Jump to content


Feedback and suggestion for future new tournaments

eSports Tournaments Feedback Suggestions

  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

dead_man_walking #21 Posted 13 May 2014 - 01:31 PM

    Captain

  • Beta-Tester
  • 20387 battles
  • 1,310
  • [-NRD-] -NRD-
  • Member since:
    07-27-2012

View PostHannt, on 09 May 2014 - 08:59 PM, said:

Hi DMW,

 

I've seen the suggestion by DQ about 2 "knock out" tourneys with a different time schedule. The idea itself is pretty sweet, since it could provide players with an alternative choice for a change. But the problem is that one time slot could have 60 teams participating while the other only have 20 teams, and it wouldn't be fair for the teams in the first one (grouped with 59 other teams) since the other side would only have 19 other teams to compete against. Since we'll only be selecting top 4 in each slot, it could be easily exploited by teams which could play at either of the timings (or based on being in the group with the lesser teams).

 

Siege of 8s and War of 5s will be continuing on alternate week, and it will be held concurrently along side WGL APAC-ASIA. This would provide more options for other teams who wouldn't wish to join WGL APAC-ASIA due to time constraint issues or differences in skill-level. Also, Siege of 8s and War of 5s would be held at a different timing, which is exactly the opposite of WGL APAC-ASIA (the timing would not clash). Even with these 3 tournaments, we're still hoping to come up with more tournaments to keep you guys entertained and provide more choices to the more casual teams. That's one of the reasons why i'm trying to gather for more feedback from the community before it's being implemented.

 

The idea of a Mix'n'Match 5 a side and "Nation" themes sounds good, we take that into consideration as well. Thank you for your suggestions DMW!

 

Regards,

Hannt

 

 

 

Hannt

 

There's no reason why you have to have "even" numbers in the two tz comps:

 

Comp "A" 7pm limited to 32 or 64 teams - gets 4 spots in the weekend final

Comp "B" 10pm limited to 64 or 128 teams - gets 6 or 8 spots in the weekend final

(or vice versa depending on demand)

 

I.E. make it proportional, with a minimum of top 4 of the group to go through

 



Hannt #22 Posted 13 May 2014 - 11:36 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 2159 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

The thing about this is that there will be too many variables in the format. You can set it for 32 and 128 teams or 64 and 64 teams, but the turnout can't be estimated properly as it varies for every week. Next is that for the advancement spots in each group will be dependent on the participation. Adjusting it every week according to the turnout would not be wise as well. Eventually it might just make it more confusing for the players as a whole.

 

NA was able to do this because their turnout for each tournament was practically full for every single time slot. The same could not be said for the current state of the server.

 

I wouldn't say it's impossible, but in this current situation the uncertainties are making it a less attractive solution.



Fendalton #23 Posted 14 May 2014 - 11:39 AM

    (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻)

  • Member
  • 11486 battles
  • 5,597
  • [LUCK] LUCK
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

Not sure if it's mentioned or allowed, but what if you promote non-WG aligned tournaments to increase the general awareness of such events?

 


Edited by Fendalton, 14 May 2014 - 11:43 AM.


Hannt #24 Posted 14 May 2014 - 12:02 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 2159 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

View PostFendalton, on 14 May 2014 - 11:39 AM, said:

Not sure if it's mentioned or allowed, but what if you promote non-WG aligned tournaments to increase the general awareness of such events?

 

 

Could you care to elaborate more on that?

If you're talking about organizing other types of tournament, it wouldn't be an issue as there's been a few other tournaments going on out there as well eg. MOL & CG. Overall, we do feel that these tournaments would help to increase the awareness and general eSports community for WOT as well.



dead_man_walking #25 Posted 15 May 2014 - 06:08 AM

    Captain

  • Beta-Tester
  • 20387 battles
  • 1,310
  • [-NRD-] -NRD-
  • Member since:
    07-27-2012

View PostHannt, on 14 May 2014 - 01:06 AM, said:

The thing about this is that there will be too many variables in the format. You can set it for 32 and 128 teams or 64 and 64 teams, but the turnout can't be estimated properly as it varies for every week. Next is that for the advancement spots in each group will be dependent on the participation. Adjusting it every week according to the turnout would not be wise as well. Eventually it might just make it more confusing for the players as a whole.

 

NA was able to do this because their turnout for each tournament was practically full for every single time slot. The same could not be said for the current state of the server.

 

I wouldn't say it's impossible, but in this current situation the uncertainties are making it a less attractive solution.

 

I'd go the other way Hannt

 

By not catering to the variety of TZ's on this server I'd say we are losing teams as they just can't participate.

When you make it early to suit the Eastern TZ players then the Western TZ players are still on their way home from work.

When you make it late then the Eastern TZ players are calling it quits so they can work the next day.

 

By running 2 (3?) "pools" that meet up for the finals then you give yourself the greatest opportunity to get those that would normally decide not to participate due to timings.

 

 

Edit:

Not saying you will get 64/256 split the first time around - it will need to be adjusted to meet the demand. 

IMO Having fewer spots is better than too many - you generate demand.  If you find you had way too few then you can always increase the numbers.  It won't be a perfect fit first time.

 


Edited by dead_man_walking, 15 May 2014 - 06:10 AM.


Hannt #26 Posted 15 May 2014 - 08:21 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 2159 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

Your argument is valid as well, we'll be analyzing the participating teams by country and hopefully we'll come up with a better schedule where everyone will be satisfied with.

 

Thanks for your input DMW!



topshelf #27 Posted 20 May 2014 - 06:43 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 24548 battles
  • 610
  • [AAD] AAD
  • Member since:
    08-12-2012

View PostHannt, on 07 May 2014 - 07:02 PM, said:

 

That's a pretty sweet idea, I will work on it and come up with the thread for it. Cheers!

Was actually thinking along similar lines as Fendalton but rather than a recruitment thread how about a Tournie version of the Recruitment Station. People looking to form / join teams can set minimum levels for various variables, eg. spoken language, TS requirements, min. win rate, min WN8, min number of relevant tournie tanks, even min level of crew skills per tournie tank. People looking for tournie teams could put their own details in, including whether they consider themselves a battle caller or not and then do a search the same way as the Recruitment Station works.



Hannt #28 Posted 20 May 2014 - 11:51 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 2159 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

Hi topshelf,

 

Thanks for the suggestion! I was actually thinking along the same line as you. I'm looking to make the thread a one-stop station for new-comers, existing team captains and established eSports teams to post for their recruitment (with regards to tourneys and not clan). In addition, I could monitor the current well-established eSports teams and keep players informed regarding their roster changes or openings so they could contact the respective captains to request for a trial.

 

It's still currently in the process of editing, I'll be posting it up once it's been completed.

 

Keep the feedback and suggestions coming guys! Feel free to voice out any ideas if you have any!


Edited by Hannt, 20 May 2014 - 11:52 PM.


topshelf #29 Posted 04 June 2014 - 05:37 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 24548 battles
  • 610
  • [AAD] AAD
  • Member since:
    08-12-2012
At Bronze series level, to weed out Alt and bad teams who intentionally, either by actual strategy or trolling ignorance, make the format Encounter mode instead of Standard battle. This will help stop camping and emphasise to junior teams that WoT eSports and WGL only has a future if it's exciting and things are happening in battles.

Hannt #30 Posted 04 June 2014 - 07:18 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 2159 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

View Posttopshelf, on 04 June 2014 - 05:37 PM, said:

At Bronze series level, to weed out Alt and bad teams who intentionally, either by actual strategy or trolling ignorance, make the format Encounter mode instead of Standard battle. This will help stop camping and emphasise to junior teams that WoT eSports and WGL only has a future if it's exciting and things are happening in battles.

 

Thank you for your feedback topshelf.

 

We've actually considered encounter mode, and past tournaments such as QYC were all in encounter mode. However, we wish to follow the standard meta that other regions are doing so that we will not be at a disadvantage at the international level should we be competing against them.

 

For example, other region uses standard mode for all major international tournaments while we're used to encounter mode instead, this would put us at a disadvantage when we play against teams from other regions.



topshelf #31 Posted 05 June 2014 - 05:53 AM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 24548 battles
  • 610
  • [AAD] AAD
  • Member since:
    08-12-2012

View PostHannt, on 04 June 2014 - 07:18 PM, said:

 

Thank you for your feedback topshelf.

 

We've actually considered encounter mode, and past tournaments such as QYC were all in encounter mode. However, we wish to follow the standard meta that other regions are doing so that we will not be at a disadvantage at the international level should we be competing against them.

 

For example, other region uses standard mode for all major international tournaments while we're used to encounter mode instead, this would put us at a disadvantage when we play against teams from other regions.

 

If it was only at Bronze series level then there'd be no disadvantage. In fact arguably you'd potentially have a much better situation for ensuring the best teams went through instead of being camped out by teams of alt accounts put into the tournament just to block other teams or total muppets who have no idea. This would actually help the Asia server level the playing field at the top levels. Any team that made it to the international level would have to be dynamic and be good strategists, so I doubt playing encounter mode at the bronze level would really impact them. Plus, as mentioned before, perhaps it'll make teams be more active at all levels which will increase the spectator enjoyment for televised matches and then lead to more teams being involved in tournaments and a bigger player base for WoT for WG to make more money. 

 

If that's not something you want to imemwnt then will WG get serious about banning teams and members from competing for the next 2 or 3 rounds if complaints of camping are made and are valid?


Edited by topshelf, 05 June 2014 - 05:56 AM.


Hannt #32 Posted 05 June 2014 - 12:54 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 2159 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

View Posttopshelf, on 05 June 2014 - 05:53 AM, said:

 

If it was only at Bronze series level then there'd be no disadvantage. In fact arguably you'd potentially have a much better situation for ensuring the best teams went through instead of being camped out by teams of alt accounts put into the tournament just to block other teams or total muppets who have no idea. This would actually help the Asia server level the playing field at the top levels. Any team that made it to the international level would have to be dynamic and be good strategists, so I doubt playing encounter mode at the bronze level would really impact them. Plus, as mentioned before, perhaps it'll make teams be more active at all levels which will increase the spectator enjoyment for televised matches and then lead to more teams being involved in tournaments and a bigger player base for WoT for WG to make more money. 

 

If that's not something you want to imemwnt then will WG get serious about banning teams and members from competing for the next 2 or 3 rounds if complaints of camping are made and are valid?

 

The difference between WGL this Season and past season's TAM tournament series is that everyone is on the equal footing starting from ground zero every week. It will be hard to manage an alt team just to block other teams when your own team is playing in the same time bracket as well. Instead of blocking, it's more like having a free walk-over in such cases.

From our point of view is that the more matches you play, the more training and practice you get off tournaments. If we were to switch Bronze Series to encounter mode and for the rest of the teams to play on standard mode if they made it into Silver Series, they would be having only 2 rounds of practice (Silver Series) instead of the usual 7 (5 Rounds in Bronze and 2 in Silver) for standard mode. That's actually a huge difference in the amount of sets for each round.

 

Camping itself, it's hard to find an exact definition for it. But at the moment, having tried and tested, encounter mode wouldn't necessary stop people from camping, they could be camping close to the cap zone as well.

 

The question is however, in your point, what way would you consider your opponents to be camping?



Fendalton #33 Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:00 PM

    (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻)

  • Member
  • 11486 battles
  • 5,597
  • [LUCK] LUCK
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

View PostHannt, on 14 May 2014 - 04:02 PM, said:

 

Could you care to elaborate more on that?

If you're talking about organizing other types of tournament, it wouldn't be an issue as there's been a few other tournaments going on out there as well eg. MOL & CG. Overall, we do feel that these tournaments would help to increase the awareness and general eSports community for WOT as well.

 

Sorry my post was poorly worded. 

 

Is there any possibility of having tournaments advertised in the garage? The 'in-game announcements'?

 

They are on the Launcher from memory, but I don't think they are in the garage? (Unless they are those messages that are all boxes)



Lockhart77 #34 Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:05 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 15789 battles
  • 10,567
  • [FLEX] FLEX
  • Member since:
    08-02-2012

View PostHannt, on 05 June 2014 - 11:54 AM, said:

 

Camping itself, it's hard to find an exact definition for it. But at the moment, having tried and tested, encounter mode wouldn't necessary stop people from camping, they could be camping close to the cap zone as well.

 

The question is however, in your point, what way would you consider your opponents to be camping?

But doesn't that mean if "they" means both teams went to the cap zone and "camped" it, will ensure engagement? I mean, they basically went to the only cap zone and high chance will be spotting each other and start engagement.

 

My 2 cent on "What way would you consider your opponents to be camping?"

- A waiting period/moment where both or one team just sit somewhere not trying to make fronts in the battlefield, different from an ambush, where an ambush is going to somewhere strategically important and enemy less expect you to be there, camping is where people sit and waits in common comfort zones where it give extraneous advantage to the defender relying on defensive elements more than the element of surprise.

 

Granted if the battle is something like the Assault mode where a team will obviously asked to "camp" or defend, cause that's what they asked to do, not in standard battle where people expect both teams try to outwit each other not "wait and see" for 3/4 length of a battle.


                                                                                                ▄██████████████▄▐█▄▄▄▄█▌ 
                                                                                                ██████▌▄▌▄▐▐▌███▌▀▀██▀▀
                                                                                                ████▄█▌▄▌▄▐▐▌▀███▄▄█▌
                                                                                                ▄▄▄▄▄██████████████▀   

Lock "Choco-chon" Hart of the Choco-Choco Hearts Host Club
 


Fendalton #35 Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:11 PM

    (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻)

  • Member
  • 11486 battles
  • 5,597
  • [LUCK] LUCK
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013
To prevent camping, make match durations shorter.

Hannt #36 Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:13 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 2159 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

View PostFendalton, on 05 June 2014 - 01:00 PM, said:

 

Sorry my post was poorly worded. 

 

Is there any possibility of having tournaments advertised in the garage? The 'in-game announcements'?

 

They are on the Launcher from memory, but I don't think they are in the garage? (Unless they are those messages that are all boxes)

 

Those in-game announcements were reserved for specific occasions, we wouldn't want to have too many in-game notifications as we're received feedback from players who feel that there may have been too many spams in the notification.

:biggrin:

 

View PostLockhart77, on 05 June 2014 - 01:05 PM, said:

But doesn't that mean if "they" means both teams went to the cap zone and "camped" it, will ensure engagement? I mean, they basically went to the only cap zone and high chance will be spotting each other and start engagement.

 

My 2 cent on "What way would you consider your opponents to be camping?"

- A waiting period/moment where both or one team just sit somewhere not trying to make fronts in the battlefield, different from an ambush, where an ambush is going to somewhere strategically important and enemy less expect you to be there, camping is where people sit and waits in common comfort zones where it give extraneous advantage to the defender relying on defensive elements more than the element of surprise.

 

Granted if the battle is something like the Assault mode where a team will obviously asked to "camp" or defend, cause that's what they asked to do, not in standard battle where people expect both teams try to outwit each other not "wait and see" for 3/4 length of a battle.

 

You can be strategically position in locations where you are able to spot anyone who tries to start a cap, and play defensively at that spot. It will be harder for either team to commit capping when they know that they could be destroyed if they tries to do so too.

 

If a team holds a position and release their T1 to scout around, would you consider that as camping?

If a team is down 2 sets to 0, they are on their last set and they chose to play defensively, you can't possibly make it a requirement for them to attack and lose the game too isn't it.

Different situation and scenarios should be factored in for this discussion as well



Hannt #37 Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:17 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 2159 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

View PostFendalton, on 05 June 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:

To prevent camping, make match durations shorter.

 

What would you recommend for the duration of a match, Fendalton?

 

It's entirely up to a team to decide if they choose to play aggressively or defensively. It's a choice of tactical decision as well. In WGL's case, teams are finding ways to crack down defensive opponents with the additional rounds given to them as draws aren't really happening as frequently now too.



Ezz #38 Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:18 PM

    How many flipping posts do I need to get past Major?

  • Beta-Tester
  • 78150 battles
  • 37,907
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    07-17-2012

View PostHannt, on 05 June 2014 - 03:17 PM, said:

 In WGL's case, teams are finding ways to crack down defensive opponents with the additional rounds given to them as draws aren't really happening as frequently now too.

So just to clarify extra rounds are given for draws based on some organiser discretion? Why not make specific rules around this? Eg draw with >50% HP left = loss for both sides.


Who the [edited] are you? Get Spoofed! "wouldn't be a proper WG balance change if they didn't [edited] something up after all "

>9000 cynicism brought to you by P2W, Balance TM and the Cartoon Connection

R. Pubbie: "why are all PBKAC players so rude, arrogant and nasty? and why do Mods favor them?"


Hannt #39 Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:22 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Member
  • 2159 battles
  • 306
  • Member since:
    12-22-2012

View PostEzz, on 05 June 2014 - 01:18 PM, said:

So just to clarify extra rounds are given for draws based on some organiser discretion? Why not make specific rules around this? Eg draw with >50% HP left = loss for both sides.

 

Ahh, not in that sense Ezz. Instead of the standard BO5, we're doing 7 Rounds, first to 3 Win format. More allowance for teams to crack down defensive playing teams to get their last win or in certain possible cases, opponents get too tired playing defensively for 5 rounds starts to make mistakes or even YOLO-ing.


Edited by Hannt, 05 June 2014 - 01:24 PM.


Fendalton #40 Posted 05 June 2014 - 01:25 PM

    (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻)

  • Member
  • 11486 battles
  • 5,597
  • [LUCK] LUCK
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

View PostHannt, on 05 June 2014 - 05:17 PM, said:

 

What would you recommend for the duration of a match, Fendalton?

 

It's entirely up to a team to decide if they choose to play aggressively or defensively. It's a choice of tactical decision as well. In WGL's case, teams are finding ways to crack down defensive opponents with the additional rounds given to them as draws aren't really happening as frequently now too.

 

Depending on what the 'theme' or 'tier' of the tournament is. 

 

A estimated figure would be 7 minutes for a tier 5 tournament. I believe it's 10 min by default, and it seems on certain maps that nothing happens for the first 2-4min unless a team is aggressive, and watching e-sports, aggressive play is more entertaining to watch than 2 teams camping until there is 4 minutes remaining. 

 

That's my opinion, without ever playing e-sports and only watching, this could not work for many reasons, or might be a brilliant idea. 







1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users