Jump to content
  • 6
Sign in to follow this  
gbwead

Qualifying System for Tournaments

Question

Signing up for tournaments has always been problematic. Forum tournaments sign ups were quite terrible and automatic tournaments are now just as bad on a bigger scale. We have a larger competitive scene than ever, more people want to sign up for each official tournaments being hosted and therefore more people get left out of these tournaments. A solution could be to host only large tournaments, but that would lead to very very long tournaments and that's not really enjoyable for everyone. I strongly believe that large tournaments (128) should be available to everyone, but that smaller tournaments (64/32/16) should be supported with some kind of qualifying system, by giving guaranteed seats to deserving players.

 

Sign ups based on qualifications is more fair because people that enter tournaments are not the fastest clickers or the ones with the best connection, but the ones that have proven themselves to be fierce competitors. For instance, if the OU ladder was used to give sign up priority to the high ranked players, people will be highly incentivize to play on the ladder and small tournaments will be more competitive with better players overall. Using the ladder as a qualifying system is just an example. We could also use weekly community combats as a qualifying system. There are multiple ways this could work imo and we desperately need a solution to this sign up problem.
 

Share this post


Link to post

13 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

One problem with this is how hard it is for new players to get battling experience in non OU tiers, since you can't spam the ladder to learn.

I think this is a great idea tho but to counterbalance the fact the main tournaments would be based on qualification, some other tournaments (maybe the qualifiers ones) should have a much larger bracket size (up to 256 or more) and be like "open tournaments" with no signup fee or any other thing.

Also it's kinda impossible to choose 1 CC as the qualifier for all the other tours because tournaments aren't really fair (by that I mean the top 16 of a 64 players tour doesn't actually represent the 16 best players since a lot of good players could have been eliminated in earlier rounds), so it's seems tricky to set it up and make sure it is fair ...

Qualification from ladder would be a great thing if other tiers/metagames were active which isn't the case as of now, maybe it could be a way to make them work tho

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TohnR said:

One problem with this is how hard it is for new players to get battling experience in non OU tiers, since you can't spam the ladder to learn.

I think this is a great idea tho but to counterbalance the fact the main tournaments would be based on qualification, some other tournaments (maybe the qualifiers ones) should have a much larger bracket size (up to 256 or more) and be like "open tournaments" with no signup fee or any other thing.

Also it's kinda impossible to choose 1 CC as the qualifier for all the other tours because tournaments aren't really fair (by that I mean the top 16 of a 64 players tour doesn't actually represent the 16 best players since a lot of good players could have been eliminated in earlier rounds), so it's seems tricky to set it up and make sure it is fair ...

Qualification from ladder would be a great thing if other tiers/metagames were active which isn't the case as of now, maybe it could be a way to make them work tho

Ya, for sure, new players need to still be supported through regular large tournaments and a huge bracket seems fine for those. I was thinking perhaps winning duels in CC and in those open tournaments could award players some kind of currency, like NU coins used to sign up for more exclusive NU tournaments. Imo, someone that can't get passed a single round in an open bracket or in a cc should not be allowed in a small tournament.

Edited by gbwead

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Qualifying based on ranked matchmaking rating would be a good idea, if the matchmaking system was fleshed out better.

Quarterly resets, end of season rewards, improved UI, etc...

There's so much to be gained from adjusting the matchmaking system.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
1 minute ago, Tyrone said:

Qualifying based on ranked matchmaking rating would be a good idea, if the matchmaking system was fleshed out better.

Quarterly resets, end of season rewards, improved UI, etc...

There's so much to be gained from adjusting the matchmaking system.

Absolutely, if matchmaking was working for every tier, this would be easy to set up imo.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

how about people who dont wanna play shitty cc and rankeds but still have a chance of playing officials for shiny?

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
48 minutes ago, Kanzo said:

how about people who dont wanna play shitty cc and rankeds but still have a chance of playing officials for shiny?

Well, is playing 1 round in a shitty cc/ranked/large open tournament worse than relying on a 25% chance to win a clicking competition? If those players prefer that 25% chance of getting in tournament, then this suggestion is not for them and they don't see any issue with our current sign up system.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Posted (edited)

Can you explain the 1 round of a cc?

 

thing is i know a lot of players who still play only cuz of officials and thats the only time they come online. Cuz This game grinding for new mons as a pvp player is already cancer. pvp players literally have to dedicate 50%+ of their days to just grind to get 1-2 new mons. Not even mentioning the stupid high prices on tms. Sometimes u lose money worth a new comp by fixing the moveset. All this is allready cancer enough and now to have this suggestions of playing cc ranked so u can enter an official tourney will kill a lot of players that are still playing only for officials. 

edit:

So i suggest to have them add new type of tourneys that only ranked and winners of cc can enter and still keep the current ones. 

Edited by Kanzo

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Kanzo said:

Can you explain the 1 round of a cc?

 

thing is i know a lot of players who still play only cuz of officials and thats the only time they come online. Cuz This game grinding for new mons as a pvp player is already cancer. pvp players literally have to dedicate 50%+ of their days to just grind to get 1-2 new mons. Not even mentioning the stupid high prices on tms. Sometimes u lose money worth a new comp by fixing the moveset. All this is allready cancer enough and now to have this suggestions of playing cc ranked so u can enter an official tourney will kill a lot of players that are still playing only for officials. 

Ya, I have struggled to explain my idea clearly. 

 

Basically, what I'm proposing would only affect official with small brackets, so 128 brackets tournaments would not be affected. So keep in mind nothing would change for large official tournaments and anyone that is fast enough to click on sign up could join.

 

For smaller tournaments, anyone can still join, but a qualifying system would allow players to get a guaranteed seat. Ideally, the ladder could be used as a qualifying system by giving high ranked players a guaranteed spot. If you were around during the old leaderboard tournaments, you will remember that the first 32 players were allowed to sign up and yet we rarely ever saw more than 10 players enter the leaderboard tournaments. This imo imply that if a 64 players tournaments gets hosted, you could be top 200 on the leaderboard and still easily make it in the tournament. And seriously, getting in the top 200 in OU is nothing, a few wins and you're in it. 

 

Realistically, the ladder as a qualifying system might not be possible for UU/NU/LC/Dubs which is why I suggested looking at other ways to qualify for tournaments. I think Community Combats or 128 open bracket tournaments could be an interesting way to approach qualifying. When you play in matchmaking, you get battle points + a rank. Why not apply the same idea for Community Combats or 128 open brackets? When you win a duel in a tournament, why not get some battle points + a rank/coins or w.e as well? The rank/coins or w.e currency you would get from playing in those community combats or 128 open brackets would simply be used to give you priority when entering smaller more exclusive official where signing up is an issue. Once again, I'm not saying screw players that didn't grind a rank or the currency. They still can sign up, but they just would not get a guaranteed seat unlike players that grinded.

I hope it's more clear, the idea is not to exclude anyone, but just to figure out a way a little bit more fair for tournament sign ups.

Edited by gbwead

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
17 hours ago, gbwead said:

Basically, what I'm proposing would only affect official with small brackets, so 128 brackets tournaments would not be affected. So keep in mind nothing would change for large official tournaments and anyone that is fast enough to click on sign up could join.

Why not just change the small brackets in bigger brackets? I think there are less people not liking to play an extra round than there are people being left out of tournaments because of not clicking fast enough, so that seems to be an improvement. 

 

Maybe something between can also solve something, make the bracket bigger and if this causes empty spots in first round, give the free first round to the people being ranked higher?

 

Also I'd like to add an idea to the ranking system if it would ever been implemented: everyone joining a tournament and failing to join a round (for example win round 1 and then just leave and not playing round 2) or forfeiting a game should get some penalty because it's ridiculous that people would join to leave later on while other people couldn't even join.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Posted (edited)

Other than qualifying system, I am more suggest that, for all shiny gift tournaments, set at least 64 or 128 seats (since 256 takes too much time to play). Arrange 2 tournaments with same gift, the second  tournaments start  in after 5min of the first one (So 1st tournament start register at xx:45, 2nd tournament start register at xx:50). The only problem is that, we giving out double gift now (

 

Qualifying system by ladder is fair but not all, since some of players dont have time on daily ladder and unwilling spend time on the ladder matches. And ways to qualify for tournaments would be so hard for new players I believe. Thus I am more prefers to open 2 tournaments in a time, reduce cash prize but keep the main price (like comps, shiny) for the players.


I dont have fast hands to click fast enough to join tournaments actally (((

Edited by mxdzzz
Add a sentence

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

I feel people fail to realise that some players haven't played the ladder in over half a year and remain still in the top 100 leaderboard. Grinding the ladder doesn't have to be a daily task.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

so wb instead of creating bigger tournaments, create more tournaments? but with the same recompense 

i think there would be more chance to people get in.. like instead of 1 tour of 64 for, 3 tours of 64

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
1 hour ago, Soultier said:

so wb instead of creating bigger tournaments, create more tournaments? but with the same recompense 

i think there would be more chance to people get in.. like instead of 1 tour of 64 for, 3 tours of 64

They don't want to give out that much money if I'm right.  They'd probably make 3x 64 man tours if the prize of one 64-man tour gets split three-way.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.