The Super-Duper-Titan Tournament! (Season 1) - Round 1.5

[CombatEX]

(11-14-2012 11:25 AM)awpertunity Wrote:  why do people always capitalize my name?! ;x lol

Yea, I try to be accurate all the way to capitalization when I write names. You'll notice in the ST replay thread your name is always correct as is the case in the Season 1 thread =)

In the invitation PM I sent, I just copied Gfich's list though.

[Pokhs]

I'm #32 so longshot but available to play if given the chance to !

[awpertunity]

(11-14-2012 03:47 PM)CombatEX Wrote:  

(11-14-2012 11:25 AM)awpertunity Wrote:  why do people always capitalize my name?! ;x lol

Yea, I try to be accurate all the way to capitalization when I write names. You'll notice in the ST replay thread your name is always correct as is the case in the Season 1 thread =)

In the invitation PM I sent, I just copied Gfich's list though.

lol, I only ask because for some reason it always seems to happen only to me. You'll notice there are plenty of other lowercase only names on that list that were preserved. This is not the first time it has happened either, happened in all the Hero Academy tourneys I joined too!

[Gf!sh]

Blame Apple's auto-shift.

[drooberry]

i'll join.
reserve rank #51

[GreatGonzales]

Hey CombatEX/Gfich, I had a thought about how you are seeding this tournament. It doesn't seem fair that you are punishing some players for not having reached the top 16 yet - presumably, they deserved to be there all along, moreso than people who were eventually pushed out due to the newcomer's ascent. A good example of this is Terenceshiu2005 - he was not ranked in the top 16 until September, and since has climbed to the top 5 players in the world. Yet, you have him seeded at only 12th. I get that this ranking is the "most consistent" players in the top 16, but it seems unfair to knock players for merely not having reached their true ranking yet.

My solution to this would be to weight ranking values according to the currency of the rank - in other words, players should earn more points for a top 16 rank in October than a top 16 rank in August. Right now you are assigning a linear scale: 1st place gets 16, 2nd place gets 15, etc. Perhaps could keep the linear scale but change the coefficient from 1 to 1.25, and then to 1.5, changing by Month? Something like that. If you wanted to be more precise, you should really change the coefficient weekly, but that's a bit more complex.

If you think this is a good idea and would like some help, I am happy to help. I have the data already after all.

[joelduque]

(11-15-2012 05:27 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:  Hey CombatEX/Gfich, I had a thought about how you are seeding this tournament. It doesn't seem fair that you are punishing some players for not having reached the top 16 yet - presumably, they deserved to be there all along, moreso than people who were eventually pushed out due to the newcomer's ascent. A good example of this is Terenceshiu2005 - he was not ranked in the top 16 until September, and since has climbed to the top 5 players in the world. Yet, you have him seeded at only 12th. I get that this ranking is the "most consistent" players in the top 16, but it seems unfair to knock players for merely not having reached their true ranking yet.

My solution to this would be to weight ranking values according to the currency of the rank - in other words, players should earn more points for a top 16 rank in October than a top 16 rank in August. Right now you are assigning a linear scale: 1st place gets 16, 2nd place gets 15, etc. Perhaps could keep the linear scale but change the coefficient from 1 to 1.25, and then to 1.5, changing by Month? Something like that. If you wanted to be more precise, you should really change the coefficient weekly, but that's a bit more complex.

If you think this is a good idea and would like some help, I am happy to help. I have the data already after all.

Nice logic and suggestion. More points for a higher rank times the number times or week at that rank...like adding points in a racing tournament for the grand rankings. The final list would likely be a litlle different.

[P1noyboypj]

I'll play! Sign me up please.

[Bad Herr Day]

If you decide to include us lower ranked super titans then count me in. I was ranked 32 once and 60 at the last count.

[Eijolend]

(11-15-2012 05:27 AM)GreatGonzales Wrote:  Hey CombatEX/Gfich, I had a thought about how you are seeding this tournament. It doesn't seem fair that you are punishing some players for not having reached the top 16 yet - presumably, they deserved to be there all along, moreso than people who were eventually pushed out due to the newcomer's ascent. A good example of this is Terenceshiu2005 - he was not ranked in the top 16 until September, and since has climbed to the top 5 players in the world. Yet, you have him seeded at only 12th. I get that this ranking is the "most consistent" players in the top 16, but it seems unfair to knock players for merely not having reached their true ranking yet.

My solution to this would be to weight ranking values according to the currency of the rank - in other words, players should earn more points for a top 16 rank in October than a top 16 rank in August. Right now you are assigning a linear scale: 1st place gets 16, 2nd place gets 15, etc. Perhaps could keep the linear scale but change the coefficient from 1 to 1.25, and then to 1.5, changing by Month? Something like that. If you wanted to be more precise, you should really change the coefficient weekly, but that's a bit more complex.

If you think this is a good idea and would like some help, I am happy to help. I have the data already after all.

I don't think changing the system at this point is a good idea, especially because the list was already officially posted on the ingame news - for the next season though, it's worth making up our mind what we want this Tournament to be.