was here.
I mean, he lost to risi in the main bracket. And then he lost to kynesie, who was already at the bottom of top 8 I think (I kind of bashed him in my qualification series).
I think tabben is maybe top 8 in casual games, but he usually performs poorly in tournaments. You say he was "easily" top 8 in this tourney, that implies that he'd easily beat soldier and wicked for example? We'll never know I guess. He didn't beat Lukas "easily" either.
And Prince lost to turk in the main bracket. That wasn't even a 3-2. And he went on to beat Wicked more convincingly than Mitoe could. Tit almost beat snowww, who almost beat Raffle.

I think the civ picking rules contributed to these weird results. Having the winner pick first every time often leads to close series and can make even long series feel like best of 3's, where only one thing needs to go wrong for a victory to slip through your fingers even if you're the better player. This is the reason we went for alternating first picks at the time, and I believe the current rules to be misguided. But that's another discussion.

The only player who qualified unscathed was you, really. Looking at overall play I think tabben's performance was top 8. Agree to disagree.
User avatar
France [Armag] diarouga
Gendarme
NWC LAN Gold
Posts: 9912
ESO: diarouga
Location: France

24 May 2019, 13:55

Yep, alternative pick makes much more sense.
User avatar
Finland somppukunkku
Jaeger
Donator 02
Posts: 2681
ESO: PrinceOfBabu

24 May 2019, 14:08

2-3 loss vs Risi
3-2 win vs lukas
3-0 win vs kingofcaptainslayer
4-3 loss vs kynesie (bo7, with his restricted civ pool, veto system, civ picking rules different to earlier tourneys)

can be perceived more deserved than?

3-0 win mongo
3-1 win vs risi
4-3 loss vs mitoe
4-2 loss vs prince

Soldier's bracket was dirty easy and his only significant win was vs umeu, after then getting 4-0 sweep'd
Co-Founder of Somali Kabuli Gaming
Homo management SKG
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
EPL Reigning Champs
Posts: 8303

24 May 2019, 14:18

somppukunkku wrote:2-3 loss vs Risi
3-2 win vs lukas
3-0 win vs kingofcaptainslayer
4-3 loss vs kynesie (bo7, with his restricted civ pool, veto system, civ picking rules different to earlier tourneys)

can be perceived more deserved than?

3-0 win mongo
3-1 win vs risi
4-3 loss vs mitoe
4-2 loss vs prince
Since when are any of those players any good? :chinese:
The rules favor close series. The entire bracket is a mess, people had disappointing results across the board (exception Kaiser). I'm going by gameplay, not scores.
User avatar
United States of America Cometk
Tournament Admin
Posts: 4384
ESO: DJ_Cometk
Location: California

24 May 2019, 14:36

Goodspeed wrote:I think the civ picking rules contributed to these weird results. Having the winner pick first every time often leads to close series and can make even long series feel like best of 3's, where only one thing needs to go wrong for a victory to slip through your fingers even if you're the better player. This is the reason we went for alternating first picks at the time, and I believe the current rules to be misguided. But that's another discussion.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Yep, alternative pick makes much more sense.

Why? The only thing these rules change is game 3, where the winner locks first for a second time. This prevents the 3-0 blowout from being as likely a result, marginally. In a 3-1 series, the player who lost game 1 still gets the exact same number of opportunities to counterpick. These rules from the past tourney are superior to older rules for a few reasons, including the ease-of-understanding and more sensical flow once playing with them in-game.
Image
User avatar
Greece BrookG
Tournament Admin
Posts: 1349
ESO: BrookG
Location: not Amsterdam

24 May 2019, 14:40

Let's be realistic though, counterpicks matter maybe only where the level of the players is roughly equal. And that is usually in the later rounds, otherwise the better player can win with any civ
Correlation doesn't mean causation.
http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

"mr.brookg go buy jeans and goto the club with somppuli" - Princeofkabul, July 2018
User avatar
Great Britain TheNameDaniel
Advanced Player
Posts: 337
ESO: danielek
Location: UK

24 May 2019, 15:00

Kaiserklein wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:Imo he was easily a top 8 player this tournament, out of the people who signed up and didn't get DQ'd. That's what I mean by people not giving him enough credit. When you say it's undeserved, you imply that he's not a top 8 player. I think he was here.

I mean, he lost to risi in the main bracket. And then he lost to kynesie, who was already at the bottom of top 8 I think (I kind of bashed him in my qualification series).
I think tabben is maybe top 8 in casual games, but he usually performs poorly in tournaments. You say he was "easily" top 8 in this tourney, that implies that he'd easily beat soldier and wicked for example? We'll never know I guess. He didn't beat Lukas "easily" either.

But Mitoe is considered easily top 8 and he nearly lost to wicked the score was 4-3
User avatar
United States of America Cometk
Tournament Admin
Posts: 4384
ESO: DJ_Cometk
Location: California

24 May 2019, 15:01

We saw a good diversity of all results. 3-0, 3-1, 3-2, 4-0, 4-1, 4-2, 4-3. I'm very happy with how Smackdown rules turned out.
Image
User avatar
Iran n0el
ESOC Business Team
Posts: 3932
ESO: n0eL

24 May 2019, 15:04

Mitoe always loses more games than he should.
SirCallen wrote:Just drink the beer as it is, you hipsters.
User avatar
Sweden tabben
Dragoon
EWTNWC LAN Bronze
Posts: 480
ESO: tabben

24 May 2019, 15:09

I get the feeling that sompp and maybe others underrate Lukas quite a bit. His bracket turned into a nightmare with RetiredRapha returning last-minute, and then me losing surprisingly early in upper bracket. He put up a good fight vs Rapha (up 1-0 and had a good shot at winning the sioux mirror in game 2 as well as aztecs vs russia). He's definitely a scary opponent, especially with his main civs (I'd say China, Sioux & Aztecs) in a bo5. He was also doing really well on ladder vs top players before the tourney, like beating mitoe flawlessly with his main civs and also winning vs kynesie's Port/Jap with China/Sioux respectively.
Image

Image

*Jeri lames a forward agra vill with nootka*
ramex19 (veni): such nooby shit i will lame you with nats forever
User avatar
Tuvalu gibson
Gendarme
Posts: 9255
Location: USA

24 May 2019, 15:14

Alternate pick makes much more sense from a fairness perspective, but winner picking first makes for more even series. It does feel stupid to be rewarding losing though.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
EPL Reigning Champs
Posts: 8303

24 May 2019, 15:16

Cometk wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:I think the civ picking rules contributed to these weird results. Having the winner pick first every time often leads to close series and can make even long series feel like best of 3's, where only one thing needs to go wrong for a victory to slip through your fingers even if you're the better player. This is the reason we went for alternating first picks at the time, and I believe the current rules to be misguided. But that's another discussion.
[Armag] diarouga wrote:Yep, alternative pick makes much more sense.

Why? The only thing these rules change is game 3, where the winner locks first for a second time. This prevents the 3-0 blowout from being as likely a result, marginally. In a 3-1 series, the player who lost game 1 still gets the exact same number of opportunities to counterpick. These rules from the past tourney are superior to older rules for a few reasons, including the ease-of-understanding and more sensical flow once playing with them in-game.
Because God forbid a player who is clearly better would win 3-0?

Momentum is a thing. The worse player, with these rules, objectively has more chances for a comeback.
Say you're up 2-0 and map 4 is one you haven't practiced. Suddenly it's 2-2 and they have momentum. Would've been 3-0 with fair rules.

You removed the significance of "breaking" someone's counter pick.
To illustrate, tennis. Imagine what would happen if you always had the loser of the previous game serve in the next. You'd get a bunch of really close sets, and the chances of the best player winning are lowered.

Normally, in a best of 3 anything can happen between 2 relatively even players. But in a best of 9, you can be pretty sure the better player will win. With these rules, you have somewhat negated this effect and made it less likely that the better player wins. Imho in a tournament, especially one with high stakes, that is misguided.

But close series are exciting and the better player will most likely still win. It's not a huge deal.
User avatar
United States of America Cometk
Tournament Admin
Posts: 4384
ESO: DJ_Cometk
Location: California

24 May 2019, 15:23

@Goodspeed I'll give you a thorough response when I'm home, but I believe you're wrong.
Image
User avatar
Argentina Riotcoke
Jaeger
Donator 01
Posts: 2236
ESO: Riotcoke
Location: Best County in the UK

24 May 2019, 15:24

I think the winner picking first puts far too much emphasis on whoever wins the first game of the series, as the game basically becomes a game of counters.
Islas Malvinas son Britanicas
User avatar
Italy Garja
ESOC Maps Team
Donator 02
Posts: 7900
ESO: Garja

24 May 2019, 15:40

Winner picks first is indeed a way to make series closer. It doesn't benefit none of the players in the end, but definetely affects the score of series.
Pakistan iamyawer
Crossbow
Posts: 9
ESO: iamyawer
Location: inyourpc

24 May 2019, 15:51

So basically if kynsie had used same proxy for logging in, he would have been fine. There are many people on darkweb doing shit and are never getting caught.
User avatar
Turkey HUMMAN
Lancer
Posts: 743
ESO: HUMMAN

24 May 2019, 15:52

I wonder what is the % of counter pick wins. If it is like %60 i guess its fine.
Image
User avatar
United States of America lesllamas
Lancer
Posts: 617

24 May 2019, 16:30

“Momentum is a thing”

“If I go up 2-0 it’s not fair to give the other person a counterpick, they’ll potentially get too much momentum!”

“They’ll get so much more momentum in games 3 and 4 than I got in games 1 and 2!”

It’s always been rather infuriating to see the same 4 people on this forum refuse to acknowledge that winner picks first is:

1) Not statistically more or less likely than alternating pick to result in any one player winning a series

2) Less likely to result in unfair momentum for the LOSER of game 1 (in alternating pick BO5 if the loser breaks the winner’s first counterpick they get an immediate best shot counterpick of their own, acquiring their second counterpick before the winner of game 1 despite being on a closeout match)

3) Not the reason why any one player lost a series they otherwise should have won. If you go up 2-0 and lose on both of your own counterpicks in games 4 and 5 you deserved to lose the series.


The one thing that alternating vs winner picks first don’t account for very well are maps. Obv maps are v important parts of how counterpicks play out. Alternating pick might make planning for which maps you might experience what matchups on a bit easier, but depending on which two players are going at it, alternating pick may just give one player distinctly better map counterpicks in one series and distinctly worse in the next (with the same map order and pool) depending on their opponent and civs.

The vast majority of organized competitions operate on WPF (or gives up possession): soccer, football, basketball, hockey, most esports. The few here in the aoe3 community aren’t the first to consider the issue and I don’t believe there’s any insight garja, gs, h20, or diarouga have on the issue (as a general concept) that hasn’t already been considered, asked, and answered. In perhaps the most excuse ridden competitive community I’ve been a part of, though, it doesn’t surprise me that they’d look at the ruleset and claim it unfairly took wins away from the “rightful” winners. Buck up and play. It’s fair, and if you lose it wasn’t because the rules screwed you.
User avatar
France Kaiserklein
Gendarme
Posts: 7868
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

24 May 2019, 16:33

Ofc it favours the worse player. It makes it easier for the worse player to win games. So obviously easier to win the whole series lol.
Can sirmusket calculate 5x - x??
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
User avatar
United States of America Cometk
Tournament Admin
Posts: 4384
ESO: DJ_Cometk
Location: California

24 May 2019, 16:37

Kaiserklein wrote:Ofc it favours the worse player. It makes it easier for the worse player to win games. So obviously easier to win the whole series lol.

How does it make it easier for the worse player to win the series when he's getting counterpicked in games 4 and 5?
Image
User avatar
France Kaiserklein
Gendarme
Posts: 7868
Location: Paris
GameRanger ID: 5529322

24 May 2019, 16:39

It gives the worse player opportunities to win more games. It's that simple. So it makes it easier for him to win the series. There's nothing to discuss really lol
Can sirmusket calculate 5x - x??
LoOk_tOm wrote:I have something in particular against Kaisar (GERMANY NOOB mercenary LAMME FOREVER) And the other people (noobs) like suck kaiser ... just this ..
User avatar
Finland somppukunkku
Jaeger
Donator 02
Posts: 2681
ESO: PrinceOfBabu

24 May 2019, 16:41

Sigh. Not true Kaiser. "Momentum" is the only thing that might differ the outcome. Probability of winning some games becomes higher but winning series remains same if momentum is out of equation. Simple statistics...
Co-Founder of Somali Kabuli Gaming
Homo management SKG
User avatar
United States of America IAmSoldieR
Howdah
Donator 03
Posts: 1856
ESO: SoldieR
Location: Chi City

24 May 2019, 16:43

It's kinda the same. Remember, if the worse player wins a game, then he is couterpicked on. If he loses a lot, he counter picks a lot, but then that ofc means he's lost a lot, which means series is probably over.
User avatar
United States of America lesllamas
Lancer
Posts: 617

24 May 2019, 16:48

At no point does losing a game improve your chances of winning a set.

But if you’re convinced of that, I recommend you try it and prove us all wrong! Strategic forfeiture, will we see it at LAN???

Forum Info

Return to “Information and Discussion”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest