popeye, on Sep 30 2004, 10:15 AM, said:
I disagree with that. The event character of tourneys is what makes them attractive. Everybody who wants to play certain persons once in a while can do so by showing up on the tracker more frequently. (Hello Mr. SHOES, Mr. Eno! :))
I think the whole idea of continuing this is that it does bring more people onto the tracker more often, thus stopping it from looking quite so dead. Almost nobody spends any time on it otherwise (with the exception mainly of people who have already posted in this topic). The league system does not require everyone to play each round - and encourages new people to join whenever they want. If we were to play fewer rounds, then whilst maybe some people might not be bothered (although then their positions will slip) or be able to make every event; chances are they will try to make it because it will not involve taking up nearly so much time. They could always leave after one round if they so wished.
popeye, on Sep 30 2004, 10:15 AM, said:
Ryoko, I think your view on that topic is a very sportive one, but that's only half of the business. The social aspect of tourneys shouldn't be underestimated, it's fun meeting all the other players, even if skills don't match. Playing against lots of different opponents is also helping the less abled players to improve or at least get a glance of what's possible in the world of Pop-Pop.
Talking a lot during tournaments is generally bad because it slows down the process for everyone (unless you have finished al your games). People can always (and often do) stay on and chat afterwards if they wish. ^^ I agree it is useful to meet lots of new players but I disagree that all of them will want to be repeatedly thrashed by lots of veterans. It can be very demoralising! (and incidentally, nemo-san, you do not suck; we just practice more ^^;; )
popeye, on Sep 30 2004, 10:15 AM, said:
Last but not least there can be some surprises (n'est-ce pas Ryoko, Ducky?) that I don't want to miss.
Why is that a surprise?! -.-* Please stop inferring things about me in side-comments, you did that in the results section too. Shoes-san, hyko-san, and eccles-san at least can all beat me easily if they are on form. Having only ever played that one round against Ducky, why should it be a surprise if he came top of his side that he beat me?
popeye, on Sep 30 2004, 10:15 AM, said:
This points into the direction of a Pop-Pop-league that was brought into discussion some meters (or feet) earlier. I think that's a good idea. Having less frequent classic tourneys isn't as good an idea. I already started discussing the league thing with Hyko, it seems to come down to absentee rules, organisation and timing. Could make up a new topic on this board.
For a bump-race-tourney, three rounds are minimum to justify the effort of bringing a bunch of people from around the globe together at the same time.
(...)
I'd really go for having classic and bump-race tourneys alternating, say every two to three weeks. Or, if technical possible, establish a Bump-o-Matic Pop-Race-LeagueŠ and have lots of classic tourneys in addition.
You seem to be contradicting what you said in your first paragraph here. I merely meant (and agree with you entirely) that 'classic' tournaments ought to be considered an event, and therefore only happen at a frequency where that is the case. (in other words, they are less frequent than league gatherings). The question is what the correct frequency is...
Tatoeba dokomade modorebaii? Oshiete
Subete wa Itami wo tomonauhodo azayaka.
We all had that discussion a long time ago with anklebiter-san, and to be fair he was in some ways correct to try and hold them more frequently than the majority wanted -- namely because it at least kept people on the tracker (something, as I said, I would like to see happen with the league, if possible). He also kept the board alive to a certain extent, though in some cases only with posts that might questionably be better off having been left unsaid.
Regardless, one topic that was mentioned at the time was the fact that people wanted a long time between tournaments to plan ahead for them. However, history shows that (with one notable exception) even with plenty of time, the turnout was never significantly higher than when the tournaments were more frequent. Also, the response rate from people to the posted topics (even those specifically asking for when they are free) was often lower than the number of frames per second in a third-rate c-class anime ^_^;; (and still is). I do not intend to be (or sound) 'holier than thou' about responding to tournament requests, I almost never do because (as I have said afore often enough) I almost never know whether I can make it or not until the day itself at the earliest. I suspect this is the same for most people, but at least I have said it.
So, hence the idea of a league springing out of what to do about tournaments that got more people and took too long. It is just an experiment, but the initial discussions were for it to be as a league, and the rules were made as such. That's what the bumps race is in real life after all - you only row one round a day in that! Yet somehow, despite only happening one week each year (and only for four days of that week!), 2000 or so people are ready to train for a good half year before hand (if not constantly all year round) to participate. There, it can be all be over in under ten seconds each day, and people enjoy it. True, it is not exactly my cup of tea, but I will still go and watch. ^_^;
So I dispute your three round minimum idea, along with other ideas for knockouts from the league etc. The league (if it is continued) is not a tournament per se, rather a frequent gathering of around 60% (hopefully more) of the players that are still out there. An attempt to try and show some of the new people who do occasionally show up that there are actually other people out there. From my own entirely selfish point of view - chances are that I might be able to make more gatherings if they are going to be short! ^_^
Of course, this is not to say that longer league matches like the one we just did cannot happen, and (of course) tournaments (in the 'classic' sense) should definitely continue on as well. ^_^ I would just like to see players on and playing on a more frequent basis. I would like to view this topic in five hours time, when I need to be up and at work, and see someone (preferably new) has replied to this post. I would like to view the tracker and see four other people already online. I would like to view this board and pretend I did not see that other topic by Isbiten7 with eighteen views and only two responses... Surely another ten people can come out and say 'yes, I play too'. Or are we all too lazy?
It might give this disgustingly apathetic board a bit of hope.
And this dying game.
(/rant)
popeye, on Sep 30 2004, 10:15 AM, said:
I don't see a way to establish a time-limit for rounds as I know only ONE person that is able to play pop AND read (e.g. a clock) at the same time! 
see comment above re ONE person. However I think you are right, in that any sort of enforcement of a time limit is probably doomed to failure... I cannot see a way it would work either - especially since you might get mouse problems, disconnects and other fun happening during the limit too.
popeye, on Sep 30 2004, 10:15 AM, said:
Maybe 2 wins out of three would do instead.
View Post
Two rounds is definitely a thought, though it might cause a rethink in the shuffling rules between rounds? I suppose it is worth considering though ^.^
