There's my rematch!

Is it tomorrow for you already? Im not used to this site so I might miss stuff

I think it is today.. :p

It is Thursday for me currently. I go by US CDT, which is Chicago time.

@Zybque: This will not be the last tournament I host. You are welcome to join all future tournaments that I host. I’m thinking Classic, Edwardian, or 1v1 Increasing Difficulty after this Cold War tournament.

I will post procedure and group stage rules TODAY at some point. Games will begin TOMORROW, Friday. Games will NOT begin earlier than 7:00 AM CDT. I will be posting the schedule TODAY.

1v1 Increasing Difficulty?

Go Cubs!

“1v1 Increasing Difficulty” meaning you play a series of maps, each more statistically difficult to win than the last. So you might start as Russia in RvE, and end as Germany in GvR. . .

Italy in IvF?

So your opponent gets easier and easier games?

So you would get points for how many you win, and the sequence would be done with your first loss. Then your opponent has a turn trying to win through the sequence.

For oblivious spectators, this current Increasing Difficulty conversation has nothing to do with Cold War Tournament II.

Expect procedure, rules, and schedule to be posted around 2:00 CDT.

GROUP ARAGORN
badivan1
ubercacher16
umbletheheep
TestSubjectOne

GROUP BEEBLEBROX
Maucat
Superwerty
Sky Hopper
Arado

GROUP CORIAKIN
bsiper
Miitag
jason4747
Electric Knight

GROUP DAEDALUS
CoffeeAndKeyboards
Argentinean Empire
Mr. Finkelmuiyer
Individual

Each of the 16 players should listen up. I require a PM from each of you. In it, you should tell me:

1) Do you want your group stage games to be RATED or UNRATED? Majority rules. A tie goes to unrated.

2) Do you want your group’s phases to be 36 or 48 hours? A tie goes to 48 hours.

3) There will be a loser’s/consolation bracket. Would you participate in that bracket if you are eliminated, or immediately concede your games?

You have until 2:00 PM CDT tomorrow, Friday, to send that PM. Otherwise it will be assumed that you don’t mind either way.

Q: How do I qualify for the knockout stage?
A: Finish in the top two (2) in your group. I was considering using a wild-card system, but that won’t work with an even 16-player field.

Q: How are points allocated in the group stage?
Win: 3 points
Draw: 1 point
Loss: 0 points
Your opponent concedes: 1 bonus point

Q: What is the EoG?
A: 17 SCs, the same as normal. Don’t mess with this setting.

Q: How long can a game continue?
A: After six phases (three years) when no SCs change hands, I acquire the right to intervene and declare a game a draw.

Q: Who creates the games?
A: I can’t do it, because I can’t moderate games. I missed one phase and my RR tanked.

You will have to create your games. PM me links to the games and I will format them all in one post on this thread.

KNOCKOUT STAGE SEEDING:

Tiebreaker 1) The number of points you gain in group play.

The most possible is 24, but that requires six Concedes. Most likely no one will top 18.

2) The total number of SCs you finish with across all six group games. No more than 17 SCs may count towards this total from one individual game.

3) Fastest victory, not counting Concedes.

4) Sudden death. More on that later, if necessary.


LOSER’S BRACKETS

—The Eliminated Eight in the group stage will play their own single elimination tournament to determine ninth place. There will be no third-tier bracket here, as only the top ten will place.

—Those four who lose in the quarterfinals will play their own single-elim bracket for fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth.

—Those who lose in the semifinals will play a third-place game.

DAY 1 SCHEDULE

Wait to make the games. I await the PMs for questions of rated/unrated and phase lengths.

GROUP ARAGORN
badivan1 vs. TestSubjectOne
ubercacher16 vs. umbletheheep

GROUP BEEBLEBROX
Maucat vs. Arado
Superwerty vs. Sky Hopper

GROUP CORIAKIN
bsiper vs. Electric Knight
Miitag vs. jason4747

GROUP DAEDALUS
CoffeeAndKeyboards vs. Individual
Argentinean Empire vs. Mr. Finkelmuiyer

What's the rationale for a bonus point for a concede? Sounds like this will just force people not to concede? (i.e., games take longer to finish) Plus, huge problem that noone will concede in the first round but in the last round players who are in practice eliminated will probably concede.

Yeah, I was thinking that I wouldn't ever concede a game.

Are NATO and USSR determined randomly for the group stage games?

bsiper, i am pretty sure we play both NATO and USSR. 3 opponents x 2 matches both sides = 6 games

@Mittag: First, I like my tiebreaker system, and people Conceding throws off SC counts. Second, I love dramatic comebacks. Players OCCASIONALLY tend to Concede too early in Cold War, in my opinion.

By the way, players eliminated from the group stage will be seeded and placed into a consolation bracket. Conceding an extra game could drop a player multiple seeds, which could harm their chances to place in the top ten. That matters to some people, but not all. Do you have a better idea that still discourages Conceding?

@bsiper: See badivan1’s comment after you. That is correct.

Seriously. Player D could refuse to concede against player A in first round when there is still a chance for D to go through, and the the same player D could decide to concede against player B in last round when D is already secure of finishing last in the group. And this could determine that player B finishes second in the group instead of player A!

You have created a system where it is not necessarily the player who played the best who goes through. Just because you don't like people conceding.

The game should be about winning. I don't care of the loser concede or played it out.

The winner doesn't get an extra point right? It's just the loser who loses a point. Also, are we encouraging games to go to the deadline or do games usually resolve earlier.

@umbletheheep,

No, the winner (the person being conceded to) would get the extra point.

Also, the amount of the phase used would be up to each individual player.

Games can go to the deadline or not. It’s up to the two players in a given game.

How about we instead subtract a point from a player that concedes, as umbletheheep sort-of suggested? Mittag makes a valid point.

I seems like that would be benefitial.

I think that would be wise because if it was close between making it out of the round between two people the concession shouldn't be the deciding factor. I'd think the head to head match up of the two should be the real deciding factor.