Abishai wrote:

berickf wrote:

BTdubs wrote:

And have we considered options like keeping the monthly format as it is but adding a rule that you can only win once every X months?  How close is the competition under berickf?

It's very close.  A different person seems to follow me every month, and, before I became interested in it a different person won it nearly every month...

See here: http://www.wargear.net/rankings/winners

There are a couple repeat winners but no consecutive winners till I decided to put my stamp on it.

Just because a different player is getting 2nd place doesn't make the competition very close. The margins can still be wide between first and second no matter which player is in that spot. Sorry, had to point out the fallacy in that arguement.

An interesting concept, though it seems that the same boards might be played a lot, especially dueling boards, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.  Getting people who exclusively play WGWF to try out other boards is a worthy goal, and good for the site.

I think a team tournament with a prize would be cool if we were able to reserve seats.

Abishai wrote:

berickf wrote:

BTdubs wrote:

And have we considered options like keeping the monthly format as it is but adding a rule that you can only win once every X months?  How close is the competition under berickf?

It's very close.  A different person seems to follow me every month, and, before I became interested in it a different person won it nearly every month...

See here: http://www.wargear.net/rankings/winners

There are a couple repeat winners but no consecutive winners till I decided to put my stamp on it.

Just because a different player is getting 2nd place doesn't make the competition very close. The margins can still be wide between first and second no matter which player is in that spot. Sorry, had to point out the fallacy in that arguement.

 

 

"competition under berickf', by definition, ignores the margin between myself and the next and specifically asks about the margin between the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th place, etc.  Click on the link provided and you'll see that the competition is usually very close and diverse below me from month to month.  So, sorry, but there is no fallacy in the argument.  Even look at the months that preceded my involvement and the same can be said... That the margins were small and new winners emerged on a monthly basis.  The competition was close before, and after I joined it remained close below me.  The only other player to have a run-away month was Babba.

charlesdale wrote:

My suggestion is for Wargear to host 5 tournaments each month with the prize of not only a trophy for each winner, but also 3 months of membership fees credited to their account. That would be a total prize value of $50 each month. I suggest each month, the boards used for the 5 tournaments to be chosen based on the most popular tournaments that were created in the previous month. This could be a way to kind of "spread the wealth" a little bit in regard to tournament prizes. I would set each of the 5 tournaments to accept about 25 players.

I like the idea of having several tournaments with the winners of these tournaments all entered into a final tournament for the prize.

berickf wrote:

Abishai wrote:

berickf wrote:

BTdubs wrote:

And have we considered options like keeping the monthly format as it is but adding a rule that you can only win once every X months?  How close is the competition under berickf?

It's very close.  A different person seems to follow me every month, and, before I became interested in it a different person won it nearly every month...

See here: http://www.wargear.net/rankings/winners

There are a couple repeat winners but no consecutive winners till I decided to put my stamp on it.

Just because a different player is getting 2nd place doesn't make the competition very close. The margins can still be wide between first and second no matter which player is in that spot. Sorry, had to point out the fallacy in that arguement.

 

 

"competition under berickf', by definition, ignores the margin between myself and the next and specifically asks about the margin between the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th place, etc.  Click on the link provided and you'll see that the competition is usually very close and diverse below me from month to month.  So, sorry, but there is no fallacy in the argument.  Even look at the months that preceded my involvement and the same can be said... That the margins were small and new winners emerged on a monthly basis.  The competition was close before, and after I joined it remained close below me.  The only other player to have a run-away month was Babba.

I interpret that as "how close is the competition under berickf" to berickf, not to eachother.  I assume that is what he meant by it. How close the competition is to eachother would have very little meaning if the margin between you and the competition was still wide. 

charlesdale wrote:

My suggestion is for Wargear to host 5 tournaments each month with the prize of not only a trophy for each winner, but also 3 months of membership fees credited to their account. That would be a total prize value of $50 each month. I suggest each month, the boards used for the 5 tournaments to be chosen based on the most popular tournaments that were created in the previous month. This could be a way to kind of "spread the wealth" a little bit in regard to tournament prizes. I would set each of the 5 tournaments to accept about 25 players.

Also, I recommend limiting players to be able to join only 2 of the 5 tournaments each month. Otherwise I might win all of them. Just kidding on that last part.

How close the competition is to eachother would have very little meaning if the margin between you and the competition was still wide. 

And yet that is still what was being discussed.

charlesdale wrote:

My suggestion is for Wargear to host 5 tournaments each month with the prize of not only a trophy for each winner, but also 3 months of membership fees credited to their account. That would be a total prize value of $50 each month. I suggest each month, the boards used for the 5 tournaments to be chosen based on the most popular tournaments that were created in the previous month. This could be a way to kind of "spread the wealth" a little bit in regard to tournament prizes. I would set each of the 5 tournaments to accept about 25 players.

I kind of like the idea of one big tournament each month. It sounds more exciting and IMO would attract more attention.  This way a player could sign up for a single tournament and enjoy all the potential benefit. Tournaments can last a few months and having 10 or even 15 live tournaments is just not feasible to a lot of people. My suggestion would be $50 to the winner and a free 3 month premium membership to 2nd place to activate whenever they want. 50 dollars cash at stake every month, to do something  you enjoy, could be a HUGE draw to the site!

I interpret that as "how close is the competition under berickf" to berickf, not to eachother.  I assume that is what he meant by it. How close the competition is to eachother would have very little meaning if the margin between you and the competition was still wide. 

Happy to clarify: I meant how close would the competition be if berickf were not included.  It already seems clear that berickf is more than capable of dominating the current setup.

My question was intended to get at whether declaring him some sort of perma-winner (or limiting winners to once a year) and then allowing the rest of us to go at it would be satisfactory. Seems simpler than inventing a new system.

BTdubs wrote:

I interpret that as "how close is the competition under berickf" to berickf, not to eachother.  I assume that is what he meant by it. How close the competition is to eachother would have very little meaning if the margin between you and the competition was still wide. 

Happy to clarify: I meant how close would the competition be if berickf were not included.  It already seems clear that berickf is more than capable of dominating the current setup.

My question was intended to get at whether declaring him some sort of perma-winner (or limiting winners to once a year) and then allowing the rest of us to go at it would be satisfactory. Seems simpler than inventing a new system.

My apologies then good sirs.

I do, however, believe an official monthly tournament would be better for the site. I have nothing to gain by the proposal,  it's just my honest assessment.  I think the reason why Tom is looking at changing it is not because berickf keeps winning, but because the current system is looking quite stale with its impact on motivating the overall community and retention. 

Noone else has any opinion on this possible big change for the site?

I was very active in competing to get in top 10 of monthly competition when I had a free month premium membership, since then, I only check the standings at the end of the month, and I know I'm nowhere in the running for top 10 because I'm not that good and I don't have the time to play the number of games needed to get me in the running. 

So, I think a monthly tourney would be cool, and get newbies and outsiders involved. Q: Would you start a new tourney each month even if the last one hasn't finished? 

Also, I like the idea of keeping the monthly rankings and monthly top 10, but that's probably more work for Tom. I wouldn't mind seeing annual rankings (with annual recognition or badge), that would help look at who are the best (relatively) current active players