IMPORTANT POLL: Round-robin or Bracket?

[Schooly D]

Eli's Oratan.com Bragging Rights Tourney is chugging along smoothly. The tournament is in round-robin format, where everyone plays everyone else once. But there is some disagreement about what should happen afterward. There are two options:

(1) The tournament ends after the round-robin is finished, and players are ranked according to their record
- The argument for this is that it's a better indication of who is more skilled

(2) The tournament continues into a single-elimination bracket after the round-robin is finished, using the results from the round-robin to seed the bracket (1st place = 1st seed, 2nd = 2nd, etc.)
- The argument for this is that it's more dramatic and exciting

Of course since this is Eli's tournament it's his decision. But even if he decides against a bracket for the final phase, that wouldn't stop someone from hosting their own bracketed tournament using the results of the round-robin.

So, post here and vote for which option, 1 or 2, you would like to see happen.

My vote is for the bracket option (and, yes, that was my opinion since before the tournament started and I was giving away wins ).

[MentholMoose]

Of course since this is Eli's tournament it's his decision. But even if he decides against a bracket for the final phase, that wouldn't stop someone from hosting their own bracketed tournament using the results of the round-robin.

I think VR-Eli already said he doesn't plan on doing a bracket for his tournament. Once the tournament is over and the results are in, someone else (or VR-Eli if he's up to it) can use the results to set up a bracket tournament.

For a bracket tournament, I think we should wait until the patch is out, since it would be cool to have spectators for some of the rounds.

[Knoxximus]

Of course since this is Eli's tournament it's his decision. But even if he decides against a bracket for the final phase, that wouldn't stop someone from hosting their own bracketed tournament using the results of the round-robin.

I think VR-Eli already said he doesn't plan on doing a bracket for his tournament. Once the tournament is over and the results are in, someone else (or VR-Eli if he's up to it) can use the results to set up a bracket tournament.

For a bracket tournament, I think we should wait until the patch is out, since it would be cool to have spectators for some of the rounds.

Definitely. I'd break out the popping corn for that! Sad thing is, that would be better than anything that is on TV!

[feixaq]

Schooly D - interesting idea. However, I think the bracket format is exciting only when there is a live audience (think NBA or NFL playoffs, or a gaming tournament at a big LAN event), but doesn't lend itself as well to an online-only structure for two reasons:

1. Ranking - if you really want to see who's at the top of the heap, round robin is probably the most indicative. Elimination brackets can sometimes be more about specific matchups (or whether a particular player was off that day) than general skill level. This can certainly be mitigated by having multiple matches, but the point still stands.

2. Scheduling - I've tracked down a lot of other players to play the best 2 of 3 round robin, but there are some that I really never see online or who haven't accepted my friend request yet. In round robin format, players can schedule on their own time, and the organizer can be somewhat flexible about it. In a bracket format, any hold-up in one portion of the bracket will drag out the elimination format (especially given work schedules and different time zones / countries).

IMHO, I'd rather see a round robin every month so we can see who's moving up or down in the standings over time (and have a champion of the month), and leave a single- or double-elimination bracket tourney to an in-person gathering (if there ever is one). That way, we can all also get to play more VOOT with each other online and develop the community that way.

[Knoxximus]

Well said, feixaq!

Very good point about fostering the community.

I hope to enter the next tourney...I'm just starting to feel really comfortable with piloting skillz.

[graefocs]

I do this for work (in the games industry) so I might be able to offer some advice here.

Why not institute an Elo-based ladder system?

For those of you who don't know what an ELO ladder system is, here are some general characteristics. There are variations of course.

Rankings are determined based on your wins and losses against similarly ranked people. Wins against higher ranked players will increase your ranking while victories against lower ranked players might yield smaller positive gains. Losing against a lower ranked team will decrease your ranking. The basic idea is similar to the Elo rating system used for professional chess. (modified from WoW arena description).

• * At the beginning of a season, players are all assigned skill values. This starts on par for all players.
  * People are ranked in a ladder from highest to lowest skill values. Higher is better.
  * As players win or lose matches, gain or lose skill points
  * The amount of skill points you gain or lose in each match is dictated by the relative skill values of the two contenders in a match. This rewards people for winning against better ranked players, and penalizes for losing against weaker player.
  * For example, if I am challenging someone who is much much better than me, I stand to gain more points in the match if I win, but lose a nominal amount of points if I lose. The person I challenge who is stronger than me will gain less points in the match if he loses, but will stand to lose more points if he loses to me. If I challenge someone who is ranked the same as me, we are on par with each other and both stand to win and lose the same amount of points regardless of outcome.
  * Players can play each other as many or as little as they want.
  * You can play whoever you want, as often as you want, and the ranking system should reflect your true skill level.
  * World of Warcraft uses this for arena PvP ranking.
  * Xbox uses this is there TrueSkill ranking system.
  * Battlefield uses this.
  * A lot of sports games uses this.

This is a great way to do it because there are no single-match limitations per player as in a round robin format.

This is also better than a bracketed system because those handles an odd number of players better -- single elimination style brackets require you to have an amount of players that number in a power of 2. For example, 2, 4, 8, 16, or 32 players. If you have an odd number people, you need to go into a system of "buys" (where people have to sit out in matches) or double eliminations, which are a pain to manage. This system is not desirable because there is a lot of admin overhead, and you need players to schedule matches.

I really wish they instituted something like this in the VOOT online play. What they have right now is a VERY distilled down version of this, but I guess it's better for casual players. It allows people that suck (like me) to still get climb their way up ranks -- it's just a grind and takes much longer.

The trick now is to find a place to host a ladder if you are all interested. I can do some of this research. Gamebattles.com hosts a lot of ladders, but I need to inquire to see how we can make a VOOT ladder.

[DeltastrikeX]

I personally would like the round robin style the whole way. The whole point of this tourney is bragging rights which = skill

also anybody that wants to play me send me a message in game. I will be playing a bit today (finally get the chance again).

[Schooly D]

I actually think a bracketed tournament would help with the scheduling. Having "X" days to play "Y" person, I feel, would get action moving more quickly and easily than having as long as you want to play any of these 25 people.

The ELO suggestion is alright and pretty inevitable considering this is a fighting game, but isn't it a separate issue? You're suggesting an ongoing competition, which is fine, but it's not really a tournament.

I disagree that the sole purpose of a tournament should be to determine who has more skill. If this were the case, then we shouldn't even have tournaments at all and instead only have a long-running season (like graefocs suggested) since that would be the best indication of skill. I think excitement and drama are legitimate reasons to have a bracketed tournament, and I agree with Menthol that this would be helped by the forthcoming spectator mode.

[graefocs]

I wouldn't rule this out so quick.

Elo is extremely flexible. Typically you do not have ongoing ladder tournaments that go on forever. There are seasons. So points/rankings reset and you start fresh after set periods. People can join each tournament at anytime, and can decide to stop playing whenever, all without affecting other players at all.

Believe me, working at a game publisher/developer I've professionally run tournaments for very big Xbox 360 and PS3 games. We had some hits and some misses and are seeing why most other game publishers tend to go with some variation of ladders systems for tournaments.

Elo is probably the absolute best way to measure skill. Bracketed and round robin tournaments are subjected to a fair amount of luck since you get one chance/match. Let's say you play a player who is normally better than you but he was having a bad day and you won by luck? The outcome would say that you are better. In an elo system, you can rematch over and over and over again, and at the end, the automatic calculations will prove who did better.

But then again, if we feel tournaments are not solely about skill, then ladders are not the right choice.

Actually, ladder tournaments are indeed tournaments. And I think you may be misunderstanding the part about timing. You can essentially have a ladder that resets on a bi-weekly or monthly basis, and call them different seasons, or tournaments or whatever. Many major game publishers do this.

One of the big advantages about a ladder is that there is very little management. You don't need an admin to set matches and seed brackets. For example, in seeding brackets, you generally should match up players so that the 2 best players play through the rounds and meet at the very end. It's not very exciting in a tournament when the 2 best players fight each other in the first round, and eliminate one of them from the rest of the tournament so early on. Professional sports do it this way.

Brackets and round robin both also require someone to schedule player matches and update the master list of results, which is kind of a pain. With ladders, you just see whoever is online whenever. Then the players agree that you will play an official match, and report the outcome to the system. All scoring and advancement is handled automatically by a system and a formula. If players want to pre-schedule and challenge, you can do that as well.

The best part is that ladders allow players to play as often as they want and against whoever they want.

[Schooly D]

An ELO system is only the best indicator of skill if everyone plays everyone else (or is linked to everyone else through who they've played). At a bi-weekly pace it would essentially become a less-accurate version of a round-robin. Plus, with the ratings being reset with such frequency, it's not difficult at all to imagine some people just not playing for the duration of a "tournament."

I'm not against an ELO/ongoing ladder. In fact I think it's a neat idea. I just think that our tournaments should be something else. Perhaps a fair compromise would be to have an ongoing ELO ladder which could be used to seed occasional tournaments.

[graefocs]

Yeah frequency of reset would be determined by the software. I am still looking for a site that hosts these and would allow us to create one on the fly.

I think I need to find concrete rules for a specific format that we can actually use because we're talking about this in abstract and it's not helping anyone understand. There are just too many variations of ladder formats. But ladders are generally regarded in our industry as one of the better tournament formats if you have a non-fixed number of players, desire to allow players to drop in and out of the tournament, don't want to have a centrally-scheduled matchmaking system, want to measure skill, and want to allow players to play as many matches as they want without an elimination system like in brackets.

[MentholMoose]

I actually think a bracketed tournament would help with the scheduling. Having "X" days to play "Y" person, I feel, would get action moving more quickly and easily than having as long as you want to play any of these 25 people.

I think one of the major draws for doing a bracket tournament with VOOT is the upcoming possibility of spectators. This works best with a fixed schedule, so spectators can join and watch. With a nebulous schedule, it is hard for people who want to watch to do so. Also, with a fixed schedule, it could be possible for a spectator to do a live, commentated video stream (e.g. with something like justin.tv).

[neoKEN]

I voiced my opinion on this on IRC already . I'm strongly for the round-robin system all the way through. It's the best indicator of skill, not to mention everyone gets to play more games. Getting the full bracket to work is a hassle whereas the round-robin system, you can play a wide range of opponents. The next round in a bracket system can be delayed just by 1 person not playing their games. There are players I haven't ever seen online yet!

As for the excitement, I don't really know about that. We are a small community. People have often played a lot with each other already online in those XBL party.