Fall Tournament Discussion 2017

@Hope I would be willing to step away from the action for once to aid you in the moderation of this tournament.

 

Based on the current scaling mechanism in the Arena, and with consideration to the level of power our present population tends to to gravitate towards, Tier 5 would be the effective parameter.

Unless you've got another dozen players waiting behind the cyber curtain to come in and give this a go, then I'd advise we end up in a predicament of not having very many teams.

Keeping it within the SE/FF theme seems reasonable. With the power cap set within more of a middle ground, this should alleviate most of the tension that would otherwise arise in terms of differing, unrelated power sources coming into contact with each other.

In the first tournament I had participated in (ever, and anywhere) the basic arrangement was that the judges were pulled directly from the combatant pool. After the match-ups were determined, participants would be paired as judges for other battles. It worked out well enough, and I don't recall there being any incidents of people exploiting their position as a judge to stack the competitive progression in their favor.

We could maintain integrity within this system by assigning judges to matches on the opposite side of the tournament bracket than themselves for the first round. Should we go the route of making this a single elimination tournament, those who are eliminated could be recruited to serve as judges in the following rounds. Or, should we go for a consolation style tournament, those that advance to the upper-ranking brackets (IE - Winners from the previous round(s)) would simply judge matches for those that moved onto the consolation brackets (IE - losers of the previous round(s)), and vice versa.

Or, if we get lucky and we have enough people among the non-combatants, we can just have those who aren't participating to serve this function.

I would suggest utilizing a combination of a turn count and time limit for making a post. Example - Each battle will allot for 20 turns, and combatants are expected to respond within 48 hours of the previous post being made. I will also be the advocate for implementing an introductory turn, which would not count towards the turn count, and in which no combatant would be permitted to mount an attack against their opponent (though they would be permitted to prep for a move in the following turn if they so desired).

Additionally, rather than making it a one-strike penalty of death, progress with: 1st Offense of time limit = a light, non-lethal auto hit against your character; 2nd Offense - a heavier, more lethal auto hit against your character; 3rd Offense - The automatic defeat of the offending combatant, and the automatic death of their character at the hands of their opponent's (the last bit can be optional, of course); since the tournament will, I would assume, NOT be within continuity, character deaths in one round will not (in the event of a consolation style tournament, or multi-elimination of some sort) apply into the following round of matches.

All of the Scooby Snacks a Doge can eat.


Post Script - I intend to participate as a combatant in this little tussle, assuming I have that option.

Post Post Script - ADDENDUM RELATING TO TIER - I would strong suggest that, in order to keep a level playing field in terms of power scaling, that, if we're going for an FF theme, we set a limiter on things such as armor and weapons, in particular, ensuring that character's aren't bloated with top-level abilities and armed to the teeth with powerful weapons.

 

Probably not. Definitely not an Ultima weapon.

 

As input to a few of the questions that popped up:

On the matter of what sort of FF Model to utilize... I would be inclined as to say that a Job Classes system, or something to achieve the same end, would be the most effective approach. In that sense, most magic and abilities can be reasoned as stemming from the same source, shaving off more of the issue of one universe's power vs. another universe's power.


If we WERE to to a team battle... I hate saying it, but I feel that teams would have to remain active together, or be eliminated or shifted to the consolation bracket together. That's a complicated situation, really. On the one hand, no one wants to be slowed down by an inactive teammate; on the other hand, you can't really advance a person on their own if their teammate is going to be consistently putting their battles jeopardy due to interrupted activity.

If we had a larger community on hand, we could always allow arrangements for each team/member of a team to have a sort of 'back up' teammate that could sub in if their original partner were to either give up entirely before a round began, or if their activity throughout preceding rounds left little room for confidence. But since we don't have that luxury, and since I think that a team tournament would be a bit too complicated of a proceeding for our relatively new Arena community, I will once again assert my support of making this a 1vs1 tournament.

As it stands, I'm counting roughly half of what we'd need to run an 8-combatant tournament; I, personally, don't like to count people as "in" unless they've confirmed here. People can talk it up on Discord and Facebook about how they're going to participate; but following through on-site is a different story.

 

I should be available at some point around 7PM? Might only be able to do a text talk, since I might be getting on a video call. But I can multitask for that one.

 

Coming in cocky there kid. Fingers crossed I get to battle you.

 

@Hope

What is our projected start date for sign-ups??