Donkey Kong Forum
Other Classic Arcade Games => Classic Arcade Game Discussion => Topic started by: wolfman24 on August 23, 2016, 08:57:13 am
-
Pretty sure it is known I am retiring from hosting contests had fun with making igby, yolympics, and the other contests I hosted. I got to talk to a lot of great people through the contests so thanks guys.
By the numbers
18475 score submissions
401 players
at least over 100 games
15 contests
-
Thanks for all your work and contributions, Wolf.
IGBY, Yolympics, and others are now a permanent fixture in the online score-chasing community and hobby. They have helped revitalized interest and given reasons another reason to work harder towards their high score goals. We'll be looking to continue having these on a yearly basis with different organizers (Jeremy Young, George Strain, etc.) as necessary.
-
Wolfy is the original!
BibleThump
The contests won't be the same without you Wolfy... I mean... will there still be last minute rules changes to keep it exciting? Kappa <stirpot>
-
Wolfy is the original!
BibleThump
The contests won't be the same without you Wolfy... I mean... will there still be last minute rules changes to keep it exciting? Kappa <stirpot>
Based on the fact debates like leeching, team balancing, and controller types will never end (mostly due to being subjective), I fully expect some good ole rule changin' will happen again. At the least, they will be suggested or argued. Unfortunately, I expect the Hollywood hucksters to win out most of the time. <Tim> <stirpot>
-
Thanks Wolf for all the time and effort you put into your tournaments.
Thanks to you I've been able to play in direct competition against some of the best classic gamers in the world (and Barra).
Good luck to Jry and Dave1 Strain in carrying the torch forward.
-
BibleThump <3
-
Thanks for all you have done for the gaming community :)
-
Wolfy, I played in my first IGBY this year and loved it (even though I don't think I earned but about 8 points for my team by the end...). Anyways, thanks for all that you've done. You will be missed!
-
sadness..... Wish you well sir!
-
Thank you very much for the tournaments. They definitely have been a blast.
-
Once my captain, always my captain. Weeaboos for life! BibleThump
-
You were always the brain child behind these tourneys, even in the early days pre-igby on RU etc
Bridging the gap has made these tournaments as great as they are and we have you to thank for that.
They'll forever in my mind be known as Wolf Tournaments whether you're involved or not
GG sir
Kreygasm
-
They'll forever in my mind be known as Wolf Tournaments whether you're involved or not
GG
Nicely put.
So much fun had by so many people, pulled out of thin air by the Nards.
A bit sceptical about this 'retirement' tho. A few months of that godforsaken animu and that bloody music will drive you back into our arms, Wolfie.
(http://i.imgur.com/R2F99U3.png)
-
A bit sceptical about this 'retirement' tho. A few months of that godforsaken animu and that bloody music will drive you back into our arms, Wolfie.
I personally think this is a cry for help. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4HAzFG8-NAjnwMuHUz4LeNs-g6K28S9e (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4HAzFG8-NAjnwMuHUz4LeNs-g6K28S9e)
But seriously, thanks Wolf - these were the first competitions I ever participated in, and except for this last one, they were a blast.
-
Quitter ftt
-
Quitter ftt
FailFish
-
Quitter ftt
https://clips.twitch.tv/muscleandfitness/ClearHareRiPepperonis
::)
-
A bit sceptical about this 'retirement' tho. A few months of that godforsaken animu and that bloody music will drive you back into our arms, Wolfie.
If he's watched a tenth of the anime that he says he has, he's well past the point where he's ever going to get sick of it. You'd have to send him to a padded room to get him to quit.
@Wolfie: You did a fantastic job with these contests. Definitely a well-earned retirement!
-
IGBY and Yolympics need to live on. Completely understandable that Wolf wants to take a step back, but wholly retiring these events would be a major hit to one of CAG's greatest bastions: tournaments.
Tournaments are fun as hell, period. But online MAME tournaments in particular have this great reach which allows everyone from everywhere to join the fray. We do not want to lose these community strengthening celebrations of the games and competition that we love.
So, I volunteer to help in the future organization of these tournaments, with the following stipulations...
1. I don't want to do it alone.
2. I want to discuss any and all ideas relevant to how we can make IGBY a more balanced tournament.
-
2. I want to discuss any and all ideas relevant to how we can make IGBY a more balanced tournament.
What if we put a cap on team size? Or a hard count?
Teams must be exactly 10 players, for example.
Would this prohibition on mega teams actually help balance, or hinder it?
-
Team drafts I think are a good way to keep them balanced.
-
2. I want to discuss any and all ideas relevant to how we can make IGBY a more balanced tournament.
What if we put a cap on team size? Or a hard count?
Teams must be exactly 10 players, for example.
Would this prohibition on mega teams actually help balance, or hinder it?
Personally I think limiting overall team size is a bad idea. I am partial to the way we did it with BOTA. We have unlimited participants per team and a final team scoring pool based on the players OVERALL performance. It limits specialist wrecking just one game but sucking at the rest. You have to be good all around for any of your scores to count for the team. So if a team has 40 members but only the top ten count for scoring everyone gets to participate and it helps promote overall play since I may not make the team just because I crush everyone at Dig Dug and Robotron... The scoring gets tricky at the end because basically you have to run the numbers on the individual team first then the teams vs teams scoring happens. Johnbart was able to code the BOTA page to do it right so I'm sure he could give some programming insight into how he pulled it off..
-
2. I want to discuss any and all ideas relevant to how we can make IGBY a more balanced tournament.
What if we put a cap on team size? Or a hard count?
Teams must be exactly 10 players, for example.
Would this prohibition on mega teams actually help balance, or hinder it?
Personally I think limiting overall team size is a bad idea. I am partial to the way we did it with BOTA. We have unlimited participants per team and a final team scoring pool based on the players OVERALL performance. It limits specialist wrecking just one game but sucking at the rest. You have to be good all around for any of your scores to count for the team. So if a team has 40 members but only the top ten count for scoring everyone gets to participate and it helps promote overall play since I may not make the team just because I crush everyone at Dig Dug and Robotron... The scoring gets tricky at the end because basically you have to run the numbers on the individual team first then the teams vs teams scoring happens. Johnbart was able to code the BOTA page to do it right so I'm sure he could give some programming insight into how he pulled it off..
That system seems something that would disenfranchise a lot of people. It's a system where one person could grind hours, and hours a day, and at the end of the day they find out that their efforts didn't make an ounce of difference for the team since they were not one of the top five overall players for their team. With the current system yeah, only top 5 count per team for any certain game, but since there are so many games, everyone has a game where they can at least get 3rd, 4th, or 5th on the team.
-
Changing top 5 to top 10 on the tourney site only requires editing 1 line of code
-
I think for a draft format, the top 4 finishers from the previous tourney should be automatic captains. Punish them for being soooooor good.
-
We do the draft for Yolympics, that's what that tournament is about. IGBY is about playing with your mates -- selecting your own team -- but MARP and DKF field huge teams with which smaller teams cannot compete.
I want to preserve the essence of IGBY but somehow make it more fair.
-
im willing to help out Ross even though i did get a little irked the last round i agree its fun to have folks play. I would want to participate too as well as help run it.
1. I do think the top 8 scoring could make this a little different like Bota does. It prevents people having a big team and just putting up but scores for the top 5 or 8 only. Course that also requires you play EVERY game too which maybe pushing it.
2. Perhaps smaller teams could get some type of handicap bonus points. The smaller teams gets a bump of xxx points. Perhaps same with people. Handicap the better players going over previous results. It does get old the same people / teams wrecking. Plus it would make it more competitive. Think like handicapping in bowling...
-
As always, I'm more than happy to help verify, adjudicate, etc. I will bug the hell out of everyone on RU to sign up, as it's actually been a little more active lately. Aside from leading a team, I'll do whatever is needed or asked, since I believe these tournaments are a fantastic way of keeping the whole community together.
-
2. I want to discuss any and all ideas relevant to how we can make IGBY a more balanced tournament.
What if we put a cap on team size? Or a hard count?
Teams must be exactly 10 players, for example.
Would this prohibition on mega teams actually help balance, or hinder it?
Personally I think limiting overall team size is a bad idea. I am partial to the way we did it with BOTA. We have unlimited participants per team and a final team scoring pool based on the players OVERALL performance. It limits specialist wrecking just one game but sucking at the rest. You have to be good all around for any of your scores to count for the team. So if a team has 40 members but only the top ten count for scoring everyone gets to participate and it helps promote overall play since I may not make the team just because I crush everyone at Dig Dug and Robotron... The scoring gets tricky at the end because basically you have to run the numbers on the individual team first then the teams vs teams scoring happens. Johnbart was able to code the BOTA page to do it right so I'm sure he could give some programming insight into how he pulled it off..
That system seems something that would disenfranchise a lot of people. It's a system where one person could grind hours, and hours a day, and at the end of the day they find out that their efforts didn't make an ounce of difference for the team since they were not one of the top five overall players for their team. With the current system yeah, only top 5 count per team for any certain game, but since there are so many games, everyone has a game where they can at least get 3rd, 4th, or 5th on the team.
Maybe we should give them a safe place to cry about not being good enough to matter...
-
These tournaments are about trying to include everyone, no matter their skill level.
What you said Ken, is a load of bollocks.
-
These tournaments are about trying to include everyone, no matter their skill level.
What you said Ken, is a load of bollocks.
You can use the safe place too. Our tournament system is by far the best and most fair so bollocks all you want. Everyone gets to play, everyone is encouraged to do well. Ringers on one or two games are irrelevant, you have to be overall good to make your scores count for the team, otherwise you are welcome to be a participant and welcome to play. If you want to matter though, you need to be good at the games, kind of the point of 'tournaments' isnt it?
-
These tournaments are about trying to include everyone, no matter their skill level.
What you said Ken, is a load of bollocks.
You can use the safe place too. Our tournament system is by far the best and most fair so bollocks all you want. Everyone gets to play, everyone is encouraged to do well. Ringers on one or two games are irrelevant, you have to be overall good to make your scores count for the team, otherwise you are welcome to be a participant and welcome to play. If you want to matter though, you need to be good at the games, kind of the point of 'tournaments' isnt it?
These tournaments weren't designed like BOTA to be super serious so we can all gloat how big our CAG-penis is. They were made to be fun and all-inclusive. Players would be discouraged if they have no chance at helping their team and I think we should be trying to avoid that.
-
These tournaments weren't designed like BOTA to be super serious so we can all gloat how big our CAG-penis is. They were made to be fun and all-inclusive. Players would be discouraged if they have no chance at helping their team and I think we should be trying to avoid that.
As they should be in a tournament. Why even keep score, just give everyone a participant ribbon and call it good.
-
Team points based on lowest common number of team mates. If Team A has 18 people and Team B has 22 people, top 18 scores count. The vast majority of people would be able to contribute and it still makes it worthwhile for the lesser players to vie for the 20th rank or whatever to get that extra point for the team. Some people wouldn't score team points, but not too many and they would have reason to get better I reckon.
A draft would make pretty even numbered teams probably. If it's friend coming together and the teams are unbalanced, the above still give people reason to play and put up scores.
-
These tournaments weren't designed like BOTA to be super serious so we can all gloat how big our CAG-penis is. They were made to be fun and all-inclusive. Players would be discouraged if they have no chance at helping their team and I think we should be trying to avoid that.
As they should be in a tournament. Why even keep score, just give everyone a participant ribbon and call it good.
Because sports doesn't work your way for the most part. We don't only take the top 3 scorers from each basketball team, and only count those points. We count all the points. We don't keep track of only the top 3 hitters, we keep track of ALL the hitters. In every sport no matter if you are the best, or the worst. If you score, than your score counts. So stop trying to politicize this garbage. If you are good enough to get points for a game it should count. That's how sports work.
-
The difference is a tard like you wouldnt be able to get on the team in MLB. Don't try and play those word games with me kid, I'm to smart and to old.
Think tryouts....
-
The difference is a tard like you wouldnt be able to get on the team in MLB. Don't try and play those word games with me kid, I'm to smart and to old.
Think tryouts....
This isn't MLB either.
-
We don't keep track of only the top 3 hitters, we keep track of ALL the hitters.
The difference is a tard like you wouldnt be able to get on the team in MLB. Don't try and play those word games with me kid, I'm to smart and to old.
Think tryouts....
This isn't MLB either.
Ya, that was kind of my point... Derp...
Most us dorks wouldnt get picked on a grade school kick ball team much less have 'our hits count' in any sport. Fact is pretty much any level of sport have a process to weed out the shitty players before scoring happens so there is no fucking chance in the world someone like Georges points matter in any contest that doesnt involve a joystick. With our system tryouts happen during the tournament instead of before, promoting both participation and competition.
-
We don't keep track of only the top 3 hitters, we keep track of ALL the hitters.
The difference is a tard like you wouldnt be able to get on the team in MLB. Don't try and play those word games with me kid, I'm to smart and to old.
Think tryouts....
This isn't MLB either.
Ya, that was kind of my point... Derp...
Most us dorks wouldnt get picked on a grade school kick ball team much less have 'our hits count' in any sport. Fact is pretty much any level of sport have a process to weed out the shitty players before scoring happens so there is no fucking chance in the world someone like Georges points matter in any contest that doesnt involve a joystick. With our system tryouts happen during the tournament instead of before, promoting both participation and competition.
I was on my college chess team, but I don't that's what you were going for. LOL Anyways, I think you yourself explained why your system is no bueno for IGBY, and Yolympics. Because, like you said, only the top players are really on the team. Everyone else would be just going through the motions.
If they were to use your system. I suggest this. Have the first week of the tourney be the qualifiers. The top(let's say 50) that make it, then are able to go on, and form teams.
That way there are actual TRUE try outs.
Having said that, first, and foremost I think the Yolympics draft, and scoring system are fine the way they are.
IGBY to me is the problem.
Also, maybe here is a compromise for the number of players on a team. Cap the teams at a certain amount, but let the captain of the team decide if it wants to be invite only or open team membership.
-
As someone who WAS picked to play sports in school and performs very poorly in CAG events, I am far more likely to play in an event where I can 'play with my mates' than one where I am drafted to play with a bunch of dudes I don't know. Personally, I really don't care if my scores count or not - its more about playing games I wouldn't otherwise play. That being said, it would be cool to have a less formal tournament that was appealing to more players making CAG more appealing to the general public (even if that means "Nerfing" either IGBY or Yolympics, as I know that no one wants the responsibility of creating another CAG tourney).
-
Jry did a great job hosting the most recent Crap Tournament, and I'm glad to say he has accepted the responsibility on a tentative basis for running the next Yolympics event. It will again be near the end of Jan in 2017.
Whatever changes are decided to scoring/teams, if any, will be very easy to implement on the tourney site. It is designed to be as flexible/organic as possible with rules.
-
Jry <3
-
Tentative? Come off it. Jry for Japanese Ambassador to everything.
-
Sorry to hear that, Wolf... because I understand how much effort you put in to organizing the tournaments yet have had to endure a lot of criticism for no good reason. I know it can be frustrating.
-
Tentative? Come off it. Jry for Japanese Ambassador to everything.
:) I said "tentatively" because my first, gut reaction was "yes," before I had taken the time to think it through. If it is ok with everyone, I now stand firmly on "yes."
I see that a lot of discussion has already taken place regarding scoring and player inclusion. I think, in general, Yolympics is easier to deal with because the way the teams are formed. By its nature, teams are equal size and balanced in terms of skill. No one can predict if certain players will participate after they're drafted, but that's an obvious risk with the system. I'll hold off on giving my thoughts about IGBY, but here are some preliminary thoughts on the next Yolympics:
1) Expand scoring slots from 5 to 6-7
We tried using 8 slots with the last IGBY and pretty much all the teams struggled to fill those spots. Yes, there were more IGBY teams with players spread thinner than Yolympics, but IGBY 2016 had more overall participation than Yolympics 2016. Last year, there were 92 people signed up for Yolympics. 81 people submitted scores, and 70 people scored points for their teams (86.42%). Of the 11 people who submitted but didn't score points, 8 of them submitted on multiple games. Of those 8, one submitted on 12(!) games and one of them was Allen.
If we expanded to 6 scoring slots, then that 70 would jump to 75 (92.6%). If we expanded to 7, the 70 would jump to 79 (97.53%). All teams filled their 5 scoring slots in Yolympics. One team failed to submit 6 scores on all games (27 of 28), and two teams failed to submit 7 scores on all games (21 of 28 and 25 of 28). Those numbers might have been different if teams were required to submit 6 or 7 scores per game, but it gives you an idea of general participation.
So, I see this as good reason to try and balance the scoring between 5 and 8 slots. 5 is not enough, and 8 is too many (for now). 6 or 7 would give essentially everyone a chance to score points, without putting too much pressure on teams to fill slots.
2) Fewer games
28 games is just too many. I'm thinking 18-20.
3) Time-based scoring bonuses for teams and players
One thing I've seen in MARP tourneys that I really like is giving players a bonus for submitting scores early. I think RU has done in this in their yearlong tourneys as well. For a 5-week Yolympics we could do something like: Teams with a full set of scores after Week 1 get 10 points added to their overall score for EACH game that has a full set of scores. After Week 2, 5 points. After Week 3, 2 points, After Week 4, 1 point. I favor this kind of scoring bonus over the previous "1st and 2nd place players get a bonus" method. I think it encourages and rewards participation by all players. We could also use this as bonus, maybe with different values, in the individual rankings (while still keeping the 1st/2nd place bonus). So, the entire team benefits from getting a full set of scores early on, and then the individual players who actually submitted those scores get a bonus as well.
-
I like the idea of adding a bonus to early score submissions. I wonder if there is a way to reward submitting good scores early rather than someone just submitting a place holder for the team points and sandbagging later on. For example, some sort of a multiplier for however long that score stands as a first place score, etc.
-
True Steve. Once "Everyone" submits you get "bonus" points based on score positions. That encourages people to just not put up a one and done but if you do where the score actually sits generates points. IT can't be too much otherwise it defeats the purpose of a tournament. Without some type of handicapping system though it always ends up pretty much the same. Kinda like all of us trying to run against Usain Bolt in the 100M. If at some point you dont give people a 50M head start they aren't going to bother anymore. :)
-
The creator of great contests such as yolympics and igby is returning to contest hosting lit.
My newest contest will be announced some time this week
It will be a return of IGBY but with an exciting twist. Which will hopefully alllow games not normally selected for IGBY a time to shine. Please understand.
-
Kreygasm Kreygasm Kreygasm
One piece of advice; openly discuss your ideas
:)