If it’s slow correspondence format count me out. I know that I’m going to get busy/bored and drop out. Long format is too much for me to handle.
I feel like the problem of fast correspondence would assume you in fact have “fast correspondence with your team-mates” I.e can be in similar time zones or some clever distribution of times zones.
Otherwise I imagine it’s just the team captain making moves or timing out, whichever is likeliest.
I mean you could use conditional move feature in some instances to speed up a sequence of moves that were discussed
If you are still interesting in participating, please reply with answers to the following questions:
Anything that gives around 1 day to deliberate a move with the team would be fine with me.
Yes, but if there’s a higher ranked player who really wants to, I’d rather have them be the captain.
3 team round-robin or 4 teams bracket. 2 teams would be too many players to keep discussion manageable.
No comments, I bet the details will become clear when playing start.
The slowest I would want to go is one move / day. Possibly some timezone grouping could be used to get it down further than that, even. Fischer is good because we get a time buffer.
I’m not willing to be captain. I am very unreliable and I procrastinate a lot almost to the level of a mental condition, which is already screwing me over in more important things than a Go game.
I’d like a three player round robin. Smaller teams give the weaker players a chance to make their suggestions and have their mistakes explained properly.
This might be controversial, but my opinion is that no “tools” should be available: no bots, no analysis, not even the score estimator.
I definitely agree with no bots and no score estimator. However, I think it would be tricky to have discussion while saying that players are not allowed to use the analysis tool.
About analysis disabled, I think that team effort would take the place of analysis here. Putting our minds together to choose our move. So, not disabling analysis because of “cheating” but rather to reinforce the team spirit.
Actually, yeah, I can see your point – there has to be freedom to analyse.
But how would sharing our thoughts work without using the analysis tool? I was imagining that each team would set up a private demo board to follow and discuss the game. Then, the players could share variations to demonstrate their ideas. If we forbid analysis, then I think that would mean forbidding variation sharing as well, which would make discussing ideas much more awkward (and remove the need for a demo board, I guess), since I guess we would have to exchange ideas through coordinates?
Fischer with +1 day per move sounds good. I can play faster but probably not discuss and play faster than that. I would need to fit in discussion between work, family and sleep.
I would prefer not to Captain, mainly because I’m but sure I can handle the responsibility without really understanding what the responsibility is!
3 team round robin would be nice but I’m not fussy.
Is there a way of being notified that discussion is on? Or will it just be a matter of checking a thread fairly frequently? I’m not sure I have my notification settings set correctly to avoid missing things. Although I’m happy to check ogs repeatedly when I can!
Re Analysis: Analysis has always been a part of correspondence games (in chess for example). It is, next to time, the main characteristic distinguishing it from live play. Without it, it would be awkward to discuss moves.
Bots: Bots cannot be consulted in any games per OGS site rules.
Fischer with 1 move/day is fine with me.
I’m fine with being team captain if necessary. If someone else would prefer to captain, though, I’m also happy to act as a regular participant.
I’d prefer 3-team round robin. It seems like the best balance between too many/too few players. Since we’d be playing our two games simultaneously, I don’t think it will take any longer than the 2-team or 4-team options.
I suggest that the games be played even, no handicap. Between any two teams, rank won’t differ much.
You convinced me on the 3-team format. I wasn’t thinking of it as simultaneous—but of course.
Something like the ladder or ogs site tournaments would suit me, that’s basically +1 day per move?
I’d prefer not to be but could if needed.
All seem fine, the 3 team simultaneous round robin sounds interesting.
It’d be nice to have a demo board of the game to discuss things on. I think you can set up a group message on the forums and it notifies you that there’s messages, or least you can still heart things/tag people etc? Like the variations can be shared in the demo board but the chat can be separated out to avoid clutter?
So when are we gonna get going?
I think we have essentially reached consensus on the time settings:
Fischer, 5 days initial/max, +1 day increment per move, pause on weekends.
In addition to the potential captains, we have @bugcat 4k, @Gia 25k, @teapoweredrobot 8k, @Conrad_Melville 8k that responded to these questions. That makes a total of 8 players, which I think would limit us to playing a single game between just two teams, even though there was significant interest in playing a 3-team round robin.
I picked the two strongest willing players as captains, the distributed the remaining players by rank using the Thue-Morse sequence.
However, if anyone else still wants to sign up, please speak up to confirm and we can redistribute to add them.
Any other thoughts, comments, objections, suggestions?
I also propose that we use either Chinese rules with a komi of 7.5 or New Zealand rules with a komi of 7, but I’m flexible about this.
Hm, I see the balance is a bit off with me the only TPK. If it’s better to wait this one out until more lower ranks express interest, it’s fine with me.