BRAutumn: no top cut
- Thread starter SD PokeMom
- Start date
- Status
TheDarkTwins
Active Member
You can't do that, you'd have an event where everyone ends up dropping after a loss, it would be stupid. I wasn't talking about just BRs.
Drew
Last edited:
Aron Figaro
New Member
I would honestly support this if Pokemon were:
A) a zero-sum game
B) a game with a low random variance
This style of tournament is a great way to determine who the best player in the room is in these situations. The swiss + elimination model, on the other hand, was designed to determine the best player when a lot of inequalities and luck are involved. By adding a "safety net" to the game, such that players who lose one round are not out, the best players will eventually "bubble up" - at least, that's the game designer's theory. It works pretty well in statistics, though it really requires a few more rounds of Swiss than most Pokemon events allow by the number of players. I don't remember the math off the top of my head, and it does have to be adjusted based on a common-sense factor for variance, but a good example would be what a 100 person Regional bracket should be.
Really, with 100 people, you should be playing 7 or 8 rounds of Swiss, and cutting to top 32. In 8 rounds, with the luck factor in Pokemon, you're not going to reliably find the top 8 or 16 players in a bracket. Top 32 is going to catch some flies, but guarantees all but the unluckiest of the good players to make cut. A best of 3 format is then used.
The other option, which is commonly used in fighting game tournaments (which have low to no luck factor, but are very unequal in sides) is the double elimination structure. I'm really surprised Pokemon has not tried, even at the Professor Cup or a side event, best of 3 double elimination as a format. With 100 players, this would only play 7 rounds of best of 3 to determine the winner of the event, and after you've lost two full matches, you're off to side events or home early. I really feel like this format could be a good thing for Pokemon.
Now on the topic of Swiss and tiebreaks - the current tiebreak system is too random, because you cannot choose your opponents. The only way to really reduce the impact of tiebreaks is to increase the size of top cut; you will always have ties. The fact that there are so many factors that determine the winner of a match really make opponent's opponents a VERY poor tiebreaker in a TCG, so enlarging top cut makes this TB less serious. There really are no good tie breaking methods that suit random, non-zero-sum games other than playing them out, and even a single game doesn't always determine much, so the best way is to just get the tiebreaks out of the way, and enlarge the top bracket. When tiebreaks ARE needed, some algorithm based on event, season, and lifetime ELO ratings is probably best, but it would take some time and a lot of data to properly develop one.
A) a zero-sum game
B) a game with a low random variance
This style of tournament is a great way to determine who the best player in the room is in these situations. The swiss + elimination model, on the other hand, was designed to determine the best player when a lot of inequalities and luck are involved. By adding a "safety net" to the game, such that players who lose one round are not out, the best players will eventually "bubble up" - at least, that's the game designer's theory. It works pretty well in statistics, though it really requires a few more rounds of Swiss than most Pokemon events allow by the number of players. I don't remember the math off the top of my head, and it does have to be adjusted based on a common-sense factor for variance, but a good example would be what a 100 person Regional bracket should be.
Really, with 100 people, you should be playing 7 or 8 rounds of Swiss, and cutting to top 32. In 8 rounds, with the luck factor in Pokemon, you're not going to reliably find the top 8 or 16 players in a bracket. Top 32 is going to catch some flies, but guarantees all but the unluckiest of the good players to make cut. A best of 3 format is then used.
The other option, which is commonly used in fighting game tournaments (which have low to no luck factor, but are very unequal in sides) is the double elimination structure. I'm really surprised Pokemon has not tried, even at the Professor Cup or a side event, best of 3 double elimination as a format. With 100 players, this would only play 7 rounds of best of 3 to determine the winner of the event, and after you've lost two full matches, you're off to side events or home early. I really feel like this format could be a good thing for Pokemon.
Now on the topic of Swiss and tiebreaks - the current tiebreak system is too random, because you cannot choose your opponents. The only way to really reduce the impact of tiebreaks is to increase the size of top cut; you will always have ties. The fact that there are so many factors that determine the winner of a match really make opponent's opponents a VERY poor tiebreaker in a TCG, so enlarging top cut makes this TB less serious. There really are no good tie breaking methods that suit random, non-zero-sum games other than playing them out, and even a single game doesn't always determine much, so the best way is to just get the tiebreaks out of the way, and enlarge the top bracket. When tiebreaks ARE needed, some algorithm based on event, season, and lifetime ELO ratings is probably best, but it would take some time and a lot of data to properly develop one.
Last edited:
bullados
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?
OK, seems like we have a difference of perspective here...
I was talking specifically about BRs CPs. I don't want an event without a Top Cut giving more than a single CP, if even that much. And I don't think that your concerns about mass droppings is really warranted. That happened under the old system. And there's still prizes to be had for one-loss players. Basically, one loss does not mean a wasted day, even if there are no CPs.
You're talking about the entire OP season. In that case, my thought is that anybody with a 75% win ratio or better should get the same number of CPs as the least amount of CPs you can get in the Top Cut. Maybe 66%. Maybe.
SidewaysDaze
New Member
Time to go make an inconsistent donk deck and win battle roads...
SuperWooper
New Member
If you have to go X-0 to win, "inconsistent" is the last thing you want your deck to be.
bullados
<a href="http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?
There's always other things to be done ^_^
ShuckleLVX
Active Member
There's still the final round top table to get.
TheDarkTwins
Active Member
I meant to say can't, not can. The issue is if you only give a point for going X-0, once the players who are trying for an invite lose, they will drop and leave. It's not a good plan for success for those events if only 1 player gets a CP. i don't want to go an hour for an event, lose in the first round, and lose my chance at a CP. That would be silly and totally counterproductive to helping the game grow. Not having top cut doesn't hurt the game as much as giving only 1st a CP.
Drew
I think expecting the Championship Point distribution for all events before Battle Roads start is a reasonable expectation, so I hope we hear something within the next 11 days. We have all made it known how much we dislike being kept in the dark too long regarding event information and I hope that we see an improvement.
King Piplup
Active Member
I'll be quite surprised if we get info before the 31st.
Charranitar
Member
What I've heard is that championship points won't change for next season. They considered changing br to 1 point, but didn't decide to go with he change.
Where exactly did you hear this from?
Box of Fail
New Member
I was under the impression that the object of changing the game was to satisfy the player base. Which should keep the game in a cycle of constant improvement as we are never satisfied.
I heard Grant Hill is so fast, he can pass the ball to himself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EG742vuahYo
ExoByte: Bringing back my childhood one commercial at a time.
Nice. So, will we hear anything about Championship Points and/or Worlds qualifying information before Battle Roads?
King Piplup
Active Member
Uh-huh, and I've heard from this guy that knows everything that they're canceling Top Cut at Regionals, getting rid of Cities overall, moving all events to weekdays, and banning The Top Cut for intruding on TPCi's rights.
It's on the internet, it MUST be true....
- Status