Slitherine

Thanks for organising a great tournament with a difference.

Thanks Karvon. Overall a good tourney except for a few hopeless mismatches. Pitting raw hoplites against phalanxes, even using every advantage (hills, numbers, etc.) wasn't viable.

Deeter

Great fun again Karvon. I'd prefer mirrors too but I know they're not your cup of tea. Either way I'll be happy to rejoin the chaos next time.

Thanks from me too.
I will vote too for mirror matches. Not only would be more fair but we will get the chance to play armies who normally would not ( eg. Ligurians).

I definitely prefer mirror matches as it gives a better insight to the strengths and weaknesses of the match ups.

Thanks again for organizing, Karvon! An enjoyable tournament as always, even if I did struggle a bit in the top division!

On the topic of mirror matches, I personally think it’s fine as it is. You definitely get some imbalanced matches, but as some folks have already said, making the best of it is part of the challenge. And sometimes you get the better end of an imbalanced match, get overconfident, and manage to lose it anyway - reference my match with the Sassanids up against the Ligurians! Mirror matches would probably mean reducing the size of the divisions and I’d rather see more matchups rather than a smaller set twice.

Just to throw out an idea to help balance things without going to mirror matches... maybe instead of assigning each player to a side, we assign two players to a match, and both secretly submit the side they’d rather play and a “bid” of points to play that side. If each player picks a different side then they play the side they chose with no changes. If both pick the same side then whichever one bid the highest gets it, and in the match setup their bid is added to their opponent’s points. Or, alternatively, you could bid a certain rout % which would be added to the opponent’s score at the end. This would be quite a bit of extra work, but I just wanted to toss it out there.

On date filters, I honestly think the wildly anachronistic matchups are a big part of the charm of this tournament. Arab conquest vs 400 BC Carthaginians! A 100 BC Hellenistic Jewish Army up against 800 AD Moravians! What’s not to love?

"Mirror matches would probably mean reducing the size of the divisions and I’d rather see more matchups rather than a smaller set twice."

I agree with rs2 on this point, if that would be the case. I would rather have more matchups rather than doubling up with mirror matches.

I think the best part of this tourney is getting random armies you would probably never play, and the more I get of those the better.^^

On saying that, either way would ultimately be fine with me.

Aetius

Although I am generally in favour of mirror matches, this particular tournament I think is better without.

I am not a fan of paired matches, but as a number of players seem interested in this option what I will do next season is open a division, or more, for those who wish to play paired matches. These would be of between 4-7 players. for 3-6 mirrored matches for a total of 6-12 games for the season. Those playing mirrored matches will essentially play half the normal number of opponents and deal with less diversity of armies. Aside from the mirrored aspect, other Chaos Tourney rules will remain the same.

The rest of the divisions will be organized and play as normal.

Karvon the Chaotic

Just wanted to add my voice to the throng....

Thanks for the Chaos Karvon!

Always a pleasure and I'm sure I'll be signing up for more punishment next time around!

Karvon wrote: ↑Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:15 pm .. is open a division, or more, for those who wish to play paired matches. These would be of between 4-7 players. for 3-6 mirrored matches for a total of 6-12 games for the season. Those playing mirrored matches will essentially play half the normal number of opponents and deal with less diversity of armies...

Sounds like a sensible approach: many thanks Karvon! I don't mind at all playing fewer opponents. On the contrary, I appreciate the dialogue during and debriefing after the two mirror matches; comparing strategy and tactics, etc. (Important for me who is still in the early learning phase of this wonderful game, and I'm a slow learner who needs to practice twice in the same situation.) And I get to play as many randomised armies as the others, albeit the match setup will of course by definition be less diverse. But still chaotic!

Hmmm, the mention of less diversity has convinced me to change my mind. I am now in favor of playing without mirrors in this tourney.

Karvon wrote: ↑Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:15 pm I am not a fan of paired matches, but as a number of players seem interested in this option what I will do next season is open a division, or more, for those who wish to play paired matches. These would be of between 4-7 players. for 3-6 mirrored matches for a total of 6-12 games for the season. Those playing mirrored matches will essentially play half the normal number of opponents and deal with less diversity of armies. Aside from the mirrored aspect, other Chaos Tourney rules will remain the same.

The rest of the divisions will be organized and play as normal.

Karvon the Chaotic

That seems like a good compromise solution! Keeps both sides happy, while giving mirror matches a test run.

Looking forward to the next season of chaos!

Here are the cumulative records for players in Chaos Tourney.

Rankings are sorted by Ave score, win%, Campaign points, Gold, Silver, Bronze and then score.

Here are the current ELO ratings of players participating in Chaos Tourney through season 4. Players start out at 1300 and go up and down from there.

Thanks to the great help of kronenblatt, I've put together a comprehensive spreadsheet which automates all the ranking data based on the game log info I input. The cumulative rankings are sorted in order of: ave. score, win%, campaign points and then ELO. ELO ranking starts at 1500 and players will move up and down from there depending the ELO ranking of their opponents.

Here is the current rankings based on seasons 1-4.