Deciding the tie maps for playoff games...

[Reed]

I don’t know how the other playoff clans feel about this, but I know from our experience that it’s a pain in the ass.

For those unfamiliar with the tie map rules each team has to pick 3 maps, if any of the maps match then that map is played. If none of the maps match then the teams pick another 3 maps, and so on until a map finally matches.

To me this has a basic flaw in it, if neither teams maps match after the first suggestions then that eliminates 6 maps, even if one of the teams might be happy to play one of the other teams maps.

For example, team X picks maps 1.bsp 2.bsp and 3.bsp. Team Y picks maps 4.bsp 5.bsp and 6.bsp. Team Y’s next choice might have been map 1.bsp, but because of the flaw in the rules they is NO chance that they can play this map.
Both teams end up playing a map neither of them wants to play, when in actual fact they could’ve been playing a map they both would’ve been happy with.

The teams can only be happy if one of their first 3 maps matches, and I know from our past experience that this is rarely the case.

Fear not, I’m not just here to criticise, I’ve come up with a simple solution to solve this problem.

I suggest using an average points system. Each team rates the maps; 1 point for their least preferred map, 2 points for their second least preferred map, and so on. The scores for each map are tallied up and divided by two, which ever map has the highest average points total is the winner.

If there are more than 2 maps with the same average points total then you simply re-rate those maps until you get down to just 1.

If there are only 2 maps with the same total then the top 3 maps should be used (I’ll let you work out why).

Example…

Team X ratings

1 – A      
2 – B
3 – C
4 – F
5 – D
6 – E
7 – G
8 – H
9 – I

Team Y ratings

1 – I
2 – H
3 – G
4 – D
5 – C
6 – F
7 – E
8 – B
9 – A

Final Ratings

A – 5
B – 5
C – 4
D – 4.5
E – 6.5
F – 5
G – 5
H – 5
I - 5

In this case the final choice would be E. If the teams had proposed these under the current system they would’ve ended up playing D or C which are the two lowest rated maps. I hope this demonstrates my point.

Sorry about the incredibly long post, but I thought I should demonstrate what I meant. I certainly think this method should be implemented ASAP in order to speed up the whole process and leave both teams happy to concentrate on practicing rather than tie map selection.

Reed.

(Jits - if youre going to edit my post for no good reason at least leave some feeback about my idea)

[Dirty_Taco]

Post removed

[oddjob]

That is a very interesting way of doing it, personally I think thats a good idea.

[jitspoe]

Reed: Good post until your clever word filter evasion.

[lekky]

yeah that sounds like a more efficient system than currently used.

[XtremeBain]

Great post Reed.  I don't know what problems you had experienced with the tie map selection for the playoffs, but it is identical to the tie map selection that is being used in the 1v1 ladder.  I reconfirmed with the site that it does hold on to the 3 previous choices and they are taken into account when the second round of tie maps are selected.

The tie maps already have a system much like you've suggested in your topic.  I played around with awarding different points for 1st, 2nd and 3rd selected maps and then summing them up from each team, but I ran into many issues if teams didn't pick a common map after their first round of selections.

The current system starts at each team's first selection and proceeds sequentially until it reaches the final selections.  The first map that matches on both teams selections will be declared the tie map.  There is the slightest advantage given to the Challenger's (or in this case highest seed) in the order that the maps are checked against the previously selected maps.

In this topic I think I've taken a lot of heat regarding the current tie system in place, so below I've included the actual code that determines the tie map for a scheduled match.  I've also summarized it with comments in hopes that more people will be able to follow.

function pickTieMap($challenge) {
   $query = mysql_query("****"); // Hid the query for security purposes.  This just retrieves all the relevant information from the current challenges. (Which teams and what maps they've picked)
   $row = mysql_fetch_assoc($query); // This moves all the info over into our $row array.
   $amaps = explode(",", $row["tiea"]); // This creates a new array, $amaps containing a list of all the maps TeamA has already voted for tie.
   $bmaps = explode(",", $row["tieb"]); // This creates a new array, $bmaps containing a list of all the maps TeamB has already voted for tie.
   $allmaps = array_merge($amaps, $bmaps); // Going to make one large array here which contains a all the maps already selected by both teams.
   if (count($allmaps) != count(array_unique($allmaps))) { // This part is a little tricky.  It checks the total number of maps in our combined lists from both teams, then compares it to the same list, with all duplicate entries removed.  If a duplicate map was removed, then proceed.
      // We hit a common map (assuming the form was validated to not allow duplicate maps per person)
      $alist = array(); // We're going to setup two lists here, and add in the maps one by one, giving the first selected map highest preference
      $blist = array();
      for ($i = 0; $i < count($amaps) && !isset($winner); $i++) { // We're going to cycle through every map here until the Challenger(TeamA) runs out of maps, or a map is agreed upon(this *should* happen)
         $alist[] = $amaps[$i]; // Move our ith map into our list for TeamA
         if ($i < count($bmaps)) { // This needs to be done because sometimes there's less b's than a's -- Also since we do this, we force b to check a's list first, ensuring that a(the challenger) maintains the advantage over tie map selection
            $blist[] = $bmaps[$i]; // Move our ith map into our list for TeamB
            if (in_array($bmaps[$i], $alist)) { // Here we check the presence of TeamB's ith map in TeamA's list.  If it's found then this map will be the agreed tie map.
               $winner = $bmaps[$i]; // Here we've declared our champion

            }
         }
         if (in_array($amaps[$i], $blist) && !isset($winner)) { // If we didn't catch the winner up top, lets check it again if TeamA's current map is in TeamB's present list.
            $winner = $amaps[$i]; // Here we've declared our champion
         }
         // If the checks found an agreed map, then we can break out of this loop, otherwise continue one with our two next selected maps.
      }
   }
   if (isset($winner))
      return $winner; // We've got our agreed map, return it back to pbcup.com
   else
      return 0; // We couldn't determine a tie map, have the next team select another 3 maps, and we'll check them again
}



I ran your TeamX/TeamY selections through this code, and here are the outputs I received.  Which are exactly like I think they should be, and aligned with the tie map your system proposes.

Code: [Select]

[tiea] => i,h,g,e,d,f,c,b,a [tieb] => a,b,e,f,c,d,g,h,i $winner: eFurther more I think that this demonstrates that there isn't the reported flaw as mentioned here:

To me this has a basic flaw in it, if neither teams maps match after the first suggestions then that eliminates 6 maps, even if one of the teams might be happy to play one of the other teams maps.

Let me know if there needs to be more clarification, or if there is anything you believe I can do to improve the current system, Thanks

[b00nlander]

actually, what reed meant there was the tiemap decision in the semifinals.  As the map-picking process doesnt seem to work in the playoffs, we had to do the tiemap decision with the help of oddjob on IRC.  As there was no such system, and as it was nowhere explained to the admins/refs of the pbcup, all assumed that, if the first picks dont match, all 6 picked maps would be eliminated.
If you can actually get your system to work, that wouldnt cause such problems.  also, if we have to decide the tiemap on IRC again, the middlesman might just want to note down the awarded "points" for the maps in round1 etc to calculate the best picked map next time.

[XtremeBain]

Yeah, that's what I thought he was referring to.  The match should have been available on the pbcup website since I had created it, however I didn't know that there were difficulties completing it online.  I just did a little investigating and found what the problem was (I had goofed and tried submitting it as a playoff match with the regular season registration IDs instead of with the playoff seeds), I've just corrected it and the 2b0 vs. eR33t match should be available for tie map selection online.  Please let me know on my gmail address or SMS if there are any problems with it and I'll look into it immediately.