Archive through May 14, 2014

Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: Star Fleet Battles Online: Tournaments: SFBOL World League 2: Archive through May 14, 2014
By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, May 11, 2014 - 03:35 pm: Edit

Ok, so looking at last year's initial pool, it looks like 30 players is the perfect optimal number. It gives us 10 teams, and each team plays exactly 1 game against every other team (i.e. 9 games total, 1 game per team against each other team).

Alternately, 24 players will work with 2 pools of 4 teams each (in which case, each team will play 3 games against each other team in their pool, i.e. 9 games total, each player of Team A plays a game against 1 player from Team B).

So either number is good--24 or 30. Whichever looks more likely is the one we will go with. If we end up with some other number of players that is divisible by 3, I'll figure something out. But 24 is good. 30 is good.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, May 11, 2014 - 03:48 pm: Edit

As of press time, I have the following signups:

-Majead Farsi
-Josh Driscol
-Matthew Potter
-Kenneth Rotar
-Peter Bakija
-Stephen McCann
-Ken Lin
-Barry Kirk
-Andy Koch
-Chris Proper

Zimdars, Lally, Scott, Evans, Brimeyer are posted above saying they are in, so I'm assuming they are in, but they haven't sent an e-mail yet (well, for that matter neither have Koch and Proper, but I know they are in).

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Sunday, May 11, 2014 - 05:09 pm: Edit

Adding:

-Paul Scott
-Dan Bennet

to the "We followed directions!" list.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Monday, May 12, 2014 - 04:24 pm: Edit

We are now at:

-Majead Farsi
-Josh Driscol
-Matthew Potter
-Kenneth Rotar
-Peter Bakija
-Stephen McCann
-Ken Lin
-Barry Kirk
-Andy Koch
-Chris Proper
-Paul Scott
-Dan Bennett
-Brian Evans
-David Zimdars
-Paul Franz
-Josh Saxton
-Scott Moellmer
-Bill Schoeller

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 08:33 am: Edit

A couple more people signed up today (Captain Ron and Andy Vancil).

We are hovering close to the magical 24 (IIRC, we are at 20).

Do we want to stop at 24 (which would be 8 teams, 2 pools of 4, each team would play each other player on each other team, top 2 teams in each pool advance to final tree), or try for 30 (10 teams in a single pool, each team plays 1 player from each other team, top 4 teams advance)?

By Matthew Potter (Neonpico) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 11:34 am: Edit

I say, be patient and wait for the final player-tally. If we get to an unfavorable number of players, We can consider asking those we aren't well attached to sit this one out.

By Andrew J Koch (Droid) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 11:39 am: Edit

There are merits to both ways but 30 will invariably result in 4 or so players disappearing from the face of the Earth. So it may be best to set the teams with 24 players and take any additional signups as a replacement squadron.

By Brian Evans (Romwe) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 01:21 pm: Edit

Or perhaps, just as "subs" if a team has a player go missing, etc?

By Paul Scott (The_Rock) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 02:06 pm: Edit

You suggested 2 weeks for sign-ups so I would stick to that. In my experience, people sign-up with the deadline in mind. No idea why, I generally sign-up as soon as I see sign-ups available, but I have seen the trend enough to recognize it as real.

I'd wait for the two weeks to pass (or if you want to modify that, then go ahead and announce that sign-ups will end on May 17 (or whatever)). Then take what we have.

I'll also suggest that as to extra's, you don't need to worry about it. Pick the team captains to reflect the number of teams desired. Do the draft. If you have extras, put them in a subs/replacement pool if they are still interested.

BTW, I will say that hurt feelings are on my mind for not being 100% for the draft idea. That was partially dealt with having the draft in emails, rather than public. Another way to avoid that part is to not have left-over, so something to at least consider is announcing a first-in/first-out policy on sign-ups forming the group of people who are in the draft.

That is, keep sign-ups going until May X. If we have 30+ people, the last X-30 people are part of the replacement pool. If we have 24-29, then the last X-24 are in the replacement pool. That way everyone in the draft is drafted.

Finally, as things are getting closer, you might want to consider starting a public discussion on the draft mechanism. I have my own thoughts, but will wait to see if you are interested in them first before posting them. ;)

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 04:26 pm: Edit

Current list:

-Majead Farsi
-Josh Driscol
-Matthew Potter
-Kenneth Rotar
-Peter Bakija bakija
-Stephen McCann
-Ken Lin Old_School
-Barry Kirk baldnforty
-Andy Koch droid
-Chris Proper duke
-Paul Scott The_Rock
-Dan Bennett V_Raptor
-Brian Evans Romwe
-David Zimdars
-Paul Franz Andromedan
-Josh Saxton blackwind
-Scott Moellmer Lord_Goofy
-Bill Schoeller BS
-John Rigley CrashandBurn
-Ron Brimeyer captainron
-Andrew Vancil Laszlo
-Jon Biggar jonbig

If you are on this list, and I don't have your call sign listed, please e-mail me your call sign. Or you could just post here. I know most of them, but it is a hassle looking them up to get the correct capitalization (Gah! Capitalization sensitivity makes me crazy!)

So that is 22. I guess I'll wait 2 weeks and see what happens. If we get less than 30, but more than 24, the extras will be alerted (when they sign up) that they are going to be on the replacement list unless we get to 30. If we get to more than 30, I'll do the same thing. I'm not going to put people into the draft pool if they might not be drafted, however (i.e. I'll exclude folks if needed *before* drafting based on when they signed up, rather than put too many folks in the drafting pool and have some of them not get drafted. As that will suck vastly more than just being shut out due to signing up late).

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 04:33 pm: Edit

Paul wrote:
>>That is, keep sign-ups going until May X. If we have 30+ people, the last X-30 people are part of the replacement pool. If we have 24-29, then the last X-24 are in the replacement pool. That way everyone in the draft is drafted. >>

Yes. This one :-)

>>Finally, as things are getting closer, you might want to consider starting a public discussion on the draft mechanism. I have my own thoughts, but will wait to see if you are interested in them first before posting them.>>

Heh. Here is my current plan:

1) Team Captains will be first Fleet Captains (of which there are currently 5 on the list, or possibly 4, but I'm gonna count Moose as a Fleet Captain due to being in the finals for the current Plat Hat; if Grim signs up, I'll do the same with him. Hint. Hint.) and then highest rated folks by virtue of the Schirmer ratings to fill in the extra slots (this is not to make folks feel good about themselves, but to spread talent around).

2) We will determine a drafting order. This is the part I haven't figured out yet. I might just do it randomly. I might do it in reverse order of Schirmer rating.

3) Via e-mail between the team Capitans, we will draft from the pool. I'm inclined to do a draft of A, B, C, D, E, F, F, E, D, C, B, A order (i.e. first picker gets 1st pick and then last pick; last picker gets 2 picks in a row, etc.).

4) We will announce teams.

By Andy Vancil (Andy) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 04:35 pm: Edit

For the draft, I say, pick the captains based on SFBOL ratings, let them each pick one person for their team. Take the remainder and assign them to teams based on ratings, in the reverse order of the captains' ratings, or just assign them randomly. I've seen this kind of approach used in P.E. to avoid hurting anyone's feelings.

Or, just dispose of the draft. Assign players to teams to balance the sum of their ratings as much as possible.

I definitely favor the idea changing the way we do teams, though. The last few years, WL has been dominated by a few teams that managed to load up on talent, while the more casual players get assigned to random teams that don't stand a chance. Balance is good.

By Andrew J Koch (Droid) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 04:43 pm: Edit

Point 3 is a serpentine draft and usually works out ok.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 04:49 pm: Edit

Hey--can someone who is apparently more of a web genius than me find out what the actual url is to this particular page?

With the frames, the only URL listed ever is www.starfleetgames.com/discus

But I want to e-mail a direct link to a guy who is in the tournament who is the only guy I don't recognize and I don't know actually reads this thread.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 04:49 pm: Edit

Serpentine! Serpentine!

By Andrew J Koch (Droid) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 04:55 pm: Edit

I like Other Andy's suggestion so far, which is to say draft via e mail in the first round, and the team who picks last gets automatically assigned the highest rated remaining player and so on. Simple.

I haven't heard Paul's secret suggestion yet though.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 05:05 pm: Edit

Unless someone gives me really compelling reasons to not do the thing I listed above, I'm gonna go with the thing I listed above. 'Cause, ya know, I like being decisive.

By Matthew Potter (Neonpico) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 05:53 pm: Edit

The URL I have is "http://www.starfleetgames.com/discus/messages/12031/140.html"

By Paul Scott (The_Rock) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 05:55 pm: Edit

Peter is doing it exactly like I would, with the exception of Fleet Captains. I would just use Schirmer ratings.

A- Highest, B- Second Highest, etc.

Then use A,B,C,...C,B,A drafting.

By Andrew J Koch (Droid) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 06:08 pm: Edit

Serpentine!

By Andrew J Koch (Droid) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 06:08 pm: Edit

Serpentine!

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 09:34 pm: Edit

Matthew--thanks! How did you get the actual url? I'm probably just being really dense.

By Peter Bakija (Bakija) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 09:38 pm: Edit

Paul wrote:
>>Peter is doing it exactly like I would, with the exception of Fleet Captains. I would just use Schirmer ratings.>>

Given that the likelihood is that the Fleet Captains are pretty close to the top of the pile of Schirmer ratings, generally speaking, it'll probably be about the same. But I figure as Fleet Captains already have the name Captain attached, ya know, we'll go with that :-)

>>A- Highest, B- Second Highest, etc. >>

Except I think that if you give the first pick to the best player, you are going to be circumventing one of the main goals of this plan, which is to distribute skill, rather than focus it. I was considering giving the best Captain the last (and then next) draft picks, and the "worst" Captain the first (and last) draft picks. To make teams as even as possible.

By Matthew Potter (Neonpico) on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 - 10:11 pm: Edit


Quote:

How did you get the actual url?


Go to the Address bar, pull the URL from that. Then yank off everything after the ".html"
Note that I've noticed that posts get a different URL once they are archived (the links at the top of the page). I have not yet determined if that URL changes as the archive becomes deeper (more links are added)

And my callsign is "Neonpico"

By Paul Scott (The_Rock) on Wednesday, May 14, 2014 - 12:06 am: Edit

Peter,
Yeah, I am not decided (not that it matters, since you are the judge) on which is "better".

Either way you end up with two "bests" on a team. In the prelims, it probably does not matter. I thought in the finals, a team consisting of best of A and C would fair better than a team of best of A and B. This is based on the Schirmer distributions of last year. Either way works well, I think.

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation