I am thinking of creating a FFA league. There would be 32 people in 4 divisions. Each division would consist of 8 people. You would play all of the FFA games possible in your division. These will be the 28 games pllayed:{1,2,3,4,5,6} {1,2,3,4,5,7} {1,2,3,4,5,8} {1,2,3,4,6,7} {1,2,3,4,6,8} {1,2,3,4,7,8} {1,2,3,5,6,7} {1,2,3,5,6,8} {1,2,3,5,7,8} {1,2,3,6,7,8} {1,2,4,5,6,7} {1,2,4,5,6,8} {1,2,4,5,7,8} {1,2,4,6,7,8} {1,2,5,6,7,8} {1,3,4,5,6,7} {1,3,4,5,6,8} {1,3,4,5,7,8} {1,3,4,6,7,8} {1,3,5,6,7,8} {1,4,5,6,7,8} {2,3,4,5,6,7} {2,3,4,5,6,8} {2,3,4,5,7,8} {2,3,4,6,7,8} {2,3,5,6,7,8} {2,4,5,6,7,8} {3,4,5,6,7,8}. The people with the 1st and 2nd most amount of wins will advance to the finals division.

i would be interested.

i will

I would love to, I have been trying to play lots of FFA, I am rather bad at them but it is fun.

im game

Sounds fun!

am in

what kind of map and settings would you use? unless you have someone else setting games up this means it's 75% luck too right?

It would probably be the standard settings on medium earth and it would have to be 75% luck, unless a member set the games up.

PM'ing or no? (I'm probably not wanting to be in on this, but I suspect many would want to know this detail).

PMs don't matter, if you want to make truces, all you have to do is start a 1v1 game with whom you want to talk

Bad format. Shouldn't be solely most wins but take into account average finish.

Player A wins 5 of 21 games, finishes 5th in remaining 16
Player B wins 5 of 21 games, finishes 4th in remaining 16
Player C wins 4 of 21 games, finishes 2nd in remaining 17

Which player was the best overall?

I disagree with you, Richard, and it's simply too hard to tell from a simple number who is actually the best.

If you made it a point to survive longer, then instead of surrendering after they lose, they find an out of the way place to sit and do nothing until they get second place. Alternately, they never try to win outright, only make friends and remain small until everyone else gets killed. Worse yet, instead of trying to win in a hard situation, they make a deal with one player to work together and kill off the remaining players so that they get second place, despite playing far worse overall.

As bad as total number of wins is for being accurate, it beats the alternative of giving points for not winning.

I might suggest a voting system, where in addition to counting wins, each game also gets voted on by other players and the person with the most votes for "best played" also gets a point. Something like that would likely help balance out bad starts or awkward positions.

I would allow PMing because as EagleBlast said that if you really wanted to talk, you could find a way around.

Richard, in that instance, Player B would win..

think about american football,

team A 12-6
Team B 12-6
Team C 11-7

team C has no chance of overcoming, since they won less
Team A and B would have tiebreaking stats, such as best against each other, best in division, etc.

If you can win more than the others, it doesn't matter what your other stats are, However I agree there has to be other stats that are taken into consideration in the case of a tie.

In the case of a tie for 2nd, whoever has the most wins in common games would go on.

The divisions will be randomly decide using random.org

*decided

sounds like fun

i'm in