Something new and exciting?

[Tiavals]

Yeah, my game with gazxtrix has been going on, but at a really slow pace. We're at turn 6 at the moment, but the fighting is fierce, it might be a few more turns until it's over. He seems to make his turns at the most unfortunate time compared to me, so the lag between our turns is huge.

I didn't quite understand what you just ordered me to do, could you rephrase it?

[ericdoman1]

It is OK, forget what I have mentioned. Thing is I really wanted each game to finish within a week (3 turns every 2 days), which is not a big ask, really. That is another reason why I chose 10 turns, to speed games up so they will finish quickly. If I intend to increase the number of turns, games may be slower still. This comp kicked off on 14th March, it is now 24th March.

Thing is I haven't been contacted by anybody about problems with computers. Nor have I seen any mention of problems

If players are having problems, please try and contact somebody, it would be most appreciated.

Again not sure what to do now.

I need games to be finished by the 25th please.

[Tiavals]

Well, I did post here that our game was going slowly. There's little I can do to speed it up. If I had to estimate how our game goes, it'd be me defeating his army while he does 50-75% to me.

[ericdoman1]

Yes I know, but there is slow and then very slow:) Well all of the other players will have to wait until the remaining players have finished their games, hopefully before 2013:)

[Tiavals]

Let's hope gazxtrix does plenty of turns this weekend, then.

[Tiavals]

Still no turn from him. This might take a while.

[rexhurley]

Still no turn from him. This might take a while.

He is the slowest player in LOEG, sorry but if you want progress you need to drop him

[stockwellpete]

Regarding slow players, Eric has set the deadline for today, hasn't he? So it just needs a firm application of the deadline tonight and the slow players will soon get the message. I know that sometimes life interferes with our wargaming, but it is a basic courtesy to the other players in the competition to adhere to the tournament conditions (or explain why they cannot).

[stockwellpete]

8 x 12, 3 x 11, 5 x 10, 6 x neutral/abstaining/not read this yet

Well a quick calculation, even if all remaining votes choose 12 turns, the average will be 11.

Round 2 will have 11 turns

Point of order, Mr Chairperson!

I can't understand the logic to make it 11 turns next time when it got the lowest amount of votes. I think there are two ways of looking at the result - either that 12 turns got 8 votes and that was higher than the votes cast for the other two options or that 11 players voted for an increase in the number of turns and 5 did not and of those 11 players, 8 voted for 12 turns and only 3 for 11. So in both cases, 12 turns should be the result of the voting.

[Tiavals]

Regarding slow players, Eric has set the deadline for today, hasn't he? So it just needs a firm application of the deadline tonight and the slow players will soon get the message. I know that sometimes life interferes with our wargaming, but it is a basic courtesy to the other players in the competition to adhere to the tournament conditions (or explain why they cannot).

How are the points determined? Estimated, or neither gets anything or what?

[stockwellpete]

Regarding slow players, Eric has set the deadline for today, hasn't he? So it just needs a firm application of the deadline tonight and the slow players will soon get the message. I know that sometimes life interferes with our wargaming, but it is a basic courtesy to the other players in the competition to adhere to the tournament conditions (or explain why they cannot).

How are the points determined? Estimated, or neither gets anything or what?

Eric will decide that, but the defaulting player should get zero or one, in my opinion. Maybe the winning player should get 4 or 5? Maybe 5 if he was ahead in the game, 4 if it was level or if he was behind? Something like that anyway.

[JonPowles]

8 x 12, 3 x 11, 5 x 10, 6 x neutral/abstaining/not read this yet

Well a quick calculation, even if all remaining votes choose 12 turns, the average will be 11.

Round 2 will have 11 turns

Point of order, Mr Chairperson!

I can't understand the logic to make it 11 turns next time when it got the lowest amount of votes. I think there are two ways of looking at the result - either that 12 turns got 8 votes and that was higher than the votes cast for the other two options or that 11 players voted for an increase in the number of turns and 5 did not and of those 11 players, 8 voted for 12 turns and only 3 for 11. So in both cases, 12 turns should be the result of the voting.

Or, we keep it at 10 because that was the original format of the competition and there has not been a majority of players voting for an increase: 11 players (50%) have voted for 11-12 turns, 11 (50%) have voted for 10 or abstained. There's not even a majority vote for increasing the number of turns, let alone the unanimous or near unanimous vote you'd expect to change the format of a comp midway.

I'm just pulling the chain and playing number games, not making a serious point Although, for us players down the bottom of the rankings, the fewer turns in which to get hammered, the better ...

[Turk1964]

Leave it as it is until we have a majority for more than 10. As Eric says he wanted each round to be over in a week ,which isnt to much to ask I really dont think an extra 1 to 2 moves will make a huge difference to an outcome.
CheersTurk

[Supervark]

Leave it as it is until we have a majority for more than 10. As Eric says he wanted each round to be over in a week ,which isnt to much to ask I really dont think an extra 1 to 2 moves will make a huge difference to an outcome.
CheersTurk

Have to agree with Turk on this one even though I voted for 12 his point that 1 or two turns will not m ake a vast difference is valid

[ericdoman1]

Might as well wait for other games to finish and that might give more players the chance to vote but based on there not being a massive difference I am going to stick with 10 turns for round 2. That was the original idea and I am guessing those people who abstained don't really mind

Gazxtrix and Mike, I need you both to contact me please. Are you able to play 10 to 12 turns in a week?

If you can not would it be OK for us to continue with just 20 players?

I will PM them both so bear with me on this.

Not sure how I can work out a score though for those games. My guess would be a 6 vs 3 for Tiavals and a 6 vs 4 for Mike (based on rankings etc)

[stockwellpete]

Not sure how I can work out a score though for those games. My guess would be a 6 vs 3 for Tiavals and a 6 vs 4 for Mike (based on rankings etc)

One way would be to be very strict and say that games not completed in the required timescale go to adjudication. Then, if one player has clearly caused the delay they should forfeit the game. You could score that 5-1 (as a way of recognising that the "winner" did not actually win the game in the usual way) or you could score it 6-1 as the largest possible win under the scoring system (I would score it 5-1). The next question is how you deal with matches where both players have done their best to complete the game but "life" has intervened for whatever reason. Maybe a 3-3 or 4-4 score would be appropriate in these circumstances? I wouldn't bring a player's ranking into the assessment at this point though, Eric. At the adjudication stage, I feel that all players should be treated equally and if the higher rated player has caused the delay he should lose 5 or 6-1. If you do this consistently then I think you will get very few uncompleted games and very few disagreements from the players.

I think this time/slow play question is a difficult one for tournament organisers of the PC tournaments. I was very conscious of it when I was running the KO competition because I was trying, on the one hand, to keep everyone playing where possible so they would not lose interest in the competition, but on the other hand, I did not want to get into a situation where someone had reached the semi-final while some first round matches were still in progress.

I think that this Swiss tournament is an interesting concept - but I do think the time element will need quite strict enforcement. Eric sets the dates for the start and finish of each round and players just have to get their games done or they go to adjudication. I think 99% of players will both accept and respect that sort of regime for a competition that is meant to be "short and snappy". After all, in LOEG-type competitions, where a season last three months, you can go on a Caribbean cruise halfway through a game and incur no penalty.

[ericdoman1]

Pete - yep agreed

I can't really alow a 3 vs 3 or a 4 vs 4 in the last round as possibly that is all a player might need to win. But in the first round it would seem fair. Also if something unfortunate has occurred to one player, I still have to consider the other 21 players. I suppose that is another random factor in the game.

For later rounds in particular 5th and 6th I would have to make a call.

I honestly don't know what to do.

I really wanted round 2 to have started on the 22nd March at the very latest.

Here goes though.

Round 2 will begin March 25th. I am going to wait until 12pm GMT Results are to be returned on that date, no matter what turns you are on. So take note of them now, just in case please, otherwise the score will be a 3 vs 3.

Rond 3 begins 1st April. Again scores will be 3 vs 3 if late

Round 4 begins 8th April 3 vs 3 once more

Round 5 begins 15th April. I will have to make an adjudication on the result (please don't let this happen:)

Round 6 begins 22nd April. As round 5

Based on most round 1 games were completed very quickly. The beginnings of the next round may change, in that they may be a bit earlier, which would be nice.

ALL rounds will be 10 turns. I shouldn't have offered the opportunity for players to vote. Also at the very beginning it was specified 1 week per round.

That's it guys

[ericdoman1]

Meant midnight GMT, so I am going to stay up late.

[Aristides]

Hmm... obviously there's nothing I can do as Mike hasn't made a move for ages. I think a forfeit is the only way if one player is responsible for the delay. (Although, as we hear his computer crashed, there isn't much he can do either.)

[ericdoman1]

Hi Daniel.

I am going to stick with a 3 vs 3. Although would really have liked to have seen your game vs Mike.

Tiavals and Gazxtrix, would also be a very close call. Although based on what T had to say he was likely to win.

I have pmd everybody and if they have set up the facility on private messages, that I stated a while back, then they should also receive an email referring them to a new private message.

I have pmd Gazxtrix twice now (time difference is a problem though) but have left a few messages here on this link.

I felt we had a good balance of players and y last resort would have tried to find 2 more players but it took a while to get the 22 playing at the moment.

There may well be a chance you will be playing Tiavals (again a very quick player) in the next round. Triarius and Gazxtrix will then play. If there are problems with them again, I may have to exclude them from round 3. Once more I am thinking of the other players.