Axel and I are testing the api tourney creation via his IPad tournament manager software - so far so good!

EDIT: example, created from an Ipad: http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=293

daily commute API update: after thinking about update, axel and I think we need an v1/api/player/{id} reference to allow for player CRUD. implementing that now.

the player api is implemented; here's the spec . last item remaining is round by round results.

click http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/api/v1/tournament/53/players to see the 'get' in action

we broke 200,000 points spent this weekend!

The XWTO app should be updated this week with support to export results to the XW Lists Juggler

Quick question Sozin. If I'm entering all the data manually, is there a way to enter the rounds and matchup data manually? I have a tournament that we had round robin in the first half and a top 4 elimination in the 2nd half I'd like to enter. This tourney in question is here.

Thanks!

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=366

heh, you are like the third person to ask this question. right now, no. but given the interest in this topic I think I have to do it. I'd been hoping to avoid it (I dread programming Javascript, it makes me feel like an idiot), but it really is an important feature.

I'll start hacking around :-)

https://github.com/lhayhurst/xwlists/issues/35

in other news, I am trying to figure out how to talk to the FFG software guys responsible for the new tournament software to discuss getting a machine readable export/import format into list juggler. stay tuned. if any FFG software devs out there want to reach out, sozinsky at gmail dot com is my email addy.

haha, no worries sozin. Yeah, we had a special invitational tournament that doesn't follow the normal format that Cryodex does, and that's why we don't have a Cryodex file to upload. I'll stay tuned and if/when it's ready I'll manually enter the matchups and win/loss

in other news, I am trying to figure out how to talk to the FFG software guys responsible for the new tournament software to discuss getting a machine readable export/import format into list juggler. stay tuned. if any FFG software devs out there want to reach out, sozinsky at gmail dot com is my email addy.

This is the most important post on the board right now. I can't imagine that anyone at FFG hadn't looked at listJuggler and been like "Wow, we need this forever."

in other news, I am trying to figure out how to talk to the FFG software guys responsible for the new tournament software to discuss getting a machine readable export/import format into list juggler. stay tuned. if any FFG software devs out there want to reach out, sozinsky at gmail dot com is my email addy.

This is the most important post on the board right now. I can't imagine that anyone at FFG hadn't looked at listJuggler and been like "Wow, we need this forever."

You might be surprised.

I'm blindly reaching out to devs via their linkedin profiles to beg for help. doubt it'll work but I'm not making much progress via other angles.

EDIT: Peterson has a linkedin profile! I sent him an "InMail". Hopefully he will respond!

Everything we do is to help the community. You would think they would want to encourage that. Sometimes I wonder.

It is time to talk obstacles!

Players now squad build with asteroids, so for regional season we're going to need some classification scheme for obstacles.

Presumably this information starts in the xws specification land/voidstate/yasb/fab's, and is fed to list juggler.

eli/others, do you have any thoughts on how obstacles should be modeled in xws? or should we even bother at all?

It would be great to get this info, it will be up to the players to fill it out when they submit their squad though. I don't think the FFG squad registration sheet includes a spot for obstacle selection?

It is time to talk obstacles!

Players now squad build with asteroids, so for regional season we're going to need some classification scheme for obstacles.

Presumably this information starts in the xws specification land/voidstate/yasb/fab's, and is fed to list juggler.

eli/others, do you have any thoughts on how obstacles should be modeled in xws? or should we even bother at all?

Oh, yeah, that's a good point; we need to add support for that. Spitballing:

{
    "obstacles": ["asteriod-1", "debris=3", "debris-5"],
    "faction": "...",
    "pilots": [...]
}

Yeah, I've been kicking around adding obstacles to lists. But mostly I've been trying to figure out how to do it without using the actual art (due to infringement issues); would silhouettes be sufficient? Would that still be too infringe-y?

IANAL, but I think silhouettes should be ok. Each one maps to a xws canonical name ("asteroid-1", "debris-6").

alternatively we wait for the organized play printed squad sheet to update and use whatever new format they give us.

Yeah, I've been kicking around adding obstacles to lists. But mostly I've been trying to figure out how to do it without using the actual art (due to infringement issues); would silhouettes be sufficient? Would that still be too infringe-y?

IANAL, but I think silhouettes should be ok. Each one maps to a xws canonical name ("asteroid-1", "debris-6").

alternatively we wait for the organized play printed squad sheet to update and use whatever new format they give us.

Obligatory:

couple of things

1) I'm told that an update to the tourney squad sheet is coming for asteroids. so we'll use whatever it uses.

2) I haven't made progress on the whole export-from-new-FFG-tourney-manager-to-listjuggler thread. I'm told that it is going to be used for regionals, and that a closed beta is happening for the regional TOs; I've contacted my local regional TO to get more information. stay tuned...

updates:

• making progress on #2 above. good news: there is going to be a text export! bad news: not sure when its going to be ready :-(
• we can make the xws changes! the below is now at the bottom of the squad submission sheet:

Let's use the spitballed suggestion above. eli, can you update the xws spec?

I assume we're going with the ordering as displayed on the FFG sheet.

Also, can we 0-index them? So we'll have "asteroid-0", "asteroid-1", ..., "asteroid-5", "debris-0", "debris-1", ..., "debris-5". Or should they be generic obstacles? E.g. "obstacle-0" through "obstacle-11"?

re: ordering, yeah.

re: 0-indexing, I prefer that too

re: embedding type into name, I prefer "asteroid-0" and "debris-0" versus "obstacle-0"

re: embedding type into name, I prefer "asteroid-0" and "debris-0" versus "obstacle-0"

As an outside vote, I would agree with that. It is less ambiguous and also provides maximum flexibility in the future, for example if FFG adds more asteroids or debris fields. (Unlikely, but who knows)

Sounds good.