The NW Thread Next Fest 9th September !!!! BACK IN BUSINESS !!!

[COEY]

You would!

 

[Fuzzyness]

sounds good if we get this all going everywhere

 

[Aiko]

golfie: i might be free on saturday afternoon - like after 4 or 5. how do i get to yours?

foxy boxy: any chance of you hosting?

also, it is my bday at end of sep so i would like some sort of bday fest. preferably with drinking

 

[AmcD]

Something for Doubles would be good but would it be worth it with only certain amount of us.
Also I don't think we need to do the Rankings exactly the same as London, Just doing the Rankings alone is enough for us to be considered by Neo Empire.

 

[Aiko]

problems with doubles:

you need to have fixed teams - but what if your partner flakes?

if you lose because of your partner - you get less points but its not your fault

better players team up together - unfair on weaker teams

the only way to solve this would be some sort of measure of performance, in particular with players better or worse than yourself. maybe this can be based on rankings eg

teams score - standard score
1st - 10
2nd - 7
3rd - 5
etc

and after this, depending on your partner you get a multiplier but this would require players to be put in tiers eg
Top tier - 1
mid tier - 2
low tier - 3

Your tier - partner tier - your standard score multiplier
1 - 1 - x1
1 - 2 - x1.2
1 - 3 - x1.5
2 - 1 - x0.9
2 - 2 - x1.5
2 - 3 - x2
3 - 1 - x0.8
3 - 2 - x2.5
3 - 3 - x4

This is only an example but i have taken everything into account eg weaker players will pull down stronger players, 2 weaker players doing better etc.

This gives an individual teams performance ie ranks how good players are in teams.
numbers are very rough and would need juggling a little. maybe more tiers to make the scoring more accurate.

thoughts?

 

[Professor Pro]

problems with doubles:

you need to have fixed teams - but what if your partner flakes?

if you lose because of your partner - you get less points but its not your fault

better players team up together - unfair on weaker teams

the only way to solve this would be some sort of measure of performance, in particular with players better or worse than yourself. maybe this can be based on rankings eg

teams score - standard score
1st - 10
2nd - 7
3rd - 5
etc

and after this, depending on your partner you get a multiplier but this would require players to be put in tiers eg
Top tier - 1
mid tier - 2
low tier - 3

formula: your tier - partner tier = multiplier score
eg 3 - 2 = 1 low tier player teams with mid tier player
1 - 3 = -2 top tier player teams with low tier player

then you compare to this chart

difference - multiplier
+2 - x0.5
+1 - x0.75
0 - x1
-1 - x1.25
-2 - x1.5

either way its complicated but it'll give individual performance rankings in team games

Liverpool is more interesting then London when it comes to the ranking system and setting up. I like the tier idea thing.
Penis!

 

[Aiko]

just changed that teams idea as i found a flaw with it. see the post again to see the system, or old system in p pro's quote

pro: im not in liverpool nemore, im back in manchester now. but yeah, NW is more interesting :D

 

[Wireframe]

Sounds gd I may make a return

 

[Retroking2000]

north are having these rankings too
2 good

 

[Bullet Bill]

Sounds gd I may make a return

good good and most importantly you know better than anyone else that the most important game aside all of this smash is guitar hero . Lets play some co-op if I manage to make it up there

 

[COEY]

Nice to see you posting again Chris man. Good games yesterday Ant man, nice to see brawl didn't ruin you too much

 

[Professor Pro]

So when is NW doing their rankings, since London has done theirs I was just curious to know?
And will your matches be recorded.

 

[COEY]

Begining of October no date sorted yet, it's just a matter of when i'm back at university. And as i have a capture card, and a decent digital cam the matches should definitely recorded in some way or another. Maybe in both so you can opt for commentary over quality .

 

[AmcD]

Can't wait for these, Let me know the date ASAP. Also have we decided on what rules we are going to use?

 

[COEY]

Gonna go with Ant's points system as it is long and complicated, so how can it not be the best way? After speaking with him though we're not gonna use the different counter stages depending on how far in front you are, instead a few stages apart from the 6 neutrals will be on to allow for stage banning. These imo should include mute, corneria, kongo64, and both floats and rbow ride.

 

[AmcD]

Well if Corneria is on the list then Brinstar should be aswell.

 

[COEY]

Sigh i guess it should be, just it's another mute city sort or stage in the way it is usually picked. I figured having mute on would be enough as you can only ban a single stage where as the corneria is often picked for camping or the low ceiling. My point is that maybe in some respects brinstar is a better stage than corneria, but it's not as good as mute.

If anyone (who is coming to this) has anything to say to this please do as we will all need to agree on the ruleset to enforce it.

 

[Wireframe]

Ben is a smash lord?! Good god i have been gone awhile.

But yeah these should be gd. Gonna have to start piping up the old falco again

 

[Professor Pro]

Ben is a smash lord?! Good god i have been gone awhile.

But yeah these should be gd. Gonna have to start piping up the old falco again

Not only is ben now a smash lord, he is a smash LEGEND.

 

[Aiko]

i played joe on mute this weekend and it was good times. heres my proposed stage list

Random:
FD
PS
DL64

Counterpick:
Battlefield
Fountain of Dreams
Yoshis Story
Brinstar
Corneria
DK64
Mute City
Pokefloats
Rainbow Ride

obviously 1 stage banning

 

[AmcD]

I think BF, FoD and YS should be on random aswell.

 

[Aiko]

im okay with that as long as other poeple are.

 

[AmcD]

Any idea who will be coming to the Power rankings/Smashfests?

 

[COEY]

I wouldn't like YS, Fod, and Bf on random. My main reason for this is that 3 randoms is a good number when stage banning applys, meaning you and your opponent can force the first stage by banning the other 2. And as none of the 3 severly handicap any of the top high tiers really and of course if they are bad you just ban it.

Also i'm sure attendees would at least include;

Myself
Joseph
Anthony
Yourself Alan
Daniel
Steven
Carlton
and Chris if hes back into coming to these thing?

And thats minimum not including anybody else that could show up, possibly even newer players from around my uni.

 

[Aiko]

theres Charlie too. Also Andy (blinky) may be attending monthly.

 

[AmcD]

Yeah I was going to say what about Charlie lol. Do you think there is any chance Skalor and Yenith would come?

 

[BloodBowler]

Just a quick interjection:

I like the direction this is going in. The North-west should be a lot more structured.

Due to having no income at all at the moment, my attendance will be impossible.

Aiko's point system (From the brief glance I gave it) will not work. As soon as anyone gets three 10 point finishes they will be unbeatable and others can only tie.

Reccomendation: Averages

Award the same amount of points, add up the players totals and divide by the number of fests they have attended. Done.

Will put more into this when I get home.

 

[Aiko]

yeniths and skalor are both very welcome, provided hosts have the space. depends whether they wanna play melee as I'm only interested in doing this ranking for melee at first. Brawl takes up too much time and isn't as enjoyable.

 

[Aiko]

Just a quick interjection:

I like the direction this is going in. The North-west should be a lot more structured.

Due to having no income at all at the moment, my attendance will be impossible.

Aiko's point system (From the brief glance I gave it) will not work. As soon as anyone gets three 10 point finishes they will be unbeatable and others can only tie.

Reccomendation: Averages

Award the same amount of points, add up the players totals and divide by the number of fests they have attended. Done.

Will put more into this when I get home.

Note taken, I will think this through. The other way to do this would be to give more points for beating people ranked higher than you, less points for people ranked lower, and conversely for when you lose to players.

If we do averages, then its favourable for you to not attend when you are ranked highly. If we keep it to 3 scores from the most recent 5 fests, then its still plausible. what about -1 or 2 points for a flake? some system needs to work that isn't ruined by not being able to attend.

also: in defence of my system, once we have a buffer of 5 fests. If someone has won 3 times, then they would have to win again, otherwise their points will go down.

 

[J03]

i dont really understand.

okies so we do a huge round robin.

imo shouldnt it be just like a football league.

W=3
D=1
L=0

BUT instead of that system why dont we just score a point for each win, i.e.

if you won 3-2 then youd get 3 points and your opponent 2.

makes perfect sense. on the condition of a draw for first place, a final play off is played.

If im honest i dont understand Aikos system... because i havent read it yet xD

_________________________________

Just read it now lol. Its unfair to award points for a league win because not everyone might be there. We should concentrate on ONE FULL round robin atm.

 

[Aiko]

its basically what you just said, except you get an extra point for winning the set. So if you win 3-2 the points would be 4-2.

After that you add up all your scores and rank them with everyone else, to give you a standard score. the standard score is used to rank you amongst the northwest players. The reason for this is, if we do rankings purely on points for each game, if less people turn up to a fest, then you get less points.

 

[AmcD]

Getting less points for beating people who rank lower and getting more points for beating people who rank higher would make sense but then there is the attendance problem

 

[Aiko]

exactly, what i'm trying to do is make a fair system that doesn't penalise unfairly on not being able to make it. we all have our reasons for not being able to attend every fest so it needs to be sorted really. I think once a month is reasonable.

If we do averages like BB suggests, then if you're averaging high, you dont have a reason to turn up since you have more chance of going down than up. With my system, If someone wins 3 times, they obviously deserve it, but they need to keep attending because once one of those wins expires they need another, unless they've won 4 or even 5 times, in which case, they deserve to be in first.

 

[Fuzzyness]

just do what we did =x

 

[Yeniths]

Yeah I was going to say what about Charlie lol. Do you think there is any chance Skalor and Yenith would come?

Yeah, I'm sure myself and Skalor would come, assuming we could both be housed for a night? We have to travel pretty far to get to these. Been playing a lot of melee recently tho, still like brawl of course, but yeah.

 

[J03]

Adding a point for winning a set is pointless though lol. if more people come then more points would be awarded anyways xD.

E.g. 1

Joe vs Will - 2/3

Joe vs BB - 2/3

Will vs BB - 3/2

Will- 6
BB- 5
Joe- 4

Ants extra points.

Will- 7
BB-6
Joe-4
_____________________________

E.g. 2
All it does is widen the gap.

Joe vs Will 3/1

Joe vs BB 2/3

BB vs Will 0/3

Joe- 5
Will- 4
BB- 3

Aikos extra points.

Joe- 6
Will- 5
BB- 4

It doesnt change anything imo lol.

say if i beat someone in a set 3-0 its bad enough that they get a 3 point decifit, another point isnt needed.

 

[J03]

Rankings dont need to play any part in a scoring system.

If i beat Chris 3-0 i still get the same amount of points as if i beat Ste 3-2. the fact that ste would get 2 points proves hes better then Chris, if its luck then No johns.

As for attendence, If BB missed 3 fests, then he'd have to catch up when he did come. A league such as this should be comprised into rounds.

If there are 10 people in a league then round 1 would only be complete after all 10 have played all 10.

Theres NO POINT progressing to Round 2. so IMO One round Should have a full Month to be completed.

I propose if BB missed a month then simply put hed miss a round in which hed be given a nill value.
These nill value shouldnt effect someone ranking untill they miss 3 full rounds. because i think 3 months is quite an adequate amount of time to suggest that a persons skill level MIGHT have lowered, or that a majority of the leagues skill level MIGHT have risen.

 

[AmcD]

That's why we proposed only 3 out of the 5 fests get recorded. Doing one round for the entire month would take too long and the rankings wouldn't progress.

 

[COEY]

I didn't forget about Charlie, but he's in Leeds by the time we do this so i wasn't sure of his attendance that's all. So did we agree to only 3 randoms i cba reading the page before to check. Been on warhammer online all day

 

[Aiko]

ok, a point for winning the set may not be necessary, but the rankings to give a standard score are important. heres an example

Fest 1:

Joe - 15
Will - 16
Ant - 17
BB - 15
Alan - 19
Dan - 13
Ste - 14
Chaz -15

Fest 2:

Joe - 6
Will - 7
Ant - 8
Ste - 4

With Joes system you get alot less points because people have missed the 2nd fest, but with my system, although initially, it has the same problem, after 5 fests, it will be equal as you take the best 3 points from the most recent 5 fests.

stages: I'm quite happy to have just 3 randoms with 1 stage ban, but what about 6 randoms with 2 stage bans? That way we can have an even bigger counter pick list with stages like onett, jungle japes, etc. 2 bans would give some flexibility for influencing the first stage too.