Guns Of Icarus Online
Community => Community Events => Topic started by: Mattilald Anguisad on June 14, 2013, 11:33:15 am
-
I've had a really cooky idea for a tournament, that I'd be willing to organise, provided that there'd be enought interest.
The idea being: random handicaps.
Each match would have had a random handycap - it could be same or diffirent handicap for both teams (team A have handicap 1 and team handicap 2).
Handicaps would be for example:
- No Mercury Field guns (merc's)
- No Lumberjack Heavy Mortar's
- At least 1 gunner per ship
- At least 1 barking dog Carrorade
- At least 1 squid
- No pyramidion
-
lol @ the notion of having a gunner being a handicap. I'd love to participate, considering Merry Men use all of these "handicaps" in normal play. ;)
-
Very versatile and all around teams would obviously be at an advantage in such a tournament. - gunners are slowly getting use again, but to some tems it would still be a sort of handicap ^^
-
If you enforced all those "handicaps" it'd make for a game the streamers would like, at least ;D
-
I think a better term would be restrictions. And personally, I'd go for broader categories than just "Don't use weapon A". Things like No Long-Range weapons, Only shatter damage, etc. Regardless of what you do though, assigning random restrictions to each side is very likely to make the two sides unbalanced. It would be more fair to give both sides the same restrictions.
-
well it would be something diffrent from the norm, lets say 4 teams sign up, you can make a decent best of 3 tournament in 1 day.
if more teams sign up the better :)
-
I think a better term would be restrictions. And personally, I'd go for broader categories than just "Don't use weapon A". Things like No Long-Range weapons, Only shatter damage, etc. Regardless of what you do though, assigning random restrictions to each side is very likely to make the two sides unbalanced. It would be more fair to give both sides the same restrictions.
Peronal prefference: rather giving broader restrictions, i'd give more speciffic restrictions per match. I'm thinking of giving idealy at least 5 day warning to teams under witch handycaps they were going to play under (it would admittedly make the random generation of handicaps, arbitrary, but it would still force teams to build around those restrictions).
The reason I haven't posted full rulles is becouse this idea is so far from the norm, and thus need some consesus on witch particulars are good.
-
I think a good way to go about the restriction pool without it getting opinionated is a thread where each person can add one restriction to the pool. Then draw from those randomly for your matches.
-
I think a good way to go about the restriction pool without it getting opinionated is a thread where each person can add one restriction to the pool. Then draw from those randomly for your matches.
That's a good idea, but we want to decide first how broad the restrictions are.
-
Specific ones are easier to enforce. I mean, who defines "long range?" It'll get unnecessary arguments started.
-
Tehnicaly MUSE defines long range (witch does not consist of LJ and Merc, both of witch go into Very Long category) by experience I'd say weapons with max range of 1000-1500M, but I know what you mean, otherwise someone will suggest a restriction to restrict "meta" builds or something like that.
-
the problem with a fight the meta tourney, is that we then create new meta.... so then we wouldn't be able to play that meta, forcing us to create even more new meta.... It's a vicious cycle!
this except with a "No meta" restriction :P
-
I like the idea, but only if there's a larger list of handicaps, or if those ones are better thought out. Looking at the ones you have it looks like the tournament would be nothing but gatt+flak.
If you put some trust in the players, you could do something like Iron Chef, where the two teams are given a theme which has to be the primary concept of each ship. For instance, today's theme is.... FLECHETTE! Or, today's theme is... AREA OF EFFECT!!! Then give each team a few minutes to plan their build, and they go to work.
-
While I believe the idea would need a good deal of refinement to get working properly, primarily in the list of "handicaps". I think you have a general concept that could be really fun. Work up a bunch of different handicaps, pull a couple out of a hat on your stream day of event (for the drama of it all don'tcha know). Be even cooler if neither team knew what the other teams handicap was. Lots of honor system involved, but I have a good deal of respect for most of the competitive players I have met in that regard. And watch a team restricted to all flamethrowers fighting a team that has no pilot roles available. It could be a glorious afternoon. I would happily participate.
-
I like the idea, but only if there's a larger list of handicaps, or if those ones are better thought out. Looking at the ones you have it looks like the tournament would be nothing but gatt+flak.
If you put some trust in the players, you could do something like Iron Chef, where the two teams are given a theme which has to be the primary concept of each ship. For instance, today's theme is.... FLECHETTE! Or, today's theme is... AREA OF EFFECT!!! Then give each team a few minutes to plan their build, and they go to work.
Those handicaps were just possible examples. One could just as easily add no gat or no flak or no hawacha, etc - in fact if this is going foward extra handicaps are going to be added to the pool of possible handicaps, those in the list were written there just to give you the idea of what kind of handycaps i had in mind.
Iron captain could be a goot alternative too.
While I believe the idea would need a good deal of refinement to get working properly, primarily in the list of "handicaps". I think you have a general concept that could be really fun. Work up a bunch of different handicaps, pull a couple out of a hat on your stream day of event (for the drama of it all don'tcha know). Be even cooler if neither team knew what the other teams handicap was. Lots of honor system involved, but I have a good deal of respect for most of the competitive players I have met in that regard. And watch a team restricted to all flamethrowers fighting a team that has no pilot roles available. It could be a glorious afternoon. I would happily participate.
Those handicaps were just possible examples. One could just as easily add no gat or no flak or no hawacha, etc - in fact if this is going foward extra handicaps are going to be added to the pool of possible handicaps, those in the list were written there just to give you the idea of what kind of handycaps i had in mind.
As for making it weekly or daily thing - i'd require help of CeSports for streaming at least.I'll probably have to make a pool to (actual a lot of pools) to see what people would prefer. Pulling random people into random teams would be a logistical nightmare - unless I get help from muse, best soulution would be to take random draw from regional chat by asking people to PM me and select first 32 of those and randomise from that.
-
Kinda goes with my Fight the Meta idea. Trouble is the game needs to be returned to pre 1.1 state to really have flexibility beyond gat/flak. Flames need to work again and carronades need to be able to shoot down.
-
OP, I always understood that your list was for example purposes as you clearly stated. Sorry my post did not indicate that. I am interested in the idea and the whole thing hinges on what "handicaps" end up in the rotation, in my opinion. I dont think you need to worry about balance per se, just hilarious/interesting modifications. I for one volunteer to be victim/victor to the whims of fate (or a random number generator) in any case.
-
This is honestly an awesome idea. I'd love to see the kind of matches we'd end up getting out of this.
-
There was a discussion with BADFOOT in game today about dual-axis randomization.
Now.
The. Following. Can. Be. Terrible.
That said, with limited options, asymmetric restrictions could be pretty cool and challenging. (IE. Team A can't use Pyras, and Team B can't use gat-flak).
Plus actual randomization (possibly with real dice or something like a oxidizing-radiation-randomizer) might be pretty interesting. With a set list of predetermined restrictions.
A mad-libs like situtation (only harpoons, only goldfish) might not work so well.
I'm not advocating these ideas per say, but I think they're an interesting jumping off point for more discussion about this sort of thing!
-
In a single dice (ie rolling once with a set of dice, this case 4 d10) roll I can generate any number between 0 and 9999, altho I don't think there is going to be that many restrictions... let's a preliminary list, if we remember any more reasonable restrictions we'll add them:
- No Mercury Field guns
- No Mortars
- No Light Mortars
- No Lumberjacks
- No Typhon Heavy Flak
- No Echidna Light Flak
- No Hawacha
- No Carrorades
- No Light Carrorades
- No Heavy Carrorades
- No Flamers
- No Banshee Rocket Carosel
- No Artemis
- No Very Long Range (merc)
- No Long Range (LJ, Hawacha, Typhon, Artemis, Banshee)
- No Medium Range
- No Short Range (Flamer, both Carrorades)
- No AoE
- All Aoe
- At least 2 Light Mortars
- At least 2 Light Carrorades
- At least 2 Typhon Heavy Flak
- At least 2 Banshee Rocket Carosel
- At least 2 Artemis
- At least 2 Flamers
- At least 1 Squid
- At least 1 Spire
- All Goldfishes
- All Spires
- All Squids
- No Pyramidions
- No Junkers
- No Galleons
- At least 2 gunners
- No Pilots
- All Engineers
- No Shatter
- All Shatter
- All Explosive
- No Explosive
- No Piercing
- No Flachette
- All Flachette
- All Fire
All Piots
All gunners
No Javelins
No Flares
No Fire
All Piercing
At least X means at least X per team.
-
How does 4d10 roll a 1?
-
Or a 0 for that matter? You do not add the dice results. You can use any number od d10 dice to generate any whole number in decimal system with as many digits as you have d10 dice. Since it's not likely at all, to be more than 100 restrictions i can use d100 by rolling 2 d10 dice. Using one to generate the right most digit and the other to generate the left digit.
Rolling a 0,0,0, 1 generates a 1 on 4 10-sided dice (d10) - aka. d10000
-
...Seriously? Or you could just, you know, use a D100, or a D66 or one dice for however many options you have.
-
I'll be using a d100 via rolling 2 10 sided dice(it's a standard way for most d&d and d10 bases systems, for rollind a d100). I don't own an actual 100 sided dice, couse they are impractical. I'm certainly intended the smallest needed dice to cover the any number of restrictions we were going to be. I could cover 48 diffirent restrictions with using base 7 system by rolling 2 normal cube dice (aka d6) side by side. So far the safest bet is d100 (if roll higher than the higherst restrictions number: reroll).
-
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/dice/dice.htm
-
Heh, it's funny, I was discussing something like this with Urz on the random casts a few days ago, how it would be fun to see a tournament with specific constraints imposed on players. I look forward to seeing how this goes :)
-
I can program a basic random number generator myself. I just can't guarantee that the numbers generated are really going to be really random - admittedly imperfection in prodiction of dice (they are thrown in rock tumblers to make them nice and rounded) makekes it impossible to guarantee the dice rolls are really going to be "fair" - ie meaning all rolls to be happening equaly often. I think that, in the end the method of random generation is pretty arbitrary as long is as the results are reasonable random, and the person generating them is not cheating.
-
http://www.random.org/
It's what I use to roll the maps for Cogs matches.
-
O_O that's awesome. Saves so much time, and so much better than random function ^^.
-
Hold on, I link you to a page that lets you roll a dice with as many sides as you want, and you say it's not worth it, Swallow links you to essentially the same exact thing and it's a good idea that'll save you time?
-
It's not personal. WotC site generates a pseudo-random number.
Random.org has 2 important pros:
1: "Perhaps you have wondered how predictable machines like computers can generate randomness. In reality, most random numbers used in computer programs are pseudo-random, which means they are generated in a predictable fashion using a mathematical formula. This is fine for many purposes, but it may not be random in the way you expect if you're used to dice rolls and lottery drawings.
RANDOM.ORG offers true random numbers to anyone on the Internet. The randomness comes from atmospheric noise, which for many purposes is better than the pseudo-random number algorithms typically used in computer programs. People use RANDOM.ORG for holding drawings, lotteries and sweepstakes, to drive games and gambling sites, for scientific applications and for art and music."
2. List Randomiser (http://www.random.org/lists/) - you dont have to assign numbers to the list items. That page randomises entire list for you, and then you can pick first X items from the list for the restrictions. It's less work.
-
This one uses atmospheris noise instead of being pseudorandom... I guess that makes a difference (sort of)?
EDIT: Whoops, didn't see Mattilald's reply.
-
It makes little sense to use a random dice generator and try to apply results provided in dice form.
-
Hold on, I link you to a page that lets you roll a dice with as many sides as you want, and you say it's not worth it, Swallow links you to essentially the same exact thing and it's a good idea that'll save you time?
I'm sorry Squash, people just love me. Don't take it personally, I love the customisable dice!
-
I like the idea of a -Restricted- tourney where, out of a list of several things, two or so restrictions are randomly picked right before the match. A sudden 'No Pyramidions' or 'No Engineers' would make for an insane match, and would be a definite spectacle for those watching it.