These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Dev blog: Alliance Tournament XI Rules and Signups

First post First post
Author
CCP Gargant
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2013-05-29 14:39:29 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Gargant
The official format and rules of the Alliance Tournament XI have been released. CCP Bro, on behalf of the Tournament Team, has brought you a fancy blog full of numbers and fun facts to get you all acquainted with the way the AT XI will run once it kicks off mid-July. There are a number of changes to the rules both from the previous Alliance Tournament and the New Eden Open so we advise you guys to scan it thoroughly.

Go here to read it.

Any questions you may have for the Tournament Team regarding this blog will be answered here. I hope you will all join us in excitement for this years' Alliance Tournament, because it is going to be a blast!

CCP Gargant | EVE Universe esports Coordinator

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#2 - 2013-05-29 14:41:08 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
First! I think you guys enjoy this tournament, we've made some significant changes to the rules and to the pre-tournament process to hopefully get us some great competition.

:Edit:
Important change from the original rules governing implants:

Quote:
Genolution "CA-" implants are NOT allowed.

With the exception of leadership Mindlinks, only Hardwirings that have a name ending in "1", "2" or "3" are allowed.

Leadership Mindlinks are allowed.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

CCP BunnyVirus
C C P
C C P Alliance
#3 - 2013-05-29 14:46:30 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Gargant
CCP Fozzie wrote:
First!


second

[EDIT: We have clarified a bit more on the Cybernetics 3 only rule, you can find it under the Fitting Restrictions section. Also, BunnyVirus's post now has content, which means I don't have to delete it - CCP Gargant]

3D Artist

CCP FoxFour
C C P
C C P Alliance
#4 - 2013-05-29 14:48:27 UTC
THIS IS GOING TO BE AWESOME! :D

@CCP_FoxFour // Technical Designer // Team Tech Co

Third-party developer? Check out the official developers site for dev blogs, resources, and more.

Chitsa Jason
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#5 - 2013-05-29 14:50:49 UTC
I am so hoping to make it in this year :)

Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me

Nicen Jehr
Subsidy H.R.S.
Xagenic Freymvork
#6 - 2013-05-29 14:58:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicen Jehr
Quote:
The finals will be a best of five series, with the team entering from the winners bracket starting one win up.
Could you explain further? Does the double elimination format split the 64 teams into a 32 team winners bracket and a 32 team losers bracket? Does this mean that, in the final match, the team from the losers bracket can win 3 bouts of 5, and still only tie with the team from the winners bracket 3-3?
Also tidi and explicit legality of Gnosis should make matches especially interesting :D
Quote:
Minimum entry payment has been reduced to 5 plex
More good news
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#7 - 2013-05-29 15:02:25 UTC
Nicen Jehr wrote:
Quote:
The finals will be a best of five series, with the team entering from the winners bracket starting one win up.
Could you explain further? Does the double elimination split the 64 teams into a 32 player winners bracket and a 32 players losers bracket? Does this mean that, in the final match, the team from the losers bracket can win 3 bouts of 5, and still tie with the team from the winners bracket 3-3?

Also tidi and explicit legality of Gnosis should make matches especially interesting :D


Not really. People drop to the losers bracket whenever they lose their first match, so the population of each side of the brakcet is constantly changing. The finals are essentially a best of 5 but with the first match already magically played with the team from the winners bracket up one.

This might help clarify: http://www.erasabletournamentbrackets.com/pdf/double-seeded-64-team.pdf

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Nicen Jehr
Subsidy H.R.S.
Xagenic Freymvork
#8 - 2013-05-29 15:03:59 UTC
Assuming there are 64 players and no draws... wouldn't exactly 32 teams lose their first match and move to the losers' bracket, after the first 32 matches were complete?
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
#9 - 2013-05-29 15:04:23 UTC
This is going to be epic :O

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.

Laura Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#10 - 2013-05-29 15:05:55 UTC
Are you going to make up any additional rules after the final is played? CCP is pretty good at that!
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#11 - 2013-05-29 15:07:31 UTC
Nicen Jehr wrote:
Assuming there are 64 players and no draws... wouldn't exactly 32 teams lose their first match and move to the losers' bracket, after the first 32 matches were complete?


Yes, but then in each subsequent stage half of the members of the winners bracket move to the losers bracket to partially replace the people getting knocked out of the losers bracket.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
Coalition of the Unfortunate
#12 - 2013-05-29 15:09:19 UTC
"Time dilation will be used to progressively speed up the solar system".

Damn, that's going to be interesting to see. Reverse TIDI.
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#13 - 2013-05-29 15:09:41 UTC
So no Mindlinks? Can you confirm that?

Winner ATXI , 3rd place ATXII, winner ATXIII, 2nd ATXIV - follow me on twitter: @ForlornW

Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
#14 - 2013-05-29 15:17:05 UTC
peeew peewwwww

★★★ Secure 3rd party service ★★★

Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'

Twitter @ChribbaVeldspar

Nicen Jehr
Subsidy H.R.S.
Xagenic Freymvork
#15 - 2013-05-29 15:25:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicen Jehr
The PDF explains the format well, I suggest adding the link to the devblog, because I and probably others weren't familiar with a double elimination format.

I think you shouldn't give the winners' bracket champion the extra point in the final round.

Team A loses their first match, Team B wins their first match. Both teams win every successive match in their respective brackets; B is now the Winners Champion and A is the Losers Champion.
B is 6-0; A is 10-1.

Now the best-of-five final begins, here are the possible scores after this match:

Possible final match scores
A vs B
5....1
4....2
3....3
2....4
1....5
0....6

So A must win four or five out of five games in the final match to win the tournament.
If A wins, A is 11-1 vs B's 6-1. If B wins, A is 10-2 vs B's 7-0.

I don't like gimping A, because IMO the whole point of double elimination is to give ppl a second chance. If A makes it through the whole losers bracket without a loss, they deserve to challenge the winner on fair ground.


EDIT: reading more carefully: there are only four rounds played in 'the best of five final'

A vs B
4....1
3....2
2....3
1....4
0....5

Chribba wrote:
peeew peewwwww
psst they're shooting players not rocks!
Kumq uat
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2013-05-29 15:27:41 UTC
Wait wait wait wait. I don't even remember seeing this May 15th thing posted. Seems idiocy to post a join date before you even post the announcement of the tourney and rules and so forth. If that stands we do not have a legit team and I will be VERY disappointed.
Laura Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#17 - 2013-05-29 15:29:01 UTC
Kumq uat wrote:
Wait wait wait wait. I don't even remember seeing this May 15th thing posted. Seems idiocy to post a join date before you even post the announcement of the tourney and rules and so forth. If that stands we do not have a legit team and I will be VERY disappointed.


sux 2 b u

(this team padding **** is exactly what they were trying to counter)
Fr0stle
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2013-05-29 15:30:35 UTC
Forlorn Wongraven wrote:
So no Mindlinks? Can you confirm that?

I'd like to see this clarified too please.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#19 - 2013-05-29 15:31:06 UTC
Kumq uat wrote:
Wait wait wait wait. I don't even remember seeing this May 15th thing posted. Seems idiocy to post a join date before you even post the announcement of the tourney and rules and so forth. If that stands we do not have a legit team and I will be VERY disappointed.


We announced it on May 15th in another dev blog. A lot of people have been discussing that rule change in the comments thread for that dev blog, the main response I posted there was:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey guys. The early cutoff was put in place because we intend the Alliance Tournament to be about people representing their alliances, whatever that alliance may be, instead of the kind of club-team system you see with the NEO or SCL (which help fill that need very well).

In cases where a corp or member are caught by surprise outside of *their* alliance for one reason or another, we can make exceptions to get them back in. What we don't want is people jumping from one alliance to another just for the tournament.

Look at it this way: that Alliance Tournament is essentially the Olympic Games of EVE. People can move from one country to another, but it's intended that you represent the country that you claim as your own the whole year round.

If you have a request for an exception, send a petition to the community queue and we'll take a look. But if you're trying to move from your home alliance to another one just for the tournament, I don't expect we'll grant those requests.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Mangala Solaris
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#20 - 2013-05-29 15:31:38 UTC
Kumq uat wrote:
Wait wait wait wait. I don't even remember seeing this May 15th thing posted. Seems idiocy to post a join date before you even post the announcement of the tourney and rules and so forth. If that stands we do not have a legit team and I will be VERY disappointed.


This Devblog covered that:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/alliance-tournament-xi-announced/

123Next pageLast page