IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Possible standardized rulesets for music games, Feedback needed
Catastrophe
post Apr 1 2009, 12:05 AM
Post #21


Human Sequencer Wannabe
*****

Posts: 1,855
Joined: 25-February 04
From: Worcester, MA


DJ Battle This User




Per Song Matches. If someone picks V first and loses by 150 points then the other guy merely has to pick The Safari (900 notes) or Dazzlin Darlin (a guaranteed low-margin song) to lock a win. That's bullshit. And that's why DDR never did it. Otherwise the length of a DDR song would've been important. The existence of specialist players (like me) who lose Max 300 and then win On The Jazz evolved out of this. But that's not why it happened. And of course Kaze owns me anyway. The better man never loses, though Tiger Woods doesn't win every week either.

Chart Modifiers: whatever the game allows. Whatever saves a score. Shuffle/Wave/Reverse are allowed in DDR. Cut/Jump-off/auto-scratch/auto-bass/auto-neck/5-line/"red donuts only" are not. I might have made that last one up. I can't remember and I can't check right now.

Combo-Based Scoring: sucks, but you gotta do what the game demands. However, Drummania and Guitar Freaks have a mode where they count perfects. Personally I prefer that. (The other two battle modes are max combo, rofl, and money score, which is both rofl AND combo-based for extra rofls.)

Failing a DDR Pick: is a match loss. For several reasons. One, if it's one of those pay-as-go tournaments (lame) and you basically just ended the match. Two, sportsmanship. If you can't do it then you're probably just trying to be a douche and tire out your opponent. Also, play out your damn matches. This isn't M:TG with intentional draws. You can ignore your opponent's song if they pick a Lv18 beast against you. But you have to play your own song, no quitting. However, I would word it like "failing your own pick gives your opponent an extra round win" because sometimes the matches are best of 5 or 7.

Cool/Marvelous Timing: ON. No debate. Konami forced them to be on for SN2 and people bitched for some reason. Konami was right. Hit the fucking windows.

Banned Songs: don't make a general rule for this. It really only affects IIDX. And then the rule is usually that you pick the song and assume "heavy". I mean another. Unless it's The Safari again.
Rather than make a banned list I think I'd make a specifically allowed list: Fake Time 7H, gigadelic 7H, whatever. You can also specifically allow Implantation 5A to that problem. The best way to prevent Gambol bullshit is to make an obvious rule like "7s and up". Fuck Pink Rose. There was one match at BMF 06 that had both Gambol and Pink Rose in it. That's bad. I do play the On The Jazz and 5.1.1. game, but I don't play Have You Ever Been Mellow (a 4 footer).


--------------------
Life is short. Don't YOLO too hard. :P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
over there
post Apr 1 2009, 01:16 AM
Post #22


World's Biggest Xythar Fan No Longer
*********

Posts: 5,767
Joined: 27-May 05
From: Laurel, Maryland


DJ Battle This User

View User Page
Pop'n Battle This User




Haha good reasons for your opinions, and thanks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
itsgreylolol
post Apr 3 2009, 02:24 AM
Post #23


I am the end of the world
*****

Posts: 1,691
Joined: 24-June 07
From: Lubbock, Texas


DJ Battle This User




I do like the idea of per song IIDX tournament, Id like to do the upcoming DJT tournament that way to see how it works.

What are your opinions on difficulty brackets per round e.g Round 1 can pick between 5-10, round 2 6-11, round 3 7-12, and then keep upping the bottom end from there. I like it in theory, but at the same time, it definitely discourages people.


--------------------
All numbers not including EMP+PB
[L7] Left to AAA: 3 (Step Into the New World, Fun, Gambol)
[7k] left to A: 1 (Pluto)
11*s left to clear: 9 (waxing and wanding, tripping contact (remix), The Dirty of Loudness, four pieces of heaven, Blocks, Bleeding Luv, Be OK [b])
12*s Cleared: 5
Ds left in IIDX: 4 (Mendes[b], Icarus[b], four pieces of heaven[b], Mei[a])
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
over there
post Apr 3 2009, 08:49 AM
Post #24


World's Biggest Xythar Fan No Longer
*********

Posts: 5,767
Joined: 27-May 05
From: Laurel, Maryland


DJ Battle This User

View User Page
Pop'n Battle This User




QUOTE (itsgreylolol @ Apr 3 2009, 03:24 AM) *
I do like the idea of per song IIDX tournament, Id like to do the upcoming DJT tournament that way to see how it works.

What are your opinions on difficulty brackets per round e.g Round 1 can pick between 5-10, round 2 6-11, round 3 7-12, and then keep upping the bottom end from there. I like it in theory, but at the same time, it definitely discourages people.


It really alienates newer players unfortunately. I think it would be okay to have it be anything up to 10 (maybe 11, some 11s have scratch patters much harder than 9s and 10s except for watch out[a] and CYO hyper) first round, then increase the upper difficulty level instead of lower with each round. Basically the point is to keep each player playing around their best skill, so getting rid of the 1-3 levels essentially eliminates all the songs with missing timing windows. I've played in a lot of tournaments that do this and I certainly don't mind, but I'm not the one who is getting his best skill taken away.
I've been in ITG tournaments where only 10s on the machine could be picked first round, and ratings went up every round until it got to 13, where any song was pickable (on a hacked machine). That really upset me because most 10s and below don't have significant speed changes or stops to memorize, and I was lucky to qualify in the top half so I could barely scrape past the first round.
Basically bringing in difficulty caps to IIDX is going to do this and, though upper level limits give new players hope, a per-song tournament is going to be a better bet in general and being good at timing GAMBOL or scratching on Wonder Bullfighter is going to give them a decent chance at winning.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Catastrophe
post Apr 4 2009, 07:05 PM
Post #25


Human Sequencer Wannabe
*****

Posts: 1,855
Joined: 25-February 04
From: Worcester, MA


DJ Battle This User




For what it's worth, DDR tournaments exclude new players too. But if you think about it, new players + tournaments = paradox. You can't compete while you're learning the basics. New players should join a league or something. (I was going to start one at TGA. Now I gotta wait.)

So while you're thinking about tournaments, assume that only "good" people are interested. And by "good" I mean "middle-tier with hope" or "top-tier with confidence."


--------------------
Life is short. Don't YOLO too hard. :P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
over there
post Apr 5 2009, 12:51 AM
Post #26


World's Biggest Xythar Fan No Longer
*********

Posts: 5,767
Joined: 27-May 05
From: Laurel, Maryland


DJ Battle This User

View User Page
Pop'n Battle This User




QUOTE (Catastrophe @ Apr 4 2009, 08:05 PM) *
For what it's worth, DDR tournaments exclude new players too. But if you think about it, new players + tournaments = paradox. You can't compete while you're learning the basics. New players should join a league or something. (I was going to start one at TGA. Now I gotta wait.)

So while you're thinking about tournaments, assume that only "good" people are interested. And by "good" I mean "middle-tier with hope" or "top-tier with confidence."


Well in DDR EXTREME anyone who can't pass every song in the game is new imo (supernova 2 would be passing everything except relinquish oni, dead end GRS, and doubles oni charts), but I do plan to take things like that into account. IIDX isn't focused on getting perfect scores like DDR (ha good luck getting perfect scores consistently), and lower difficulty songs make things like e-motion [a] available to Schala if she goes up against VGTA and he picks Mei [a] on her. If she wants to score an easy win, that's the way to do it. DDR doesn't have timing windows that differ for different difficulties since like 5th mix iirc.

Also, I played in tournaments back when I couldn't pass 7s. There's nothing wrong with new players coming to tournaments; it helps bind the community together and get people more interested (and I never would have played IIDX for more than a year if I didn't go to that first tournament and get my ass kicked). You shouldn't exclude a group because they don't belong, that's basically dropping them before you consider them. Plus, more new players means more people that will have a chance at beating someone.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
grayfox9996
post Apr 5 2009, 02:26 AM
Post #27


Ready for mission.
*********

Posts: 5,293
Joined: 14-August 04
From: Phoenix, AZ


DJ Battle This User




QUOTE (osrg @ Apr 4 2009, 10:51 PM) *
Well in DDR EXTREME anyone who can't pass every song in the game is new imo

I never passed PSMO. I played regularly for like, 4 years. sad.gif


--------------------
QUOTE (IIDX Clock @ Jan 31 2009, 08:21 AM) *
actually, Japan has REALLY high technology.

heck they even have predecessors to HD already
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Spiritsnare
post Apr 5 2009, 10:47 AM
Post #28


make some noise daaadaadada
******

Posts: 2,919
Joined: 19-January 06




I, likewise, played regularly for four years (with two years of on-and-off prior), and I was only able to get so far as Max 300.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
over there
post Apr 5 2009, 01:16 PM
Post #29


World's Biggest Xythar Fan No Longer
*********

Posts: 5,767
Joined: 27-May 05
From: Laurel, Maryland


DJ Battle This User

View User Page
Pop'n Battle This User




So did I. I passed PSMO maybe 2 years ago. Keep in mind, EXTREME has been around for a LONG time and other dancing games have pushed the bar far higher, so almost everyone I see at a large tournament like Kings of the Coast (even BBQ!) can pass every song with a AA. The reason I call players who can't do that new is because other dancing games help you go past that level within a year or two at most, and it's no longer within the hardest set of charts.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Catastrophe
post Apr 14 2009, 01:11 AM
Post #30


Human Sequencer Wannabe
*****

Posts: 1,855
Joined: 25-February 04
From: Worcester, MA


DJ Battle This User




QUOTE (osrg @ Apr 5 2009, 01:51 AM) *
Also, I played in tournaments back when I couldn't pass 7s. There's nothing wrong with new players coming to tournaments; it helps bind the community together and get people more interested (and I never would have played IIDX for more than a year if I didn't go to that first tournament and get my ass kicked). You shouldn't exclude a group because they don't belong, that's basically dropping them before you consider them. Plus, more new players means more people that will have a chance at beating someone.

It's not like I walk around with the signup sheet and ask people if they can clear Maxx Unlimited. I'll sign anyone up! And I encourage everyone to sign up, just like you said. Tournaments are great community events. I used to think all the same things of tournaments that you do. But you're not thinking about what happens when your only events are tournaments.

Asking people for $2 or $5 for a DDR tournament is kind of like asking them to sit at a poker table. Of course, you want as many people as possible. And there are a few sharks who know for certain that they're getting paid that night. Casual DDR players who just want to haing with friends or strangers who share a common interest for a few hours will pay the $5 and suck at DDR all night no problem. And yeah, they'll meet people, maybe come back, great.

But after awhile it gets stale. Everyone learns better than a bookie who beats who. And then people stop playing. In MA we used to have 4 tiers: good (consistent AAAs), good-enough-but-always-loses-to-good (AAs on all 9s and 10s), better-than-most (me), and fish food. Surprisingly, it was the good-enough-but-always-loses-to-good people who quit first. The good people were showing up for free money. The fish food people were only ever there to be social. But the competitive people in the middle quit because they would always go W-L-L or W-W-L-L or W-W-W-L-L every single time to the same top tier people. Eventually you end up with me in the quarterfinals. That means your scene is dead.

You might be surprised to hear that TGA had lively tournament scene in 2006, but not in 2003 (lol), 2004, 05, 07, or 08. That's because Andy chose to stop hosting them. But why if they're such good community events? Besides me making the quarterfinals, they were also scaring people off. Not all of the "fish food" wanted to pay $2 to get pwned. And on tournament days you typically end up playing less DDR because you'll have 12 people (God forbid any more) sharing one machine. After just a few months of holding DDR tournaments on the first Saturday of every month, Andy noticed he was getting fuktons of DDR players on the following Sunday. All of them fish food. Some of them were noobs who were in awe of my 9 foot AAs, whoop. But some of them had been playing for years without a AA. And they're not noobs, just fish food. But they hate waiting in long lines (who doesn't) and it turns out that they were actually attracted to the idea of playing DDR with no awesome people around. It makes sense. Even if the people scoring AAAs are nicest, most encouraging people imaginable, they're going to intimidate the social players. (I'll stop calling them fish food now.) This really happened. Saturday - AAAs. Sunday - Xepher reclaims its rightful spot on the player's best list.

But mostly it was the threat of long lines, or pros hogging the machine, whichever way you look at it, that scared people away. Which is why leagues are better.


--------------------
Life is short. Don't YOLO too hard. :P
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
over there
post Apr 14 2009, 02:00 AM
Post #31


World's Biggest Xythar Fan No Longer
*********

Posts: 5,767
Joined: 27-May 05
From: Laurel, Maryland


DJ Battle This User

View User Page
Pop'n Battle This User




QUOTE (Catastrophe @ Apr 14 2009, 02:11 AM) *
It's not like I walk around with the signup sheet and ask people if they can clear Maxx Unlimited. I'll sign anyone up! And I encourage everyone to sign up, just like you said. Tournaments are great community events. I used to think all the same things of tournaments that you do. But you're not thinking about what happens when your only events are tournaments.

Asking people for $2 or $5 for a DDR tournament is kind of like asking them to sit at a poker table. Of course, you want as many people as possible. And there are a few sharks who know for certain that they're getting paid that night. Casual DDR players who just want to haing with friends or strangers who share a common interest for a few hours will pay the $5 and suck at DDR all night no problem. And yeah, they'll meet people, maybe come back, great.

But after awhile it gets stale. Everyone learns better than a bookie who beats who. And then people stop playing. In MA we used to have 4 tiers: good (consistent AAAs), good-enough-but-always-loses-to-good (AAs on all 9s and 10s), better-than-most (me), and fish food. Surprisingly, it was the good-enough-but-always-loses-to-good people who quit first. The good people were showing up for free money. The fish food people were only ever there to be social. But the competitive people in the middle quit because they would always go W-L-L or W-W-L-L or W-W-W-L-L every single time to the same top tier people. Eventually you end up with me in the quarterfinals. That means your scene is dead.

You might be surprised to hear that TGA had lively tournament scene in 2006, but not in 2003 (lol), 2004, 05, 07, or 08. That's because Andy chose to stop hosting them. But why if they're such good community events? Besides me making the quarterfinals, they were also scaring people off. Not all of the "fish food" wanted to pay $2 to get pwned. And on tournament days you typically end up playing less DDR because you'll have 12 people (God forbid any more) sharing one machine. After just a few months of holding DDR tournaments on the first Saturday of every month, Andy noticed he was getting fuktons of DDR players on the following Sunday. All of them fish food. Some of them were noobs who were in awe of my 9 foot AAs, whoop. But some of them had been playing for years without a AA. And they're not noobs, just fish food. But they hate waiting in long lines (who doesn't) and it turns out that they were actually attracted to the idea of playing DDR with no awesome people around. It makes sense. Even if the people scoring AAAs are nicest, most encouraging people imaginable, they're going to intimidate the social players. (I'll stop calling them fish food now.) This really happened. Saturday - AAAs. Sunday - Xepher reclaims its rightful spot on the player's best list.

But mostly it was the threat of long lines, or pros hogging the machine, whichever way you look at it, that scared people away. Which is why leagues are better.


Thanks for your comments. I'll be more careful about how I categorize people next time. I don't intend for these rules to be used all of the time though, Just for large tournaments or tournaments in a large setting (like KOTC/COTC or BOWLmanifest-type tournaments) or for people who know others in the area take the games very seriously. These rules will be guidelines, not something that every tournament must have. In those tournaments, it's not as much about who wins ___ tournament as who is the best overall music gamer, which is an entirely different idea and takes completely different skills.

I am by no means a "good" DDR or ITG player and it shows, even though I can *** most of ITG singles and have an SDG on almost every song in DDR singles. I will ALWAYS be knocked out of large dancing game tournaments by the third round because so many good players go to the tournaments I attend, therefore making it impossible for me to win. But I like competition and showing people that you can win by knowing more songs and being worse at timing and stamina, or that they don't have that magical intangible ability called consistency yet. Hell, the ONLY music games I consider myself good enough to enter tournaments for money in are pop'n and Gitaroo-Man, and I've never seen a tournament for the latter (and probably never will).
KOTC/COTC has offered me the opportunity to show people I am the best overall music gamer attending for the past three years, and every year I've failed to make top three in total points (which is in my opinion a problem rooted in the popularity-biased point system). I won two tournaments, got third in another, and made it past the first round in ITG last year, along with entering every tournament and placed 5th or 6th overall behind people who got an average of like 3rd-7th place in every dancing game tournament, and didn't enter but one or two other tournaments (which they flopped in). This year Jimbo's fixed it a bit, so I should be able to place better overall. My point here is that if there is a significant chance of a prize for less talented players, they will be there and the attendance will be much higher.
I'm quite disappointed at GOMX's list of tournaments and won't be attending, thanks to no overall prize and it being almost entirely dancing game-centered. Those tournaments are best left to pros and area players, but because of size it's best to use a standardized tournament format that players have agreed on (which is why I'm trying to get a lot of feedback before I write and before I finalize anything). That makes it more appealing and basically voids arguments because the competition is fair, as defined by the players themselves. Just because X group isn't attending doesn't mean the tournament won't have a large draw, and just because X group IS attending doesn't mean the standardized rules MUST be used; they're always suggestions.
I've seen the Brawl community here in Maryland become very conservative rule-wise, banning some couterpick stages and making most of the neutrals counterpicks. This is simply because our region progressed very quickly at first, and reached a level higher than that of the people who made the standardized ruleset for Brawl. The rules are always being revised, and this is how these rulesets should be viewed once they're finished (which is far from now honestly). I've been asking Schala what she thinks about the rules to see how she views things from higher up on the rankings. I need more info from great players who go to tournaments to get real, immediately usable data though. It would be good if limey or Toph posted in here about how they view tournament play, but they haven't bothered so I don't have that viewpoint yet.

I intend to take the "fish food" players into account with my rules; what I said about who I believe is good and who is not does not necessarily apply in that case (since one of the worst players could feasibly pull a victory on one of the best if they know ___ song better than that best player and get a lucky random). As long as it requires some sort of skill that the game rewards the player for, that skill should be measured in tournament play. That means anything from consistency to clearing songs to timing to switching between doubles and singles during one round, or anything else that can be feasibly measured and create a winning round for a player.

The idea of weekly or even monthly tournaments isn't a good idea in my opinion (neither is a league, after attempting one recently) for music games because those players who just want to play to have fun or get better are too pressured by others and by the constant high level of competition around them. They end up losing touch and fall out of the game. I'd say tournaments in large arcades could happen monthly, but smaller arcades should make them at least two months apart to make it a bigger deal and give people a chance to see their improvement (and this appeals to those "fish food" players as long as they play a lot). It's worked surprisingly well at my arcade for the past 3 years and it will probably continue to work that well. However, this isn't something I intend to cover in the rules. I've defined what they're for and how they should be viewed, and I don't intend for them to dictate how to schedule tournaments for the best turnout or which group to appeal to.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jimbo22291
post Apr 15 2009, 01:15 PM
Post #32


Tranoid
****

Posts: 752
Joined: 22-June 05
From: Rutherford, NJ




I've been looking for a thread like this for a REALLY long time.

For dancing games, I have always wondered if it is possible to make a 100% accurate seeding list without the use of a qualifier during each and every tournament. That being said, the one or two song qualifier before a tournament way is the current best thing around, as it has been done for years, but it is still EXTREMELY flawed. In the case of KOTC2, all of my tournaments will be single elimination up until 32 remain, and then it will be double elimination from there on out. Hell, I would do double elimination the entire time, but I have to follow certain time constraints. Now with seeding by a qualifier in mind, I have seen countless first round matchups in ITG2 where two of the best players in attendance had to face each other in the first round due to their "low seeding" (SINGLE ELIMINATION), and one of them was eliminated right off the bat.

Look at the NCAA Basketball tournament. Everyone is seeded based on their performance throughout the year. Could the same thing be done with something like ITG2? For big tournaments, should people from all over the country be seeded based on their performances in other tournaments: big or small? I would LOVE to see that happen, but it would be nearly impossible to get it right. The pros are very simple though, it saves A TON of time because song qualifiers will be eliminated, it prevents imbalance in terms of seeding, and the margin of error in terms of seeding will be a hell of a lot lower than by doing an actual qualifier. Yeah, I could see a margin of error of 2 or 3 spots instead of a margin of error of 40-50 spots. And since there would be no qualifier, sandbagging will be gone, and people who aren't regulars at the specific location can catch a break due to not being used to the machine right away. With the current qualifier system, the people that usually seed high are the regulars of the location where the tournament is being held.

tl;dr- I know it's close to impossible, but if there is ANY good way to accurately seed ITG2/DDR players with little of margin of error based on past performances, I would love to know.

Now, let's shift over to IIDX and Pop'n Music. For those of you who don't know, I am going to be in charge of KOTC2 this year, which is a huge music-game based 3-day event. I was reading Gabe's posts and I was thinking of applying some of this stuff to these two divisions over at KOTC2 this year.
-Pop'n Music: Same overall rules, 2 out of 3 regardless of score, pass/fail, etc. Anything hyper and above may be selected at any time. S-Challenge, however, could be the biggest change and a very good thing to try out.
-IIDX: Same overall rules. 2 out of 3 regardless of EX Score, pass/fail, etc. Anything hyper and above may be selected at any time.

Any other ideas? And Gabe, if you read this and are on AIM later, send me an IM whether I'm away or not.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
over there
post Apr 15 2009, 02:04 PM
Post #33


World's Biggest Xythar Fan No Longer
*********

Posts: 5,767
Joined: 27-May 05
From: Laurel, Maryland


DJ Battle This User

View User Page
Pop'n Battle This User




QUOTE (Jimbo22291 @ Apr 15 2009, 02:15 PM) *
I've been looking for a thread like this for a REALLY long time.

For dancing games, I have always wondered if it is possible to make a 100% accurate seeding list without the use of a qualifier during each and every tournament. That being said, the one or two song qualifier before a tournament way is the current best thing around, as it has been done for years, but it is still EXTREMELY flawed. In the case of KOTC2, all of my tournaments will be single elimination up until 32 remain, and then it will be double elimination from there on out. Hell, I would do double elimination the entire time, but I have to follow certain time constraints. Now with seeding by a qualifier in mind, I have seen countless first round matchups in ITG2 where two of the best players in attendance had to face each other in the first round due to their "low seeding" (SINGLE ELIMINATION), and one of them was eliminated right off the bat.

Look at the NCAA Basketball tournament. Everyone is seeded based on their performance throughout the year. Could the same thing be done with something like ITG2? For big tournaments, should people from all over the country be seeded based on their performances in other tournaments: big or small? I would LOVE to see that happen, but it would be nearly impossible to get it right. The pros are very simple though, it saves A TON of time because song qualifiers will be eliminated, it prevents imbalance in terms of seeding, and the margin of error in terms of seeding will be a hell of a lot lower than by doing an actual qualifier. Yeah, I could see a margin of error of 2 or 3 spots instead of a margin of error of 40-50 spots. And since there would be no qualifier, sandbagging will be gone, and people who aren't regulars at the specific location can catch a break due to not being used to the machine right away. With the current qualifier system, the people that usually seed high are the regulars of the location where the tournament is being held.

tl;dr- I know it's close to impossible, but if there is ANY good way to accurately seed ITG2/DDR players with little of margin of error based on past performances, I would love to know.

Now, let's shift over to IIDX and Pop'n Music. For those of you who don't know, I am going to be in charge of KOTC2 this year, which is a huge music-game based 3-day event. I was reading Gabe's posts and I was thinking of applying some of this stuff to these two divisions over at KOTC2 this year.
-Pop'n Music: Same overall rules, 2 out of 3 regardless of score, pass/fail, etc. Anything hyper and above may be selected at any time. S-Challenge, however, could be the biggest change and a very good thing to try out.
-IIDX: Same overall rules. 2 out of 3 regardless of EX Score, pass/fail, etc. Anything hyper and above may be selected at any time.

Any other ideas? And Gabe, if you read this and are on AIM later, send me an IM whether I'm away or not.


I'll definitely contact you later but I want to get some of my ideas out here as well, thanks for posting!

I've tried a league, as I said, where players at my local arcade simply challenged the other player and both players were required to play (within reason, as long as they had money and legs were working, etc.) in a tournament-style match. Wins were worth 1 point, losses were temporarily worth nothing (though later challenging a high seed from the first season, if you were low, would be worth points regardless of a loss, and if you won it was extra). The problem was that some of the players were really into it and got a lot of wins and dominated, while others just didn't do it at all so they seeded low even though they may have been a top player.

So I'm thinking now something like the ECRC that the Brawl community does would be good, where specific tournaments (assigned well-ahead of time) would position players based on points rewarded for each placing. The remainder of players who did not enter any of these get randomly seeded in the bottom few seeds so that they have a difficult first round. The system rewards activity, so players who enter more tournaments and place well overall are seen as good. This still doesn't fix the problem completely though, especially for people who don't want to travel far or don't have money/time to spend on tournaments. I'm not sure what I'd do personally, but that's what's been done before. This is a lot like the NCAA tournament format you're referring to, so you might want to check out how different regions rank players on smashboards.com (ECRC is the East Coast, mostly VA to CT but includes other states).
I think people being used to the machine is a HUGE problem though, as I've had many issues with that on my own. This doesn't eliminate it, and in fact might make it worse if players don't get a chance to warm-up beforehand. What you could do is what I suggested earlier; call people up for the warm up, no big loss if they're not there, just call the next person after 20 seconds or so. A single song, and they have to agree on it. If you finish early, start at the top again so you can give the people who haven't played in the longest time a chance again. Alternatively, create a warm-up sheet where players write down their name at what time they want to warm up; it's in the player's hands to be there and do it so if someone isn't there one person gets a song on their own or whatever, or the next players go up to play. You can't really put someone in a tournament "cold" when their opponent is a regular who plays at the arcade every day and expect the cold player to win. Even if the other player hasn't played that day, they still have a significant advantage on that first song (though if the out-of-towner is smart he'll choose the first song).

I'd say definitely do super-challenge for pop'n because it's how the game is currently ranked by Konami. Also, consider making 9-lines available (maybe with both players' consent if you don't like it?), because there are many songs with bad timing that only have 9-lines (23 or whatever that license song is in pop'n 10) or are only difficult to time on 9-line (MUSICAL from pop'n stage, various others). This requires timing, which is definitely something pop'n rewards players for, and I know I have a few tournament songs from pop'n 1-5 that only have 9-lines.
Be careful allowing Random/S-Random, as both players won't play at the same time so they may get vastly different charts. I think Velius suggested for IIDX (when you have two players playing at different times) to have both players consent before one player (or both) may use random or s-random on a song, and I think that works here. If I picked Classic 4 Hyper or Classic 10 EX on someone, it's probably because I think I'm better at scales, not because I'm going to random it and beat them. If you allow them to use random, that song one person may have an advantage on is thrown away.

Same thing about random for IIDX if you play it on AC, but I like the CS format you had last year where both players play at the same time smile.gif Prevents different random/s-randoms (s-randoms I have to check but I think so) and it's more comfortable to players since they're playing on more available setups/controllers/games.
L7 is less important to allow than 9-line in pop'n because almost all songs are fine, but I would allow it just to get a larger draw and give lower players an advantage against someone who has never played Pluto L7. If you ever do a 3rd Style tournament though, I would definitely allow GAMBOL L7 at the very least because it's a big challenge in timing (and more difficult than the 7k IMO, thanks to having less notes).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 15th October 2018 - 05:58 AM