@Hedgie:  I hope you two have something special planned, because Tb and Sedna isn't going to cut it. 

@Mith:  Cow has the issue with you, because apparently you have a huge ego. 

@Pacov: I'm not happy with the new bracket because there's no guarantee Cow and Jaws will make it through 2 teams before mith and renz get them, but oh well, it's an improvement. 

suggestion - how about an exhibition match between them.  Might give our commentators a chance to get warmed up. 

Practice makes perfect, me and Jaws are still working out some match up issues. Learned a nice lesson from Kalel the other night about reg vs rook. I would be down for it if we can get together one of these days but if it doesn't happen it doesn't happen. I am sure Mith and Renz would like a bit of practice too.

I was no where near my prime during the tourney and you were at your prime. I was in the tourney just to see if I could get into the one of the brakets but my comp died in the last few days of the last priliminary. I am still pissed about that. Oh and I was never as good as you were at RoL but I am pretty sure I have you beat in Demigod by a long shot.

We did have some good games after you got rusty though and I will always remember beating you in like 5 minutes when you were drunk one night.

Actually i have to say a few words as well.

First, I don’t really know pacov, I think I didn’t even play with him one game until now, but from his presence and behavior in this forum I think he is a very reasonable person. I just cannot imagine that he did something unfair with the brackets, and to say so without any proof is just… well you know.

Second, I really hate the idea that the teams will not treated equally!!  I don’t care if the tier 1 player will kick each other or if the kick my ass in the first round!! It’s random, and that’s how it should be!! Everybody should have the same chances!!

Third, I thought about a method how we can create random positions(maybe for the next tournament), with the proof that everything was going 100% kosher. Just to avoid such unnecessary and stupid statements.

1)      I will order the teams randomly from 1-25

2)      Every team will send pacov a number from 1-5(except pacovs)

3)      Pacov will sum the numbers

4)      He will pick the first team subtract their number from the sum

5)      And then he starts to count the positions and stop if he reaches the number from point 4

=>Postion of team 1

Addition to point 4: For the next team he will subtract the number from the remaining sum

Addition to point 5: He will start to count from the position that the last team got

If the matches are settled he can post my order and the numbers from the teams, so everybody can recount for them self that everything was going 100% cool. I know it’s a lot of work and if you don’t want to do it, I will.

Well for now I’m fine with the new brackets…

You're making the false (and common) logical fallacy that random and "fair" are interchangeable and that randomness provides anything close to "equal" chances. 

Then plz tell me, who is going to deiced what are “equal” chances??  

For me it’s that simple, if we do it random, every team has the same chance to face each other. Its easy and the least subjective method.

I would like the bracket modified to give my team multiple bye's until the final round, which will be played merely as a formality. 

re:SmokingBalrog's method

If I'm not mistaken, the entire method hinges on pacov being honest. He would have to perform the operations without oversight. If pacov isn't trustworthy, then the method doesn't matter. On the other hand, if pacov is trustworthy (which I firmly believe, even if he does get cranky over towers), then your objection is with pacov's random ordering.

As hedgie has noted, random is not necessarily fair. Indeed, the majority of random effects are not fair. Consider the following. I flip a coin 5 times and record what the it shows. Which of the following is the most likely outcome, and which is the most fair outcome?

1. HHHHH
2. TTTTT
3. HTHTH
4. HHTTT
5. TTHHH
6. HHTHT

The answer is: All possibilities are equally likely and fairness is meaningless.

Lastly, the randomness of pacov's method. His method, on review looks to be the result of a random ordering using Excel. The likelihood of his method being fair and random is much higher and much simpler than the proposed method.

Unsolicited personal opinion

My personal thought is that there is a tremendous amount of complaining about fairness in this bracket. The bracket may or may not be fair, but the difference is relatively trivial. The griping really reminds me of people quitting the game because the stats aren't recorded perfectly. This suggests that playing a game for fun is only fun if someone is keeping track of how good you are. That seems pretty weak to me. The other reason I can think of for the amount of complaining is due to the money prize. If it keeps up, dropping it to reduce the amount of complaining seems like a good idea. That's right, if you can't behave you don't get nice things.

No bracket will be "fair" in single elimination, random or not. The only ways to do it so its more fair is if its double elimination or where everyone plays everyone once and then the teams with the most wins play each other in the semi and finals. These take longer, thats the only problem.

If someone wants to do an exhibition match, for prospective commentators to use as a demo commentary, that would be awesome. I was just going to use a match one of my friends had in 2v2 against hedgie and thunder.

While Ptarth is right that all of those outcomes are equally likely, it is completely irrelevant to your discussion. In that case heads and tails are equally likely. Our bracket is made up of equally likely elements (the teams), but while these teams are equal in the random organization of the bracket, they are not actually equal to each other. So making them equal in the random draw is problematic. The argument isn't about whether its random or not, whether pacov is trust worthy, the argument is about the fact that all teams aren't equal, if they were no one would care who plays who when. So your coin example while accurate, isn't really relevant to our situation.


"The answer is: All possibilities are equally likely and fairness is meaningless." - partly true. they are all equally likely, BUT they are also all fair. If they were not equally likely like dice for example, then someone rolling a bunch of unlikely outcomes and beating you would be unfair because it is less likely. In coin flips, both sides are equal and therefore trivial, they mean nothing. In a situation with odds that aren't 50-50, fairness is more of an issue. And since some teams are not as good as others the coin example IS meaningless. Sorry for posting about this useless stuff, but i was bored

Ptarth your right, pacovs method is way simpler!! The difference is in my method pacov would have no influence of the outcome and everybody could proof the result.

Maybe I used the wrong words! What I mean is that every team should have the same chance to face each other!!

Well somehow I don’t feel very conferrable to talk this through, it has this tendency that pacov is the bad guy, what I really don’t think!!! Maybe we should leave it how it is now!! And can discuss this again in the next tournament.

you guys don't pay attention, you think it can't change the end result, this isn't true at all, a different bracket can produce a different winner.

There may not be absolutes, one team isn't necessarily the absolute best, just because they lose to someone in the second round, doesn't mean if they never faced that team, they wouldn't have beaten everyone else. For example some combos are better than others, one team could have the best of one combo and another team can have the best of a different combo, now one of these 2 are better against the other, so if they face off early on, one gets dropped, but if they never faced each other and the winner of that match up gets knocked out by someone else, the loser of that match up could win the whole thing because they never had to face their counter. Think of it more like rock paper scissors, paper beats the rocks in the tournament, but what if all the rocks already beat then scissors earlier and the paper never has to fight the scissors, the paper wins, but if the paper had to face the scissors then they wouldn't win. I'm not saying this will happen for sure, but it IS possible. Its possible there is an absolute winner and no matter what happens they will win, but it is ALSO POSSIBLE that theres a situation like i described.

Also, even if there is an absolute winner, random stuff happens, the game isn't perfect, the world isn't perfect. A game taking place on a different day could even effect the outcome. That's why double elimination or something with even more matches would be better, it lowers the chances of the rock paper scissors scenario and the effect of flukes, whether game related, or otherwise, from effecting the outcome. Plus obviously having the more interesting matches later on builds suspense and increases the viewership and interest, if all the good matches happen earlier, no ones going to bother watching the rest. And the more interesting matches there are, the better for everyone. No one wants one fun match, then garbage, or the opposite.

of course you do, buttttttt a miracle will happen, mark my words, lol.

Randomness is actually disadvantageous towards the better teams. Do the math yourself and you'll see.

And you also said you were fine with the new brackets that no one seems to mind so far, so I'm not really sure what the issue is.

pacov - that chart looks good, let's get this party started, and thanks for all your hard work, espepcially in a time of not awesome

ninki - ever notice that you never see Teseer and Thundercles in the same place?  Sorta like Batman and Bruce Wayne....

everybody else - why are we still talking?  It's time to bring the pain

ABornExile - every post you make hurts to read in whatever 9 point font Stardock forums use.  Please use line breaks, thank you

I thought tournament brackets were supposed to be random, not listening to people whine "I don't want to face (insert random friends or good team here) as early as the first or second round. " Right, because the match is so much likely to be better if it's a semifinal or something, than if its a round 1 or 2 game...

So how does this work, is it up to us, the 4 people in each matchup, to discuss a good time for all of us, or is there gonna be some assigned time for people to show up for.

Well.... to be honest, I have no idea.  As this isn't a dictatorship with me as king shite, I can't simply say piss off re: the brackets.  The concern I raised a few pages back when ninki was all fired up over the brackets was whether or not other teams that aren't considered "tier 1" considered the new arrangement fair.  Oh, and to go on the record, yes, a double elimination tournament would be the fairest way to go, but I personally think pulling that off would be quite challenging at this point. 

Anyway, we need to either agree that the bracket I provided is good or make additional changes.  Until the bracket is set it stone, there is no point in starting the tournament. 

have Teseer and Thundercles play qot - the difference will become clear

edit - also, I added the current bracket to the OP so you don't have to dig through older forum posts to find the current proposal. 

Csonti and smomkingbalrog might as well play janook and I now.  This weekend at 7pst?  Or any weekday at 9pst.

Weekend sounds good, but we have to chance the time, I and csonti have GTM +2, we have to meet us somewhere in the middle. I don't wont to fight you at 4 o'clock in the night. Something like 2or3pst is possible I guess.

GOOD LUCK MAGGIE!!

So, are we good with the brackets then?

Thanks go out to Thundercles.  He has pledged and paid $20!