Jump to content


Photo

Champions League 2018 - Questions


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
41 replies to this topic

#1 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,030 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 16 March 2018 - 02:02 AM

If you have a question of any kind regarding the Champions League 2018 please ask it here and a member of TC (Master Mind/roeczak/steelers//TheOptician) will get back to you.



#2 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 800 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 04 April 2018 - 12:31 AM

How does this international scheduling rule apply to GMT +7?

 

Thanks.


​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#3 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,030 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 04 April 2018 - 09:36 AM

How does this international scheduling rule apply to GMT +7?

Thanks.


Hi Scott,

It doesn't apply. However I will recommend to TC that we should be able to apply this rule to any combination of timezone should scheduling be proving difficult.

#4 scottrussia

scottrussia

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 800 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Bronze General

Posted 04 April 2018 - 09:01 PM

Ok, Thanks for the reply.  Usually things get resolved ok in terms of scheduling.


​Spartan Warriors

KING of the Battlefield!!!!!!


#5 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,030 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 06 April 2018 - 04:19 PM

Are STRs required to be a minimum of 2 hours?

It seems to me that a one hour minimum is preferable because it might allow players to propose additional windows on days when they have a limited amount of time to play.
 
You do not even need a minimum time slot.

 
Yes - An STR is only considered valid if it is at least 2 hours. If a slot is only one hour long it will not count towards the 3 required, but that shouldn't stop a player proposing a one hour slot. Players are encouraged to provide as broad availability as possible.  If you only have a one hour window on a certain day, you should go ahead and propose it.

 

If the minimum length of time slot was reduced this would result in players providing smaller windows and scheduling would become more difficult. 



#6 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • WC Online Team
  • 787 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Colonel

Posted 07 April 2018 - 07:30 PM

 
Yes - An STR is only considered valid if it is at least 2 hours. If a slot is only one hour long it will not count towards the 3 required, but that shouldn't stop a player proposing a one hour slot. Players are encouraged to provide as broad availability as possible.  If you only have a one hour window on a certain day, you should go ahead and propose it.

 

If the minimum length of time slot was reduced this would result in players providing smaller windows and scheduling would become more difficult. 

Shortening minimum slots will actually increase availability as long as players are required to provide 6 hours of availability.

 

Availability is conditional. Let's say that we are considering my availability between 18 and 19 GMT. The likelihood that I can play between 18 and 19 GMT is probably higher if I can play between 17 and 18 GMT than if I cannot play in the preceding hour. This makes sense because if I am busy at work, with my dog or other activities, then there is a greater chance that I am still busy with those things in the proceeding hour.

 

Applying this logic to STRs, if I am unavailable in the first hour, then I am unlikely to be available in the second hour. Therefore, two separate intervals of an hour each that are separate, say 16-17 GMT and 20-21 GMT are more likely to result in an arrangement. Extending this, the TC does not needs mandate a minimum slot length because more proposed slots will make arrangement even easier.


I'm in love with Stacy's mom.

#7 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,030 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 07 April 2018 - 09:13 PM

I've opened this up in the Proposal Log

 

http://forum.strateg...og/#entry451045

http://forum.strateg...um-length-strs/



#8 Fks

Fks

    Major

  • NASF Committee
  • 1,119 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 09 April 2018 - 05:20 AM

Is it a mistake that I am matched to Theo?

Proud Member of the North American Stratego Federation (NASF)

http://forum.strateg...18/#entry461226


#9 Master Mind

Master Mind

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,193 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 09 April 2018 - 05:22 AM

Is it a mistake that I am matched to Theo?

 

Nope


  • Fks likes this

#10 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • WC Online Team
  • 787 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Colonel

Posted 09 April 2018 - 05:37 AM

You guys put me in the wrong group.

 

My max ELO (961) is higher than both Aris1970 (960) and TheOptician (954)

 

https://imgur.com/dGKM7bq

 

 

https://imgur.com/a/ZiHjz


Edited by astros, 09 April 2018 - 05:42 AM.

  • Aris1970 likes this
I'm in love with Stacy's mom.

#11 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • WC Online Team
  • 787 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Colonel

Posted 09 April 2018 - 05:45 AM

Also, logically, the two highest seeded players should be in the groups with 5 people.


I'm in love with Stacy's mom.

#12 Master Mind

Master Mind

    Major

  • Tournament Manager
  • 1,193 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum General

Posted 09 April 2018 - 05:56 AM

>You guys put me in the wrong group

 

That's not correct. For the seedings, TC uses the ELO of your account of registration. For you, this account is still malcom.jansen, not your previous account astros.


  • Napoleon 1er likes this

#13 astros

astros

    Stratego TM

  • WC Online Team
  • 787 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Colonel

Posted 09 April 2018 - 06:14 AM

 

>You guys put me in the wrong group

 

That's not correct. For the seedings, TC uses the ELO of your account of registration. For you, this account is still malcom.jansen, not your previous account astros.

No that is not what the rules say.

 

Tobermoryx and Napoleon 1er have not correctly updated their ranking to incorporate my past stats. I should not be penalized for that. They track main accounts, and my max ELO on my main account is 961.

 

Furthermore, I never requested to be re-added to the clean ranking on this account. Therefore, I am being punished for an inclusion that I did not want. The rules state that: "where a player has previously featured, but no longer features on the Clean Ranking, their Max ELO from their last entry on the Clean Ranking will be used."

 

When I was last voluntarily in the Clean Ranking, my max ELO was 961 , so I expect that ELO to be used.

 

I'd also like to point out that "astros" has a max ELO of 961. Since my account is "astros" that is my ranking.


Edited by astros, 09 April 2018 - 06:18 AM.

I'm in love with Stacy's mom.

#14 Napoleon 1er

Napoleon 1er

    General

  • Honorary members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,573 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 09 April 2018 - 07:22 AM

As astros did not register his account malcom jansen in the alias register he is infringing the rules of this tournament. TC to decide but possibly a disqualification is appropriate...
If you don't know where you go ... you have a lot of chance to arrive elsewhere ...

#15 Aris1970

Aris1970

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,703 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 09 April 2018 - 09:32 AM

You guys put me in the wrong group.

 

My max ELO (961) is higher than both Aris1970 (960) and TheOptician (954)

 

https://imgur.com/dGKM7bq

 

 

https://imgur.com/a/ZiHjz

 

  Aris1970      :  Max ELO 960 ,  Kleier  1547

The Optician  :  Max ELO 954  , Kleier  1424



#16 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,030 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 09 April 2018 - 11:49 AM

You guys put me in the wrong group.

 

My max ELO (961) is higher than both Aris1970 (960) and TheOptician (954)

 

https://imgur.com/dGKM7bq

 

 

https://imgur.com/a/ZiHjz

 

 

No that is not what the rules say.

 

Tobermoryx and Napoleon 1er have not correctly updated their ranking to incorporate my past stats. I should not be penalized for that. They track main accounts, and my max ELO on my main account is 961.

 

Furthermore, I never requested to be re-added to the clean ranking on this account. Therefore, I am being punished for an inclusion that I did not want. The rules state that: "where a player has previously featured, but no longer features on the Clean Ranking, their Max ELO from their last entry on the Clean Ranking will be used."

 

When I was last voluntarily in the Clean Ranking, my max ELO was 961 , so I expect that ELO to be used.

 

I'd also like to point out that "astros" has a max ELO of 961. Since my account is "astros" that is my ranking.

 

Here are the rules on Seeding.

 

--------

 

11) Seeding & Group Allocation

At close of registration, each player will be ordered by the HIGHEST of either:

 

‘Max ELO’ from Tobermoryx and Napoleon’s Clean Ranking (http://forum.stratego.com/topic/1488-tobermoryx-and-napoleons-clean-ranking/?hl=clean+ranking)

 

OR

 

'Kleier-Converted ELO'

 

This is Kleier Ranking (http://greg.kleier.net/) converted into ELO using the following formula:  (KLEIER*0.5)+140

 

(Example A player has a Max ELO of 832 and a Kleier Ranking of 1852. A Kleier Ranking of 1852 using the above formula produces a Kleier-Converted ELO of 1066. As this number is higher than 832 it is used instead of Max ELO).

 

Where a player is not featured on either ranking, their ELO at close of registration will be used. Where a player has previously featured, but no longer features on the Clean Ranking, their Max ELO from their last entry on the Clean Ranking will be used

If, at close of registration, a player has a current ELO higher than their Max ELO, then their current ELO will be used. [Note that TC will disregard the ELO of any aliases in regards to the registered player)

 

-------

 

1. Note the last sentence which confirms that the ELO of the registered player is used. In this case, the account that is registered to the tournament - and the account which is also the primary account in the Alias Register - is 'malcom.jansen'. (This account has since been re-named to 'astros'). 

 

2. Note the last sentence which confirms that where a player has a current ELO higher than their Max ELO, the current ELO is used. 'TheOptician' had a current ELO of 961.

 

3. There is no rule which requires TC to individually verify that each account listed in the Clean Ranking had 'volunteered' to be a part of the Clean Ranking, and I note that you didn't request to be removed from the Clean Ranking despite being listed in it for many months. And even if malcom.jansen didn't appear on the Clean Ranking, the Max ELO of 'astros' still wouldn't have been used, because that isn't your registered account.



#17 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,030 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 09 April 2018 - 11:58 AM

As astros did not register his account malcom jansen in the alias register he is infringing the rules of this tournament. TC to decide but possibly a disqualification is appropriate...

 

As the Alias Register states, players are not required to list all previous accounts, they can choose to declare or alternatively request that old accounts are deleted. When malcom.jansen signed the Alias Register in June 2017, this was his first entry in the Alias Register. 'astros' had not participated in any tournament since the Alias Register rule was developed, and the account 'astros' appeared as deleted - so there is no breach of the Alias Register. (There would only be a breach if the account 'astros' had played a game since).

 

It is confusing because the old 'astros' is now active again (it has been renamed to 'Astros 17'), and malcom.jansen has been renamed to 'astros'. I suggest that the new 'astros' make a new post in the Alias Register and declare the account 'Astros 17' before he plays any game on that account.



#18 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,030 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 09 April 2018 - 12:12 PM

Also, logically, the two highest seeded players should be in the groups with 5 people.

 

As this is a proposal not a question, I suggest you incorporate it into the proposal you raised:

 

http://forum.strateg...-league-format/



#19 Aris1970

Aris1970

    Colonel

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,703 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Major

Posted 09 April 2018 - 01:12 PM

@TheOptician

Max ELO  or  'Kleier-Converted ELO'
It would be better (and more fair) to use the average :  50% max ELO   &   50% 'Kleier-Converted ELO'
 



#20 TheOptician

TheOptician

    Marshal

  • Tournament Manager
  • 3,030 posts
  • Coat of arms
  • Platinum Marshal

Posted 09 April 2018 - 01:29 PM

@TheOptician

Max ELO  or  'Kleier-Converted ELO'
It would be better (and more fair) to use the average :  50% max ELO   &   50% 'Kleier-Converted ELO'
 

 

This is part of a wider discussion about the use of Kleier Rankings.

 

http://forum.strateg...leier-rankings/

 

TC have decided to re-think how Seedings work for the next competition that uses it.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users