Mithrandir
03-22-2007, 02:21 AM
I've decided to run another tournament. The two ideas that appeal to me most are another PSST, which I won't run for probably a year or so, and another grey tag-team tournament. I have an idea for my own spin on the tag-team concept which would drastically improve the inactivity problems tag-team tournaments have always had. If the community is in favor of the idea, I will begin the tournament.
Each team would consist of four players: three starters and one substitute (one of which must be named as team captain). Signups would last a while, as I would naturally want the tournament to be somewhat large-scale. I would rather ambitiously hope for 32 teams of 4. Each round would work as follows:
These rules are strict and harsh, and at times a pain, but is necessary to avoid the inactivity that plagues every freaking tournament nowadays. Each team captain PMs me the order of play for their team: first player, second player, third player, sub. I randomly match up the teams. In the first week, the first game must be played. Period. No exceptions. If it is not played, I (and possibly an assistant, should I wish to include myself in the tournament) will examine the evidence and disqualify either one of the players or both, depending on if one made more effort than the other to get the game in.
This will be measured mostly on the basis of the exchanged PMs. I would recommend that players post of their private messages between themselves and their opponents so I can see what they are doing to get their games in. In the opening private messages from one opponent to the other, they must exchange both time zone info and at least one available time that they can be online to play their game that week. If you agree to be on and you aren't on, you'll probably be the one to get the ax. If you're being vague and not helping to suggest times and get the game in, I'll assume you're trying to secure a double DQ and will DQ you. Being specific will go a long way in these PMs.
Obviously, each game will have a week allotted to be played. After absolutely no more than five weeks, the round will end and the next will begin.
These are seriously rough rules and will no doubt create some headaches (sigh, the cost of keeping a tournament going). So I have two solutions to make the problem less significant. The first is the subs. Each team that signs up will sign up with four players, not three, so that if one of the players is too busy or is having a difficult time getting their game in, the team captain can declare the current player on his team that is supposed to play as being replaced by the sub (only one substitution per round). This decision should be made early, as there will still only be one week allowed per round.
The second solution is that, as this tournament will run for a few months, in between rounds, a team captain can permanently replace one of the players on his team (himself included) with someone else willing to play. This may only happen once in the tournament, and the exchange will be final.
I hope this is clear. If anyone has any questions, I'd be happy to try to clarify.
The main pro of this tournament is that under no circumstances will it stall. It WILL continue to advance every single week. I don't think any large-scale tournament that has ever been run can make this claim. This is the problem with large-scale tournaments: they get boring, they slow down, people forget, people stop caring. With a strict system, if people don't show they can expect to be DQed on the dot every week. Wouldn't you love to be in a big tournament like this AND have it stay active?
Each team would consist of four players: three starters and one substitute (one of which must be named as team captain). Signups would last a while, as I would naturally want the tournament to be somewhat large-scale. I would rather ambitiously hope for 32 teams of 4. Each round would work as follows:
These rules are strict and harsh, and at times a pain, but is necessary to avoid the inactivity that plagues every freaking tournament nowadays. Each team captain PMs me the order of play for their team: first player, second player, third player, sub. I randomly match up the teams. In the first week, the first game must be played. Period. No exceptions. If it is not played, I (and possibly an assistant, should I wish to include myself in the tournament) will examine the evidence and disqualify either one of the players or both, depending on if one made more effort than the other to get the game in.
This will be measured mostly on the basis of the exchanged PMs. I would recommend that players post of their private messages between themselves and their opponents so I can see what they are doing to get their games in. In the opening private messages from one opponent to the other, they must exchange both time zone info and at least one available time that they can be online to play their game that week. If you agree to be on and you aren't on, you'll probably be the one to get the ax. If you're being vague and not helping to suggest times and get the game in, I'll assume you're trying to secure a double DQ and will DQ you. Being specific will go a long way in these PMs.
Obviously, each game will have a week allotted to be played. After absolutely no more than five weeks, the round will end and the next will begin.
These are seriously rough rules and will no doubt create some headaches (sigh, the cost of keeping a tournament going). So I have two solutions to make the problem less significant. The first is the subs. Each team that signs up will sign up with four players, not three, so that if one of the players is too busy or is having a difficult time getting their game in, the team captain can declare the current player on his team that is supposed to play as being replaced by the sub (only one substitution per round). This decision should be made early, as there will still only be one week allowed per round.
The second solution is that, as this tournament will run for a few months, in between rounds, a team captain can permanently replace one of the players on his team (himself included) with someone else willing to play. This may only happen once in the tournament, and the exchange will be final.
I hope this is clear. If anyone has any questions, I'd be happy to try to clarify.
The main pro of this tournament is that under no circumstances will it stall. It WILL continue to advance every single week. I don't think any large-scale tournament that has ever been run can make this claim. This is the problem with large-scale tournaments: they get boring, they slow down, people forget, people stop caring. With a strict system, if people don't show they can expect to be DQed on the dot every week. Wouldn't you love to be in a big tournament like this AND have it stay active?