Where do we go from here?

BaronDeMoroz

Squire
Best answers
0
prize Money

Lust, my clan and myself (I was then deputy leader of the clan).

We were the only ones who organized the tournament with a prize fund in the form of real money. (in Russia).
Believe my experience, and take my word:

Do not do it. Never!

What Alex wrote, it is only a small part. You get a very big disappointment.

P.S. I find it hard to write in English. But I can give you all the arguments, if you wish.
 

BaronDeMoroz

Squire
Best answers
0
captain lust said:
Tournament Format

As it stands, though, mobility in the ENL is too low and new, strong teams shouldn't have to wait so long to compete at a top level. Infact, I don't think they should have to wait at all.

This isn't a regressive step, back to what we had with the ENPL or anything like that. I want these tournaments to be professional and fast affairs. 2 weeks and over.
Duken96 said:
I think that one tournament every 2/3 weeks would be excessive: some teams can't play 2 matches ore more every week.
I want to remind you about the Russian teams, who are experiencing a big difference over time.

We can carry  matches out only at the weekend. Especially with teams from Spain and Portugal.
 

ModusTollens

Baron
M&BWBWF&S
Best answers
0
captain lust said:
Like now, maps and factions would be predermined (the method is irrelevant but in any competitions I might run, they would probably be random). However, instead of two setups, you would have three. Closed, Mixed and Open.
Just to make sure: the method of predetermining maps and factions would always be random but the accomplishment of this randomness doesn't matter? And not: the method of predetermining maps and factions doesn't matter in general (so they could be chosen by the teams for example)?

captain lust said:
This isn't a regressive step, back to what we had with the ENPL or anything like that. I want these tournaments to be professional and fast affairs. 2 weeks and over.

Many of you may wince at the prospect of playing such a fast tournament but I say it's the best way of moving forward and I want to run a test tournament very soon to see how it works. I'm thinking single elimination with a scheduling system somewhat similar to that of Division C's but more rigid.
But wouldn't such (regular but different in their formats) tournaments involve even more administrative work than a league (or a single ladder)? These tournaments could also be affected worse by things like roster violations and drop-outs, thinking that those won't happen because something is over fast - judging from the habit of things being dragged out way above the estimated time period even that could be doubted (and could even be supported by some empirical evidence and justification) - isn't necessarily accurate.

Lord Rich said:
Could we not just have the possibility of a draw (all 3 maps drawn) because otherwise those 2 points ahead rules would make it a very long game (potentially unending XD).
Not in the proposed single elimination tournaments of course but as far as a league or ladder are concerned I'd agree.

captain lust said:
Once this release out (sorry about that, I wanted to postpone making this thread a few days but discussions were starting anyway) we'll get some testing done for that.
I blame Arch3r.

captain lust said:
We're not massive scene with hundreds of competitive teams and thousands of dollars of prize money. That's certainly the situation I'd like us to be in... though I don't know if that's an opinion shared by everyone.
captain lust said:
I'd also like to start thinking about somehow integrating prize money, even small amounts into these competitions.
As far as a broader, so to speak, audience is concerned I don't believe a game like Warband (or WotR or M&B2) will ever be able to address a significant enough portion of gamers.

I'm opposed to the introduction of prizes or prize money (apart from them being used for advertising purposes like in the WFAS-tournament). If one needs prizes to play a game in an at least semi-serious way without being overly ambitious they're either kiddies thinking they need the 10 bucks to buy some random **** or conservative idiots who need some sort of material incentive. In both cases they can go **** themselves as far as I'm concerned.
 

Morii

Sergeant Knight
Best answers
0
I feel that IF its probable that money-prizes will draw more people to the game or tournaments and/or improves general competitiveness, its worth looking into at least.
 

BaronDeMoroz

Squire
Best answers
0
Do not see the point.

All those who have played in Native already are participating in the ENL.

Those who do not play in the Native. Savvy enough to realize that they can not win a prize.
 

Morii

Sergeant Knight
Best answers
0
BaronDeMoroz said:
All those who have played in Native already are participating in the ENL.
That's just not true :O Look at RN, RS and plenty of small clans in Poland, Germany and possibly Russia(?) who are currently not participating in the ENL.

BaronDeMoroz said:
Those who do not play in the Native. Savvy enough to realize that they can not win a prize.
Also not really true; as an example, there are plenty of cRPG players/clans who think they'd do very well in Native.

There are serious concerns to be dealt with before implementing moneyprizes, but I doubt the idea itself would have no effect whatsoever on activeness in the competitive scene.
 

BaronDeMoroz

Squire
Best answers
0
Morii said:
Check the roster of the Syndicate and you will see  the clans and players about which you are told by . (In Russia, not excluding the RS).

Others would not go in Native for the money.

P.S.
RS for two years waiting for t-shirts, which they won at the NC 2010. So it never came.
 

Shemaforash

Marquis
WB
Best answers
0
BaronDeMoroz said:
Morii said:
Check the roster of the Syndicate and you will see  the clans and players about which you are told by . (In Russia, not excluding the RS).

Others would not go in Native for the money.

P.S.
RS for two years waiting for t-shirts, which they won at the NC 2010. So it never came.
This was promised from ONE member of the taleworlds staff who no longer works with them, I do think it's bad to make a promise for something like that and not going through with it. But didn't the RUM team recieve NW keys?
 

Arch3r

Count
M&BWBNW
Best answers
0
ModusTollens said:
captain lust said:
Once this release out (sorry about that, I wanted to postpone making this thread a few days but discussions were starting anyway) we'll get some testing done for that.
I blame Arch3r.
Such a blamer...

Anyways, NAste system seems pretty cool.
 

BaronDeMoroz

Squire
Best answers
0
Shemaforash said:
But didn't the RUM team recieve NW keys?
Yes, they got the keys and played in NW

But,
Keys unconvincing consolation. Keys can buy one.
A tournament T-shirts is a unique thing.

And this is just one of those things on which I want to warn Lust:

People will always be unhappy.
 

LEGION_Sil

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
I like Lust suggestions, and i m sure an "direct-elimination tournament" is better and more interesting than a ladder. why not use the NC format for ENL?
this way nodoby would discuss which teams deserve the title (cf. trinity vs IG drama)
plus as an example when RNGD did lost against trinity (as we were really involved & motivated) early in the season, a lot of us loose their motivation by the fact champion title was 90% lost
 

BaronDeMoroz

Squire
Best answers
0
Sil Good Feeling said:
I like Lust suggestions, and i m sure an "direct-elimination tournament" is better and more interesting than a ladder. why not use the NC format for ENL?
this way nodoby would discuss which teams deserve the title (cf. trinity vs IG drama)
plus as an example when RNGD did lost against trinity (as we were really involved & motivated) early in the season, a lot of us loose their motivation by the fact champion title was 90% lost
The idea is good, but what about those teams that have not been to the playoffs?
 

Arch3r

Count
M&BWBNW
Best answers
0
I really dislike the idea of direct-elimination and in my opinion it's way less interesting than a ladder. Joining a tournament and then only getting to play one match because you lost sounds much less fun for me than having a bad match and learning from mistakes to improve your performance on next matches. I prefer the ladder as it is now.
 

LEGION_Sil

Knight at Arms
Best answers
0
Arch3r said:
I really dislike the idea of direct-elimination and in my opinion it's way less interesting than a ladder. Joining a tournament and then only getting to play one match because you lost sounds much less fun for me than having a bad match and learning from mistakes to improve your performance on next matches. I prefer the ladder as it is now.
Maybe you can get better by playing training and friendly matchs all year long, outside the ENL competition
 

BaronDeMoroz

Squire
Best answers
0
Sil Good Feeling said:
Maybe you can get better by playing training and friendly matchs all year long, outside the ENL competition
it is not interesting. I agree with Arch3r . I prefer the ladder as it is now.
 

Newbiejunky

Knight at Arms
WB
Best answers
0
In my opinion we can find a way to mix tournaments and ladder. We can imagine a season where some tournaments where each tournaments' results give a certain amount of points wich lead each team to a rank.

At the end of the season ( i can't tell how long the season is ), we arrange a "super" tournaments splited in 3 divisions where div A get the best ranked teams, div B got the lower ranked than A and Div C lower than B.

The goal is to win the more point we can to qualify to the Div A.

So, at the end there is a great tournament where teams' levels are suppose to be balanced, and the winner become the Best team.

I was pracitcing fencing in competition, and that was the system. It is still that way and it work well.

I know i'm not precise in my explaination, and it's more a summary to give you an idea of what i mean. I talked about it with Lust already, and i think he could help me to explain it to you better than i can.
 

ModusTollens

Baron
M&BWBWF&S
Best answers
0
Morii said:
I feel that IF its probable that money-prizes will draw more people to the game or tournaments and/or improves general competitiveness, its worth looking into at least.
I don't see what's there to look into. Of course prizes will make tournaments more attractive for some people who wouldn't even have participated otherwise. It's also clear that what you seem to understand as "improved general competitivesness" doesn't necessarily has to be perceived as a positive development.

As implicated by BaronDeMoroz' experience some people tend to behave even more like irrational pricks as soon as material gains are involved. Just imagine the possible ****storm at the end of the ENL if some sort of "real" prize could have been won. (That Trinity may have taken their match against Inquisition more seriously if they could have won something - presupposed you're believing dzioOb's tale - isn't something I'd value positive, but that's just my opinion, as is the rest of the post).

If the organisers of a tournament can be arsed to raise money for prizes (beside the money they need for the official servers - if there are any), one could still decide whether one wants to participate in those tournaments - I haven't and I won't, neither as far as computer games are concerned nor "real" sports for that matter. It's not like I couldn't deal with "increased competitiveness" (whatever that means) or the inherent greater amount of worse attitude (especially from people with an already bad attitude), I just can't be arsed to deal with it when I do something which should be at least somewhat enjoyable and I just don't think the prospect of a larger playerbase is worth those nuisances.
 
Best answers
0
Too me so far, reading peoples responses, the most popular idea seems to be a sort of giant division C ladder, integrating NASTE match rules. As lust said he wants people non-angry responses as well as angry, i would just like to say i think this seems like a great idea and i would be in support of it.

In terms of money, im not convinced. Imagine the **** storms about cheating that could ensue. It would mean the community would have to start taking it a lot more seriously and as it really isnt a major problem at the moment, it seems like a surefire way to make it become one. (not to mention some of the other problems people have raised with this idea).

With regards to khergs and F and D or w/e, as you've pointed out, i find it difficult to have a strong opinion either way until in depth testing has been done on them.

All in all lots of good suggestions all around though.
 

Morii

Sergeant Knight
Best answers
0
That's alright and your points might very well turn out to be true. But its still just presumptions partly based on DeMoroz' opinion (1) of 'hey guys, we tried it, doesn't work' and partly based on your ideas (2) of what would be good for the community.

1) Sofar DeMoroz hasn't really explained what all went wrong with his tournament, doing this would already count very much toward 'looking into it' and could clarify and decide the matter right away. I'm not a supporter, I'm a supporter of making sure we know why we say yes or no to the idea.

2) Everyone is allowed to have their own opinions of where they want to see this community go; Lust wants to make it more 'professional' so that it eventually even could be considered for systems like the ESL, where you seem to not want to go in that direction or at least not that far. And that's all good, but I think I personally lean a bit more towards Lust's direction than yours and I'm interested to see which sentiment is shared more inside the community.