jesus1412 wrote:
RIP Japan. UK gonna ruin you.
forum
osu! World Cup 2013 - Discussion Thread
posted
Total Posts
1,715
what
he can prob wreck me, can't stream for shit so...Zarerion wrote:
what
Hi,
Just a google docs with datas.
Currently there is only players from top-seeded teams but I want to add at least high-seeded teams and probably low-seeded teams.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... utput=html
Ps : Contact me if you find an error
Just a google docs with datas.
Currently there is only players from top-seeded teams but I want to add at least high-seeded teams and probably low-seeded teams.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... utput=html
Ps : Contact me if you find an error
WE WILL STOP YOU-Kamui- wrote:
Alright, now, nothing can stop France.
now this is a real spreadsheetKrah wrote:
Hi,
Just a google docs with datas.
Currently there is only players from top-seeded teams but I want to add at least high-seeded teams and probably low-seeded teams.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... utput=html
Ps : Contact me if you find an error
Krah wrote:
Hi,
Just a google docs with datas.
Currently there is only players from top-seeded teams but I want to add at least high-seeded teams and probably low-seeded teams.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... utput=html
Ps : Contact me if you find an error
I giggled
that's what it feels like to play osuBlue Dragon wrote:
Krah wrote:
Hi,
Just a google docs with datas.
Currently there is only players from top-seeded teams but I want to add at least high-seeded teams and probably low-seeded teams.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... utput=html
Ps : Contact me if you find an error
I giggled
the receiving end, i mean.
HuehuehueBlue Dragon wrote:
Krah wrote:
Hi,
Just a google docs with datas.
Currently there is only players from top-seeded teams but I want to add at least high-seeded teams and probably low-seeded teams.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub ... utput=html
Ps : Contact me if you find an error
I giggled
I hesistated to add this but last four columns are complementary informations so no change '-' (no you can't mod my spreadsheet !!!!)rezoons wrote:
I'm not sure it was that useful to know , krah!
Too many number kill the number.
rezoons
any exact time on when the map pool is announced?
Great! With the asians xDDDDD
This will be Hardestestestest.
This will be Hardestestestest.
._. Australia, let's clutch this ahah not.
Topic Starter
If you read the rules, you would know. :pbuny wrote:
any exact time on when the map pool is announced?
Sunday as in rules, I plan Saturday (tomorrow) tho
BRASILLLLLfabriciorby wrote:
BRASILSynchrostar wrote:
i guess NL is going 1-3 maxif we somehow manage to win vs singapore.
at what time? or is it just whenever you feel like it?Loctav wrote:
If you read the rules, you would know. :pbuny wrote:
any exact time on when the map pool is announced?
Sunday as in rules, I plan Saturday (tomorrow) tho
Why are people getting silenced for their sigs? dont get it. Everyone with a OWC sig has been getting it.
Deleting signature gives silence automatically. Sigs were having almost 3mb, and that is just too much.Rules wrote:
No content (including youtube videos) should automatically play on page load. Animated gifs/pngs are excepted, but posting large volumes of animated image data to consume resources are not allowed and you will be banned for doing it. Use spoilerboxes for larger animated images.
Ya, the UK ones were about 1.5mb, the one I've got new is just over 500kb tho so I guess it's fine.Marcin wrote:
Deleting signature gives silence automatically. Sigs were having almost 3mb, and that is just too much.Rules wrote:
No content (including youtube videos) should automatically play on page load. Animated gifs/pngs are excepted, but posting large volumes of animated image data to consume resources are not allowed and you will be banned for doing it. Use spoilerboxes for larger animated images.
What happened to everyone with the Bahrain sigs 
Topic Starter
The Match Schedule (Group Stage) is now available.
So yeah, Poland and Germany are organizing a friendly match tomorrow at 5PM UTC (6PM GMT+1). The match will be streamed for testing purposes at http://www.twitch.tv/Nyquill. Tune in if you're interested.
of course the times are scheduled poorly
Just to confirm: This match will be streamed on my channel because its not official in the sense that its not part of the tournament. We're also going to probably be running some parallel things to check quality before we go run the actual matches next week.
That said, I hope you're all hype for OWC2013!
That said, I hope you're all hype for OWC2013!
Topic Starter
It does only take the time into account that the team was registered with (the one named in the local time). Is there any issue?pielak213 wrote:
does the local times for usa take into account dst?
usa has a thing where time goes back one hour this sunday. i'm not sure if your time is incorrect or something is wrong with my mind
edit: sorry i was being dumb. it's all good now
edit: sorry i was being dumb. it's all good now
Topic Starter
Well. I used the time zone that has been used while registering.pielak213 wrote:
usa has a thing where time goes back one hour this sunday. i'm not sure if your time is incorrect or something is wrong with my mind
I can adjust the set times according to the Daylight Saving Time. Just tell your captain to request a time zone change.
Nyquill wrote:
Just to confirm: This match will be streamed on my channel because its not official in the sense that its not part of the tournament. We're also going to probably be running some parallel things to check quality before we go run the actual matches next week.
That said, I hope you're all hype for OWC2013!
Lol feeling stupid for asking this but can i have a link to your channel?
evan129994 wrote:
Nyquill wrote:
Just to confirm: This match will be streamed on my channel because its not official in the sense that its not part of the tournament. We're also going to probably be running some parallel things to check quality before we go run the actual matches next week.
That said, I hope you're all hype for OWC2013!
Lol feeling stupid for asking this but can i have a link to your channel?
fartownik wrote:
So yeah, Poland and Germany are organizing a friendly match tomorrow at 5PM UTC (6PM GMT+1). The match will be streamed for testing purposes at http://www.twitch.tv/Nyquill. Tune in if you're interested.
I would like to address an issue regarding the rankings for group stages.
Just for reference
For example
Let's say there is a group consisting of 4 teams facing each other in best of 7 matches, so each team plays a total 3 matches. In this group there are two teams, Alpha team and Gold team. Alpha team wins 2 matches 4-3 and 4-3, and loses one 3-4. Gold team wins two matches 4-2, 4-3, and loses one 2-4.
In this case both teams have won two matches and lost one. So they are equal in most matches won (priority number 1). Alpha team has won a total of 11 maps and lost 10, while Gold team has won 10 maps and lost 9. Thus in regards to priority number 2 (Have higher {(the number of maps won) - (the number of maps defeated)}.) They are equal as well.
This means that we must go the number 3, most maps won. Alpha team has 11 wins as opposed to Gold teams 10, thus Alpha team would be the higher rank. But there is a problem here, Alpha team has played a total of 21 maps and won 11 of them. Alpha team's win rate is 11/21 or about 52.4%, on the other hand Gold team's win rate is 10/19 or about 52.6%. While these values may seem close, what's important is that Gold team has won a greater percentage of their matches.
In fact no matter what numbers you produce, if you assume results 1 and 2 of two teams to be equal, the team with the lower percentage of wins, and consequently the higher percentage of losses, will be the higher ranked team.
I believe that priority number 3 should be changed to the team with the higher percentage of wins as that would be a better reflection of which team is more deserving of the higher rank.
Just for reference
Rankings of each group are determined by sorting the results of each team's performance in the following priority:I believe that number 3 may need to be revised.Intuitively, winning more maps seems deserving of a higher rank, it's important to note that it is only taken into account if the two higher priority results (matches won, and maps won to maps lost) are equal. If two teams were equal in matches won, and equal in maps won - maps lost, this current ranking system would declare the team with the lower win/loss ratio as the team with the higher rank.
1. Most matches won.
2. Have higher {(the number of maps won) - (the number of maps defeated)}.
3. Most maps won.
4. Have higher ∑{(total score difference) / (maximum score)}.
5. Winner of the rematch.
For example
Let's say there is a group consisting of 4 teams facing each other in best of 7 matches, so each team plays a total 3 matches. In this group there are two teams, Alpha team and Gold team. Alpha team wins 2 matches 4-3 and 4-3, and loses one 3-4. Gold team wins two matches 4-2, 4-3, and loses one 2-4.
In this case both teams have won two matches and lost one. So they are equal in most matches won (priority number 1). Alpha team has won a total of 11 maps and lost 10, while Gold team has won 10 maps and lost 9. Thus in regards to priority number 2 (Have higher {(the number of maps won) - (the number of maps defeated)}.) They are equal as well.
This means that we must go the number 3, most maps won. Alpha team has 11 wins as opposed to Gold teams 10, thus Alpha team would be the higher rank. But there is a problem here, Alpha team has played a total of 21 maps and won 11 of them. Alpha team's win rate is 11/21 or about 52.4%, on the other hand Gold team's win rate is 10/19 or about 52.6%. While these values may seem close, what's important is that Gold team has won a greater percentage of their matches.
In fact no matter what numbers you produce, if you assume results 1 and 2 of two teams to be equal, the team with the lower percentage of wins, and consequently the higher percentage of losses, will be the higher ranked team.
I believe that priority number 3 should be changed to the team with the higher percentage of wins as that would be a better reflection of which team is more deserving of the higher rank.
welcome to owcAngusman wrote:
I would like to address an issue regarding the rankings for group stages.
Just for referenceRankings of each group are determined by sorting the results of each team's performance in the following priority:I believe that number 3 may need to be revised.Intuitively, winning more maps seems deserving of a higher rank, it's important to note that it is only taken into account if the two higher priority results (matches won, and maps won to maps lost) are equal. If two teams were equal in matches won, and equal in maps won - maps lost, this current ranking system would declare the team with the lower win/loss ratio as the team with the higher rank.
1. Most matches won.
2. Have higher {(the number of maps won) - (the number of maps defeated)}.
3. Most maps won.
4. Have higher ∑{(total score difference) / (maximum score)}.
5. Winner of the rematch.
For example
Let's say there is a group consisting of 4 teams facing each other in best of 7 matches, so each team plays a total 3 matches. In this group there are two teams, Alpha team and Gold team. Alpha team wins 2 matches 4-3 and 4-3, and loses one 3-4. Gold team wins two matches 4-2, 4-3, and loses one 2-4.
In this case both teams have won two matches and lost one. So they are equal in most matches won (priority number 1). Alpha team has won a total of 11 maps and lost 10, while Gold team has won 10 maps and lost 9. Thus in regards to priority number 2 (Have higher {(the number of maps won) - (the number of maps defeated)}.) They are equal as well.
This means that we must go the number 3, most maps won. Alpha team has 11 wins as opposed to Gold teams 10, thus Alpha team would be the higher rank. But there is a problem here, Alpha team has played a total of 21 maps and won 11 of them. Alpha team's win rate is 11/21 or about 52.4%, on the other hand Gold team's win rate is 10/19 or about 52.6%. While these values may seem close, what's important is that Gold team has won a greater percentage of their matches.
In fact no matter what numbers you produce, if you assume results 1 and 2 of two teams to be equal, the team with the lower percentage of wins, and consequently the higher percentage of losses, will be the higher ranked team.
I believe that priority number 3 should be changed to the team with the higher percentage of wins as that would be a better reflection of which team is more deserving of the higher rank.
buny wrote:
of course the times are scheduled poorly
Why are you even posting here?buny wrote:
welcome to owc
because i canXPJ38 wrote:
buny wrote:
of course the times are scheduled poorlyWhy are you even posting here?buny wrote:
welcome to owc
it seems like each owc, the organising gets worse and worse
Just change most map won to highest map win ratio and that's it.
Topic Starter
Seems like you lack of attention again, uh?buny wrote:
it seems like each owc, the organising gets worse and worse
If you dislike the organization, feel free to not participate. dramaqueen
Angusman: will revise that. You seem to have a valid point but I am still unsure if the weighting of the 4-3 and 4-2 wins are more fair with that.