Coming Very Soon: InterGender War!

In the semi-regular battle of the best, who'll come out on top?!

Moderators: DUEL Jaycy, Staff

Locked
DUEL Jaycy
RoH Official
RoH Official
Posts: 195
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 10:16 pm
Location: Her ship, with various friends, or at the dueling Arena and Outback

Coming Very Soon: InterGender War!

Post by DUEL Jaycy »

Yes, it's that time!

Only this time it's going to be bigger and better than ever!

That's right; ALL THREE SPORTS are participating this time!

There'll be achievements! There may even be nobles awarded! (all to be determined)

January 3rd, 2011 will be the tentative start date - get ready!
DUEL Rand
RoH Official
RoH Official
Posts: 53
Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:29 pm

Post by DUEL Rand »

Those of us not here for previous events are interested in knowing exactly what this is.
User avatar
G
Legendary Adventurer
Legendary Adventurer
Ric Flair

Posts: 4124
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:09 am
Location: Generally found at the Golden Ivy Tavern. If not there, then on the SpellJammer, his ship.

Post by G »

DUEL Rand wrote:Those of us not here for previous events are interested in knowing exactly what this is.
Male -vs- Female dueling.
G'nort Dragoon-Talanador
Duel of Swords Legend. Best In The World™.
First All Time DoS Title Holder.
Listed as "Daddy" in your daughters contacts list.
Image
User avatar
Rand alTan
Proven Adventurer
Proven Adventurer
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 7:07 pm

Post by Rand alTan »

G wrote:Male -vs- Female dueling.
Wow, super useful. :?
I guess I'll wait and see if specifics are supplied, thanks.
User avatar
Harris
Legendary Adventurer
Legendary Adventurer
King Of The Outback

Posts: 1427
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: Sometimes Here, Oftentimes There

Post by Harris »

I'm pretty sure this announcement was meant to be a tease and that details will be given before the event kicks off, considering the start date is tentative and apparently further details are being worked out.

I've heard that patience is a virtue.
Image
User avatar
Rand alTan
Proven Adventurer
Proven Adventurer
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 7:07 pm

Post by Rand alTan »

Harris wrote:I'm pretty sure this announcement was meant to be a tease and that details will be given before the event kicks off, considering the start date is tentative and apparently further details are being worked out.

I've heard that patience is a virtue.
That's great! I really hope you're right about providing details. I greatly enjoy being able to discuss and contribute to community events.

I fail to see how I've been impatient. All I did was profess interest, which, if I read you correctly, is exactly what the post was designed to do.
DUEL Kheldar
Asst. Coordinator
Asst. Coordinator
Posts: 1168
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 6:59 pm

Post by DUEL Kheldar »

The IG war has typically been a DoF event. We are still working out the details for the site wide event, but if you want an idea of how it's worked in the past, there are posts that can be found in the DoF archives.
User avatar
Jake
Top Thug
Top Thug
Warlord of the Boards

Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2004 1:25 am
Location: Red Orc Brewery, a dueling venue, or the taverns of Badside
Contact:

Post by Jake »

The short version...

A contest that runs over X number of weeks.

Duelers get points for dueling and beating members of the opposite sex.

After X number of weeks the tourney ends, and either the guys or the gals are declared the winner by accumulation of wins.

DoF has been doing IG wars for several years.

In the past, entry has not been required. If you dueled, and your opponent was of the opposite sex, it counted.
User avatar
Rand alTan
Proven Adventurer
Proven Adventurer
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 7:07 pm

Post by Rand alTan »

So I like this IG a lot and was looking at the scoring system of this and previous IG events. I like the bonus% for wins over minimum.

One thing I noticed is that the minimum number of duels seems to stay very low over the run of the event, mostly due to people dueling just once. I'd like to see a little more emphasis placed on dueling a few more times! Here's my proposal.

Change the bottom bracket to middle bracket and add a new bottom bracket. Anyone with only one duel is in the bottom bracket. Duel twice or more and you move into the middle (or top if you meet min duels).

The big change is to NOT INCLUDE the bottom bracket duels in the minimum duel calculations.

Everything works the same, but single duel duelists just don't count.
User avatar
Harris
Legendary Adventurer
Legendary Adventurer
King Of The Outback

Posts: 1427
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: Sometimes Here, Oftentimes There

Post by Harris »

I don't really understand the logic behind this. If the average is already low and a substantial amount of people are still only netting one duel, how is driving the average up going to entice them to duel more? If anything it's only going to reward powerduelers and leave everyone else in the dust. I don't think that's really the spirit of the idea.

And when would single duels be excluded from the average in the stats? If it's done on a weekly basis that's a nightmare for the person doing the stats for obvious reasons. If it's only done at the end in the final week, the statistics are going to be incredibly skewed suddenly. There's no way to accurately track progress if the stats are fluctuating weekly or if they suddenly fluctuate right at the end.

It's fine the way it is, in my opinion.
Image
User avatar
Rand alTan
Proven Adventurer
Proven Adventurer
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 7:07 pm

Post by Rand alTan »

As I understand it, whoever is doing the stats has to (weekly) keep track of everyone's W-L-T, count total # of duels, and count total # of duelists and then do some division to find bracket minimums. The extra work caused by this proposal is to not count a subset of duels and duelists, so I fail to see how that's a nightmare.

If people are only netting one duel and will never be in the top bracket, how does moving the bracket minimum have any impact on them, ever? If people want to participate at the very minimum level, they need to duel more than once over three months. Seems reasonable to me.

Anyone wanting to win will duel enough to be in the top bracket. Doesn't setting this minimum based on active participants make more sense than on 1-offs?

I don't know if this year will be like the last one, no one does. But last time:

Total number of duels for the cycle: 312
Total number of duelers for the cycle: 59
Number of duels to qualify for top bracket: 5.28 (5)

Ignoring single-duel-duelists:

Total number of duels for the cycle: 312 - 27 = 285
Total number of duelers for the cycle: 59 - 27 = 32 (46% of all duels were 1 off)

Number of duels to qualify for top bracket: 8.9 (9)

So instead of being able to make the top bracket and just stay there after dueling 5 matches (which to make a point, Dizzy did in the 2nd week, 5-0) the competitors would be forced to actually continue to compete. To her credit, Dizzy did keep fighting and winning, but she didn't actually have to duel after the second week, because single-duel-duelists kept the average down.

From that example, the Ladies top bracket wouldn't actually have changed as they all had 9+ duels. Only 5 of the 12 guys would've been in the top bracket.

9 duels over 13 weeks? I don't see how that's powergaming.
User avatar
Harris
Legendary Adventurer
Legendary Adventurer
King Of The Outback

Posts: 1427
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: Sometimes Here, Oftentimes There

Post by Harris »

And that's one of the functions of the bonus percentage incorporated into this year's IG War. It's to keep people from coasting, since having a perfect record can be trumped by someone actively dueling and racking up enough bonus percentage to go over 100.
Image
User avatar
Rand alTan
Proven Adventurer
Proven Adventurer
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 7:07 pm

Post by Rand alTan »

Harris wrote:And that's one of the functions of the bonus percentage incorporated into this year's IG War. It's to keep people from coasting, since having a perfect record can be trumped by someone actively dueling and racking up enough bonus percentage to go over 100.
I have a very hard time believing this will ever push someone defeated over someone undefeated, though it is of course possible, just unlikely.

considering 5 minimum duels

Player A goes 5-0-0 = 100%
Player B has one loss or tie, forcing them to go undefeated for six more duels to reach 10-1-0 = 91% + 10% bonus, 101% to beat the undefeated one who sits on their laurels. This is best case scenario, forcing at least twice as many duels.


My goal is to make it worth your while to duel each week. To have that happen, the top bracket minimum needs to increase over time. Right now, you are encouraged not to participate if you win, and encouraged to powergame if you lose.
User avatar
Jaycy Ashleana
Expert Adventurer
Expert Adventurer
Sassiest

Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 5:32 pm
Location: Dockside

Post by Jaycy Ashleana »

The current system is likely to generally create an average near 6 at the end of the War – an average of 1 duel every 2 weeks. This current average requirement, and the method of producing it, is generally in line with activity requirements both historically and currently.

The last IG War produced an average of 5, which is close to the goal. Of all top bracket qualifiers (17), only 1 (Sartan, 4-1) dueled less than the goal. Only 2 more duelers fought at the goal; 14 duelers dueled 7 times or more.

To qualify for TDL’s honors, duelers needed to duel one half of the season (aka 7 duels in 14 weeks, 8 duels in 16 etc).

When ERS was being recorded and used, from very early on, single duels were recorded in the totals and single duelers were qualifiers for the bottom bracket. (See
https://duelingzone.org/duelarchives/vi ... ld+ranking, https://duelingzone.org/duelarchives/vi ... ld+ranking, https://duelingzone.org/duelarchives/vi ... ld+ranking, http://www.ringsofhonor.org/dof/ers/ers10-0213.html
for examples). As a reminder, the current system is modeled after the ERS.

Currently, activity requirements for title holders in the sports are:

DoF: The Opal/Diamond must remain active. There are no specific standards for what counts as “active” in the rules of rank. (http://www.ringsofhonor.org/dof/index.php, Maintaining the Opal Rank deals specifically with Opals, other sections describe Emerald requirements)

DoS: A Baron/Overlord must remain active. There are no specific standards for what counts as “active” in the rules of rank for title holders, but the rules do state that “Any [other] dueler who is inactive over the duration of a complete cycle is subject to removal from the Standings.” (http://www.ringsofhonor.org/dos/index.php under Retirements and Inactivity). However, WLs who intend to challenge have a Show of Activity Requirement, 10 duels from the beginning of the previous cycle to challenge for Baron, and 15 to challenge for Overlord. Thus, the base minimum requirements to challenge require one duel every 2.4 weeks (for Baron, 10 duels in 24 weeks – the length of the 2 cycles) or one duel every 1.6 weeks (for Overlord, 15 duels in 24 weeks). (same link, under Show of Activity for Warlords)

DoM: A Keeper must duel once a month. (http://www.ringsofhonor.org/dom/index.php, under The Title of Keeper)

To require 9 duels in 12 (not 13) weeks would be to require a duel every 1.33 weeks; why would we want to require a higher standard of activity for this event than we require for our title holders? (This event, btw, distinguishes from the 1-duel-a-week requirement of DoS Madness in that all three sports are involved; to have the higher number effectively risks making duelers duel close to once a week in every sport if they want to qualify for overall honors).


There are various other reasons for not changing the requirement that while not statistically-driven they are, in my mind, relevant factors arguing the current goal is adequate.

1) Raising the number the way you suggested goes against the spirit of the competition. Everyone, regardless of rank, can participate and help (or hinder) their side. To not include a number of duels (and duelers) because they’ve only dueled once is contrary to that idea.

2) As Harris said, raising the minimum number of duels isn’t going to make those duelers who’ve dueled once duel more.

3) Raising the minimum number of duels effectively punishes duelers who would be dropped to a middle bracket because they couldn’t duel as often as others. I strongly feel asking duelers to duel more than once every two weeks fails to take into account how busy peoples’ lives are. Between school, work and families I would feel very uncomfortable asking for them to duel more than we do currently for this, particularly when this is through all three sports.

4) Keeping records and writing reports would take longer. For the same reasons that I don’t want to make people duel more often to qualify, I don’t want to make my job take more time.

5) IG War should be fun, not a chore. The looser requirements help keep it fun. I’m very concerned that requiring almost a duel a week in each sport would make this feel much more like a chore than a fun event.

6) Unless the dueler has a good record already, the amount of duels needed to overcome a perfect (say, 5-0) record is so great it’s really anomalous that multiple people would make the attempt, so it’s unlikely that powerdueling beyond one person would be an issue. In the last IG, even if Maranya had gotten the 48% (from 24 wins over minimum) in bonuses that she would have if we used modified percentage, she still wouldn’t have won. Dizzy’s modified percent would have been 108.86% with her 13-1 record. Even if she faced someone with a 5-0 record, she would have needed 4 more wins without a loss. The current system emphasizes more tactical dueling as opposed to sheer numbers.
Locked

Return to “InterGender Wars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests