Forum


Multi Table Tournament Decision
Ryan wrote
at 10:20 AM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
I just finished table reshuffling and the prize structure. It works well for GPokr but I've bumped into an interesting decision with kdice. In gpokr, tables can be reshuffled easily because hands are relatively short. In kdice reshuffling requires you to wait until other players are done. So there are three choices here:

1) You play the same people until a table in the tournament can be removed. At this point your table gets broken up and spread over the other tables. In this scenario you need to wait for your table to finish for the next game and when there's a reshuffle you need wait for another table to finish.

2) Games are synchronized. You don't start the next game until all games have finished. At that point tables are reshuffled at random. The benefit here is random players every round but longer waits.

3) Start new games as people are knocked out of current games. This is the quickest way to start new games but it creates a strange effect of winners playing winners and losers playing losers - or in other words big points on one table and none on another.

Thoughts?

Replies 1 - 10 of 44 Next › Last »
ChristianSoldier wrote
at 10:33 AM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
Make the games end automatically at 10 minutes.
DoubleDogDareYa wrote
at 12:21 PM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
Choice # 2 is my vote. It's the most fair and logical option.
montecarlo wrote
at 1:13 PM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
agree with dddy. at least most of the people who are interested in testing out MTT are used to waiting around for up to half an hour for a game to start.

perhaps during testing, you can experiment with some other alternatives that could speed up the game with the slow endgame? penalties for only 8v8ing somehow?

or perhaps, make sure none of the maps used in MTT have two large halves connected by a single territory, or make sure there are no donut maps, etc... which have longer average game lengths than others. or have an all-donut MTT, er whatever.

anyways, option 2 seems fairest. option 1 might result in brokenup-table people being at a disadvantage, since relationships have developed on the other tables, while all of their relationships have been broken off? option 3 might be fun to try just to see what happens... it might turn out to be a good effect?
dasfury wrote
at 1:32 PM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
I vote Synchronized.
kam|k2 wrote
at 1:50 PM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
think we need to test this on some kind of beta-server... rly got no opinion yet, which one would do it.


leekstep wrote
at 1:52 PM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
#2 sounds awesome
Rorschach wrote
at 2:04 PM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
Yeah, #2.
manbearpig wrote
at 2:04 PM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
Option two would be the fairest and best, despite taking the longest.
montecarlo wrote
at 2:10 PM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
if monte and leek agree on something, is the kuniverse about to asplode?

i was also thinking about how well pga might work in MTT, as in a whole pga team, and whenever two of you happen to sit at the same table, yay, you get an unfair advantage...

is there some way to incorporate a really strict RC into each tournament? sure, there will be complainers because every now and then, there will be a few games in a row where it makes sense for two strangers to ally each game... but we really need to test this against pga teams i feel, especially if the final table winnings are so huge.

i figure the best way to test this is to let DLK play MTT, right? or ask Vohaul and fiero to play?
Thraxle wrote
at 2:29 PM, Tuesday September 9, 2008 EDT
#2 sounds best
KDice - Multiplayer Dice War
KDice is a multiplayer strategy online game played in monthly competitions. It's like Risk. The goal is to win every territory on the map.
CREATED BY RYAN © 2006 - 2026
GAMES
G GPokr
Texas Holdem Poker
K KDice
Online Strategy
X XSketch
Online Pictionary