Jump to content
  • 29

Event Suggestions & Feedback


Strych

Question

As you all know, we enjoy running events. We try to come up with as many new and exciting ideas for them as we can, whilst also attempting to cater to our broad player-base.

Have we run a particular event that you'd like to see again? Perhaps one that you didn't like so much?
Do you have an idea for an event that you'd like to see happen? We're interested in your feedback and ideas, so feel free to post them in this thread.


Please keep ideas within the realm of possibility. I realise "if X is implemented, Y could be a great event", but lets try to work with what we have.



Note: This thread is for the discussion of official events (like those posted in PokeMMO Official Events).

Link to comment

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Plague, remember this is just another gimmick tournament, if you do not like it or how it is run, you do not require to participate. Not all events will interest everyone, as you know, there is negative feedback in the thread. I understand how you feel, but this is just something new to try out. 

 

It may be a list but it is not to be looked at as an Official list. If an official one was being put together, I would have talked to competitive players on the thought (as DopestDope said in the thread.)

 

I will re-create the whole NU list for this tournament, by PMing competitive players, and then have my lists together and organize them to create a new list.  (Using DopestDopes suggestion)

no dont do that. its much easier and efficient to make and run a uu list than to go through the 100s of pokes out there to establish a uu list as whatever is left out can be NU and i believe there are some competitive players right now making a uu list so just give it time

Link to comment
  • 0

no dont do that. its much easier and efficient to make and run a uu list than to go through the 100s of pokes out there to establish a uu list as whatever is left out can be NU and i believe there are some competitive players right now making a uu list so just give it time

There is, but the thread quickly devolved. I'm looking into posting a list of all Pokemon that are not currently rated and having the competitive community rate them appropriately.

Link to comment
  • 0

It'd probably be better for you all to just create a new thread (ditch the old one. Just lock it and trash it) and start directing traffic into there. Hell, throw out some in-game Announcements during Tournaments or what not "to check out the NU, UU and OU/BL tier lists in the forums and provide feedback" so you ensure familiar, common competitive players seeing it and going there to participate in it.

 

Also. To whoever it was (I don't wanna go back and find who it was) that said the Shinies for the Masters Tournys are terrible and the gimmick Tournys are getting high end valued Shinies. Thank you. I'll come out and say I was a bit more than annoyed that I won a Shiny Spinarak and then less than a month later Shiny Starters/Eevees/One-Of-A-Kind Story Pokes started being given out for non-Masters Tournys. That was very frustrating for me and turned me off a bit from even playing. I ask for the Staff to re-think the way they pick Prizes for Tournys and not to randomize it anymore. Its clearly unfair. Create a list of common Shinies if you have to then randomize one from that list. Not the entire Pokedex as it seems that is what it is done currently. Though I could be incorrect.

Link to comment
  • 0

I personally don't think the PokeMMO community is ready for an NU tier yet (by making a UU tier list). 

I think it's best if everyone just lets this tournament go by playing by these specific rules (like every other "gimmick" tournament) and then we can come back a couple months time when we're ready for another tier. 

As I said in the other thread, just pretend it's not actually the names Never-Used and Under-Used, rather just a banlist for this specific tournament that Archinix thought up. 

Link to comment
  • 0

It'd probably be better for you all to just create a new thread (ditch the old one. Just lock it and trash it) and start directing traffic into there. Hell, throw out some in-game Announcements during Tournaments or what not "to check out the NU, UU and OU/BL tier lists in the forums and provide feedback" so you ensure familiar, common competitive players seeing it and going there to participate in it.

 

Also. To whoever it was (I don't wanna go back and find who it was) that said the Shinies for the Masters Tournys are terrible and the gimmick Tournys are getting high end valued Shinies. Thank you. I'll come out and say I was a bit more than annoyed that I won a Shiny Spinarak and then less than a month later Shiny Starters/Eevees/One-Of-A-Kind Story Pokes started being given out for non-Masters Tournys. That was very frustrating for me and turned me off a bit from even playing. I ask for the Staff to re-think the way they pick Prizes for Tournys and not to randomize it anymore. Its clearly unfair. Create a list of common Shinies if you have to then randomize one from that list. Not the entire Pokedex as it seems that is what it is done currently. Though I could be incorrect.

 

 

Already being worked on.

Link to comment
  • 0

I personally don't think the PokeMMO community is ready for an NU tier yet (by making a UU tier list). 

I think it's best if everyone just lets this tournament go by playing by these specific rules (like every other "gimmick" tournament) and then we can come back a couple months time when we're ready for another tier. 

As I said in the other thread, just pretend it's not actually the names Never-Used and Under-Used, rather just a banlist for this specific tournament that Archinix thought up. 

 

Problem is the NU list he's using is clearly broken and missing key components as far as Pokemon not considered/known at the time. Its going to be an absolute mess and Hell for those participating. As far as "give it a few months" goes, you don't need to do that at all. Post a thread. Direct competitive player traffic to that topic to discuss the list, give it a week or two and that list will take credible shape much like the OU/BL list did. Let it evolve, grow and be created naturally rather than by sudden force without discussion.

 

 

Already being worked on.

 

I demand compensation for my Tournament win. Give me another Shiny Spinarak to even it out with those damn Shiny Starters/Eevees for clearly lower classed tournaments (no offense Staff, but come on. Everyone knows the Lightweight/Doubles/FnFs/Heavyweight tournaments are the "premiere" tournament you have going everyone wants in on).

Link to comment
  • 0

Problem is the NU list he's using is clearly broken and missing key components as far as Pokemon not considered/known at the time. Its going to be an absolute mess and Hell for those participating.

 

Bunch of us are trying to rectify that on TS atm.

Link to comment
  • 0

I think the new method of creating events is silly and goes back to the old days of fastest internet guarantees sign ups. At least before you could have the thread open before it was locked, now you don't even have that option.

 

TL;DR

 

I'm fine with having separate event discussion threads, but please don't lock the original thread, just trash unnecessary comments that are made there.

Link to comment
  • 0

I think this might be the third time posting here with this suggestion

So I'm honestly tired of why this suggestion has pretty much been ignored outright the first 2 times.

 

So let me try this and hopefully see if I get some kind of feedback (positive or negative).

 

Suggestion: 2 Registration periods separated by about 6 hrs for official tourneys.

 

Selfish Reason why I post this: I hated that almost every official registration time was during work or class in the past

Selfless Reasons why I post this:

1) People complain about locking threads prior to sign ups.

2) People complain about staying up until 2 am...4 am...6 am to register in other countries( it's still not guaranteed they get in).

3) People complain about lag spikes during refresh due to traffic in the popular officials.

4) People complain about a time when the thread wasn't opened when it was advertised to for sign ups (I wasn't there, but if it were me I wouldn't continue clicking refresh for more than 1 min before stopping and wondering if I got the time wrong or something and going to check the OP).

5) People talk about how they sneak out of class, or how they go without sleep to try to get into the tourneys.

 

This second registration would

A- have less traffic since 32 people signed up already.

B- Give people the opportunity to sign up themselves in case they have to miss the first sign up

C- Give second chances to those who post too early or too late.

D- Fix the majority of the  "I have to stay up late to sign up argument and lose sleep" As 6 hrs before 4-6 AM is 10 PM -Midnight and 6 hrs after that is 10 AM-noon.

 

Lets be real here, I don't live in Europe or Asia, but if you can allow people to sign up without taking away their sleep, why don't you?

If you can give people a 2nd chance to sign up with reduced lag, why not?

If you can give an opportunity to people so that they don't have to ditch their obligations for 5 minutes to try to sign up, will it hurt anyone?

 

I just really don't get why 2 registration period for each tourney hasn't happened yet. Especially the 64 man ones. There are just so many pros and not enough cons

Link to comment
  • 0

EDITED OUT TO SAVE SPACE.

 

I like the idea of opening the registration to a greater audience, without having to make them wait up till late night, or having them access the internet at work.  This is an idea I would to at least give a try on an official event, to see how it's received by the players. So I'd like to hear what you think as well.

 

"Registration would be open at 00:00 then locked at 23:59. All names entered would be given a number, then a random number generator would pick numbers until the bracket is full."

 

I think this way address pretty much address all the points you made except the locking thing, but hopefully if this method was used unlocking it a minute late wouldn't really make a difference. However, as pointed out to me by other an other staff member the drawing process is completely luck based, so people may not be a fan of that. 

Link to comment
  • 0

I like the idea of opening the registration to a greater audience, without having to make them wait up till late night, or having them access the internet at work.  

 

 

"Registration would be open at 00:00 then locked at 23:59. All names entered would be given a number, then a random number generator would pick numbers until the bracket is full."

 

I think this way address pretty much address all the points you made except the locking thing, but hopefully if this method was used unlocking it a minute late wouldn't really make a difference. However, as pointed out to me by other an other staff member the drawing process is completely luck based, so people may not be a fan of that.  This is an idea I would to at least give a try on an official event, to see how it's received by the players. So I'd like to hear what you think as well.

 

Wasn't this tried for a petite cup a while back? I don't remember the reaction being very positive for that...

Link to comment
  • 0

Wasn't this tried for a petite cup a while back? I don't remember the reaction being very positive for that...

 

 

From what I remember the petit cup was done similarly, but with a shorter time frame. Again it's just a suggestion and something I was for when it happened the first time. It doesn't hurt to see if the community has changed it's mind on things, seeing as there are new players as well.

 

EDIT: Also I'm not sure if it was the petit cup that was done that way.

Link to comment
  • 0

 

"Registration would be open at 00:00 then locked at 23:59. All names entered would be given a number, then a random number generator would pick numbers until the bracket is full."

 

Until newer players complain about signing up being too hard for them, I don't know about this being a viable solution. The people with the complaints are the ones already in the competitive scene. With that said.

 

The Cons I can think of are these:

1) Consistently competitive players will rage. (Think of Pareto's Principle. 80% of competitive scene are 20% of the players). In the competitive scene you don't want to get these competitive player unhappy with the product if you can avoid it, because without them, the competitive scene would die (hypothetically) . More RNG will certainly get them unhappy.

2) The new players who get in might not show. Just because new guy "Player A" signs up and gets in doesn't mean he'll show. A lot more people will sign up over a 24 hour period if they know they have a chance to get in. That doesn't guarantee they'll be at the tourney though. You might have 200+ people sign up. You run the risk of having 30 players sign up, get into the tourney, but don't show anyways. This means you have to dip into reserves longer and gets more players restless during Roll Call.

3) A player could just have bad luck. Truthfully you don't want the top competitive players to run into a string of bad luck when it comes to tourneys. For example you don't want an Amanu or uMadBrah to go 3+ straight tourneys without being selected in the tourney because of RNG. Pretty much apart of that 80-20 rule mentioned earlier.

4) 24 hours means a lot of time to sign up multiple accounts. Self Explanatory. Even with IP tracking, people can just change their IP or just go to different places during the course of the day and sign up.

 

Ultimately the players want the fate of sign ups in their hands and not in the hands of RNG. They have enough of that already in the game. I would try the 2 registration method before I would try anything that involved a RNG.

Link to comment
  • 0

Until newer players complain about signing up being too hard for them, I don't know about this being a viable solution. The people with the complaints are the ones already in the competitive scene. With that said.

 

The Cons I can think of are these:

1) Consistently competitive players will rage. (Think of Pareto's Principle. 80% of competitive scene are 20% of the players). In the competitive scene you don't want to get these competitive player unhappy with the product if you can avoid it, because without them, the competitive scene would die (hypothetically) . More RNG will certainly get them unhappy.

2) The new players who get in might not show. Just because new guy "Player A" signs up and gets in doesn't mean he'll show. A lot more people will sign up over a 24 hour period if they know they have a chance to get in. That doesn't guarantee they'll be at the tourney though. You might have 200+ people sign up. You run the risk of having 30 players sign up, get into the tourney, but don't show anyways. This means you have to dip into reserves longer and gets more players restless during Roll Call.

3) A player could just have bad luck. Truthfully you don't want the top competitive players to run into a string of bad luck when it comes to tourneys. For example you don't want an Amanu or uMadBrah to go 3+ straight tourneys without being selected in the tourney because of RNG. Pretty much apart of that 80-20 rule mentioned earlier.

4) 24 hours means a lot of time to sign up multiple accounts. Self Explanatory. Even with IP tracking, people can just change their IP or just go to different places during the course of the day and sign up.

 

Ultimately the players want the fate of sign ups in their hands and not in the hands of RNG. They have enough of that already in the game. I would try the 2 registration method before I would try anything that involved a RNG.

 

this plus qualification tourneys for the 'major' events (WND, SNHW, FNF)

Link to comment
  • 0

From what I remember the petit cup was done similarly, but with a shorter time frame. Again it's just a suggestion and something I was for when it happened the first time. It doesn't hurt to see if the community has changed it's mind on things, seeing as there are new players as well.

 

EDIT: Also I'm not sure if it was the petit cup that was done that way.

 

Petit Cup #2 was done this way.

 

I will say I'm not completely against your idea if the time span was shorter. 10 minutes being the max time I'd allow for it. 5 would probably be best. It allows the thread to not be locked (as early posts don't need to count since 5-10 minutes is enough time to realize the mistake and repost). Also you would have to allow reserves to be placed in the order they registered in (so 1st poster still has a great chance in getting in). Just to keep complaining to a minimum and not have 1st person registering becoming reserve #100. 

 

It doesn't solve the idea of inconvenient registration times for Asia and Europe though. Sometimes PST get screwed over too because of school (the 5 PM EDT registration times = 2 PM PDT).  I think for the competitive scene to continue gaining members, staff has to be considerate of players in all parts of the world. Two registration times would be ideal for that.

Link to comment
  • 0

Petit Cup #2 was done this way.

 

I will say I'm not completely against your idea if the time span was shorter. 10 minutes being the max time I'd allow for it. 5 would probably be best. It allows the thread to not be locked (as early posts don't need to count since 5-10 minutes is enough time to realize the mistake and repost). Also you would have to allow reserves to be placed in the order they registered in (so 1st poster still has a great chance in getting in). Just to keep complaining to a minimum and not have 1st person registering becoming reserve #100. 

 

It doesn't solve the idea of inconvenient registration times for Asia and Europe though. Sometimes PST get screwed over too because of school (the 5 PM EDT registration times = 2 PM PDT).  I think for the competitive scene to continue gaining members, staff has to be considerate of players in all parts of the world. Two registration times would be ideal for that.

 

Correct, Petit Cup 2 was done that way, however I misjudged the interest for the event and as such was a horrible tournament to test random selection on.

10-15 minutes would be the max time I would like to allow for randomised selection, however it was not my idea in the first place to use that method, as I was originally opposed to it.

 

Generally our registration times are the same times as our event starting times. If they are inconvenient, why couldn't we instead host events that are convenient for those timezones?

 

Regarding your multiple signups, I believe you will still have problems with lag during signups especially since you are dividing the amount of places being given per signup time. I personally don't like the idea for example of offering only half of our places for an event at one time, then forcing those who didn't make it in to be inconvenienced by having to sign up at a totally different time.

 

All this being said however, we won't make a change until we have a consensus among the staff and are able to apply one registration method across all of our events. What we are doing is always looking for ways to make it better, but every method has a tradeoff along with it. 

Link to comment
  • 0

Generally our registration times are the same times as our event starting times. If they are inconvenient, why couldn't we instead host events that are convenient for those timezones?

 

Regarding your multiple signups, I believe you will still have problems with lag during signups especially since you are dividing the amount of places being given per signup time. I personally don't like the idea for example of offering only half of our places for an event at one time, then forcing those who didn't make it in to be inconvenienced by having to sign up at a totally different time.

 

All this being said however, we won't make a change until we have a consensus among the staff and are able to apply one registration method across all of our events. What we are doing is always looking for ways to make it better, but every method has a tradeoff along with it. 

 

The first idea makes perfect sense in theory. Maybe give it a test run? But you're wrong about the registration times being the same as the starting times. I checked 5 recent officials and only 1 fell into that category.

 

Maybe you're right about the lag, but it would need to be tested. I think the second registration will have dramatically less lag cause of 32 people missing it since they signed up for the first tourney. But any non randomized solution will have the same issue so that can't be helped.

 

I don't believe I'm being counterproductive when it comes to your second point though. In fact, if what you said about 2 registrations is your biggest con about it, then to me it makes the most sense to go with 2 registrations.

 

Okay let me see if I get this

What you said: 2 registrations are inconvenient because it forces a potential 32 people in a 64 person tourney to come back later and try again.

What I said: 2 registrations are convenient because it allows players to not inconvenience themselves by staying up late, waking up early, leaving class, getting on the internet at work, or ditching any other obligation to sign up for a tourney in it's 1 and only registration time.

 

You know what though? I'm speaking for the community with this suggestion and can always be wrong. Maybe people don't care about staying up or waking up early or leaving their commitments to sign up for a tourney that they're not guaranteed to get into. Maybe people who accidentally oversleep or had something to do or just forgot about it for 2 minutes don't care about getting a second chance.

 

I'll say this though. It's a global game where I met lots of cool people from Eurasia. I see a lot of people talk about how they didn't sleep til 4 am or 6 am because they wanted to sign up for a tourney. Along with myself, I've heard people say "oh well, guess I'll leave class for a bit to sign up for this tourney". I've heard people say "dam I can't believe I stayed up until 3 am to be 20th reserve" before. It honestly makes me slightly sad knowing that people do this because they enjoy the competitive gaming aspect of pokemmo and they're forced to sign up in these ways.

 

TL;DR

If you could allow people to have fun in this game without sacrificing sleep and obligations, why wouldn't you? Because you'd rather not have people be inconvenienced by failing to sign up at a time that was convenient for them and letting them have a second chance? Okay. If I didn't get through with this post I'll just give up trying.

Link to comment
  • 0

I agree with Jag's idea about a double (maybe triple?) timed sign-up. Afterwards using a RNG to select players to compete in the tourny and fill reserves.

 

But this alone won't be enough!

 

So I would sugest adding two things to Jag's sugestion:

 

1. Top 4 (or 8) of last month's tournament get a spot in the upcoming tournament.

This ensures consistently competitive players have a spot in each tournament. Also great external motivator to do well in a tourny.

 

2. Create some sort of 'blacklist' of people that did sign-up but did not show up for the tournament.

If someone didn't show up after getting in a tournament bracket / top 10 reserve, write down his/her name. If this happens twice in a row, his next sign-up will be invalid.

Ofcourse, people can cancel their sign-up until 1 hour ( can be discussed) before the tournament begins,

As other effect, people will think twice before registering for a tournament, so the amount of sign-ups will be lower and the RNG will be more likely to pick the competitive players who do show up constantly.

 

Note: these are just raw ideas that obviously need some tuning, but the general thought can be read and hopefully discussed.

Link to comment
  • 0

You also have to keep in mind that most hosts of Official Tournaments watch their threads each time sign ups occur. I am not fond of having to add more responsibilities and more cases where things can go wrong for my tournament Sign ups. 

 

We are, and have been for a while now, discussing better registration methods. I won't say that I am for or against multiple sign ups at this time but being required to watch a thread multiple times (and at times I am not available) does not seem workable for me at the moment. 

Link to comment

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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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