Beltion Depends on how much you trust the players.
A good question without answer. Either you trust him. Or you don't... simple as that.
Fnord I think you will need *some* method of handling any disputes if any should crop up. If the rules are really clear and the maps are tested, there shouldn't be many problems but there's always the chance. So yes, you'll probably need someone to act as a moderator/map checker, just in case.
AngelA Moderators- should check maps beforehand for balance, examine endgame savegames, any autosaves from crashes (a good spot to cheat) and endgame saves. If a game is suspicious, they might suggest a rematch, or a forfeit. I read somewhere else that you plan to have 5 computers linked- are you planning to have people be neutral observers in game?
Kriton Not necessary, but if so, they should probably take on a role similar to what Zowwie and SkyBroad have done with the HTO.
Simon Mooncalf I think there should be a few, just in case... They should be there to moderate if players differ in opinion. :-)
If a difference on how the game should have been played. On what should have been done after a crash... You need some respected players to settle any dispute.
Lifetaker yes you should have mods in the game just to make sure nothing happens.
KSummers Not necessary per se, but I think it's a GREAT idea.
Beltion Games should be played for honour (and for fun). IMO playing for cash or any other prize would sort of ruin it.
a web page and a picture of a nice trophy, that's all there needs to be.
Fnord This depends on how much you can afford. Only the person putting up prizes can decide how much he/she wishes to put up. I think any prize amount (be it $5 or $50) is going to be appreciated. Putting up games (prechosen) or choice of games is also fine. Or a choice by the winners of what they want (cash or game). Any of these can work. One important thing to keep in mind is that not all players will accept a prize, especially if they have a good job and enough money to buy any game they wish. So you may want to establish ahead of time what happens to any non-accepted prizes (e.g., donated to a specific charity, or given out randomly to a non-winning participant, or whatever).
AngelA I think that it would depend on the number of participants- myself, I would consider a free game an adequate prize. If we're going all out, perhaps a piece of hardware for first prize. Money is more convenient, of course, but somehow less meaningful. For larger sums, sponsorship might be necessary- which is a whole other consideration.
Kriton Well, personally, I think money and/or prizes are OK, but this may take away some of the fun from playing. People will be so focused on winning that portsmanship/comradery might suffer. It may even entice cheating, just to win the prizes.
Dragon Master the prize hmmm i don't know maybe have it so the could cheat in one level of the next tournament?????
Simon Mooncalf Something like a free game or an special (home made) Heroes (or Black Dragon) T-shirt would be just as fun.
I would start cheatin' if you said Kings Bounty was the prize <grin> But a game could be game by choice of the winner if available... However I would like to win a T-shirt, cap etcetera... anything that is unique :-)
Lifetaker It all depends on the number of participants, I think a game of choice would be enough. I wouldn't give a money as a prize.
KSummers I think something small but meaningful, like a t-shirt (either an official Heroes t-shirt or one specially made saying something about being a Heroes tourney winner)
Beltion I don't think there are technical means to stop all cheating. Perhaps playing small fast maps and playing them in one session could give players less time to cheat, but that in return would have negative effects.
Fnord See answer to 1 above. But in general, requiring a saved game (or several saves at different points in the game even) to be sent in usually goes a long way towards this.
AngelA If you have a moderator "sitting in" on each game, that would eliminate it, as far as I could tell.
Kriton I don't think you can ever eliminate cheating, but it can be reduced by careful moderation of the games and shorter game times (smaller or quicker maps), so they could be played in fewer sessions.
Simon Mooncalf After a crash have them send in the autosave before the crash and a direct safe when the game has started again. And have the endgame saved and send in.
BES, my buddy, I'm the cheatchecker on the AW-tournament.You don't want me to tell how to check in public. Anyway, it is very tough to cheat in H3, except between breaks... But saves games will give a cheater away :-)
Lifetaker You can't eliminate everything, but you can try to prevent it, by using Medium Maps and by using Mods.
KSummers I think having a moderator is a good deterrent. I don't agree with smaller or "faster" maps because that changes the whole game and each player's strategies but I agree that each person should be willing to set aside long stretches of time (ie. 6 hours?) for each game in the hopes that the game could be completed in one sitting.
Fnord A team tournament is fun but hard to organize. It's hard to get several people together and even harder if it has to take multiple sessions. Maybe if you used a small map and/or a time limit or something this would be easier. I'm not sure how you would combine it with the other tournaments though--maybe if "winning" overall depends on accumulating points from winning single matches, the team tournament could also give some points towards your total.
AngelA I think you'd have to have a separate tourney. And, although it takes delicate scheduling, the best "team" experience is 2 on 2- allied multiplay.
Kriton Excellent ideas. Perhaps the different rounds could be setup as 1v1, 2v2, maybe even a handicapped 1v2, 2v3, or more - a "gauntlet" of rounds so to speak, with the odds against you increasing each round until you lose. Then the one who has the most wins, takes the "crown", with the second most next and so on.
You could also have every competitor play all the maps. If you lose a particular type of map, then you're out of that "category". Playoffs for each category after everyone's played once. For example: -Categories ~~Singles 1v1 FFA 3 P's FFA 4 P's FFA 5 P's FFA 6 P's FFA 7 P's FFA 8 P's ~~Teams 2v2 3v3 4v4 ~~Handicap Singles/Teams 1v2 1v3 2v3 2v4 This may seem excessive, but what the heck! >;-) You could have prizes/winners from each category. More than one category can be won by same players.
Dragon Master Yeah there should be a team tournament
Lifetaker I would like to see a team tournament but organizing this could be very difficult, because all the different time zones
KSummers one or the other 1:1 or 2:2
Beltion Well, talk to Rex in the Comm about how hard it is to get 2 sets of 2 people to show up at the same time. How they could be combined? Well, perhaps having "brackets" like in Rex's tourney. (4 teams in one group, all play eachother, top 2 go on.) and then after the bracket play has been finished, break up the teams and make it a single player contest.
Well, when Rex used it, most people just signed on and let Rex do the teams.
Fnord I don't have much experience in this but if you go with a points system, you could guarantee everyone 3 matches plus the team game. If they win at least one of the 3 single matches, they could have another 3. Something like that...then you could take the top winners from there and do playoffs. But that might all take too long. :-)
AngelA Again, depends on number of participants. I'd say at least 2 losses before elimination- anyone can have a bad day. This is a little harder to set up- single elimination is the easiest, especially when you have a power of two (ie 16, 32, 64) players.
Dragon Master i think that if you lose 3 times you should be out of the tournament but should be able to watch the other players play and maybe after people get kicked out of the tournament from loseing so many games you should have some maps for them to play just for fun like one map will you only get one hero and can not get anymore heroes and maybe a game were you can only recuit level 1 creatures and will get no joins and maybe even one were you can only get one level one spell and the lowest level shooter unit and lowest level non shooter unit in the town
yeah i thought it would be cool to have a tournament in a tournament so the people who get knocked out can still play
Simon Mooncalf -If you have as many as 64 contestants and every round would be a month, it would take (only) 6 months to have a (1st) winner, if you use sudden death (maybe a possibility to rematch against the same player). -month 2: the 32 losers of the first round could then enter in a second round against each other, which would result in the 2nd winner. (3rd prize) -month 3, the 16 losers playing for 1st winner could enter a competition for 3rd place (2nd prize), the 16 losers for second winner could enter a competition for 4th place. (4th prize) -repeat process in month 4, to have a 5th & 6th, 7th & 8th winner. -in month 5 and 6 the losers don't get another chance, but at least they would only have to wait two months for the new tournament to start. Fringe benefit is that by month 5 and 6 the players capabilities will be evened out, which makes it more fun to play! If you decide to start another tournament after six months, you can make a position list on the wins in the first tournament.
I would ;-) If you want to shorten it, every round should be played per week. That would definitly need online moderators since not showing up would be losing by default. Heck of a lot of administration :-(
Lifetaker Most fair: two losses. Most practical one loss.
KSummers I think double-elimination is fair. Single elimination is very tough because someone could have just had a bad day or some very bad luck.
Beltion I can't say I like the idea. Specially since I don't think it's possible to do in AB/ROE and thus would limit the game to SOD owners.
Can't be done. You can disable heroes and artifacts, but not spells or secondary skills. The only way would be to take out all heroes with a spellbook, and not let anyone build a mage guild. (hehe... Stronghold & Fortress would rule in that case.)
Fnord Could be interesting.
AngelA If it was possible using RoE only (i'm not sure about this) then it would be interesting. As long as the players knew ahead of time about the limitation.
Kriton Sure, as long as it's clear before starting the map.
Simon Mooncalf If it would restrict players to using SoD, that would be a shame.
You are the boss <grin>
Lifetaker You mean no magic heroes or no spells at all?
KSummers Only if the only towns available are Stronghold and Fortress or something. That might be interesting.
Beltion and no Library for tower, I assume? Sure, why not. It could be interresting. As long as you mention it in advance so people can choose might heroes.
Beh, who cares about 'em pansy mages!
Fnord Probably not, because I think the magic is part of the balance in a town. So if you remove higher level magic from some towns, they become significantly weaker than some of the non magic-heavy towns. Better to customise spells and stuff on particular maps.
AngelA I personally like this idea, but again, the players would have to know ahead of time.
Kriton That's really hard to say. I personally think the towns are pretty balanced as they are. Limiting all towns to 3rd level mage guild might handicap those towns that normally can build 4th and/or 5th level mage guilds.
Dragon Master could have it so that all towns could chose from 5 levels of the mage guild and only level 1-4 creatures or level 1-7 creatures and only a level 2 or 3 mage guild
Simon Mooncalf see the above
Lifetaker No that way the barbarians and beastmasters would get an advantage.
KSummers Absolutely not. Each towns has it's strengths. To take away a Dungeon's 4th and 5th level mage guild and Mana vortex takes away too much. And a Dungeon is actually pretty weak untill you get the Blackies - ESPECIALLY with no magic (or limited magic). See my point? If you wanna have a MIGHT battle, just have Stronghold vs Fortress on one of the maps.
Beltion if it's purely as a "side-show" and has no influence on the tourney itself. People who just wish to play HoMM shouldn't have to start writing up witty bios in order to play a tourney.
Fnord Maybe..not sure.
AngelA It should be optional, I think -but if this is long term, it does build community and is something that will draw interest.
Kriton Sure. It might even be an alternate contest for those who are better at writing fiction than playing Heroes. >;-)
Simon Mooncalf Yes, it definitly is!! ;-)
Lifetaker Yes that's a good idea, this way players who are'nt very good at Heroes could still enjoy the tournaments.
KSummers I don't think it's a big deal either way. Fine if you do, fine if you don't.
Beltion no "longest game" IMO. But the "fastest win" sounds cool. You could really se some blazing fast agressive play if you promised something like "your next loss will not count" to the fastest win.
Yep, more daring gameplay could make for more interesting games.
Fnord Sure. :-)
AngelA Victory using the lowest level troops, closest final battle are just some other ideas.
Kriton The possibilities here are virtually limitless. Biggest Upset Best Tactics Best Use of a Spell Best Town Defender Best Town Sieger and so on. >;-)
Simon Mooncalf Not so sure about this... unless all players play the same map and same position.
I figured that, but I wanted to make sure. So round 1 is all played in the same map.. I like that idea.
Lifetaker You mean like:closest win. Most money * reseource. Highest level of Hero? yes I like the idea of that
KSummers Sure - just as "honerary" thing. No prizes for that though.
AngelA If you want to be online while every game goes on- scheduling may be tricky. You've got heroes all around the globe. You may have to schedule opponents (at least initially) by time zone/availabililty (which is not necessarily the same thing- someone from North America who likes to play in the daytime can play against someone from Europe who likes to play in the evening). I'm also not clear on whether all these matches are meant to be between two players, or if some would be against AI, but with a moderator "watching" the game. This is a very interesting idea- I may have some more suggestions as it develops I'd also suggest contacting webmasters/league officials of sites that have tourneys, to get their suggestions. Their experience would likely be very helpful.
Dragon Master first of all it will be free right and i don't have armagedons blade yet do you need it if so i will get it
well one place wanted me to pay so i just left well i will get AB soon and i am not sure how to make it so people can waych but i have done it before somehow
KSummers Are you really going to run a tournament? Are you ready for the vast amount of time and effort it will take? Do you have map makers? AND testers? Are you ready to spend an ENORMOUS amount of time just scheduling the games? Are you ready for people to complain at you for a various number of reasons? I'm just curious if you're really planning on doing it or just bringing up for the sake of discussion.
|