News Shop
Events Chat

[Tournament] Experimental Codex Asynchronous Spring Swiss 2021 (XCAPS21)

Welcome to our Spring tournament! As before, this is an experimental format. This time around, we’ll be trying out Midori’s Balanced Bouts. Each match will have randomly chosen multicolour decks, such that the statistical model I’ve be working on here thinks the matchup should be roughly fair.

This is a Swiss tournament, with one match per week, plus a grace period if your match overruns.

I’m planning to post the first round on Monday, 29th March.

General rules

  • Late signups will be accepted without penalty until the second set of pairings are made. Signups after that may occur, but will be given one loss for each full round / “tournament week” that has elapsed. Please submit your entry to the tourney, via PM to me or reply in this thread, in order to sign up!
  • I am accepting volunteers to help judge the event. You could be an authorised judge!
  • New pairings will be posted roughly every Monday. Matches that are not progressing may be given an adjudicated result. The “tournament week” is considered to be from one round of pairings posted to the next (so possibly more or less than an actual calendar week, depending on how prompt I am with the Monday postings / others are at finishing games).
  • Matches are 1 game.
  • The first player is responsible for creating the match thread.
  • Tag @charnel_mouse when a winner has been determined.
  • CAS tournaments use a “three strikes” rule - any player who has three losses will be automatically dropped from the tournament. Players may also drop out at any time.
  • There is no “top cut”: the last player standing wins the event. Thanks to the “three strikes” rule, the field should narrow towards the end, and culminate in some exciting final few matches.
  • The default is to play all matches as play-by-post within the forum. A match may be played in an alternate format – in person, on an alternate platform, via snail-mail, whatever – by mutual agreement, until the field is reduced to four or fewer players.
  • If any rulings are necessary, any single judge who is not participating in that match may make a ruling.
  • Rulings are subject to appeal only if the judge making the ruling is wrong about the facts of the game (e.g., forgetting that a Building Inspector is in play, or that the Shrine of Forbidden Knowledge only makes Demons unstoppable by units), or the rules/FAQ as noted in the rulebook and/or the Rulings thread.
  • Please note the forum-suggested post generation spreadsheet, or one of the other format suggestions (like this or this) such that it includes hand, tech and worker decisions, either in a details + spoiler combo,
like this,

Here’s my hidden stuff!

  • or in a linked source that I can get to. This helps with judgements, adjudication, as well as spectators. For games involving me, you can send a private link to a different judge if you so choose.
  • As with all PbF games, the honour system is in place: don’t peek at your opponent’s spoilers, just as you wouldn’t grab cards out of your opponent’s hand / deck / discard / worker pile and look at them in a real-life tournament!

Other details

Details for Swiss pairings

Each round, pairings will be assigned as follows.

If the number of players is odd, a bye, which counts as a win for future pairings, will be assigned to the player who:

  1. Has had the fewest byes in the tournament (normally zero)
  2. Has played against all other players, or so many of the other players that a bye is needed to avoid a re-match elsewhere in the tournament (probably won’t happen)
  3. Has the most losses
  4. Has played against the most remaining players (this helps minimize re-matches, while also keeping more players in the tournament longer)
  5. Was picked randomly from among players tied for criteria #4

Each remaining player will be paired with another player who

  1. They have been paired against the fewest times (normally zero)
  2. Has the same number of losses (an unfinished match is not counted as a loss for players with fewer than two losses)
  3. Is randomly selected

The player to go first in a match will be chosen as follows:

  1. If one player has gone first fewer times in the tournament (not counting byes), that player goes first. Otherwise, the first player is decided randomly.
  2. If a re-match can not be avoided, and the number of P1 assignments is equal between the re-matching players, P1 will be assigned to the player with fewer P1 plays within the head-to-head.

I reserve the option to hand-craft pairings and/or the bye if necessary, to minimize the number of re-matches. This manual manipulation will not result in someone getting a second bye, unless all players have had a bye.

Players that have not completed their previous matches will be handled as follows:

  1. If a match between two players who each have two losses is not completed when the next round is paired, a proxy of “the winner of x vs y” will be paired for the next round in lieu of either participant.
  2. When the delayed match completes, the proxy will be replaced by the actual winner. This proxy is considered to have the combined opponent and bye history of both players, for purposes of making pairings.
  3. Deliberately delaying a match, in an attempt to affect your pairing for the next round, is considered cheating, and is punishable by being disqualified from the tournament. Yes, this is technically “not enforceable” but it’s still illegal. Don’t do it.
Details for unfinished match adjudication
  1. Matches where Player 1 has posted their 5th turn within a week will not be adjudicated until 3 days after (10 days after pairings, Thursday by default).
  2. Matches where Player 1 has posted their 10th turn 11 days after pairings (Friday by default) will not be adjudicated until two weeks after pairings (Monday by default).
  3. Matches subject to adjudication may have a win declared, by opinion of the judges, for
    a) the player that is “going to win” (having clear hand / tech spoilers is helpful for determining this);
    b) the player that is less responsible for delaying the game;
    c) for no one, if prior arrangements were made, or the match result isn’t critical for making the next round of pairings, or if a “catch up” week is coming up.
  4. Generally, I will be pretty generous about allowing for extra time, provided I’m given notice of absence. If you ‘re ghosting the tourney with no notice, however, don’t be surprised if you’re given forfeit losses!
Details for correcting game errors

In the event of a game error, one of three fixes will be implemented:

  1. If a unit, hero, or building took the wrong amount of damage, and changing it to the correct amount does not cause anything to leave play or not leave play, then the damage will be corrected.
  2. If not enough gold was spent, and the excess was floated, the gold total will be corrected. If too much gold was spent, the excess will be refunded. The possibility of theft (red starter, Anarchy, or Law) does not impact this, as both players are responsible for maintaining the game state. An actually executed theft (or failure to steal after taking the appropriate action) forecloses this remedy.
  3. The game will be backed up to the turn of the error. In this case, having the decisions / game state noted is important for re-constructing things. Any random events that are undone (e.g. drawing cards) must be re-randomized, regardless of the size or type of error. Normally the entire turn containing the error will be backed up and re-done, but if knowledge has been gained, or cards drawn, and the error occurred after the new information was gained, the judge must only back up to the point where new information was revealed.
  4. If neither of the above apply, or if I think a backup cannot be performed, the game will be left as-is. (For example, an error occurs on Turn 2, and it is now Turn 4, both players have made decisions, reshuffled, etc. based on the incorrect game state).

Regardless of remedy, players should feel free to use any information disclosed by their opponent’s error in making gameplay choices: for example, an opponent’s tech choice revealed via a card illegally played and then returned to hand.

In the case of repeated errors, or errors where the game state cannot be recovered, a game loss may be given if the error was substantial.

List of players participating:

  1. charnel_mouse
  2. FrozenStorm
  3. Nekoatl
  4. Bomber678
  5. zhavier
  6. dwarddd
  7. bansa
  8. flagrantangles
  9. CarpeGuitarrem

Authorised judges

  1. charnel_mouse
  2. FrozenStorm
  3. zhavier

You can find the tracker spreadsheet here.

I’m in, nice to not have to choose a deck XD

1 Like

Oh, I forgot to add some notes on the model-driven deck pairings.

In short, caveat lusor.

While the model thinks the matches should be fair (not accounting for players), it’s basing this on historical tournament results, in a game with several thousand possible decks. As such, it’s bound to be a little off, but should be close enough to give matchups that are fun/interesting to play.

If there’s agreement that a given matchup is hopelessly lopsided, I’m happy to provide a replacement.

1 Like

I’ll give it a try.

1 Like

Here I am.

1 Like

pls count me in

1 Like

Oh also I forgot to ask this at the end of the tournament just been, but I have a request: can we get rid of Vandy resist at midband? I think everyone agrees it’s superfluous and a bit unnecessary and too good, so if we just agreed that it shouldn’t be there it’d be much nicer.

I’d be leery about doing it this time, mostly because the model’s fit to the normal cards.

Yea, recommend against changing vandy given we are using the model.

Also, I am pretty sure there are only a little under 400 possible decks in codex, as [a]/b/c is identical to [a]/c/b. Still a lot.

Also, im in.


Even accounting for that, it’s a lot!

I thought there was a thread about it, but clearly i remembered the number wrong :stuck_out_tongue:

Oh right, I wasn’t clear. I meant just change it for every tournament ever, because it was confirmed that it was never supposed to have made it to print

If people haven’t seen it, there are some example matchups here. I’m planning to draw enough matchups that we don’t have any repeats, probably about 50.

Wait, where did Sirlin say that? I don’t remember ever seeing him say it wasn’t meant to be in the final version of the game.

Bomber will be referring to this:


Count me in for the tournament :+1:

1 Like

@charnel_mouse, sign me out pls. Sorry!

1 Like

One week to go!

1 Like

I will take bolyarich’s spot. See you guys in the tourney :slight_smile: Thanks for hosting @charnel_mouse this is gonna be fun!

1 Like

@CarpeGuitarrem @EricF @Unity @flagrantangles @Bob199 @Mooseknuckles @Dreamfire @hardy83 @Steve44 @Hobusu any takers for the tourney?

1 Like