Slitherine

mkjhartmann wrote:Maybe ever user should be limited to only one active tournament? Seems like some users get the inside scoop and sign up for every tournament.

If Slitherine wants this game to grow, you have to provide a way for everybody to participate, not just the same 32 grognards.

Mike

Agreed. That is a good suggestion. Maybe only let them sign up if it isn't full 24 hours before it is due to start.

Is there some infrastructure issue that caps it at 32? The demand is clearly there. I missed signup for this one.

MikeC_81 wrote:Is there some infrastructure issue that caps it at 32? The demand is clearly there. I missed signup for this one.

No, the first tournament has 64 players which is probably the most the system can handle.

MikeC_81 wrote:Is there some infrastructure issue that caps it at 32? The demand is clearly there. I missed signup for this one.

I am very sorry about that. Slitherine are currently experimenting with different tournament formats to try to see which is best.

Some restriction on people signing up for multiple concurrent tournaments is going to be needed, I think, so that others can get their chance, but that facility is not currently available to us.

Richard, I raised the point earlier in this thread that three rounds wasn't really long enough to allow the Swiss system to work properly. With 32 players it really needs 5 rounds, which is 10 battles each. I think the increased number of battles might also dissuade some players from entering two competitions at the same time as well. What do you think?

stockwellpete wrote:Richard, I raised the point earlier in this thread that three rounds wasn't really long enough to allow the Swiss system to work properly. With 32 players it really needs 5 rounds, which is 10 battles each. I think the increased number of battles might also dissuade some players from entering two competitions at the same time as well. What do you think?

I think nothing will deter the core grognards from entering every tournament that gets opened, if they are able to do so.

That is a sad state of affairs. You have a perfectly fine point based non elimination system that can be used to do swiss pairings which can support a field of any size as long as there are an even number of opponents but for some reason you need to cap a tournament in size?

Why would you create a system where you actively limit your player base from participating? Even if you really wanted to make a perfect bracket you could have on demand tournaments that fire when they fill up and start another signup right away.

This is really subpar from standard offerings from a gaming perspective,

I think if you asked players already in a tournament not to enroll in a second, until given the go-ahead, most would comply.

After all, Ancients player are know to be honest and trust-worthy.

Whats that you say......measuring distances on the table.......they wouldn't do that, would they......

Given that this is due to start tomorrow, should I have received some notification at this stage?

Have checked emails and in-game but not sure what to expect.

It is "magic" with these tournaments, games to play will appear in MP automatically - hopefully.

Can users set up their own tournaments?

jamespcrowley wrote:Given that this is due to start tomorrow, should I have received some notification at this stage?

Have checked emails and in-game but not sure what to expect.

You should get email notification when it starts, and shortly afterwards your first two games will show in you My turn and enemy Turn tabs the the MP lobby in-game

jomni wrote:Can users set up their own tournaments?

Currently the set-up system is rather arcane and inaccessible, so Slitherine don't want to let it loose on the general public as yet.

Hopefully, in due course, it can be made more user-friendly and made more generally available.

Dame , missed it again , maybe next time

If you go to the results page for this tournament it is showing a test run by Shards at the moment, not the 32 players who have entered.

stockwellpete wrote:If you go to the results page for this tournament it is showing a test run by Shards at the moment, not the 32 players who have entered.

Hmm. Will look into it.

Not getting email notification that opponent has completed his turn.

Geordietaf wrote:Not getting email notification that opponent has completed his turn.

But are the turns appearing in your "My Turn" tab in game? Note that they normally appear there much sooner than the emails are sent out.

rbodleyscott wrote:

mkjhartmann wrote:Maybe ever user should be limited to only one active tournament? Seems like some users get the inside scoop and sign up for every tournament.

If Slitherine wants this game to grow, you have to provide a way for everybody to participate, not just the same 32 grognards.

Mike

Agreed. That is a good suggestion. Maybe only let them sign up if it isn't full 24 hours before it is due to start.

Yeah, I agree with this myself; don't let them be greedy and wait their turn again.

stockwellpete wrote:Richard, I raised the point earlier in this thread that three rounds wasn't really long enough to allow the Swiss system to work properly. With 32 players it really needs 5 rounds, which is 10 battles each. I think the increased number of battles might also dissuade some players from entering two competitions at the same time as well. What do you think?

No, I don't agree with this; making it longer won't solve a thing and I don't prefer long tournaments. 3 is a good number and i hope it remains that way.