open All Channels
seplocked EVE Alliance Tournament Discussion
blankseplocked Team Rankings are UP! Now with corrected Match Schedule (27-01-09)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

CCP Mindstar

Posted - 2009.01.25 22:35:00 - [1]
 

Team Rankings

Match Schedule

Please reply here if you see any discrepancies, and think your team is on the incorrect number of points.

Exolon
Caldari
Nefantar Tribe
The Wrong Alliance
Posted - 2009.01.25 22:53:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Exolon on 25/01/2009 22:59:47
May i ask you why The Wrong Alliance have 119 point? We won the match with flawless victory, and didn't loose any ship.Shocked

Ryder McGrump
Gallente
Stargate SG-1
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2009.01.25 23:01:00 - [3]
 

Edited by: Ryder McGrump on 25/01/2009 23:09:02
Edited by: Ryder McGrump on 25/01/2009 23:07:50
Maybe it's me...but shouldn't the teams with a flawless points score be reversed in number order....currently the top rank team is in that position as their first round opponents finished higher than everyone else's....should that spot not be taken by the team with the 125 score who's opponents finished lowest from the 64 ?

ie.. Puppett masters are in top spot with 125...their opponents finished 33rd..

10th legion on the same points (125) had their opponents finish 63rd...should they not be in top spot ? due to the fact that they had less in points loss than appears everyone above them....the fact that their opponents were DQ's is irrelevant..they had no ships lost... :-)

Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
Posted - 2009.01.25 23:03:00 - [4]
 

hahahah we got 1 point, how did we manage 1 point Shocked

****ing hell, 2nd match of the day on saturday. way too damn early Sad

and yea 10:20 am is way too damn early to get up on a weekend for a vidoegame.

Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
Spreadsheets Online
Posted - 2009.01.25 23:03:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Exolon
May i ask you why The Wrong Alliance have 119 point? They won the match with flawless victory, that means didn't loose any ship.Shocked

Hmm. They didn't lose any ships and they used 100 points right on.

CCP Mindstar

Posted - 2009.01.25 23:04:00 - [6]
 

Just a quick FYI. We will take down the schedule for now, as we will resolve any rankings disputes before finalising the matches.

We will post the schedule again in a day or so.

Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
Spreadsheets Online
Posted - 2009.01.25 23:06:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
hahahah we got 1 point, how did we manage 1 point Shocked


Gallente fw only used 99 points of 100.

Shaak'Ti
Caldari
The All-Seeing Eye
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.01.25 23:12:00 - [8]
 

we were to fast ? 3min not enough for a good show -> 6 points penalty ? =)

Trevedian
Amarr
Shaolin Monks
Posted - 2009.01.25 23:31:00 - [9]
 

Woot! We still have a chance...


Joe Shooter
You is Trollin' Enterprises.
Posted - 2009.01.25 23:33:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Ryder McGrump
Edited by: Ryder McGrump on 25/01/2009 23:09:02
Edited by: Ryder McGrump on 25/01/2009 23:07:50
Maybe it's me...but shouldn't the teams with a flawless points score be reversed in number order....currently the top rank team is in that position as their first round opponents finished higher than everyone else's....should that spot not be taken by the team with the 125 score who's opponents finished lowest from the 64 ?

ie.. Puppett masters are in top spot with 125...their opponents finished 33rd..

10th legion on the same points (125) had their opponents finish 63rd...should they not be in top spot ? due to the fact that they had less in points loss than appears everyone above them....the fact that their opponents were DQ's is irrelevant..they had no ships lost... :-)


Isn't this something to do with the fact it's based on this 'resistance' thing whereby the team that managed to beat such a successful loser must therefore be uber and not fail.

Tbh it does seem a bit borked after just one round, but it does make sense as a system.

Mistress Suffering
Einherjar Rising
Cry Havoc.
Posted - 2009.01.26 00:23:00 - [11]
 

According to this model, the way to get highest ranking is to let your opponent kill a bunch of your ships before finishing them off.

Not really worth a big stress-fest over though, since all those 125s will be tie-broken by whatever they kill this next round. With this format there haven't been a lot of 0 point losses.

Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
Posted - 2009.01.26 02:28:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Jason Edwards
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
hahahah we got 1 point, how did we manage 1 point Shocked


Gallente fw only used 99 points of 100.


that gives us points Laughing wtf?

that really doesn't make any sense.

and if you couldn't tell I don't think anyone had any clue what was/is going on in IDLE Laughing

Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
Posted - 2009.01.26 02:31:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Joe Shooter
Originally by: Ryder McGrump
Edited by: Ryder McGrump on 25/01/2009 23:09:02
Edited by: Ryder McGrump on 25/01/2009 23:07:50
Maybe it's me...but shouldn't the teams with a flawless points score be reversed in number order....currently the top rank team is in that position as their first round opponents finished higher than everyone else's....should that spot not be taken by the team with the 125 score who's opponents finished lowest from the 64 ?

ie.. Puppett masters are in top spot with 125...their opponents finished 33rd..

10th legion on the same points (125) had their opponents finish 63rd...should they not be in top spot ? due to the fact that they had less in points loss than appears everyone above them....the fact that their opponents were DQ's is irrelevant..they had no ships lost... :-)


Isn't this something to do with the fact it's based on this 'resistance' thing whereby the team that managed to beat such a successful loser must therefore be uber and not fail.

Tbh it does seem a bit borked after just one round, but it does make sense as a system.


go gallente navy faction warfare team! they should be number 1.

unless someone else got a flawless victory where the other team fielded 100 points.

jst tstng
Posted - 2009.01.26 02:37:00 - [14]
 

Quote:
Maybe it's me...but shouldn't the teams with a flawless points score be reversed in number order....currently the top rank team is in that position as their first round opponents finished higher than everyone else's....should that spot not be taken by the team with the 125 score who's opponents finished lowest from the 64 ?


As I understand it "Last Opponent Rank" should be opponent points scored or something like that. Meaning those are the points you let your opponent score against you.

Faraelle Brightman
Gallente
Eleutherian Guard
Posted - 2009.01.26 03:11:00 - [15]
 

And as I understand it it roughly translates to "if points scored are equal, the team that had to fight harder against their opponent to win (figured by how many points they scored against you which translates to how high the looser is in the rankings) gets the higher rank."

In other words, a total wtfpwn is worth less in the standings than a hard fought close match.

You can argue it I guess but once it gets to the finals it won't matter as I think points are reset and it goes to single elimination brackets.

Faraelle Brightman
Gallente
Eleutherian Guard
Posted - 2009.01.26 03:14:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton


and if you couldn't tell I don't think anyone had any clue what was/is going on in IDLE Laughing


Curious minds want to know, however!

Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
Spreadsheets Online
Posted - 2009.01.26 05:44:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
Originally by: Jason Edwards
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
hahahah we got 1 point, how did we manage 1 point Shocked


Gallente fw only used 99 points of 100.


that gives us points Laughing wtf?

that really doesn't make any sense.

and if you couldn't tell I don't think anyone had any clue what was/is going on in IDLE Laughing

Ya it's in the rules.


1. Each team has 100 points to select their ships. Teams must use a minimum of 75 points.
2. Each team may have up to 10 ships on the battlefield.
3. Unused points will be added to the opponents score.

The Pie
Amarr
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2009.01.26 06:13:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton
hahahah we got 1 point, how did we manage 1 point Shocked

****ing hell, 2nd match of the day on saturday. way too damn early Sad

and yea 10:20 am is way too damn early to get up on a weekend for a vidoegame.


Half our team woke up at 6am to prepare for 7am match (15:00, first match on sunday)

Q_Q

Cazzir
Caldari
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
The Fourth District
Posted - 2009.01.26 07:43:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Cazzir on 26/01/2009 07:46:12
I see us (the fourth district) on 105pts. As our opponents fielded 99pts worth of ships which were all destroyed and we won therefore claiming a 25% pt bonus (rounding up) I make our total to be 124pts. Which we can then add the 1pt unused by our opponents bringing us upto the magic 125pts. Not sure how you came up with 105pts...

YChin Mei
The All-Seeing Eye
Posted - 2009.01.26 09:06:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: YChin Mei on 26/01/2009 11:35:35
Originally by: Cazzir
Edited by: Cazzir on 26/01/2009 07:46:12
I see us (the fourth district) on 105pts. As our opponents fielded 99pts worth of ships which were all destroyed and we won therefore claiming a 25% pt bonus (rounding up) I make our total to be 124pts. Which we can then add the 1pt unused by our opponents bringing us upto the magic 125pts. Not sure how you came up with 105pts...


Oh, i see, you want to fight against PL at any cost, dont u? Very Happy (just kidding ofc)

To my Hungarian mates in The Wrong Alliance: Although it wont change your ranking whether you have 125 or 119 pts, but you earned 125 pts and it does matter how many points do you acquire during the qualifying rounds, so you are totally right. Wink
Hajrá magyarok!! Smile

Shaak'Ti
Caldari
The All-Seeing Eye
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.01.26 09:50:00 - [21]
 

Yap, we make the best what can we do in this match. Kill all enemy, no losses, we were really fast. We can't do it better. =( we want the max points.

Go G00DFELLAS ! Go HUN Reloaded ! .. Hajrá Magyarok !


CCP Mindstar

Posted - 2009.01.26 10:19:00 - [22]
 

As mentioned by the teams in question, it looks like we made a couple of minor errors in the rush to update all the stats and get next weeks schedule out. As such, the following teams should be on full points:

- The Fourth District
- The Wrong Alliance

The teams rankings will be updated accordingly later today, once we double check the whole lot. This will cause a few of the matchups to change slightly from the schedule that was originally posted last night, which will also be placed back online later today.


If you are in an alliance other than the two mentioned above, and you think you have the incorrect number of points - please speak up now!

HUN GHud
Nefantar Tribe
Posted - 2009.01.26 12:07:00 - [23]
 

Wtf Hungarian hax?

Btw, I suggest you CCP next time to clarify how points should be calculated through examples as this time was a little bit confusing - or simply I don't have the brain to see clearly. Razz

CCP Mindstar

Posted - 2009.01.26 12:16:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: HUN GHud
Wtf Hungarian hax?

Btw, I suggest you CCP next time to clarify how points should be calculated through examples as this time was a little bit confusing - or simply I don't have the brain to see clearly. Razz


Total points are calculated by:

Unused points of opponent + Ships killed

If you win, you get an extra 25%


sliver 0xD
exiles.
Posted - 2009.01.26 12:25:00 - [25]
 

is there any news on who will go vs who next week ?

will the points now have any effect on that list? or will it be completly random ?


CCP Mindstar

Posted - 2009.01.26 12:28:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: sliver 0xD
is there any news on who will go vs who next week ?

will the points now have any effect on that list? or will it be completly random ?




The rankings have a direct effect on that list. We aim to have the match listings for next week back online tonight or early tomorrow.

The match ups will be in order of rank, so 1v2, 3v4, 5v6, 7v8 ... 63 v 64. If the ranks change, the matchups change (only slightly at this stage).


Varbind
Caldari
SniggWaffe
Posted - 2009.01.26 14:24:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: CCP Mindstar

The rankings have a direct effect on that list. We aim to have the match listings for next week back online tonight or early tomorrow.

The match ups will be in order of rank, so 1v2, 3v4, 5v6, 7v8 ... 63 v 64. If the ranks change, the matchups change (only slightly at this stage).




I do not see how that match up system is fair. The better you do the harder the opponent you have. Doesn't seem right.

Lucius Rex
Minmatar
Rex Enterprises
Posted - 2009.01.26 15:11:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: Lucius Rex on 26/01/2009 15:11:52
Quote:
I do not see how that match up system is fair. The better you do the harder the opponent you have. Doesn't seem right.


Welcome to the swiss matchup system. It works well for chess, Magic the Gathering and Warhammer tournaments.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2009.01.26 17:32:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 26/01/2009 17:33:01
The Swiss system is far superior to others in this case, who wants to see/listen to a match up called: Tyson vs Billy "The Beer Belly" Johnson?

Besides, with the prizes what they are I think most people are in this for bragging rights which you just don't get wading through weak-sauce to the finals Laughing

By the way, has anyone calculated the average match length this year, I have a feeling the no Logistics has had a massive impact .. some matches seem awfully short ... hahahaha

csebal
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
Posted - 2009.01.26 17:44:00 - [30]
 

I would really hate to drag this out any further, but please tell me how the current second criteria is locical. Teams now, that had perfect matches - kind of THD from earlier tournaments are ranker lower than teams who lost half their fleet.

Swiss system says, having a higher score opponent lose against you must mean you are better than someone losing against a lower score opponent, which is fine.

But in here, especially in the first round, where all opponents are equal in score, having a higher 'opponents' score actually means you did suck more than those who did kill their opponents without giving them points.

I could imagine something like this instead: points scored - points the opponent scored. If thats equal, then go ahead with the other criteria, like the point total of the opponents BEFORE this round, whether you did fight eachother in the past, initial draw, etc.

Currently its just weird.


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only