Would you participate

[jim beam]

Well since masa had to say I had an idea I guess ill share it.
And Please remember its only an idea

I was thinking of having people sign up in pairs. Say masa and butters wanted to be on a team
and i wanted to be on a team with gator. That way if i get put on a team with masa and butters I would have gator as a friend on my team some im not surrounded by people i dont like(bad example cause butters is cool even though he goes to boise state.) The pairs would be picked rather randomly most likly. Or we would take X number of pairs say 8(if there were going to be 8 teams) and the other two spots are picked by a random number generator. But that might be a little complicated and not happen who knows. I just want to get community feed back to make this enjoyable for everyone. Cause i dont remember what happend with the last one or who ran it. All i remember is it ran smooth and I had fun losing.

[Guardian]

[quote="jim beam";p="212637"]Well since masa had to say I had an idea I guess ill share it.
And Please remember its only an idea

I was thinking of having people sign up in pairs. Say masa and butters wanted to be on a team
and i wanted to be on a team with gator. That way if i get put on a team with masa and butters I would have gator as a friend on my team some im not surrounded by people i dont like(bad example cause butters is cool even though he goes to boise state.) The pairs would be picked rather randomly most likly. Or we would take X number of pairs say 8(if there were going to be 8 teams) and the other two spots are picked by a random number generator. But that might be a little complicated and not happen who knows. I just want to get community feed back to make this enjoyable for everyone. Cause i dont remember what happend with the last one or who ran it. All i remember is it ran smooth and I had fun losing.[/quote]

Sounds cool.

[NoahTheBoa]

You wouldn't need a random number generator, just order the pairs in the order they sign up and use a table of random digits to pick teams

[Araris]

[quote="Stevo";p="212582"]I prefer best of 3. 5 just draws it out too long...[/quote]

THIS. In my experience if a team is going to roll you it's going to roll you, better just get it over with.

[Plinko]

I am not really a fan of the pairs idea, I'd prefer someone just picks teams. Sounds like trying to get a date for the middle school dance!

[Oddjob]

Since L4D is so dependent on teammates I think it would be fun to at least pick some of the people we are playing with. I would like to work with the people I typically play with day in and day out.

[Plinko]

On the other hand, as I suggested to Masa the other day ' it's a Ville event, what are the odds you're going to be on a team of 4 with someone you don't know??'

[TheCarpe]

[quote="Oddjob";p="213170"]Since L4D is so dependent on teammates I think it would be fun to at least pick some of the people we are playing with. I would like to work with the people I typically play with day in and day out.[/quote]

This is what we -don't- want to prevent the uber team with tons of practice from rolling everyone.

[ShadyJane]

Since I typically do nothing around here I figured I’d try something new. Also everyone is out of the office on vacation and I’m bored…really bored.

Anyway I tallied the names of the people who expressed interest in participating in a Scavenge Tourney (see below). If you are not on that list, but would like to join in, please post something expressing that intent. I added a few names under maybe that did not express interest but who I’ve played L4D2 with recently (IronWolf & Steveio) or Princess who has posted in length about Scavenge. In total I have 29 names. 38 people voted so I have to be missing some. I’m hoping for at least 40 – first round starts with 5 games.

Moving on, I really think the teams have to be random. No picking, no signing up in pairs, just a straight up roll of the dice. However, in order to hedge the risk of a “stacked” team occurring by random, I thought maybe the scoring could be done differently. Winning a round will still garner the most points, but you could include additional points for gas cans scored vs gas cans allowed. I also think adding points for kills would be a healthy addition. If you score your 16th can with only one survivor alive, then the opposing team should get points for those three kills. It could help balance for those who are great as survivors but stink as infected (they might always get 16 cans, but are incapable of damaging the other team or stopping them from scoring) and vice versa.

Of course, I think we should fine tune the notions of scoring collectively, but I don’t think it should be restricted to just who wins or loses that particular round. This may also have the adverse affect of becoming too complicated so I’m also open to throwing away all of these ideas and following someone else’s lead. I’m looking forward to this coming to fruition at some point. Let’s keep the discussion alive!

Definite (20): Jim Beam, Plinko, TheCarpe, Kilgore Trout, Guardian, NoahtheBoa, Doobop, Rigges, Bronze Fox, Red Seal, BETTEH, BigBiker05, Cool Guy, Clay Pigeon, Masakari, gator, ShadyJane, Stevo, Araris, Oddjob

Maybe (9): TTHREAZ, bullet4o1, mr_s, Grapedrink, Gizanked, Shifty, Steveio, Ironwolf, Princess

[Jesus_Faction]

I'm interested

[Ironwolf]

I didnt post here, but I did vote a maybe depending on the rules and such.

[Cpt. Winky]

I voted yes, sounds fun!

[Rits]

I didn't post here either, but given if I'm moved into my new place and have my internet up and running before the event, I'd love to participate. I voted yes.

[Thorn]

couldn't we do like, a controlled random assignment? Like assign each player a skill value 1-4. Four even groups of 1-4, and then random the teams making sure each team has a 1,2,3 and 4?

You wouldn't have to do 4 groups either, you could do 1-3. and each team makeup would be like, 1,2,3,3. So that group 3 would have twice as many people, ect ect.

Point is, it could be done lots of ways, but this way we could have the benefits of random assignment and some semblance of inter-team balance for EVERY team. Because even with random assignment, the odds of getting at least 1 team with like, three "1s" is pretty high since the team size is so small (4). In a game like TF2 where you have 9-12 people, the odds of getting a super stacked team goes down quite a bit, not so for L4D

[Guardian]

[quote="Thorn";p="213736"]couldn't we do like, a controlled random assignment? Like assign each player a skill value 1-4. Four even groups of 1-4, and then random the teams making sure each team has a 1,2,3 and 4?

You wouldn't have to do 4 groups either, you could do 1-3. and each team makeup would be like, 1,2,3,3. So that group 3 would have twice as many people, ect ect.

Point is, it could be done lots of ways, but this way we could have the benefits of random assignment and some semblance of inter-team balance for EVERY team. Because even with random assignment, the odds of getting at least 1 team with like, three "1s" is pretty high since the team size is so small (4). In a game like TF2 where you have 9-12 people, the odds of getting a super stacked team goes down quite a bit, not so for L4D[/quote]

Trying to decide one person's skill level is difficult, let alone everyone in a tournament. Also team sync (the ability to work with the people your playing with) is more important in L4D then skill level, which is also why it's so frustrating at times.

I think the pairs idea would work better.