Future STGT Guidelines (STGT '08 Rule Changes?)

[DJ Incompetent]

So you're saying extend the voting time 12 hours as well, esentially cancelling out the time extension on the scoring week.

hmm, a fair and just idea. That would work.

Only drawback is that voting deadline puts me at 7am 8am monday morning to close the vote week. My schedule changes every school semester. If my new classes or work start time gets moved to around there, I won't be able to close any voting weeks.

But that's getting ahead of things..things that may or may not happen. We'll settle with this idea.

Are there any objections?

[DJ Incompetent]

Was that red slash mark on your pic before, DJI? I don't remember it.

..........................................to cement a rivalry
..........................................an Edge I will cross—
..........................................his red trophy reminds us
...................................................................~DJ ははほほ

[DJ Incompetent]

no objections

Technically the time extension has been eliminated. However, now the voting week & the scoring week have been lengthened twelve hours (from originally planned 12am monday GMT deadline) so they both now end monday at noon GMT.
So if you played in '06, this means:
-Scoring weeks play and end the same as before
-Voting weeks end twelve hours later than they normally do

next-up:

QUESTION

Code: Select all

Should old teams be allowed to “grandfather clause” themselves into next year?  (Later subjected to the rest of the regular rules TBD)

That means can a team that played together in '06 announce before TBD registration procedures take-hold that all the players will return in the form of their original team? (and the individual players themselves can still change their mind later of course)

Ok, first off, cuttin' through the public relations bullshit, a lot of this question has to do with namakoteam and should it be able to return next year as-is and even fill up its roster as it chooses.

The situation:
We know that for '06, UK was really the only country that truly picked its teams by skill, easily explaining why one UK team took first place while the other took last place (unless you want to make a Sweden/Skandinavia argument also). Now that this has been let go, we have the fact that namakoteam is more than interested in returning with the same roster. Should we care and will players just under and far under their superiority feel like they will drop out with the excuse that "namakoteam is gonna win anyway so why should I participate 10 weeks?"

The arguments for supporting this rule:
-Who are we to disband a group of players who have already united and bonded over competition to take on the world. Why should our solution to a wide-gap competition problem be, "well, they're the best in the english-speaking world, so let's split them up."
-The English-speaking (Western) shoot-em-ups culture should be able to support a tournament with teams that arrange their top players together to prove to the rest of the world what we can do and how good we can do it....unhindered by people who shout the loudest but don't play as good as them.
-Top teams should not bend over backwards and disband just to make lesser players feel better. The lesser players (teams) should adjust their playing habits to rise up to challege the top teams. If they can't do it, they shouldn't cry about it.
-Teams that didn't place in the highest spots may still want to reform because they enjoyed the stability their team provided, or they feel they get along well with their prior teammates.
-If this rule is struck down, in the regular process of forming teams if players who previously played together want to reform their old team, there won't be a lot to stop them from getting at least most of their old team players back into the same group.

The arguments against this rule:
-Teams should be balanced with good players and not-as-good players so the final numbers put up by every team are at least closer and look like any team can overtake another if they really knuckle-down. Basically, score gaps should be closer together so climbing the placement board doesn't look so hopeless from week 1.
-This competition is still about everybody first, not about "how namakoteam is going to stay the best" (this assumes that no other team/country is going to arrange its best players to rival with namakoteam)


Please note before answering that if you feel namakotier-ish teams consisting of only great players are going to spoil the competition for regular players, I already have some ideas that will allow for regular (casual players) and hardcore top-level players to coexist. But I'll get into that in the later questions.

All we're talking about right now is before the process of assigning players to teams even starts, can a group of players simply say "we would like to bring back everybody in (team name from '06)" and that team is reinstated with its original players, then later on, people assigned to the team can decide later to leave it, switch teams, bow out, whatever. But I'll get into that part in a future question.

This is a yes or no question. And I personally believe the answer should be yes

[Icarus]

Didn't realise my team had that much of an effect on the tournament. -_-;;

I think it would be unfair to namakoteam if we were broken up for STGT '07 and still expected to defend our title. At least now, teams who have shown good competitiveness (i.e the teams fighting for second place, which was a good battle to watch) as well as slightly more casual teams will be more clued up and will try to select players to boost their strengths, or to keep their original team rosters and start to develop their playing skills in the areas they know they lack in.

I agree with all these...

The arguments for supporting this rule:
</snipped to save space>

Also, while I do support balance, you have to also remember that there are a lot of casual shmuppers on this forum. While you can fairly claim that balancing teams out by putting skilled with non-skilled leads to a more competitive tournament, you also in some way handicap particular competitive players by bunging them with players that might not give a crap.

By allowing teams to be selective (and some teams to retain their roster for the next tournament) the tournament can stay competitive, and plus new registered players can look on the lineups and results from the old tables to see the playing level of teams and players in the past.

Please note before answering that if you feel superteams consisting of only great players are going to spoil the competition for regular players, I already have some ideas that will allow for regular (casual players) and hardcore top-level players to coexist. But I'll get into that in the later questions.

So have I. Split the team results table in half, so you have an upper and a lower tier. Teams in the lower tier can fight to get "promoted" (even though its still only one table) and teams in the upper tier can fight for 1st place, or to not get "relegated" depending on which end of the tier you are.

By the way, I wouldn't call namakoteam a "superteam". Despite our dominance of the Team Rankings, the Individual Rankings were far more competitive. "Superteam" assumes all players sit at the top of the table throughout the tournament, which was only the case in two of the six weeks (1st and 2nd place finish for Batrider and Guwange playing weeks). Our team was originally put together to answer the challenge of Team Cowboy who were assumed to "have the tournament in the bag" (to quote various members of the forum) at the start of STGT, and I think we did more than that.

[DJ Incompetent]

Please note before answering that if you feel superteams consisting of only great players are going to spoil the competition for regular players, I already have some ideas that will allow for regular (casual players) and hardcore top-level players to coexist. But I'll get into that in the later questions.

So have I. Split the team results table in half, so you have an upper and a lower tier. Teams in the lower tier can fight to get "promoted" (even though its still only one table) and teams in the upper tier can fight for 1st place, or to not get "relegated" depending on which end of the tier you are.

Yep, that's about 90% of it. ^_^

By the way, I wouldn't call namakoteam a "superteam". Despite our dominance of the Team Rankings, the Individual Rankings were far more competitive. "Superteam" assumes all players sit at the top of the table throughout the tournament, which was only the case in two of the six weeks (1st and 2nd place finish for Batrider and Guwange playing weeks).

I was thinking team total rankings...which your group sat very comfortably at the top of.

I'll think of a more politically correct term later.

[Icarus]

I was thinking team total rankings...which your group sat very comfortably at the top of.
I'll think of a more politically correct term later.

That was primarily because of the way team points were calculated. With three seperate amounts added together to create a team points total for the week, you're going to have variance between the totals of each team, especially if the three totals are particularly high. Because namakoteam were fairly consistent with all of our individual placings, our team totals were always high enough to ensure we gained a big lead and kept it.

With the Individuals, it was far more competitive. I thought I was about to lose first place by the time Cave Week rolled in, what with a lowish position in Retro, and coming second in Psikyo and Hidden Gems. And if Cave Week was Progear, I might have. And my team mates were very competitive in trying to maintain their Individual placings, which also benefitted the team.

"Superteam" assumes that all players will sit at the top of the table. If you want to see a real "superteam", get someone to go to 2chan and enlist some top Japanese players, or go to MARP and chat with Team2ch. ^_-

[DJ Incompetent]

I was thinking team total rankings...which your group sat very comfortably at the top of.
I'll think of a more politically correct term later.

"Superteam" assumes that all players will sit at the top of the table. If you want to see a real "superteam", get someone to go to 2chan and enlist some top Japanese players, or go to MARP and chat with Team2ch. ^_-

-kaaay...

Gigateam? Uberteam? Megateam? Upperteam? Betterteam? Enhanceteam? Deluxeteam? MaximumStrengthTeam? Higherteam? TopTierTeam? UpperTierTeam? Steroidsteam? Bigteam?

What word would your group like to substitute for what I'm talking about (to define a really powerful team rankings only style team)? or...make your own term..or something.

Edge and I get veto power if the new term sounds stupid in serious sentences

[Icarus]

Gigateam? Uberteam? Megateam? Upperteam? Betterteam? Enhanceteam? Deluxeteam? MaximumStrengthTeam? Higherteam? TopTierTeam? UpperTierTeam? Steroidsteam? Bigteam?

What word would your group like to substitute? or...make your own..or something.

Edge and I get veto power if the new term sounds stupid in serious sentences

Just namakoteam, thank you. ^_-
We don't need silly descriptive words to describe our level of power.
You did use namakotier at one point though, which I thought was quite funny.

Although if we did it Dragonball Z style, we'd be OVER NINE THOUSAAAAAAAAAAAND!!!!

[DJ Incompetent]

Just namakoteam, thank you. ^_-
We don't need silly descriptive words to describe our level of power.
You did use namakotier at one point though, which I thought was quite funny.

So I'm gonna go replace "superteam" with "namakotier-ish team" and assume everybody knows what the hell I'm talking about..and that's what I'll describe it as from now on.
Ya gotta account for the fact there may be more teams that hold your characteristics...hence why we need a term for them so I don't walk in another shmup dojo terminology trap.

Although if we did it Dragonball Z style, we'd be OVER NINE THOUSAAAAAAAAAAAND!!!!

[zakk]

Our team was originally put together to answer the challenge of Team Cowboy who were assumed to "have the tournament in the bag" (to quote various members of the forum)

Yeah, that worked out well, huh...

[The Coop]

Should a team be broken up because they did well? No. That's just stupid. I say leave it up to the team if they want to get back together again. If they do, cool. If not, then they can reform their ranks as they see fit. The choice should be up to them who they choose, and not be limited by a "U GUYZ DID 2 GOODER LAST TYM! U CANT PIK EACH UDDER NO MO!" retardation clause.

[Icarus]

So I'm gonna go replace "superteam" with "namakotier-ish team" and assume everybody knows what the hell I'm talking about..and that's what I'll describe it as from now on.
Ya gotta account for the fact there may be more teams that hold your characteristics...hence why we need a term for them so I don't walk in another shmup dojo terminology trap.

Well, you could always point them to this post if they ask what it means. ^_-

Although if we did it Dragonball Z style, we'd be OVER NINE THOUSAAAAAAAAAAAND!!!!

Oooookay... back to the topic. Teams should be allowed to rejoin with their original roster if they want to, and if players wish to defect to other teams, then so be it.

Yeah, that worked out well, huh...

If Valgar and Plasmo were competing you guys would have been even more competitive. As it stands, your team did pretty well given the depleted ranks.

[Pirate1019]

Sure, let old teams reform if they want, just be ready to accomodate for the people who will compete next year that missed out this year (i.e. me).

[zakk]

Yeah, that worked out well, huh...

If Valgar and Plasmo were competing you guys would have been even more competitive. As it stands, your team did pretty well given the depleted ranks.

We also had no team coordination. I should take a screenshot of the team forum, it's quite the lolz.


Anyways, I say let the teams return as they see fit.

[Rob]

UK was really the only country that truly picked its teams by skill

Everyone knows what to expect next time. I'd like to have 3 other people from my team return anyways. Of course it'll probably end up being a contest between 3-4 teams, at most. Because, as Icarus said, there aren't too many truly competitive players (half of which seemed to ignore the competition altogether).

Bringing back existing teams would also make it easier on comp. organizers.

[BulletMagnet]

To contribute a point of view from the other end of the spectrum, trying to "artifically balance" all of the teams sort of eliminates the whole concept behind The Illustrious Team Loser.

[Twiddle]

Team Apes is now taking applications

one of the prerequisites is that you have to suck in an awesome fashion

[DJ Incompetent]

Team Apes is now taking applications

one of the prerequisites is that you have to suck in an awesome fashion

I'd almost apply for that. I wanna roll with _bnu. I spectacularly lost to all my objectives. That reminds me I should try that IRC crap again...



Anyway, that question. Yeah, I'm ending it a little early, but the direction it was going seemed safe enough.

Yes.

QUESTION

Code: Select all

Do you want to change the way we set up teams?  Using team captains?

PROPOSAL DEFEATED:
revised here: http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.ph ... &start=120

I tried to come up with an all captains rule to solve this. But everything I thought up just seemed too restrictive to casual players. And I feared things would start getting 'clique-ie'...like....the middle school cafeteria table kind...with the 400CCs of drama...not as it was with our current team arrangements. And then just having it a total free-for-all looked pretty chaotic for Edge on the '06 board.

Therefore, I propose a sort of hybrid system:

All new teams starting up will start as a free-for-all team

All previous-year teams reqested to be brought back with the same players will be treated as a Captain's team from the start

Team Without Captain (free-for-all team):
-Players may be shuffled around at a tourney organizer's wish to balance player numbers.
-Team Captains may request to take players from a free-for-all team.
-Both points above are overridden if the player specified he wanted to join that specific free-for-all team, in-which case the organizer (or captain) must ask the player if he is to be moved (Organizers may choose to take a team captain's word if the requested player movement was approved by the player over PM by posting the player's quote)

Initiation for Captain's Team:
-Teams are a free-for-all in a player’s choice until a player declares himself a captain of a team or somebody else nominates a player as captain of a team.
-When that nomination or self-appointment takes place, all incoming or added player entries must be approved (/seconded) by the team captain.
-If the nominated captain declines without a 2nd (different member) nomination, the team goes back to a free-for-all team.

Team With Captain:
-The team captain may add players as he chooses who have not specifically specified a team yet.
-If a player is already assigned to another captain’s team he cannot be taken.
-If a captain requests a player from a free-for-all team where that player hasn’t specified any preference, he may have the player.
-A team captain's request may be overruled by tourney organizers in the event that moving the player will upset a free-for-all team roster to the point where it doesn't have enough qualifying members and there is no other free-for-all teams to pull surplus players from (What qualifies as a filled team will be decided another question).
-A captain may request removal of any player on his team he chooses. It'll be up to the organizer's judgment to just automatically add players requesting to be on a captain's team or to ask the captain first for approval.
-If a tourney organizer's requests for approval or negotiation are not replied by the captain in a reasonable time, if another team member will not speak for the captain, the organizer can apply his best judgment to the situation instead.
-No player removals or team edits will be made after the first scoring week starts (or voting week by organizer's choice)

Summary:
Basically, when a team captain is declared, the roster is frozen and other captains and tourney organizers must negotiate with that captain before removing or trading players.
The player himself has the final say on what team he wants to be on....unless a captain outright rejects a requesting member to that captain's team.

For a tourney organizer stuck with this task of sorting out the teams, memorization or constant reference of all these rules is not required. The tourney organizer's best judgment is best to be used first, provided he is doing a fine job of honoring requests to the best of his ability. These rules will be around as a backup to settle ongoing disputes.


Sound good? Or you have your own idea?

[Pirate1019]

Wait, so let me just make sure I understand this. I heard it like this:

Everybody except people in returning teams are split into captainless-teams of six(or whatever). The teams with captains pretty much use the free-for-all teams as drawing pools and can pick and choose what players they want for their team. Am I right?

If that's what you meant then it sounds like a good idea to me as long as the captains aren't asshats and make a big stink over certain players or something. Even then it would only really be a pain for organizers, other captains, and the disputed player.

[DJ Incompetent]

basically. People will be requesting on-the fly. By no means will there be any fixed rate of team creation or an organized flow of requests. It'll just be about somebody "sorting cards as they're dealt." Frankly I dunno if it'll be anymore efficient than the first 15 pages of the 06 thread. Some people were sayin' they wanted captains, so I opened the door for there to be captains. I would just as assume that people are going to try to match their country region again unless we get a new wave of crazy team names. Maybe one or two team captains will be asshats. Who knows. I do know that whatever happens, somebody will find a place for you somewhere..and if you just say you want to represent wherever you're from, you'll be sorted out as such.

I'm banking a ton of the drama to be cut down though because of returning teams.

If my system passes, if a team wants to be selective anal bastards they can. If a team just wants to grab some people and play they can. If a player doesn't know what's going on but wants to play, he'll be sorted out as such or drafted somewhere.

Something to try out, as I read the 06 thing and stuff like this came up here and there...

What says Edge to all this?

[Icarus]

I'm banking a ton of the drama to be cut down though because of returning teams.

Hah. If anything, there'll be more drama, as newcomers attempt to apply for existing teams, and returning teams trashtalk from the start of registration to the start of the first playing week with "I'M GONNA PWN J00" and other assorted comical one-liners.

[DJ Incompetent]

well..the trash talk drama is what we want, right? I'm always a fan of that shit. I was worried about the "he said this team but he's going to this team and this guy has too many players and blah blah blah" drama.

This could very well be just something completly different. Dunno for better or worse for certain till we try it. But if there'll be more shit talking as a result, by all means, that what I wanna see :) That and comical one-liners.


I can't think of a different system that would play out with anything other than similar, if not the same results. We can't exactly make the forum line up single file or anything. The order of posting of desires is about the best we can make do with I suppose.

[Rob]

Sound good?

Yes.

Now we just need to find some new teammates Making the Band style.

[DEL]

Quote:

UK was really the only country that truly picked its teams by skill

I'm to blame there. I chose the members then Icarus took it on from there.
I felt it to be the logical thing, considering the threat of Team Cowboy, Rob, Sweden etc.

[Acid King]

I'd like to see a draft. Say, take all the existing teams top players and appoint them as captains. If they don't want it, pull someone else from the same team. Do a lottery to decide the selection order of each round (As many rounds as players on a team) and put all the remaining players in the draft pool. There are a lot of problems with it (Some teams not returning, existent teams like Team Cowboy wouldn't be able to play as part of their team, new players who want to form teams etc) but I think it'd be interesting to see how the captains go about selecting players and balancing teams.

[DJ Incompetent]

Now we just need to find some new teammates Making the Band style.

haha, yikes. What, all requests have to be through video voice mail; narrated by Diddy. The candidate with the least emotional stability wins?

I'd like to see a draft. Say, take all the existing teams top players and appoint them as captains. If they don't want it, pull someone else from the same team. Do a lottery to decide the selection order of each round (As many rounds as players on a team) and put all the remaining players in the draft pool. There are a lot of problems with it (Some teams not returning, existent teams like Team Cowboy wouldn't be able to play as part of their team, new players who want to form teams etc) but I think it'd be interesting to see how the captains go about selecting players and balancing teams.

That'd be a kinda cool idea if we didn't let the old teams come back with original rosters. The effect of trying to balance teams by isolating all good players to their own teams would probably send us on our way to the exact same score results as 06, with giant point gaps in the team top spots. With us allowing old teams now, the organization process can't really focus on "balancing teams through legislation," as it'll only really put new teams at a disadvantage.

If this were to be run, it wouldn't allow a lot of time for new teams to be created. I think room should be made for new team names and regions to be created as new players join. And if new good free agents want in on the tourney mid draft pick round, that would also upset the order of who got to pick first..then you have captains wanting to change minds and repick their choices to adjust for newcomers just then adding themselves to the draft pool mid-round and maybe other captains intentionally holding out on their draft pics in-case better players feel like joining the tourney at the last moments.

And appointing captains. I don't think this will work out period. If we start appointing captains who were blindsided by this initiative, we wouldn't get prompt responses for team picks when we needed them. Putting the whole process on hold waiting for responses from a variety of different captains in a predetermined series of turns will slow stuff down. Things may drag on. In the way I proposed, at least when waiting for a captain's response, the organizer may multitask with whatever first-come first-serve captain request is made. And if veterans and newcomers want to maintain and add to their region teams it can still be done.

Thanks for the input though. But I think it has to be left open for teams wanting to strengthen their numbers without any form of forced balancing and it has to be left open for a group of casual people who don't want to be stuck as captains of anything organized and just want to churn out a score together.

[Acid King]

That'd be a kinda cool idea if we didn't let the old teams come back with original rosters. The effect of trying to balance teams by isolating all good players to their own teams would probably send us on our way to the exact same score results as 06, with giant point gaps in the team top spots. With us allowing old teams now, the organization process can't really focus on "balancing teams through legislation," as it'll only really put new teams at a disadvantage.

If this were to be run, it wouldn't allow a lot of time for new teams to be created. I think room should be made for new team names and regions to be created as new players join. And if new good free agents want in on the tourney mid draft pick round, that would also upset the order of who got to pick first..then you have captains wanting to change minds and repick their choices to adjust for newcomers just then adding themselves to the draft pool mid-round and maybe other captains intentionally holding out on their draft pics in-case better players feel like joining the tourney at the last moments.

And appointing captains. I don't think this will work out period. If we start appointing captains who were blindsided by this initiative, we wouldn't get prompt responses for team picks when we needed them. Putting the whole process on hold waiting for responses from a variety of different captains in a predetermined series of turns will slow stuff down. Things may drag on. In the way I proposed, at least when waiting for a captain's response, the organizer may multitask with whatever first-come first-serve captain request is made. And if veterans and newcomers want to maintain and add to their region teams it can still be done.

Thanks for the input though. But I think it has to be left open for teams wanting to strengthen their numbers without any form of forced balancing and it has to be left open for a group of casual people who don't want to be stuck as captains of anything organized and just want to churn out a score together.

That's the thing. If we did captains, a draft would be the best way to run the selection process. Random lottery for selection order, with a lottery for each round should end the bitching, unless people want to complain about bad luck. The best way to do it would probably be a chat but with everyone so spread out through the different time zones it would be hard to organizize. No team would come back whole, that's the problem with it. There would be all new teams. You'd just have to set deadlines for entry and not allow people to join mid draft. Get all the captains listed, have a 2 day signup to be included in the draft, run the lotteries for each round selection order and do the draft chat. There's organizational problems with it, but i think it'd be better and easier on the organizers than "sorting cards as they're dealt".

[Edge]

I won't have the time to follow the dicsussion the next 3 days or to come up with my opinion. But on monday evening or night I'll join again.

[Rob]

There would be all new teams.

Don't like this. I think people will be much more interested in playing if they can decide where they go. Drafting also seems overly convoluted even if it would be more cut and dry regarding organization. I thought the last team selection was a working formula and the latest question would make it a little easier (also, returning teams). It'd definitely be a more even contest, but less fun.

[Davey]

Captains are a good idea, regardless of whether or not we have a draft.

I don't care whether or not we have a draft. But if we do, I think everybody should provide some basic info about themselves beforehand (which systems they have, developers they like, favorite games, hated games, etc.).

well..the trash talk drama is what we want, right?

I find trash talking even more irritating than whining. But I could just be saying that because I'm some kind of pussy.