Lucky Winner weirdness

[Andrew Davidson]

I've been playing a Terraforming Mars tournament for some time. This was run by mrdoctor using his Lucky Winner format. There were 500 entrants and they played 5 player games. After each round, the last player in each game would be eliminated. So, from each game, four players would advance and one would be eliminated. Any odd players would be given a bye so that the games always had 5 players. The tournament software tracked this as being "skipped".

Eliminating players at this steady but slow rate took a while. It started in September 2024 and will finish in January 2026 as it's down to one table now for the last round -- round 21. These final stages have been quite good fun as the surviving players were all quite competent and the stakes were rising.

The result of round 20 was weird though. Going into that round, we were down to 9 players and so one game was scheduled and the remaining four players were skipped -- being given a bye. We've just finished that game but instead of the last player being eliminated as usual, four players were eliminated for the first time. The final table then has the winner of the penultimate game plus the four players who were skipped. So, getting that final skip was huge as it gave the players a seat in the final. Me, I came second in the penultimate game and so feel somewhat
aggrieved that I have been eliminated rather than advancing.

For the record, the players in at the finish were:

Fektoer 1st
Andrew Davidson 2nd
saraho_berlin 3rd
Barmaley86 4th
Joost1987 5th

ja900330 skipped
Doogs1 skipped
monya_junya skipped
Nyecto skipped

So, the final table is Fektoer plus the four skipped players. If one of the latter wins then they will indeed be Lucky!

[mrdoctor]

So, getting that final skip was huge as it gave the players a seat in the final. Me, I came second in the penultimate game and so feel somewhat
aggrieved that I have been eliminated rather than advancing.

BGA resolves all final 2 stages of multi-elimination tournaments like this. It's something to ask BGA to change - it's not anything that can be changed by users who set up the tournaments as they have zero control over it.

Note, the post on the tournament wall that was there from the start of the tournament:
"Do not skip players. Games will end after 30 days. If anyone skips an opponent - then they are asked to also quit themselves for breaking the rules of the tournament"
Looking at the game logs, Andrew Davidson skipped at least 2 players in his games, and ought to have withdrawn from the tournament long before the final stage.

[FSKFSK]

Multiplayer elimination tournaments always get weird at the end. For example, if there are 9 players left and 5 person tables, 4 people get a bye to the final and 5 people will play one game with only the winner advancing to the final. That's kind of silly if it was 4 of 5 for the whole tournament and then 1 of 5 at the end. This happens whenever you have fewer than 2 tables of people left.

The only way to avoid this is to make even eliminations. Make it 2 people advancing from 3-4 player tables, or 3 people advancing from 4-6 player tables, or 4 people advancing from 5-8 player tables. That doesn't work for games that play best at an odd player count, though.

If you do 2 out of 3-4, then at the end you have 4 players (no problem) or 6 players and you can play two 3 player tables with 2 advancing.

[Andrew Davidson]

The only way to avoid this is to make even eliminations. Make it 2 people advancing from 3-4 player tables, or 3 people advancing from 4-6 player tables, or 4 people advancing from 5-8 player tables. That doesn't work for games that play best at an odd player count, though.

If you do 2 out of 3-4, then at the end you have 4 players (no problem) or 6 players and you can play two 3 player tables with 2 advancing.

Interesting. I was contemplating a tournament with 4-player games with 2 advancing and 2 being eliminated from each game. If you allow games with a minimum of 3 players too, will BGA schedule more than one in a round? The tournament setup form has two parameters:

Number of players in a match -- Matchmaker will create a table with this number of players, if possible.

Number of players in a match (minimum) -- Matchmaker will not create table with less than this number of players. Games with less than this numbers of players (because of absence) will be abandoned.

Suppose you set these to 4 and 3. If there are 6 players left, then won't the matchmaker create a 4-player game because it is possible to do so? So, you get a 4-player game and 2 skipped players, rather than two 3-player games

[FSKFSK]

Suppose you set these to 4 and 3. If there are 6 players left, then won't the matchmaker create a 4-player game because it is possible to do so? So, you get a 4-player game and 2 skipped players, rather than two 3-player games

Here is an example. It does it correctly, two 3-player games. Notice how there are no byes.

https://boardgamearena.com/tournament?id=486838

[Andrew Davidson]

Here is an example. It does it correctly, two 3-player games. Notice how there are no byes.

https://boardgamearena.com/tournament?id=486838

That's a great example, thanks.

I like that the tournament match-up grid fits nicely onto the screen without much horizontal scrolling. That's because there were just 8 rounds even though there were 280 players. The Lucky Winner tournament went to 21 rounds because it started with 500 and only eliminated one player per game. That made the grid quite challenging to scroll.

You call your format "Half Elimination" and that sounds nicely intuitive. It looks to be a good format but there is a catch, as you indicate

"Half Elimination" is the best multiplayer elimination format, because it means the tournament finishes without anyone needing to take a bye. Hopefully, all the slow or absent players will get knocked out in the first round or two. If you get unluckily eliminated due to someone else running out of time, just wait for the next tournament.

The problem is that a game might finish due to a player being timed out and, in a 4-player game, the 3rd player would be eliminated too. The format in which only one player is eliminated per game aligns better with the time loss scenario.

[FSKFSK]

Yes, timeouts suck, but it usually only happens in the first round or two, before you've put too much into the tournament. It's rare to get timeouts in the later rounds.

[Andrew Davidson]

Here's the final outcome of that Lucky Winner tournament. Note that the final game reverted to only striking the last player at the end. It was only the penultimate game that had four strikes.