Duel League Structure & Rules

[Qgqqqqq]

Look, there's no point to starting 6 threads here. It'll just clog up the forum unnecessarily, and create a bunch of stubs with little to no reporting in each. There is no disadvantage to using one thread, except the necessity of using appropriate spoiler tags - which is only infinitesimally more work for the author (moi) and makes things easier for the lurkers. We did it in 5the Perpy game with no problems, we did it in the last duel league with no problems. I fail to see any reason not to do so here.

You can feel free to use multiple threads. But I'll only be using one.

[Kragroth]

Look, there's no point to starting 6 threads here. It'll just clog up the forum unnecessarily, and create a bunch of stubs with little to no reporting in each. There is no disadvantage to using one thread, except the necessity of using appropriate spoiler tags - which is only infinitesimally more work for the author (moi) and makes things easier for the lurkers. We did it in 5the Perpy game with no problems, we did it in the last duel league with no problems. I fail to see any reason not to do so here.

You can feel free to use multiple threads. But I'll only be using one.

Q. You're always stating that this post or that post belongs somewhere else. You try to inject some organization into posts about EITB and that's generally a good thing.

Well, I'm trying to inject some organization here too just like you have earlier and I need your support not your opposition.

The point of providing game commentary is to benefit the other readers. It is much more difficult to follow both sides of a game when someone has to slog through game threads which already include 3 or more simultaneous games. Separating the threads makes it much easier to follow the games one at a time. It is always easier to combine threads later than separate them after the fact. You can only play one game at a time, it is not a significant effort to post in more than one thread.

Please support me in organizing this torunament just as you like organization yourself in other threads.

[Mardoc]

I really don't like the idea of having my thread and my opponents thread title start identical. That seems like a recipe for tons of accidental misclicks.

[Kragroth]

I really don't like the idea of having my thread and my opponents thread title start identical. That seems like a recipe for tons of accidental misclicks.

Good point. I edited that post and reversed the order.

[The Black Sword]

Partially a reply to stuff in the game roster thread, but I thought it would be better to keep it all here.

Why not flip the Dreylin/North game for player 1/player 2 and then everyone has 3 of each?

I do like that everyone has 3 of each rather than flipping a coin and someone potentially getting ~5 either way.

However I think it would be better if both players chose civs/leaders simultaneously, to eliminate potential counter-picking.

Can we potentially repeat civs in the finals/tiebreakers that we used in the round robin? IMO, better to say no repeats at all.

I'm not too familiar with the mapscripts, I assume the ones suggested will generate the proper FFH resources?

I'd also prefer to keep my reporting to 1 thread.

Nice job on the organisation Kragroth.

[Kragroth]

Partially a reply to stuff in the game roster thread, but I thought it would be better to keep it all here.

Why not flip the Dreylin/North game for player 1/player 2 and then everyone has 3 of each?

I do like that everyone has 3 of each rather than flipping a coin and someone potentially getting ~5 either way.

However I think it would be better if both players chose civs/leaders simultaneously, to eliminate potential counter-picking.

Can we potentially repeat civs in the finals/tiebreakers that we used in the round robin? IMO, better to say no repeats at all.

I'm not too familiar with the mapscripts, I assume the ones suggested will generate the proper FFH resources?

I'd also prefer to keep my reporting to 1 thread.

Nice job on the organisation Kragroth.

Thank you The Black Sword.

1. Good point on the even # of picks. I switched Northstar and Dreylin and now everyone has an even 3 3 of first and second picks! Thank you!

2. On simultaneous leader picking. That is possible, but it would require two things
A. We'd have to involve a third party to create the map otherwise player 1 by default still gets to counterpick. Not a huge deal perhaps, but it delays games. In the current method of order, no admin or third party is required to step in to start games
B. We'd have to consider allowing duplicate civs to face each other in Round Robin I & II because true simultaneous picks would result in duplicate civs.

3. For repeated civs in the tiebreakers / finals. I assumed that if someone makes it to the tiebreaker or the final that they've already been through the gauntlet and won. I didn't want to hear that anyone lost the tournament because they couldn't play their best civilization. Also, there's a disadvantage if one person has to slog through the tiebreaker and the finals vs. the other person has to go to the finals only. I'm open on this one and if people feel your way, we can change it.

4. I'm going to allow single threads for reporting. I got almost no support for multiple threads

[Dreylin]

Sorry if this is posted in the wrong thread; not sure which one to use.

Would it be helpful to collate the typical play windows for everyone so that we can look for potential overlaps?

Personally I'm going to suggest to my opponents to stagger the starts of these games (by a couple of weeks or so) rather than getting 3 going at once. As such, I'm going to want to start the games where I have zero expected overlap in play window first, since they will necessarily take longer. Where there's an overlap (e.g. me & Kragroth in Game1), we can start later as there's a reasonable expectation of catching up.

For the record, my play window during the week is 8pm-11pm Central US (2-5am GMT?) with some flexibility at weekends.

[Tasunke]

I think repeat/duplicate/etc should be fine for the tie breaker and final.

[Dreylin]

So if someone is going to start a "whole tournament" thread - e.g. Mardoc's - then each of the posts should be wrapped in Spoiler tags with an appropriate indication of whether they apply to a specific game or to a general tournament strategy?

Does that mean that we can read each others' threads for the games that don't involve us and comment on them? Can we dedlurk someone else's games verses <everyone but us>?

[Kragroth]

So if someone is going to start a "whole tournament" thread - e.g. Mardoc's - then each of the posts should be wrapped in Spoiler tags with an appropriate indication of whether they apply to a specific game or to a general tournament strategy?

Does that mean that we can read each others' threads for the games that don't involve us and comment on them? Can we dedlurk someone else's games verses <everyone but us>?

You're hinting on something Dreylin that was intended by multiple threads. We could view the threads of other players so long as those threads did not involve us. I suppose it could work with one thread if the person used spoiler tags like you mentioned.