Battle of Bucharest 2017 - Sign Up!

Gibby Jr

Marquis
Best answers
0
HKP said:
So you want to change up the format in order to give 'toptier' teams an advantage just because they consider themselves better than other teams?  :party:
The purpose of seeding is not to give anyone an advantage but to spread top teams out so that everyone has a reasonably equal chance of reaching the finals - in this case everyone's goal is first and foremost reaching the LAN. None of the "Lower tier" teams have a chance in the upper bracket as they have to face Castellans, 2 AE teams and Charlini's team which is full of sick players. Not only is this unfair on the "top tier" teams as their chances of reaching the finals are lowered but it makes it almost impossible for a non-top tier team to reach the semi-finals. Plenty of other competitions use seeding and you won't have to look hard to find some big examples
 

Oliveran

Master Knight
WB
Best answers
0
It's like knocking out Federer or Djokovic from Australian Open, by having them play each other in the round 64, by randoming the seeds.

Or put up Juventus, Real Madrid, Bayern and Barcelona in the same group in Champions League, and then have a group with Kopenhagen, Aston Villa, Blackburn and Real Betis.... It's not fair for the teams in the first group to get knocked out, because they had to face all other good teams and be thrown out. Then the teams that might've not deserved it (either by never peaking in performance, yet still getting to the finals) play, and it just ruins it for the other teams by breaking their chances, along with making a potential finals disaster.
 
Best answers
0
The problem with seeding this time around is that there isn't really an established and stable scene to build that around, and certainly not for 5vs5.

It would have been possible to get a committee together but then you suddenly end up with a lot of subjectivity, dealing with decisions that can have a very dramatic effect on an individual team's chances. I'm happy to admit that I made the call to go random and avoid putting myself or anyone else in that position. No person is free from bias but random certainly is.

This tournament will offer a stronger precedent for seeding in the future and I'm definitely open to doing so, but at this point I think what's important is the integrity of this tournament and its success. Let's see how it *actually* plays out, rather than blow things out of proportion based on assumptions which could easily turn out not to be true. Single elimination will find us a well-deserved winner and nobody is getting a free pass to Bucharest.

As I've said, I do understand where people are coming from!

 
Best answers
0
If this was up to discussion with the community, it would've been earlier, it wasn't.
Although the tourney seems quite rushed and flawed, it's a big (small in the greater scheme of things, I presume more similar tourneys will come) step in the right direction.
Voice your opinions, hopefully they will be listened to and changes will be made in the future, for now it's random, one map, whatever, make do.

Forum Rules said:
Armagan's word is final
These boards are provided at TaleWorld's expense for fans of Mount & Blade. Purchasing a licence does not confer any right of access to these boards, you have no right of free speech or anything of the sort. This should be considered a privately owned forum of which we are all guests, nothing more. While we do try to work with and listen to the community, once a decision has been made no amount of complaining is likely to alter it.
Just gonna leave this here, take it as you will
*1 new message*
 

Lagstro

Baron
Best answers
0
Captain Lust said:
Single elimination will find us a well-deserved winner and nobody is getting a free pass to Bucharest.
Yes, Single elimination is sufficient in finding an accurate 1st place team within a tournament, however it fails to provide accurate results for 2nd or 3rd place teams (which are getting a cut of the prize pool).

I agree with you that seeding in this scenario would be highly subjective and would cause a different kind of unfairness within the tournament, which is one of the reason why we typically have some sort of round robin so that teams can deserve their seeding in the single elimination stage of a tournament.

You've made it clear that there's no time for something as extensive as a round robin, but could you perhaps fit in a mere loser's bracket?

You could keep the randomization, and it would still do its job at finding more accurate teams to deserve the 2nd and 3rd placements in the tournament and potentially make more exciting LAN matches.

Otherwise, I'd just move the entire prize-pool to 1st place as they are the only one's truly and fairly deserving of it in a randomized single elimination tournament. The seeding fairness issue would mostly disappear as it wouldn't really matter who ends up 2nd or 3rd in the end, but the potentially lack luster LAN finals issue would still remain.

In any case, I hope this tournament goes as well as it possibly could no matter what format is used <3
 

Guaccmoleboy

On probation
Best answers
0
Lust, will you be introducing more anti cheat systems and stricter punishments for this and future tournaments? I believe that at the e-sport level of Warband more people would be inclined to cheat and play unfairly
 

Colonel Greed

Grandmaster Knight
WB
Best answers
0
GlorvalhirSRB said:
If this was up to discussion with the community, it would've been earlier, it wasn't.
Voice your opinions, hopefully they will be listened to and changes will be made in the future, for now it's random, one map, whatever, make do.
I disagree, as I've been saying on twitter, nobody can say for certain what team deserves to be seeded, and who gets to decide this? The players already involved in the tournament? Do we say ok AE clearly deserves to be seeded, they also ran tournaments for a long time, so they decide who else is worth fighting. This is open to such abuse, even if you mix in players from other clans/teams. No...The community is not neutral enough to decide this, everyone knows each other, some are friends, some are....well not. This will impact your decisions. You're not a robot. Honestly there's too much elitism going on in the game already, its natural as the players are also the hosts ect, but who knows in the future. If we want this to be seen as a potential e-sport, we have to act like it. I would rather see an article saying "X TEAM CRUSHES Y IN THE GRAND FINALE!" than "Warband e-sports dies due to favoritism at LAN" Its out of our hands at this stage, disagree if you will, but if warband does become an e-sport and more of these tournaments do happen, dont expect a say in how its done.

You'd need a neutral committee of people who would look at the past tournament results of the teams and players and determine who should be seeded and who shouldn't. Nobody in this community has enough knowledge of the teams and players to make a ruling here. If people actually took 5v5 seriously this wouldn't have happened.

_Osiris_ said:
For a proper seeding we would need more 5v5matches (don't orgasm just yet greed,)
In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.

 
Best answers
0
Uhm.. disagree with what in my post ?
My point is not for or against seeding, if I wasn't clear enough, but rather that it's pointless to ***** about it now and that people should do their best with what they are given and present the community in the best light possible now that WB was given this opportunity.

The other point being that hopefully, for future tourneys, the general opinion of the community, whatever that may be, will be taken into consideration when making rules, the final decision being made by TW as they are the ones organising it.
 

MaRzz

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
This whole thread atm https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/beggars_can%27t_be_choosers
 
Best answers
0
MaRzz said:
This whole thread atm https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/beggars_can%27t_be_choosers
you guys should just be happy that you get this amazing opportunity. A big, $10,000 LAN tournament (hell, we can't even get a sub board on this side of the pond.) There are others excluded who would happily take your place.

I get that randomization isn't perfect, but as Lust said, it will be used to seed in future tournaments. Be happy that Warband is finally getting some real e-sport recognition
 

Colonel Greed

Grandmaster Knight
WB
Best answers
0
GlorvalhirSRB said:
Uhm.. disagree with what in my post ?
My point is not for or against seeding, if I wasn't clear enough, but rather that it's pointless to ***** about it now and that people should do their best with what they are given and present the community in the best light possible now that WB was given this opportunity.

The other point being that hopefully, for future tourneys, the general opinion of the community, whatever that may be, will be taken into consideration when making rules, the final decision being made by TW as they are the ones organising it.
Sorry maybe I misunderstood, busy days this... I thought you meant that if the community had more of a hand in the decision it wouldve been better. If I was wrong I apologise.

Achilles_TheIV said:
The_Troubadour said:
finally getting some real e-sport recognition
I agree. Keep on, gentlemen
Hear hear!
 

OurGloriousLeader

Grandmaster Knight
Best answers
0
@ Greed: Seeding doesn't need to be arbitrary it can be done via seeding matches in the qualifiers. Seeding by review is worst case scenario when limited by time (as we might do for example in ECS or NC). Failing that a double elimination provides some credibility to the consistency of results. Any option is better than full randomisation, one chance.
 

🐝 M

Marquis
Best answers
0
The_Troubadour said:
I get that randomization isn't perfect, but as Lust said, it will be used to seed in future tournaments
You can't properly seed future tournaments from an unseeded tournament, the seeding data will be terrible. If Charlini's team goes out in the first round, a team that should be a contender, they'll have the same seed in the next LAN as any terrible team who also went out in the first round. That means for the next hypothetical LAN the seeding data will be barely better than random, and still far worse than any community member/manager could have done for the first non-hypothetical LAN. That also assumes all these 5v5 teams will stay together for many LANs, which won't happen, since we're apparently and completely bizarrely unwilling to seed based on compositions of players we've all known for 7 years.

Having to explain seeding to competitive gamers, I'm old but this is a future I could not have imagined. I hope it still all goes great since I love this game but every decision seems to be designed to kill potential LAN hype. Terrible format for the teams, terrible seeding, no faction switching in duel - forget seeing anything but a greatsword, anything else is too risky to commit to if you can't switch back. A real knock to this thing's potential, hopefully it's still useful to generate publicity for Bannerlord and bladegames in general.