Future STGT Guidelines (STGT '08 Rule Changes?)

Pirate1019 · Post by **Pirate1019** » Fri Nov 17, 2006 11:35 pm

Any which way I see it so far, it'll be total chaos. So we might as well go with the plan that seems the most fleshed out. That means DJI's plan.

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Fri Nov 17, 2006 11:55 pm

Pirate1019 wrote:Any which way I see it so far, it'll be total chaos.

oh no

Post by **Icarus** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 12:58 am

A draft? This isn't the NBA. Don't overcomplicate matters.

Nemo · Post by **Nemo** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 8:48 am

A draft is a good idea as long as there is a salary cap.

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

We get Aubrey!

Acid King · Post by **Acid King** » Sat Nov 18, 2006 8:05 pm

Icarus wrote:A draft? This isn't the NBA. Don't overcomplicate matters.

My goal is to hyper convolute as many processes regarding this tournament as possible or, failing that, be contrarian and kick up as much discussion as possible. It's more fun that way.

Edge · Post by **Edge** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 1:22 am

Team Captains:
I think team captains are a good idea. It will help to organize teams and also, I hope, that someone will keep an eye on his teammates, motivating and reminding them. Also when the organizers want to inform a team they can simply send a pm to the captain, who will be in charge for delivering this message to all his teammates. That's why I'd say that every team needs a captain.

Therefore the captain has to be relyable in the first place, that's why I'd like to suggest that only persons who joined at least 5 playing weeks this year can be a captain next year. However, this will be only true for people who joined the prior tournament. New teams with all new rooster might have new captains.

I am expecting that players in a team will come up by their own who they'd like as their captain. If not we could go as you suggested with nominating. Or even doing a team intern poll, like in school.

Team set up
I do not agree with the free for all team, as this team has the biggest chance of skipping weeks. Because the teammembers might lose interest during the tournament, also beeing only the last player's which weren't picked in any team might hurt their team morale. I do agree that we should try to get everyone in a team and we did that in this tournament too.

In the ideal case the players will form teams by themselves. All the drama talk is just to help the players gather themselves in teams. I don't think we need strict picking rules for that. I think in the end all those approval and nominating rules might even slow the whole process down.

So I think it's the best solution to simply keep the team set up rule like we had this time, despite the captains. Forming teams on regional or random interests worked as a really fun formula for me.

Post by **Icarus** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 1:33 am

Edge wrote:New teams with all new rooster might have new captains.

Sorry Edge, couldn't resist. ^_^

Team captains sound good. I think the organised teams in the '06 tournament already had one in place without really trying, due to the way most teams organised themselves.

Edge · Post by **Edge** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 1:40 am

Icarus wrote:
Edge wrote:New teams with all new rooster might have new captains.

Oh, i see it should be "roster" offcourse.

Post by **BulletMagnet** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 2:05 am

Shoot, now I'll hafta call Jim Purdue back and cancel that special order...

The Coop · Post by **The Coop** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:14 am

Drafts? This is a shmup tournament, not the armed services

Why are we trying to make this unnecessarily convoluted? The original teams came about by people choosing where they wanted to go. Invites were made, but no one had to go anywhere but where they wanted to go... unless a team was full. When that happened, they could go to another team, or make there own if enough people joined. Why grotesquely complicate matters that should be kept simple?

Nothing beyond bragging rights are at stake here. Remember "fun"? This is supposed to be for that. If you start making processes for processes, and then add processes to those processes, it becomes anything but. As has been said many times in the past, K.I.S.S.

I personally vote "nay" on the draft idea. It's not needed.

Post by **Icarus** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:28 am

The Coop wrote:As has been said many times in the past, K.I.S.S.

Must... resist... urge... to post... crappy album covers...

The Coop wrote:I personally vote "nay" on the draft idea. It's not needed.

Seconded. It was an idea that warranted discussion, but its better to maintain the free-for-everyone style of team organisation that we were running on in the '06 tournament. I think that if you give people a certain level of freedom, then everyone will manage to organise themselves in the end, which is what happened in this case. Put restrictions or processes in place to manage team organisation and people might not want to join for fear of being stuffed on a low-ranking team, or put in a group with people they might not work well with. (Unlikely, but could happen.)

Even though we were winging everything for the '06 tournament, quite a lot of things worked out well, I reckon.

Davey · Post by **Davey** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:30 am

The Coop wrote:Remember "fun"?

Kinda. But we decided to take this thing to the next level.

Post by **BulletMagnet** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:39 am

Davey wrote:
The Coop wrote:Remember "fun"?
Kinda. But we decided to take this thing to the next level.

Quote of the thread.

The Coop · Post by **The Coop** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:56 am

Davey wrote:
The Coop wrote:Remember "fun"?
Kinda. But we decided to take this thing to the next level.

That would be what, annoyance?

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 4:59 am

The Coop wrote:Remember "fun"?

Nemo · Post by **Nemo** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:00 am

Entering a tournament for "fun"? Isn't that kind of like playing shmups for "fun" where people credit-feed and ignore how the game was intended to be played?

The Coop · Post by **The Coop** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:21 am

Nemo wrote:Entering a tournament for "fun"? Isn't that kind of like playing shmups for "fun" where people credit-feed and ignore how the game was intended to be played?

FUN FACT!

That "fun" has nothing to do with this "fun". They're from two completely different areas of Funland... like if this fun is area code 718, your fun is area code 510.

Nemo · Post by **Nemo** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:29 am

Obviously I'm being a bit facetious, but really, most of the people that had the "fun" you mentioned were at the bottom of the scoreboard. Everyone else wanted to win, and with that came stress and at times frustration (and probably 40+ hour shmupping weeks for some people), and if it didn't, then well, that person should be ashamed because they probably didn't try very hard.

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:31 am

so did you download mame yet

Post by **Icarus** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:34 am

I am ashamed. I admit I was playing for fun in STGT '06.

Nemo · Post by **Nemo** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:47 am

Icarus wrote:I am ashamed. I admit I was playing for fun in STGT '06.

That's "fun"ny. Weren't you the one that said you couldn't and had no desire to touch a shmup after the tournament concluded and also said that you wouldn't compete again for another year? Sounds more like you got burned out. If it was so much fun you would be craving more tourney shmupping action not loathing it.

Post by **Icarus** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:52 am

Nemo wrote:That's "fun"ny. Weren't you the one that said you couldn't and had no desire to touch a shmup after the tournament concluded and also said that you wouldn't compete again for another year? Sounds more like you got burned out. If it was so much fun you would be craving more tourney shmupping action not loathing it.

That's "fun"ny. My burn-out lasted all of a week. I'd take a nice long break from tournament play, however. Spending 12 weeks on stuff I wouldn't otherwise touch is fun, but I'd rather play stuff I want to at this point in time.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:58 am

The Coop wrote: That "fun" has nothing to do with this "fun". They're from two completely different areas of Funland... like if this fun is area code 718, your fun is area code 510.

No, according to you there's "fun". The kind we're supposed to remember. We all know what kind of fun that is. Fifth place fun.

I went there.

Nemo is right, obviously. Competing can result in some fun, some learning, etc. But it's not all fun. Playing Star Force was near 100% not fun, but it was part of the competition.

Smoothing out the rules can make the next one more fun. That's what this is about.

The Coop · Post by **The Coop** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 8:10 am

Rob wrote:
The Coop wrote: That "fun" has nothing to do with this "fun". They're from two completely different areas of Funland... like if this fun is area code 718, your fun is area code 510.
No, according to you there's "fun". The kind we're supposed to remember. We all know what kind of fun that is. Fifth place fun.

I went there.

Too bad you went to the wrong place. Fourth thank you very much

Post by **BulletMagnet** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:23 pm

Icarus wrote:I am ashamed. I admit I was playing for fun in STGT '06.

ban plz!

landshark · Post by **landshark** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 6:48 pm

(didn't read the first 3 pages)

What about single player, not teams? Then if part of a team doesn't play that week, nobody gets penalized.

And a few handicaps: Icarus, Rob, MulletGeezer, The Coop, Smraedis, and MrMonkeyMan must play with only their right hand and right foot and wear a pirate's eye patch while listening to old Vanilla Ice CDs.

How's that?

howmuchkeefe · Post by **howmuchkeefe** » Tue Nov 21, 2006 7:22 pm

Parachute pants are my anti-drug.

Pirate1019 · Post by **Pirate1019** » Wed Nov 22, 2006 1:20 am

Icarus wrote:That's "fun"ny. My burn-out lasted all of a week.

Yeah, I wasn't expecting you to get in to a competition with shiftace in the Parsec47 thread.

This question is stagnant and is leading to tacos. When does DJI get back? We've already moved from team organization to whether or not the tounament is supposed to be fun or the eqivalence of being hit over the head with a brick.

Post by **Icarus** » Wed Nov 22, 2006 1:32 am

Pirate1019 wrote:Yeah, I wasn't expecting you to get in to a competition with shiftace in the Parsec47 thread.

Heh, I only popped in to post some quick scores while I was working on reinstalling Windows on my PC. Then it turned into a little competition. Its cool, I like it when people play well, it motivates me to play well as well.

My PS2-to-Neo joypad adaptor just arrived this afternoon, my Hori joystick will be coming in the mail later this week, and I want to get back into Ibara on the PCB. But I think I'll play parsec47 for a bit longer, to see how high we can push these Lock Type scores. ^_-

ED-057 · Post by **ED-057** » Wed Nov 22, 2006 8:11 am

I was playing for fun, every week, at least until my left hand got sore or I got pissed about my score not improving. Certainly didn't take 40 hours for that to happen though. I wonder who put that much time in.

Now Landshark don't be modest, surely you deserve at least an eye patch as well?