[K10] Round 5 - Metamorphic Force (ver JAA) [metamrphj]

[Chrono256]

Bye bye K10!
I really liked the games of the tournament (and that's really unusual for me ), I only think Metamorphic Force was too much luck-based for an elimination round, but ok, it was nice anyway, so my sincere compliments to the coordinators!

[sawys]

I'm not qualified for the next round but i totally lost motivation (don't play since 18/04) when i saw my opponent didn't send an inp until saturday... And finally i noticed that he finally sent his inp during the 4 last hours of the competition...

I think it's totally unfair and not in the spirit of the competition.

Paulo, you should have warned me you were in life because i would have try to play more than this like giro-x did the week before.

Bye bye for this tournament.

[oldtimes]

I'm not qualified for the next round but i totally lost motivation (don't play since 18/04) when i saw my opponent didn't send an inp until saturday... And finally i noticed that he finally sent his inp during the 4 last hours of the competition...

I think it's totally unfair and not in the spirit of the competition.

Sawys, even if it's late, i would ask sorry to you because i made the same thing when i was against you in the K9... now i understood and agree with you

[RAX]

Thanks Dax, this game wasn't my favourite genre too, but at least it wasn't so long. But being punched by lizardmen was quite depressing

Hey TRB, we'll meet again. Analogy with K5 increases, Good Luck!

[BBH]

Results of Round 5:

TRB_MetroidTeam [32] defeats INNUENDO [17]
442,000 - 254,800

RAX@AIVA [8] defeats Dax [24]
339,100 - 197,400

nii-san [4] defeats essekappa [20]
330,700 - 260,300

el_fumador [12] defeats NotMan [28]
290,500 - 268,100

Paulo Valmir [31] defeats Sawys [18]
293,800 - 157,600

*Goldtimes* [7] defeats Chrono256 [23]
445,600 - 288,100

colman paolo [3] defeats oldtimes [14]
477,300 - 470,500

Tekkaman@AIVA [22] defeats BDFil [27]
160,100 - 85,900



Geez... colman paolo vs. oldtimes was a really unfortunate matchup It's some really bad luck when the 2nd highest score in the round has to be matched up against the 1st... you hate to see this kinda thing happen...



http://challonge.com/k10

Interestingly, of the remaining competitors, the top 8 all come from only 3 countries (Brazil, Italy, Spain)

TRB_MetroidTeam [32] vs. RAX@AIVA [8]
nii-san [4] vs. el_fumador [12]
Paulo Valmir [31] vs. *Goldtimes* [7]
colman paolo [3] vs. Tekkaman@AIVA [22]

[BBH]

I'm not qualified for the next round but i totally lost motivation (don't play since 18/04) when i saw my opponent didn't send an inp until saturday... And finally i noticed that he finally sent his inp during the 4 last hours of the competition...

I think it's totally unfair and not in the spirit of the competition.

Paulo, you should have warned me you were in life because i would have try to play more than this like giro-x did the week before.

Bye bye for this tournament.

I should point out that Paulo has done a last-minute submission for pretty much every round thus far. He's come dangerously close to having submissions DQ'ed because of the 24-hour rule too.

I agree that it's bad sportsmanship to not show anything and just to always wait until the last minute, but ultimately there's no rule against it this year. It's always a concern and I've tried to brainstorm ways to make sure people participate more in a week, but it ends up complicating the rules a bit. Trying to come up with a day-based bonus point system doesn't really work because at the end of the week, highest score is all that matters. Putting a rule in to force someone to submit something by a "midpoint" or something along the week doesn't really work because one could still sandbag and submit an inp that kills one enemy or something and then quits. Believe me, I've given it some thought but in the end, I figured it was better that we not change anything like this and just ask that people show good sportsmanship in the name of fair competition. Maybe the next group of coordinators will figure out a better solution?

[Phil Lamat]

Geez... colman paolo vs. oldtimes was a really unfortunate matchup It's some really bad luck when the 2nd highest score in the round has to be matched up against the 1st... you hate to see this kinda thing happen...

I agree that it's bad sportsmanship to not show anything and just to always wait until the last minute, but ultimately there's no rule against it this year. It's always a concern and I've tried to brainstorm ways to make sure people participate more in a week, but it ends up complicating the rules a bit. Trying to come up with a day-based bonus point system doesn't really work because at the end of the week, highest score is all that matters. Putting a rule in to force someone to submit something by a "midpoint" or something along the week doesn't really work because one could still sandbag and submit an inp that kills one enemy or something and then quits. Believe me, I've given it some thought but in the end, I figured it was better that we not change anything like this and just ask that people show good sportsmanship in the name of fair competition. Maybe the next group of coordinators will figure out a better solution?

The best way to avoid both point is :
top32 --> top16 --> top8 --> top4 --> top2 and final

It has been used for one edition (k4 ?) and it is the most enjoyable format.
I think actual/old format should be voted for next edition

[BBH]

I thought people enjoyed the whole bracket-based thing, but this time around it has definitely led to some unexpected results.

It may definitely be time to try going back to basics next time, but that's for the next coordinators to decide.

[Dax]

I thought people enjoyed the whole bracket-based thing, but this time around it has definitely led to some unexpected results.

It may definitely be time to try going back to basics next time, but that's for the next coordinators to decide.

I think the way the brackets are set up, with the #1 seed playing the #32 seed and so forth is the best and only way to do a knockout single elimination tournament. Im not exactly sure what the point Phil is trying to make. The unpredicatability and major upsets is what makes this tourney fun.

If you want to see a tournament where the vast majority of the higher seeds are advancing and not so many upsets then you need to have more consistancy with the choice of games. Ie All classic games (pre-1984) Hang-on didnt count by the way, or all shooters, or all fighters. This way you would have more consistancy with the higher seeded opponents remaining equally difficult throughout the tourney. The seeding would be more representative of each players ability with these types of games. By completely randomizing the game you get some people who are great and some people who suck one round. Then the next round suddenly the #32 seed is a master at beat-em ups and the #3 and #4 seeds hate them so bad they dont even bother playing. Does this make sense?

I personally would love to see a tournament with only pre-1984 games, a pure classic tournament. No crappy 90's cookie board cutout crap to poison it. Id be happy to sponsor and coordinate such a tourney.

[sawys]

I should point out that Paulo has done a last-minute submission for pretty much every round thus far. He's come dangerously close to having submissions DQ'ed because of the 24-hour rule too.

I agree that it's bad sportsmanship to not show anything and just to always wait until the last minute, but ultimately there's no rule against it this year. It's always a concern and I've tried to brainstorm ways to make sure people participate more in a week, but it ends up complicating the rules a bit. Trying to come up with a day-based bonus point system doesn't really work because at the end of the week, highest score is all that matters. Putting a rule in to force someone to submit something by a "midpoint" or something along the week doesn't really work because one could still sandbag and submit an inp that kills one enemy or something and then quits. Believe me, I've given it some thought but in the end, I figured it was better that we not change anything like this and just ask that people show good sportsmanship in the name of fair competition. Maybe the next group of coordinators will figure out a better solution?

I've nothing against the organisation of this tournament or the others (and i know what it is when i co-organised one of them) i've only bad feelings against players who wait until the next moment to send their inp. I'm sure, it could be funny for the one who make this "strategy" but it's no good for your opponent and i'm again one the opponent ^^

I don't know if the next game would have been good for me, but i was hoping a little bit more consideration from my last opponent. Last week was very good because with giro-x we didn't hide something to the other, the only was to "fair" play at the game ion the competition.

And i remember one of the 1st edition i participated where some of the players waited the last minute to send their inp... That's why i always wonder if i participate or not.

Even all of this, i''m proud to have participated to this edition and it was a good time for me (but not for wy wife ^^). You, coordinators, made very good job this year and it's not finished

See you next time

[INNUENDO]

I understand Sawys. It is very hard to explain this feeling, but I have a suggest.

The player must send a inp before the dead line. If the same don´t send the inp, he´s disqualified. Simple like this.

[Dax]

The best way to avoid both point is :
top32 --> top16 --> top8 --> top4 --> top2 and final

It has been used for one edition (k4 ?) and it is the most enjoyable format.
I think actual/old format should be voted for next edition

I see what you're saying now, basically the top half of each round advances. This format really only lets players compete against the field rather than one opponet, at least until the final round. This format sounds fun but maybe should be reserved for its own tournament. I think the idea of a knockout is one on one matchups, where your position against your opponet, not the field, determines whether you advance. Just my input, either way im sure it will be fun.

[TRB_MetroidTeam]

Hi, Innuendo, thanks! Novamente eu não pude jogar a quantidade que eu gostaria neste último final de semana (e pena que eu ainda não sei como será meu tempo livre no próximo final de semana também), mas de qualquer forma eu realmente temia algum recorde seu terminando o jogo, e com influência do fator "sorte" você poderia vencer. Eu digo isso pois eu conheço a sua grande habilidade em games a-la Final Fight. Saúde e sucesso meu amigo!

Hi Rax... K5 ??? Hmmm... Oh yeah... was you that guy??? Grrrr (just kidding). That was a really good match, and I hope to be (again) a good challenger for you this time, according to our free time. Don't forget that after my qualification as 32nd (tied) all the next rounds are "bonus rounds" for me, no matter the results Well, seriously now, I hope to play well! Let's have fun with this "hobby", and good luck my friend!

And about the format, I agree with Dax, the "head-to-head" matches that are the best part of Knockout (as the name says). Despite the first 3 rounds are not "head-to-head", and it's "top X", I think it's already balanced about the 2 formats. In the last situation, "Top X" format deserves to be another competition, and not to kill the "head-to-head" great format.

[el_fumador]

The best way to avoid both point is :
top32 --> top16 --> top8 --> top4 --> top2 and final

It has been used for one edition (k4 ?) and it is the most enjoyable format.
I think actual/old format should be voted for next edition

I agree the method "only the better half" is the fairest for all players. And all could discuss about the proper format for the next K11.
On one hand, that system would avoid unfair eliminations. Only the best players in each round would advance thru the next phase.

On the other hand, Knockout Tournaments have been designed thinking one on one duels.
Preliminary round doesn't need any changes. The top 32 players are determined fairly and the face to face 1 vs 32, 2 vs 31... is quite interesting. Obviously the better players are supossed to be rewarded (theoretically) in their first duels.
But we have seen several times unexpected results and disappointing eliminations due to playing the same game.

I have thought a system that could assure the randomness to avoid unfair eliminations during 1 vs 1 rounds. Furthermore, this method could preserve the exciting one vs one system.
However this system will complicate the selection of games and significantly increase the games chosen...

For instance, suppose that there are only 16 players and beat'em up genre. The coordinators could have in mind 8 different beat'em up games. Each game would be randomly assigned to each 1 vs 1 duel.

Duel 1 --> Final Fight
Duel 2 --> Metamorphic Force
Duel 3 --> Asterix and Obelix
Duel 4 --> Double Dragon
Duel 5 --> Captain Commando
Duel 6 --> Golden Axe
Duel 7 --> Vendetta
Duel 8 --> Undercover Cops


Next round, 8 players and vertical shooter genre.

Duel 1 --> 1943
Duel 2 --> Flying Shark
Duel 3 --> Tokio
Duel 4 --> Star Force


Next round, 4 players and platform genre.

Duel 1 --> Snow Bros
Duel 2 --> Bubble Bobble

This method would prevent unfair eliminations because the only target would be defeat your rival.
But I know it's tough to put in practice (16 random games to match the top 32 players it's not a good idea...). There is no perfect solution to have a "fair" tournament based on 1 vs 1.

Another solution could be a second round where only 16 of 32 players continue in the tournamet.
From now on, the method described above could be applied if people agree.

That's only a quick thought. Grobda is causing me side effects...

[BBH]

I have thought a system that could assure the randomness to avoid unfair eliminations during 1 vs 1 rounds. Furthermore, this method could preserve the exciting one vs one system.
However this system will complicate the selection of games and significantly increase the games chosen...

For instance, suppose that there are only 16 players and beat'em up genre. The coordinators could have in mind 8 different beat'em up games. Each game would be randomly assigned to each 1 vs 1 duel.

Duel 1 --> Final Fight
Duel 2 --> Metamorphic Force
Duel 3 --> Asterix and Obelix
Duel 4 --> Double Dragon
Duel 5 --> Captain Commando
Duel 6 --> Golden Axe
Duel 7 --> Vendetta
Duel 8 --> Undercover Cops


Next round, 8 players and vertical shooter genre.

Duel 1 --> 1943
Duel 2 --> Flying Shark
Duel 3 --> Tokio
Duel 4 --> Star Force


Next round, 4 players and platform genre.

Duel 1 --> Snow Bros
Duel 2 --> Bubble Bobble

This method would prevent unfair eliminations because the only target would be defeat your rival.
But I know it's tough to put in practice (16 random games to match the top 32 players it's not a good idea...). There is no perfect solution to have a "fair" tournament based on 1 vs 1.

While this system in theory would prevent unfair eliminations compared to matchups on the same game, this system would be AN ABSOLUTE NIGHTMARE for coordinators.

Having to come up with 8 (or 16 if you're starting with a 32-man bracket) different games of the same genre isn't as easy as you think it is. You'd have to spend time checking out every single game, making sure there's no gameplay issues with the game so that they'd at least be somewhat suitable for a tournament (no problems with easy leeching, etc), and making sure inps playback ok (possibly in two different versions of MAME). In addition to that, keep in mind that coordinators try not to pick games that have been used in recent MARP tournaments... using a wide pool of games like this effectively lowers the amount of game candidates for the next group of coordinators to pick from...

Sure it'd be less games for every round but it'd still be a lot of time checking things out, making sure there's no problems with the games. Plus it doesn't really solve the whole randomness thing, if anything it makes the rounds even MORE random because of people getting different games. You know there'd be complaints of "It's not fair, why didn't I get to play Final Fight!" or what have you.