Tournament Finals and Seating Selection

Ankha wrote:

I beg your pardon? Having twice (or three times) the same deck as a prey or predator, starting the three rounds with 1 transfer, playing only 4 player tables when you could play some 5 players table are real issues that the archon manage to solve.
Random seating "creating less issues" is completely absurd.

Unless you are talking about the final table?

No I am not. The corner-case scenario you describe has very low chance of actually happening and I would much rather be willing to risk it than use the current archon system. Several times just this summer we have had tournament tables where only one person changes in a table between rounds, thanks to the deterministic Archon seating. This is a major issue because of contesting crypts. Even if the first round seating is random, the following round seatings are not, and its really starting to irritate me.

Bloodartist wrote:

Ankha wrote:

I beg your pardon? Having twice (or three times) the same deck as a prey or predator, starting the three rounds with 1 transfer, playing only 4 player tables when you could play some 5 players table are real issues that the archon manage to solve.
Random seating "creating less issues" is completely absurd.

Unless you are talking about the final table?

No I am not. The corner-case scenario you describe has very low chance of actually happening and I would much rather be willing to risk it than use the current archon system. Several times just this summer we have had tournament tables where only one person changes in a table between rounds, thanks to the deterministic Archon seating. This is a major issue because of contesting crypts. Even if the first round seating is random, the following round seatings are not, and its really starting to irritate me.

That is correct. After a couple of smaller tournaments where seatings were semi-randomized I am thinking twice attending those kind of tournaments anymore. The problem lies in smaller tournaments with 2 rounds and a final.

Bloodartist wrote:

Several times just this summer we have had tournament tables where only one person changes in a table between rounds, thanks to the deterministic Archon seating. This is a major issue because of contesting crypts. Even if the first round seating is random, the following round seatings are not, and its really starting to irritate me.

Perhaps you should offer real examples of how the Archon is failing you so that it can be remedied. Having some events use the Archon and some events not use it is simply bad.

Ankha wrote:

Indeed, and tell us another "better" seating you have in mind.

Already did. Full randomization.

Unless you drop some criterias (such as never twice the same prey or predator), so I'm opened to any concrete suggestion.

I would drop all of those criteria in a heartbeat if it was up to me.

If for some reason my meaning has been unclear despite multiple times I have posted about this same issue.

Ankha wrote:

When there are not enough players, you sometimes can't have great seatings. What was the size of tour tournament, and how many rounds, and we'll do the test if you want.

No. The problem is that archon CONSISTENTLY provides a worse seating with a certain amount of players. It is consistent because it is deterministic. First round seating is irrelevant. For reference you can use all TWD reports of Finnish tournaments this year other than Ropecon/GP. This is a persistent problem. If there was a 50-50 chance of getting a worse seating or a better seating, it would already be an improvement.