Championship AARs

Teams of players playing several games simultaneously, one player per team per game. TD Pedros

Moderator: Morg

Championship AARs

Postby Pedros » 20 Mar 2012, 18:51

Feedback here please on the whole event - good idea or bad? Try it again sometime? If so, improvements?
"Sooner or later, one of us will stab the other. But for now we're both better off as allies" (kininvie)
User avatar
Pedros
 
Posts: 12465
Joined: 25 Jan 2009, 12:59
Location: Somewhere full of gorse and brambles, West Cornwall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1085)
All-game rating: (1314)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Championship AARs

Postby asudevil » 20 Mar 2012, 19:35

I loved the idea. Of course we won.... :D

I would absolutely do this again. I think its a great idea. The only thing I had an issue with (and I dont know the solution, so I would have to think some more about it), was that once we had the lead because of Heptarchy, we knew that we had to make sure CLD didnt take another solo. So that drastically changed our strategy in Zeus, because USSR started ceding territory to Japan to put Japan in the lead and force US into a 2man draw, when before that he had a good shot of a solo.

Also, we had minimal goals of winning in 1900 because we knew we really only had to survive and do better than Germany. So England didnt take risks or stab in 1900 because he didnt mind Austria or Italy winning, (Or sharing in the draw), because we knew we had the victory as long as we kept a decent lead on Germany.

Anyway, I love it, I would totally play again. I think 4 games is a good number to play (I know how hard it was to get the 35 players required to play the 4 games).
Captain FANG, forum team championships WINNER
Part of the surviving nations of WW4/Haven

Unless I am in the cheater's subforum. 99% of what I say is NOT as a mod.
User avatar
asudevil
Premium Member
 
Posts: 16606
Joined: 18 Jul 2011, 02:20
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1351)
All-game rating: (1437)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Championship AARs

Postby cheesers52 » 21 Mar 2012, 00:41

Let me first say that I thought the idea on a whole was great, and it encouraged working together to win overall.

However, this was not the case in my team. Not once did I get a PM asking for help or giving me help, and I didn't feel like I was in a team tournament at all - rather just playing a game of 1900. I asked around and other players said they'd had much communication from their teams. It's a shame!
cheesers52
 
Posts: 217
Joined: 05 Jul 2011, 14:41
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Championship AARs

Postby asudevil » 21 Mar 2012, 00:57

cheesers52 wrote:
However, this was not the case in my team. Not once did I get a PM asking for help or giving me help, and I didn't feel like I was in a team tournament at all - rather just playing a game of 1900. I asked around and other players said they'd had much communication from their teams. It's a shame!


I have to think that part of that was based on the captains thoughts for the game. I told my team that I wanted to hear them talking and working together. I would offer advice, and even if it was ignored, at least they had something to think about.

Im sure other captains more went about it by making a solid team and then trusting everyone to do their thing. Some people dont like other's backseat criticizing their play. I just didnt really care if my team wanted to hear advice or not, they were going to hear it.

Now, at the same time, this advice kinda dried up as the tournament continued and the overall strategies had been decided. Only communication in the late-game was hey, we have to make sure so and so wins, and so and so doesnt...but before that we even talked about bidding strategies for the blind-auction bids.

Sorry you feel that you were left high and dry cheesers, but if we do this again, you should step up to be a captain and you can run your team however you feel is best. I know we had a tough time even getting 7 captains to get this started.
Captain FANG, forum team championships WINNER
Part of the surviving nations of WW4/Haven

Unless I am in the cheater's subforum. 99% of what I say is NOT as a mod.
User avatar
asudevil
Premium Member
 
Posts: 16606
Joined: 18 Jul 2011, 02:20
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1351)
All-game rating: (1437)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Championship AARs

Postby Pedros » 21 Mar 2012, 15:16

I certainly thought from outside that it was clear that different captains were putting in a very different amount of effort; no criticism, but it seemed to be reflected in the results. For instance, for the first half of the tournament, asudevil put in captain's orders just about every move for every game. The fact that his team almost never needed them would be irrelevant except that it probably shows they were scared of him as well! I received very few captain's orders from anybody else.

This may also be a reflection of the fact that although (once the momentum took off) players were queuing up to play, it was extremely difficult to get people to volunteer as captains.
"Sooner or later, one of us will stab the other. But for now we're both better off as allies" (kininvie)
User avatar
Pedros
 
Posts: 12465
Joined: 25 Jan 2009, 12:59
Location: Somewhere full of gorse and brambles, West Cornwall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1085)
All-game rating: (1314)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Championship AARs

Postby asudevil » 21 Mar 2012, 15:29

Pedros wrote:I certainly thought from outside that it was clear that different captains were putting in a very different amount of effort; no criticism, but it seemed to be reflected in the results. For instance, for the first half of the tournament, asudevil put in captain's orders just about every move for every game. The fact that his team almost never needed them would be irrelevant except that it probably shows they were scared of him as well! I received very few captain's orders from anybody else.

This may also be a reflection of the fact that although (once the momentum took off) players were queuing up to play, it was extremely difficult to get people to volunteer as captains.


Yeah, and that I stopped putting in captains orders and my team quickly NMR'd...lol

Wasn't haroonriaz, one of your last captains?
Captain FANG, forum team championships WINNER
Part of the surviving nations of WW4/Haven

Unless I am in the cheater's subforum. 99% of what I say is NOT as a mod.
User avatar
asudevil
Premium Member
 
Posts: 16606
Joined: 18 Jul 2011, 02:20
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1351)
All-game rating: (1437)
Timezone: GMT-7

Re: Championship AARs

Postby Pedros » 21 Mar 2012, 16:33

Yes, Haroon was one of the last, and it clearly didn't apply to him.
"Sooner or later, one of us will stab the other. But for now we're both better off as allies" (kininvie)
User avatar
Pedros
 
Posts: 12465
Joined: 25 Jan 2009, 12:59
Location: Somewhere full of gorse and brambles, West Cornwall
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: (1085)
All-game rating: (1314)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Championship AARs

Postby Bluewolf » 21 Mar 2012, 23:29

i would definitely captain again, but this time play. It would be easier to keep in touch if you are playing. more extense to follow
User avatar
Bluewolf
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: 10 Nov 2011, 22:50
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (897)
All-game rating: (896)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Championship AARs

Postby Girion » 22 Mar 2012, 21:58

I really liked this way of playing, we had quite much disscusion in the team. I remember spamming down me fellow team mates with sevral messages before my stab in 655. I'm not sure whenever we acctually cracked some great new ideas when we talked, but it was still nice doing it. Keeping the team spirit up an so.

Towards the end we also had quite much disscusion as asudevil mentioned on how to play to secure or win, wich didn't necesarly was the same as aiming for best possible score in that specific game.

In the beginning we also had quite much disscusion, who to play who, what countries were we to aim for. When the countries were decided I also got some info on my team mates who had more experiance playing with them.

Nothing big really but I think theese many small things was an good help to our team, an more importantly I think it made the team championship more engaging, and also much funnier. It was also fun wathing my team mates game when I little what was going on behind the scenes, and also having an biased opinion on who I wanted to succed.


If there was another one of theese I would definetly want to join again, preferably playing with FANG again. This have been an wonderful idea, and if we're to have another one I think there's many thing you'd could give an though, buts not necesarily an improvment.

Whenever we continue playing using the old score or not, doesen't really matter to me. One could argue that we'd maybe used an diffrent tactic if we had understand that might happend. But then we do have an great lead over certain team, maybe it woulden't be that fun for them to start that far behin? Also we'd probaly seen an lot of changes in the teams, maybe some disapearing and some new coming in. But if you wanted to have it like that you might as well turn it an series. New games for the "Team series" popping up at various time, and the team each send an player in.
But I think it'd probaly be the easiest to just play it like this again, but yes waint some time (so we can take plessure of our victory an little wile longer... :) )

Next the scoring system, I think that it's good that an solo is well revarded, but one might argue that the system were you
i) split 70 points among the winner
ii) split the rest proportionally to the number of SC's held at the end
might turn thing interesting for the small players, increasing the effect they can have on the outcome (and not just trying to stop whoever they might think is an treat to the win). This may also add something for thoose 2-3 SC nations to play for, something you commonly lack in games on the main sight (thus resulting in surrenders). And this one will still take the number of SCs you have into account, so an good dominating win will still be well revarded.

On diffrent games to run, I think it was an good split having one more diffrent variant, but I doubt it will be Deviant next time? I don't think the variant is beyond hope, I acctually find it quite interesting. But after the last game we played I think it won't be that popular to show up here again, especially since it's an part of an point-giving tournament. Asudevil suggested Vain Rats, I would second that, altough I haven't played it myself I watched it with great interest, and the map had an refreshingly non-standard devlopment (and yes, I've also had great fun composing diffren possible power combinations :) ).

Then on more maps, would we want to play an new round, go with the same, making an "classic" team Championship set-up, are there acctually that many standard maps that we could use?

Another thing to discuss is how diffrent game affects each other. Forbidding cross game alliances is definetly good, but in our team we'd alter our tactics quite much after the first two games, when we knew we'd had an good position. I can image harooniaz irritation when he realized the Noosh was giving Japan his territory to prevent another CLD win. Now is this good or bad? It do change the games from standard Diplomacy in some way, but also help add to the "team feeling", so it's not just 4 separate games. It might also be hard to stop, and hard to play in an situation when you know what's best for the team but not allowed. But what would you have done if it weren't an team tournament, it's not uncommon for people who know they are lost to act in unusual way and we could see much disscusion whenever some behavior was entirely with the spirit of the game.

The best solution would be, as someone suggested to late in the last, to just reveal the identities of the captains, but keeping everything else hidden. That would make recruting harder though, and would also be an problem in an second game since many teams would probaly want to play again together.

That was some thoughts, I don't expect an project of this size to be rerun soon, but I hope that some one sometime would take the effort in doing it (maybe considering sevral GMs, should that be needed?), because it was really nice. Until then there will be an lot of room for disscusing what was good/bad, so it can become even better next time!
User avatar
Girion
 
Posts: 187
Joined: 29 May 2010, 21:56
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT+1

Re: Championship AARs

Postby Bluewolf » 22 Mar 2012, 22:13

i agree, and maybe ANOTHER game of colonial, or something, cause i would want to play without bumping someone to reserve on my team
User avatar
Bluewolf
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: 10 Nov 2011, 22:50
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (897)
All-game rating: (896)
Timezone: GMT-5

Next

Return to 2012: The team championship

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron