|V| VIRTUE
GAMERANGER CLAN
Forums
| Forum Home > Tournaments > A list of suggestions for future Tournaments | ||
|---|---|---|
|
Limited Member Posts: 109 |
Hey, as the current tourney is going along nicely (3 cheers to voz for his great organisation), I've been thinking that tournaments could be a nice regular addition to our community. I've also been thinking about how improving them further and have come up with this: 1.) make recording the games obligatory apart from solving the problem about submitting wins, it would also provide us with a growing base of recorded games. This will probably cause some moaning from certain members, but let me quote H2O on this matter: If your strat wins its really just an All in type of strategy that hopes your opponent is caught off guard and wont help you get anybetter. (...) my advice is to always try to take the "legitimate win" if you really want to get better. If you share your strats your opponent get better. If they get better, you have to get better aswell -> everyone wins 2.) add a loser bracket nothing sucks more than participating in a tournament and getting beaten in the first round. A loser bracket is a great way to give those players a second chance. The winner of the loser bracket could even play the winner in the winner's bracket in a Grand Final. 3.) increase the number of games to be played in higher rounds apart from more recs, this also makes the tournament a great deal fairer. Map balance is still not the best unfortunately, so a BO7 in the final would make the tournament win much more legitimate. 4.) Add civ restrictions quoting the civilization rules from the currently finished LMS tournament: Civilization: - BO 3: In the first two games you must use two different civilizations! - BO 5: In the first three games you must use three different civilizations! - BO 7: In the first four games you must use four different civilizations! - Overall: You are not allowed to use a civ more than twice a round. This adds variance to the recs, reduces laming to a minimum and makes players work on ceveral civs. 5. whatever reasonable you come up with Tell me what you think! PS: how do you quote properly? I tried [quote]textextext[/quote] | |
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 96 |
A losers bracket would be a great addition in my opinion. It was always fun in those double elimination tournaments to lose to a team in the main bracket then go back through the losers bracket and knock them off at the end. Also, I don't think that the civ restrictions are as necessary as no on civ is really unbeatable overpowered, however it would be fun to see how some particular players (who will go unnamed) to move from their typical predictable civ. | |
--
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 143 |
Well that doesnt mean there isnt still laming....BB rush *cough cough* DARK RIDER *cough cough*. With those civ restrictions it would reduce people that only know how to lame all three games. | |
|
--
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 262 |
=] | |
|
-- A man wrapped up in himself makes a very small bundle.
| ||
|
Posts: 173 |
I dislike the civ restrictions. I agree with duke it will not stop people from laming. They will just go from iros to india and then to another civ like aztecs. | |
|
-- sangoku116: santa claus is made by coke |RW| sangoku116 :): jg is pro
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 93 |
and also civ restrictions are lame sauce | |
--New Gag Site HereSame Login as |V| Clan!
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 45 |
nice work from vozohe AND deathboy : ) it has been the most well run tourney so far, the disqualification rule has worked really well for getting the games in on time boys. as far as the civ restrictions i think its a good idea, i mean it will challenge most players to have to switch civs all the time.... but thats what its about really, getting better and challenging yourself so i like it. also this is where the argument of who is ranked where on gameranger can be solved, cause i know deathboy and dans have their specialist civs, but what goes down when they have to play 3-4 different civ???? i couldnt say. but i'd love to see | |
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 117 |
+1 @ Hastings +1 | |
|
-- im for a vozohe free gameranger
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 23 |
Sounds good! Feed in consolation sounds great and maybe the winner of the losers brackets plays winner of the winners brackets in finals like yall were saying except that to win the tournament the loser bracket player would have to win twice. So that the winner's bracket winner would be fed into the consolation so pretty much like you got 2 lives but this kind of tournament takes a long time and is really hard on the directors (deathboy and voz). And hastings idea of rec games sounds good | |
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 288 |
haha im pretty sure you're referring to my dutch but heres the thing (i know you agree kuts, this is @ hastings), civ restrictions limit what players like me can do. i mean, yeah my other civs are slightly above average, but my dutch are what sets me apart, and what would get me to the latter parts of the tourney. thats not to say im a bad player, i dont just follow BO's and win with strats (as youve said), i actually understand the dutch, its just i spend most of my time trying to get to know the dutch better. | |
|
-- Vagina.
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 96 |
Haha, actually Mag I was referring to Vozo's Japanese. However there are many who fit this description, and recently I've fit into it more than I'd like. @ Vozo | |
--
| ||
|
Posts: 290 |
Didn't you quit? | |
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 109 |
sry DB! no disrespect intended, it came to me after the 10 min edit period. and civ restrictions aren't lame. And it's not like you have tto be a master of all civs. The civ restrictions from the Hope tourney still allow twice the same civ in a BO3. So in a BO7 you can get away with playing 4 civs. It's nothing impossible to achieve. So you can theoretically win the tourney by playing just 4 civs. | |
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 23 |
I decided not too but i just won't play as much | |
| ||
|
Administrator Posts: 259 |
kutuzov. why do you have to initiate this arguement again. You are a fool if you thought this comment would not instigate a response from me. for the last time, i see no reason why you are specifically pointing at me when talking about using one nation and relating it to decreasing of "laming". I've made posts a plenty explaining Japans extreme difficulty in fanpatch with very little opposition. Their eco is one of the weakest in 1v1. I've told you many times my Japan is extremely dependent on getting 6-10 treasures and heavy micro in order to be successful. Many people have tried playing Japan, including yourself, and failed miserably and have not improved. I am not perfect at japan, but like many other people with their specific nations (deathboy w/ french, macabee w/ aztec, tkddans w/ china, jeff w/ sioux, borgie w/ 1v1india, fred w/ british, etc) I stick with one to get better with it. It is simply a choice on how to go about playing the game. You even claim that you are not merited yourself to make this claim anymore... so don't make it! i do not think there should be a negative connotation towards someone who mainly plays a single nation. in a 1v1 tournament, I think it is ridiculous to limit someone's play count with a specific nation. guys, this is a TOURNAMENT - where you show off your BEST skill. This is not a test-your-other-sucky-nations session. Plus, as I've also stated way too many times, this tournament is much more about increasing traffic on TWC/TAD+FP games (specifically poaching from vanilla). If we're making the barrier to entry for community tournaments even higher, by increasing skill requirements, then surely we will be seeing less new faces showing up at these events. Hastings, you cannot compare this aspect with ESO. They have a huge member base with much more people able to sign up. They don't have this issue to address, so they can go ahead and make more limitations. ... And this is where all the past tournaments have failed. When ideas of relatively high complexity come in play combined with non-existent organization. You're talking about BO2 and BO7, when there are people in this tournament who do not know how to Email or Login to iChat. Why did we omit a losers-bracket in this tournament? -- Unneccessary pity-games that add to complexity for the first large-scale tournament we've had. People are barely finding time within a week to play there winners' bracket games. Keep it simple! Keep it inclusive! We have roughly 150 in the community, not 5000. As for future tournaments, I've heard many good suggestions from chats that surprisingly are not posted here. One of my favorites is a 1v1 King of the Hill Event where the winner of this 1v1 Tournament becomes "king". He/she can be challenged at any time, and if defeated, loses the title to the winner. Problems with this idea is obviously having the king getting alot of play requests. But it would be something for people to strive towards. As for 3v3 tournaments, there are serious simultaneous-logon issues. But I would be supportive of a 2v2 tournament with perhaps 1.5 week round time restrictions. Anyways, that's my rant. Kutuzov, if you decide to debate back, please stay factual and specific rather than general. | |
| ||
|
Limited Member Posts: 109 |
@ 2. paragraph: I wouldn't say their eco is one of the weakest, their eco can be just slightly behind a brits. The real struggle is to survive early rushes, esp. xbow rushes. Once that is achieved without too many casualties Japan nearly auto wins. @ 3. paragraph: you could also argue "guys, this is a TOURNAMENT - where you show the world you are the most complete and skillfull player there is". If someone is sucky with certain civs, well, tough luck, doesn't deserve to win a tournament IMO. If you want to recruit new players from Vanilla, you definately should add a loser bracket, because let's face it, they won't stand a chance anyway if they are totally new to TWC+TAD. @ 4. paragraph: past tournaments have failed because of non-existent organisation, I agree. However, you and DB are doing a splendid job so far, so no reason to keep it simple IMO People who don't know how to email or log into iChat shouldn't be left alone with a Mac anyway. I can't see them being a huge problem, especially as BO3-BO7 aren't concepts that only the most exquisite minds can comprehend. Loser brackets aren't unneccessary pity games, if the winner of the loser bracket can play the winner of the winner bracket in a grand final. It would also be an extra incentive for new players, as I stated above. It also doesn't add complexity to anything, you'll just have to make an extra sheet with the loser bracket. If people find the time to play a game if they won the last match, they can also find the time to play a game if they lost the last match. I don't see your point. @ 5. paragraph: my whole post was about future tournaments. I saw this as a prototype and am trying to improve it. King of the Hill sounds fun, a bit like the title of world chess champion (although they have to play 15+ matches, not just one). And I think that both 2v2 and 3v3 aren't viable. Different time zones make scheduling much more difficult. PS: it would be much easier if one could split a message into several quotes, so it's easier to understand what I'm referring to. You think that could be implemented somehow? | |
| ||
|
Administrator Posts: 100 |
I love the idea of a "King of the Hill." But I have a better method of carrying it out. (And yes, some of you may know where I'm stealing this system from.) The tournament WINNER is the "No. 1". The loser of that final round is the "No. 2". Only the No. 2 can challenge the No. 1, but the No. 2 can be challenged by anyone. If the No. 2 beats the No. 1, than they swap places. If the No. 2 loses to someone else, he sacrifices his place as No. 2 and the winner becomes the No. 2, and therefor can challenge the No. 1. Everyone understand? | |
--
| ||
|
Administrator Posts: 259 |
Hastings, I totally agree edits to rules/structure can be made for future tournaments. However, such things as loser brackets, civ limits, saying people who don't know how to email should be left alone.... that seems like alot of extra bulk for a small community with limited resources trying to accomplish the task of recruiting members and increasing gameplay. Please remember, just from a factual standpoint, when people had to play only in the winners bracket, I had to default people to the next round. Requiring double the gameplay during a school season is demanding to say the least. I think improvements can be make in scheduling-structure. I checked out some of the other ESO clan tournaments and they have seperate threads for everyone's matches where they can discuss game times. That is excellent. | |
| ||
|
Administrator Posts: 259 |
Oh also, Evill seemed supportive of the tournament and ask me to email him to remind him to comment or make an appearance but never did. Probably doesn't help that I'm not a silver/gold member. Anyways, we know he cares atleast a little. Any silver/gold members wanna shoot him up for a possible sponsored tournament for more GR traffic on his part and a Gold/Silver Account prize on our part? | |
| ||
Hastings.. Voz and I's tourney 
You must login to post.
Recent Forum Posts
Shoutbox
Becoming a Clan Member
Interested in becoming a clan member? Start a topic requesting an acceptance vote here!