AwesoMeCiv.com FFA Tournament (w/Prizes)

[TheRealAwesoMe]

AwesomeCiv.com Civ V FFA Tournament


AwesomeCiv.com is opening its doors once again and is hosting a 48 player Civ V FFA tournament.

Sign-Up information for tournament will be posted in the next few days!!!

The MINIMUM prizes available at this time other than bragging rights:
First Place: $40 Steam Cash
Second Place: $20 Steam Cash
Third Place: Civ V Emoticons

Games are to be played on Saturdays at 11:30 Eastern Standard Time. Start date has yet to be determined (tentative start date is April 5th). This tournament will be played two Saturdays in a row followed by a bye week then the following two Saturdays will be the completion of the tournament. This will be a 48 player FFA tournament based off of NQ Rules. The first round will have 48 players. The second round will have 24 players. The third round will have 12 players. The fourth and final round will have 6 players. Top 3 players place and receive prizes.

Map Settings:
Private
City States: 12
Map Type: Pangea
Map Size: Small
Game Pace: Quick
Game Era: Ancient Era
Turn Mode: Simultaneous
World Age: 3 Billion Years
Temperature: Temperate
Rainfall: Normal
Sea Level: Low
Resources: Strategic Balance

All Victory Types Enabled

Advanced Game Options to Enable:
Enable Turn Timer (Default)
Quick Combat
Quick Movement
DLC Allowed:
Mongolia
Spain and Inca
Polynesia
Denmark
Korea
Ancient Wonders
Expansion: Gods & Kings
Expansion: Brave New World

Drafting is going to determine Civs played by players.
Auto ban: (note Babylon not enabled) Spain, The Huns.
There will be two rounds of banning and then a round of picking. In each round, the players will ban one civ or pick their civ in order from team 6 to team 1.

Stand-in Policy: If a player misses a tournament game they must find a stand-in for themselves for that round. The replacement cannot be one of the players already in the tournament. Ten minutes past start time of tournament (11:40 Eastern Standard Time) of the day of the game will be the time the player forfeits his spot in the tournament. Stand-ins are allowed up to the final 6 players. If all six players in matches do not show the previous rounds fourth place finishers will be moved to the next round after a coin toss to determine which fourth place finisher will compete in said round. If fourth place finishers are not available then the fifth place finishers will be moved forward after coin toss and so on. If no players are found a player will be pulled off a wait list for the tournament and if players still not found it is up to the tournament director to determine who plays in place of missing player in said round.

Notes:
*Points decide final standings based on end of game through unanimous conceding or a victory condition is met. Points do not matter if players cap is taken and player quits.
*Players have the option to stay until their last city is taken.

 

[Kyp Durron]

Good stuff AwesoMe. I put my support and reputation behind you on this. I am really sure the community is going to enjoy this tournament.

 

[CraigMak]

This sounds awesome, I'm definitely in. So it's going to be 8 separate 6 man FFA games making a total of 48 players?

 

[TheRealAwesoMe]

Yes 8 different pools of 6 player FFA making 48 players. Each pool the top 3 players will advance to next round with the top 3 that place in the final round receiving prizes!

 

[CanuckSoldier]

Yes Awesome and Ciplayers/CivNQ are glad to cooperate on this tournament. I am working on some civ swag from Firaxis to go along with the prizes. MTF as I get more details. Awesome will coordinate the event, and Civplayers/CivNQ will be glad to use our FFA ranking system to support the tournament.

CS

 

[tommynt]

of NQ Rules

really cant come up with own "rules" (not like there are many rules needed to play civ ..)

The first round will have 48 players. The second round will have 24 players.

So it will be basicly a 3-3 seperate start if people are kind of clever.
Cause teaming up is obvious thing to do with multiple "winner"

awful idea

 

[nemesis464]

really cant come up with own "rules" (not like there are many rules needed to play civ ..)


So it will be basicly a 3-3 seperate start if people are kind of clever.
Cause teaming up is obvious thing to do with multiple "winner"

awful idea

For once, shut up

Moderator Action: Trolling other posters is not acceptable. If you have a problem with another post, use the report function.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[PrimEval]

Sounds great, I have 4 suggestions for changes and clarification. The first is very minor, for start time I assume you mean 11:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time.

The second is much more important; the tournament structure. Allowing second and third place to qualify will warp the game dynamics (ie all sorts of weird teaming up that would not happen in a normal FFA) and potentially lead to games that should have ended to drag on for another hour or 2 as the losers jokey for the other qualifying spots (also very bad). In an FFA there should only be one winner.

I see the appeal of multiple rounds, particularly since the map provides so much variability and you want to even out the luck factor there. I propose multiple qualifying rounds instead, only the winner qualifies to advance, but players get multiple games to try to qualify. You may not play in a qualifying round if you have already qualified. Qualifying games will be player until the target number of players has advanced (eg 12). This also allows the tournament to be played without exactly 48 players.
Again to even out the luck factor the map provides, the finals can also have multiple rounds. The finalists are grouped randomly and shuffled between games. First person to win 3 games wins the tournament, player with next most number of wins gets second place. Ties are settled by duels. This is of course only a quick idea and would result in a tournament going longer than 5 weeks. An alternate would be to have just 2 FFA games for qualifying players and then have the winners of each face each other in a duel for first or second place.

The third suggestion is about NQ rules. I enjoy NQ and NQ style games but their rules need additional clarification if they are going to be used in a tournament.

Finally the civ drafting, I do like the idea of the last player (Team 6) getting to pick their civ first and so on. But the civ banning at the start of each game seems like it might be a bit of a mess. Instead I suggest that when players sign up for the tournament they also list 3 civs they would like to ban. Once everyone has signed up the 12 (or whatever) most voted for civs are banned for the entire tournament.

 

[TheRealAwesoMe]

First I want to thank everyone who has read and posted on this thread even including the moderator. That being said I hope that people understand the point of this tournament is to promote fun competition among the multiplayer community. I also hope that most if not all people involved in this thread would be interested in joining this open tournament!

I think that criticism is a good thing but it should be constructive or at least not destructive. Please understand what that means is that if you have a suggestion(s) as to how to improve the current tournament rules (or in life in general to be honest… life lessons from AwesoMe ) the delivery of your communication is key to appropriate communication. So please feel free to discuss options of the tournament and maybe in future tournaments the rules may change and if necessary rules can be added or modified to current tournaments.

In regards to what Tommynt has said if I were to translate it to non-destructive language I would like to say that in regards to the rules I like to collaborate with as many people as possible to get a good feel as to how best serve the Civ Multiplayer community. I would like to think as part of the multiplayer community I have had and will in the future have a positive impact on this community. I cannot nor do I wish to take credit for everything I do in the Civ community and to those that have helped me in improving this community which I enjoy playing with I would like to say thank you! In respect to the insinuation that people will team up or collude in the tournament I would like to honestly say it is possible. As long as people do not collude pre-game, which even if they did could be a detriment to their game in some cases, said collusion cannot be controlled because this is a FFA (free for all) not a CTON (cannot talk or negotiate). I would only anticipate that most people would play to win on principle and because the difficulty of three players to collude in an FFA based on what the game gives players to work each game. Not to mention in the end there can be only one first place winner in the FFA tournament and previous collusion will over time be noticed possibly in future tournaments by players themselves.

Once again please feel free to discuss changes to future/current tournaments I will be hosting and sponsoring and to all those that decide to join this tournament if I don’t get to say it to you I wish you good luck and hopefully everyone has fun!

Thanks again to all those that are working to improve this community!

 

[dannyk2011]

Just hope you pay attention to everything. I hope everything goes well. You have my support.

 

[nemesis464]

Instead I suggest that when players sign up for the tournament they also list 3 civs they would like to ban. Once everyone has signed up the 12 (or whatever) most voted for civs are banned for the entire tournament.

This sounds like a great idea

 

[Empedocles]

Tommy has a point that having three winners per game will change how people play, but I think it will make the game now interesting. It elevates diplomacy above starting position as factors in advancing to the next level. Diplomacy is the thing that makes FFA unique from all other game modes.

Spontaneous alliances of 3 civs in a world war, with all the backstabbing and deals that involves, sounds like a much better story than a 6 hour race to XCOMs.

It might be good to include some incentive to be first, though. One option is to give points for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place finishers and populate the finals based on those points.

 

[tommynt]

Tommy has a point that having three winners per game will change how people play, but I think it will make the game now interesting. It elevates diplomacy above starting position as factors in advancing to the next level. Diplomacy is the thing that makes FFA unique from all other game modes.

this setup kills dipolmacy how can one be so blind to see?

only diplomacy is that 2 or 3 strong guys talk to each other turn 1: say - Ok lets pawn them and then run over guy after guy in 2 or 3 vs1s

 

[Empedocles]

That is one outcome, but far from the best strategy. Why team up with the two best players when you will have to face them for real in the finals? Better to team up with competent players based on geography and attitude than to collude before you've seen how the game shapes up.

Some incentive to actually win is good idea, though. Perhaps let the winners from the last round have first pick of which team they want.

 

[CanuckSoldier]

It's an FFA tournament, so yes there are going to be human factors that influence the outcome of games. If we don't want that then play a Cton-always war game :-/

But as long as it's FFA, then I think having the top 3 progress is as valid a system for advancing as any other format, how players react to that to get themselves into the top 3 is their strategy. Personally I would look at the in-game Geo-politics and pick the two partners that benefit myself best, not who I think might be the strongest players at the start of the game, they may have crappy starts or something.

As for the rules, Awesome is certainly open to fine tuning them to make them the best they can be, but being a FFA, CivNQ rules are certainly a good place to start.

CS

 

[TheRealAwesoMe]

Tournaments sign up has commenced. Please sign up HERE to register for the AwesoMeCiv.com tournament! Thank you to CivPlayers for providing additional prize’s to be announced later this week and the hosting to the tournament. Check back for further announcements!

 

[Conspirator]

I would like to join this but I can't play on Saturdays. Can't we add a Monday or something?

 

[CraigMak]

I agree with Tommynt that it's going to be pretty messed up. It's very likely that the most skilled players will not be the ones proceeding to the next bracket due to teaming and collusion. Will it be fun? Yes, that is what matters. You win some, you lose some.

The fact that it's organized will make it far more fun than your average pick up FFA.

 

[GaelicWarrior]

Civ v multiplayer competitive is pointless with natural wonders, poor map scripts and OP Civs, this game is completely unbalanced. Good luck with being lucky and thinking you're a good player as a result.

Firaxis need to focus on MP as a priority for Civ 6.

Multiplayer in this game is dead for any decent strategy player.

 

[TheRealAwesoMe]

The tournament as of now due to lack of players will be pushed back to start April 12th. Please do not wait until last minute to sign up!

In regards to all of the negativity surrounding the game of multiplayer Civ V. While we expect perfection due to our nature and how well Civ actually portrays controlling an empire sometimes players should step back and realize how awesome this game actually is. I agree the best player might not always win but isn't diplomacy part of the game also? And the best player should be able to place in top 3 I think if played correctly and in the final the best player(s) will rise probably. Also in my opinion playing AI in comparison to another player(s) is not even close when it comes to strategy, game play, etc. So in short I might be the first person to point out certain wonders and scripts are OP under certain conditions but at the same time its part of the game lets have some FUN!

Also in regards to Monday tournament games I would like to keep it simple because I will be online during these tournament games resolving disputes and keeping it rolling so Monday games are out as of now. Hopefully Saturday will be good for most players and maybe pushing it back a week opens the tournament up to more players.