@KarlMarx - of course I understand. It's your time after all.

@KarlMarx82 This is just an update, my AI Level is currently at 235.

My AI level changed to 300.

If it really matters, my AI is 373 now.

Thanks for the updates :)

**First lessons learned from the 1st tournament:** * As anticipated it needs more balancing: The top tier participants usually win overwhelmingly, no real chance for lower tier players. So how can we balance this more without making it way more complicated? And I do still think it shouldn´t be completely equalized: Whoever has higher levels etc. should have a slight advantage, just not so much that you practically predict the outcome by AI- or PvP-Level. There are a lot of good suggestions out there, including makeing a special tournament account, but most of it seems making the tournament-rules too difficult. I´m thinking about a higher account of flagshipd to at least give the very top players more of a handicap. What do you guys think? * The 24-hours-deadline should be extended to at least 48 hours. * Participants should be viable for only one wildcard, since it´s a bit booring if the same player is getting wildcards in a row and eventually ends up loosing against the same opponent again.

* I think the tie-breaker, where we had to fight multiple opponents was the best. Since the fights were mostly one-sided, this was the part where it was meaningful to try some new tactic on the players that are close to me. I don't want to comment on the balance, because it looks like an impossible job. Even if the developer decided to give some help in it, it would be an entire different game then. I'm fine whatever the rules will be, it's for fun anyways. * I'm a little sad how many people didn't show up after registering, but sometimes life gets in the way. Longer intervals can make this better. It was a worthy experience, thanks for organizing!

I got a proposition for the next tournament : * The host propose a fleet to compete with. He will keep the same fleet on spot 1 and won't change the fleet during all the tournament (from monday to friday). * The fleet proposed by the host, should be beatable by a majority of players to allow most of them to compete. * The competitors will ask to challenge the host on the forum : once a challenger declares himself, he'll have to keep his challenge build for 24 hours on fleet 1. Last challenge on friday midnight. * The host will attack the challenger 5 times. If the challenger wins 3-5 times and ties 0-2 times, he passes, if he loses 1 time or tie 3 times or more, he doesn't. * The host will check and note the number of units of the challenger (flagships count as 1 unit). * The winner is the challenger who passes with the smallest number of units. In case of a tie, we'll find some way to break it (with the number of ships alive at the end of the fight for example). * The host can upgrade his ships. The best time to challenge him/her is not necessarily friday at midnight. Before upgrading his ships, the host got to clear all the pending challenges, and he must mention that he upgraded. * A competitor can challenge only once in tournament. * We can possibly add a rule stating that if none is able to beat the host with a smaller or equal number of units than him/her, the host wins. I'm not 100% sure about this. With this set of rules, the fleet size doesn't count, but the upgrades do. We don't need to rely on the declarations of competitors and we have a fair and reliable judgment. What do you think about this ? Any ideas to improve this system ?

Thanks mormord and meou2001 for the suggestions, really good thoughts. The attacking-the-host-tournament style is very interresting, a complete other style but a very good idea. But a few thinks to think about: * So as host of the last tournament I see one obvious downsize from the hosts perspective: Keeping a for most players beatable fleet on spot 1 means the host is going to loose A LOT of offline battles... * Its good that the insentive is to win with the smalest fleetsize, so fleetsize doesn´t matter. But tech-levels and flagships still give a huge advantage which should somehow be adressed (but not equalized). But how, without overcomplicating it? Maybe mormord is right: balancing seems like an impossible job :) * How and when should the outcomes of the challenges be announced? Right after the challenge or at the end of the tournament? If after the challenge: Later challengers have the advantage of knowing what fleetsize the have to beat. If after the tournament: Everybode flies blind, have no comparison, don´t know how their chances are, if they should play safe with a bit more ships or need to take a risk with fewer. I tend to second, but it doesn´t feel quite right. Maybe second, but with 2 challenge-rounds?

> *Originally posted by **[KarlMarx82](/forums/1065360/topics/1891606?page=2#13337348)**:* > Thanks mormord and meou2001 for the suggestions, really good thoughts. > > The attacking-the-host-tournament style is very interresting, a complete other style but a very good idea. But a few thinks to think about: ***More "challenging the host" than "attacking the host".*** > * So as host of the last tournament I see one obvious downsize from the hosts perspective: Keeping a for most players beatable fleet on spot 1 means the host is going to loose A LOT of offline battles... **In terms of PVP rankings, it doesn't matter a lot, since you have saturday and sunday, and everything happens at this moment. In terms of gold, the host will get a lot from offline battles.** > * Its good that the insentive is to win with the smalest fleetsize, so fleetsize doesn´t matter. But tech-levels and flagships still give a huge advantage which should somehow be adressed (but not equalized). But how, without overcomplicating it? Maybe mormord is right: balancing seems like an impossible job : ***Flagships are big, but just for show : they only deal 1 damage but they can absorb some. Better balancing is possible, but would raise many issues (complex computation, possible optimisations for the handicap system, possible false declarations).*** > * How and when should the outcomes of the challenges be announced? Right after the challenge or at the end of the tournament? If after the challenge: Later challengers have the advantage of knowing what fleetsize the have to beat. If after the tournament: Everybode flies blind, have no comparison, don´t know how their chances are, if they should play safe with a bit more ships or need to take a risk with fewer. I tend to second, but it doesn´t feel quite right. Maybe second, but with 2 challenge-rounds? ***Very good thinking. I would also prefer the blind system.***