@Leif : Maybe we can say concede works for both map, not only one that the player put Concede button. This brings an incentive to finish both games or at least one game to see whether it is worth the risk to not complete a game.
Empire 1 on 1 is just a map, if one thinks he can get better result on longer map, then go ahead. It comes back to one's strategy. Just like if someone choose Lepanto Map.

@Devonian : This is IMHO for the proposed solution
1. First option : Expanded Challenge Rate is just a temporary fix that only temporary clear the bottle neck. When 5 people on top of you are still playing, this make you only get chance to be challenged.

2. Expanded immunity and/or waiting period is more likely create more bottle neck with refusal of a person to be challenged by his below opponent so he can challenge somebody above him. If everyone play this kind of game, then there would barely any people playing the game.

3. Anyone can explain this first?

"Maybe we can say concede works for both map, not only one that the player put Concede button."

How do you enforce this?

Just put that in the rule so there would no one Concede before they see both of his/her games are impossible to win anymore.

It's been over a week since I solicited opinions, and there has only been 1 comment. It was critical of the proposed changes. At this time, there will be no changes to the rules.

Official Rules for 1v1 Ladder Tournament - Complete with revisions to date

1. An initial list of players will be created and ranked based on reverse order of their vdiplomacy points. (in order to require top players to move up rather than simply be at the top)

2. New players that arrive after the start of the tournament automatically are placed last. Players may join at any time. Just add your name and challenge someone.

3. If the list of players is between 2 and 20 players, any player may challenge anyone else on the ladder that is ranked no more than 2 higher or lower than them. If the list is 21 to 30, any player may challenge anyone 3 higher or lower. If the list is 31 to 40, any player may challenge anyone 4 higher or lower, etc. However, you cannot challenge the same person twice in a row, if either player won both games. This is regardless of who initiated the first challenge. You cannot challenge or be challenged by someone who is currently in a challenge match. Players may only be in one challenge match at a time.

4. A challenge is made by a player posting the current ladder ranking, and stating who they are challenging. The challenger may indicate a map that they would like to challenge them on, or indicate that the player being challenged may choose the map. A PM must also be sent to the person who is being challenged. Only one challenge may be made or accepted at a time.

5. Standard victory conditions for the map are assumed, unless both players agree to alternate victory conditions. The victor should post the revised rankings after challenge match is complete.

6. Time limits may not exceed 3 days per turn, but both players may elect shorter time frames by mutual agreement. If there is no agreement, the time limits will be 36 hours per turn. The player being challenged has the right to know the time limit before deciding to accept or refuse a challenge. (But will still be penalized as indicated below for refusing a challenge) Both sides of the challenge should be started simultaneously.

7. A player MAY refuse a challenge with no penalty to either player, if:
a. the challenger picks the map
b. if they are currently in a challenge match
c. or have finished a challenge match where they were challenged (not the challenger) within the past 7 days.
Both players are free to make another challenge, even to each other.

8. However, a player may NOT refuse a challenge where the person being challenged is allowed to choose the map. (Unless 7a, 7b, or 7c apply. See above.) If they do refuse, the penalty is that they are removed from the list. If they desire to return to the tournament, they must re-enter at the bottom of the list. All remaining players move up.

9. The player who was challenged must respond to within 2 weeks or it will be considered a refused challenge. Penalties will apply as if they responded by refusing the challenge.

10. All challenges will be played twice, with each player taking the opposite side.

11. If the lower ranked player has more wins (2-0 or 1-draw), they switch positions in the ranking. They may not play each other until at least one has played another player.

12. If the higher ranked player has more wins (2-0 or 1-draw), there is no change to the ranking. They may not play each other until at least one has played another player.

13. REVISED TO: If the challenge ends in a tie (1-1 or draw-draw), both players must have a rematch, with the other player picking the map. If there is another tie, there is no change to the ranking. Neither player may challenge the other for a period of 2 days."

14. There is no end to the tournament. However, on December 1st, and each annual anniversary, the top ranked player, may claim the title for that year. Challenges initiated and accepted, but not yet finished may be completed.

15. All disputes will moderated by Devonian or his successor(s), as designated by him. All decision by the moderator will be final. Should amendments to the rules be necessary, they may only be proposed by the Moderator, and must be approved by 2/3rds of the participants at the time of the vote.


Recordkeeping:
Per Rule #4, post your challenges to this thread.
Per Rule #5. Post the results of the challenge matches to this thread.Per Rule #2,anyone interested in joining once the tournament starts, should copy all previous participants, add their name to the bottom, and post it to this thread.

So, you would prefer the discussion to move here?

Yes. This is the thread for rule change discussions.

Gramuk if you can get two more people to join, bumping up the numbers to 21, then you can challenge three above you.

Since I can't play until my house guests leave in a few days, I would be happy to step aside and let you challenge Skylin (if he is available). With luck your game would be over by the time I am ready to play, and I can then challenge either you or Skylin (depending upon the winner).

I don't know if Skylin is available, however, as he has not replied to my challenge yet (no hurry of course).

If we assume the 'victor posts the results' from rule 5 to actually be restrictive, that would quite simply solve the issue Gramuk raised, of the loser poaching the intended next challenge of the successful defender.

The rules do not state that the results of a match must be posted before the participants can be challenged again. I would interpret the rules to mean that paticipants in a match can be challenged as soon as the final game in the match ends.

Bozo, that is correct. As soon as a match is over,challenges may be made or accepted at that time. The reason for having the victor report the win was to promote self moderation of the tournament. I did not want to have to continually update lists and challenges. I figured the victor would be the most motivated to announce his victory. Although, I don't care who announces it.

If we want to create a delay, then it should add it by rule, not by inference.

Rules 11 & 12 could be revised to add: "The victor may make a challenge immediately, but the defeated player must wait 2 days to make a challenge."

I would accept comments on this as a possible solution.

Also, there were three issues with rule 14: 1. Fighting for a single spot caused a situation where it is possible for a players to be unable to challenge for the top spot simply because someone else is in the challenge at the time. 2. The rule allowed the challenger to postpone acceptance of a challenge simply to win the title. 3.The 2-2 tie was anti-climactic.

So, I would also like to change rule 14 to:

"14a. There is no end to the tournament. However, on December 1st, and each annual anniversary, challenges initiated, but not yet finished may be completed. The top 2 players may not begin a challenge with each other after October 1st and the 4th ranked player may challenge either of the top 2 players if neither are not already in a challenge. (Note: challenges initiated include any challenge made by a challenger whether or not they have been accepted on Dec 1st)

14b. After the annual ranking are complete, the top ranked player, and the runner-up must have a play-off match to determine the title for that year. The play-off match will be played the same as all other matches, except that Duo may not be selected for the first 4 games, but must be used as a 1 game tiebreaker should the 4 games end in a tie. If the game of Duo also ends in a tie, the higher ranked player will be awarded the title for the year. "

I will also accept comments on this also.

[Quote]
Rules 11 & 12 could be revised to add: "The victor may make a challenge immediately, but the defeated player must wait 2 days to make a challenge."
[/Quote]

Seems like a pretty good plan. Even 24 hours might be enough to be honest. But whatever you think is best.

I'd say "24h or the victor has already challenged someone else." Unless you want to match it up to the default turn length of 36h, given that's the deadline for reasonably expecting someone to see that their match is over.

No real stance on the proposed changes to 14. No objections, though.

I like that. It also sets a good flow to the ladder. Basically, if you are on the way up, you get the initiative to find matches above you. If you are on the way down (losing,) you have to chill for a bit, thus you are more likely to be able to be challenged from below.

Mouse, I used 2 days to match up with the 2 day delay in rule 13.

Perhaps a teeny-weeny amendment.

The loser should wait two days before issuing a challenge, or until the winner has issued a challenge, whichever comes first. No point dragging things out any longer than needed.

Just a suggestion :)

I can add that.

Rules 11 & 12 could be revised to add: "The victor may make a challenge immediately, but the defeated player must wait 2 days to make a challenge, or until the victor has issued a challenge, whichever comes first.."

I am accepting comments on this as well as the rule 14 change.

Makes sense to me.

I will leave these open for comment for about a week before deciding if it should be put up for vote.

Both seem to be good amendments to me.

I will put both proposals up for vote, now that the period for discussion is finished. In order for either of these proposals to pass, 2/3 affirmative vote will be required. There are 18 players currently, so 12 affirmative votes will be required. Please vote for them individually.


Proposal #1:

Rules 11 & 12 should be revised to:
"Rule 11. If the lower ranked player has more wins (2-0 or 1-draw), they switch positions in the ranking. The victor may make a challenge immediately, but the defeated player must wait 2 days to make a challenge, or until the victor has issued a challenge, whichever comes first.

12. If the higher ranked player has more wins (2-0 or 1-draw), there is no change to the ranking. The victor may make a challenge immediately, but the defeated player must wait 2 days to make a challenge, or until the victor has issued a challenge, whichever comes first."


Proposal #2:

"14a. There is no end to the tournament. However, on December 1st, and each annual anniversary, challenges initiated, but not yet finished may be completed. The top 2 players may not begin a challenge with each other after October 1st and the 4th ranked player may challenge either of the top 2 players if neither are not already in a challenge. (Note: challenges initiated include any challenge made by a challenger whether or not they have been accepted on Dec 1st)

14b. After the annual ranking are complete, the top ranked player, and the runner-up must have a play-off match to determine the title for that year. The play-off match will be played the same as all other matches, except that Duo may not be selected for the first 4 games, but must be used as a 1 game tiebreaker should the 4 games end in a tie. If the game of Duo also ends in a tie, the higher ranked player will be awarded the title for the year. "

These changes are open for voting.

I don't think you should rely on 2/3 of the vote players. Maybe 2/3 of the vote perhaps. I don't think you can count on everyone voting. We don't even know if everyone currently on the ladder is still playing.

Here are my votes:
1. Yes
2. Yes

Sorry that does not read right. What I am trying to say is I don't think you should need 2/3 of players currently on the ladder to approve. Rather I think 2/3 of those who vote should be sufficient.

It's supposed to be 2/3 of the players. If it was 2/3 of the votes only, I could call an end to the vote right now and say it passed with only 1 vote.

I suppose I should have added, after a minimum amount of time for consideration. But whatever you think is best.

We only have 1 vote. Please vote!

I vote yes to both.