webdiplomacy.net

A win’s a win, doesn’t matter how you get there. People throw games for all kinds of reasons and none of them make a solo any less valid or deserved. It’s part of the game, and this being a tournament is no different.

Congrats Yigg!

In that game one of the players had a unique idea of what scoring in the tournament should be. I tried to make it as clear cut as possible in my explanation that "No, a solo absolutely hurts you more than a draw" but what am I to do? I can't force a draw when there are players on both sides not wanting to draw, and I tried explaining the scoring. The West should've had a less passive early game and knocked someone out. Or been in a better position to eliminate the dissenting power when their position became known.

As for the other complaints, none hear that more clearly than I do. But let me be clear - I initially *did* have entry requirements. I have for all the iterstions I ran. I'm pretty sure I went through and PM'd about 150+ players for interest, going by GR. My efforts yielded about 15 players. And frankly, the higher GR ones are the most frequent drop-outs.

In the end, there was barely enough interest in the tournament to get it off the ground. This is also one of the smallest tournaments run on the website, in terms of number of people. And it cannot be cut down more in size, otherwise it loses its purpose. The World Cup frequently gets 100+ players involved. The Leagues used to have far more. I believe the ODC was bigger. GBT certainly was bigger. I had hoped that this tournament would spark interest in the tournament scene on the website again, but that seems to have died ~8 years ago. This is the first press tournament the site has hosted in 2 years, and it barely garnered interest.

As it stands I've gone through about 20 subs, with an equal number of volunteers turning me down when I actually asked them to join. And I'm still searching for more that are urgently needed.

If anyone has ideas on how I can make the tournament a better experience, please let me know. But please know what you're talking about before you start complaining. I've been doing as best as I know how.

@Goldfinger: Please be assured that your efforts are valued and I am sorry if I did not give that impression. My criticisms were, in general, aimed at some of the other participants, rather than your organisational efforts, which are appreciated.

First off, thanks Goldy for running the tournament. I know they take a lot of effort.

I'd be interested to hear from other people but I'm guessing that with the addition of other tournaments, game modes, and whatnot people don't have the time commitment for 7 games that often overlap. Some of the top players in particular don't like to overextend themselves because they either put a lot of time into their games or don't want to divide their attention.

Perhaps a less ambitious tournament format would attract a bunch of top GR players. The idea of only solos counting is fun but I'm not sure if playing every country is necessary.

p.s. Shout out to Village Idiot who seems to have an endless amount of time to play in Diplomacy tournaments across different sites. You truly are a masochist.

But also, I want to know why they didnt move for years on end. What the hell was going on there?

Congratulations to Yonni, TemplarsBane and Yigg for the solo in round 4.
The leaderboard is getting tighter, until now I felt myself in comfortable position, but there are still 3 full rounds, so don't forget: still everybody can win here, I hope nobody will give up. :)

The game R4G6 was quite interesting, I didn't feel as this idea was fair, but I at the end I could agree with goldie, there was nothing in the rules which could say this is not allowed, I think also many people have interesting ideas to convince the other players to do what they want, this one was just a little bit more special.
I even think my solo wasn't fair neither, because I felt some player has no rational goals, but finally I benefit a lot from these other goals.

@Chesney: I think when you felt this way you don't want to play, you could ask for a forced draw, as I remember there is an option asking for that even in the normal games ("Game is stalemated").

Anyway, I'm happy to see this game is ended and we can calculate with its result for the next rounds. And I've enjoyed a lot from the messages in the game, I think there were at least two unforgettable:
- "The German armies never stop!"
- "Or, if we want to keep ourselves entertained, we could try something like convoying an army from St. Petersburg to Syria."

Good luck to everybody!

Dear Goldie,

Thank you very much for running this thing. Kudos where kudos are due, friend!

To back up goldie's message, there is 10000000% a pattern of top players being more likely to back out of a tournament. No idea why, but it does make keeping a tournament high GR only very difficult once the replacements begin to be needed. I have seen this uniformly across tournaments of all time devotions and set up formats for years and have yet to find a wining solution. The best to normally aim for is keeping the games fully occupied by willing players.

Yonni wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 12:13 am

But also, I want to know why they didnt move for years on end. What the hell was going on there?

I'll let someone from the game explain that rather than bursting the bubble myself.

Thank you everyone for the kudos. Tournaments are my favorite thing about the site, so I'm invested in making sure they're everyone else's favorite thing too :)

@Gold - My criticism wasn't directed at you, but to the players that decided to throw a game because one of them wants to clearly distort the rules (by waiting the other rounds to finish to arrange a result, this shouldn't be allowed at all). Sorry if I was a bit harsh.
I think you are probably the only one still tryng to get press tournaments going and I value a lot your effort. I had some great games in the tournament and I don't think the overall level was lower then the usual, but a few players have no commitment and no sportsmanship, which is a pity.

@rdrivera2005, if you disagree with the tournament director's decision to approve a strategy you are always welcome to appeal their choice to the admin team at [email protected]. But it does seem to me that once a player has checked with a tournament director on a strategy and it has been approved, the player really should not be criticized for their play.

As for commitment, like I mentioned in my above post, this has always been a problem in tournaments and for close to a decade we've failed to solve it. Suggestions on how to fix it would be very very welcome.

Every time someone posts in this topic, some poor sap sees the title and thinks, "Ooh, I want to be in the 2020 Masters Tourney!" Then they start reading from the beginning of the thread. At some point it finally dawns on them that they are way too late.
I don't know what you are talking about, I totally didn't do this a month ago.

Instead of a Masters Tournament, has there ever been a "100 percent Reliability Rating" Tournament?
That might have a pretty good commitment level. It wouldn't promise a high level of play though. Not sure how many players would qualify either.

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:27 pm

@rdrivera2005, if you disagree with the tournament director's decision to approve a strategy you are always welcome to appeal their choice to the admin team at [email protected]. But it does seem to me that once a player has checked with a tournament director on a strategy and it has been approved, the player really should not be criticized for their play.

Why on earth not? If there's to be any meaningful discussion of diplomacy on the forums beyond a self appreciation society, being critical of play is absolutely vital. And there's a hell of a lot to be critical of in that display.

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:27 pm

But it does seem to me that once a player has checked with a tournament director on a strategy and it has been approved, the player really should not be criticized for their play.

lmfao

Octavious wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:44 pm

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:27 pm

@rdrivera2005, if you disagree with the tournament director's decision to approve a strategy you are always welcome to appeal their choice to the admin team at [email protected]. But it does seem to me that once a player has checked with a tournament director on a strategy and it has been approved, the player really should not be criticized for their play.

Why on earth not? If there's to be any meaningful discussion of diplomacy on the forums beyond a self appreciation society, being critical of play is absolutely vital. And there's a hell of a lot to be critical of in that display.

What else would you want a player to do?

MadMarx wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 7:12 pm

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:27 pm

But it does seem to me that once a player has checked with a tournament director on a strategy and it has been approved, the player really should not be criticized for their play.

lmfao

?

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:27 pm

What else would you want a player to do?

Do better. Also not dragging out a game in way that everyone could but shouldn't do. Nobody is asking for you or the mods to get involved but sharpening our pitchforks is fair game.

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 7:20 pm

MadMarx wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 7:12 pm

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 6:27 pm

But it does seem to me that once a player has checked with a tournament director on a strategy and it has been approved, the player really should not be criticized for their play.

lmfao

?

I read into that response a rationalization / justification / defense of how another tournament played out is all...

MadMarx wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 8:37 pm

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 7:20 pm

MadMarx wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 07, 2020 7:12 pm

lmfao

?

I read into that response a rationalization / justification / defense of how another tournament played out is all...

You really need help. If you're still going on about that all this time later you have some type of problem.