Poll |
What do you think about these tournament ideas? |
Yes! Please implement them right away! I'm in! |
|
38% |
[ 24 ] |
Yes...I like the format but not the prizes. |
|
25% |
[ 16 ] |
Yes...but with some modification (specify please) |
|
6% |
[ 4 ] |
Yes...but just to shut the B coaches up, I'm out. |
|
3% |
[ 2 ] |
No. I want a B tournament, but not at all like this. |
|
7% |
[ 5 ] |
No. I don't want to see tournaments in B. |
|
11% |
[ 7 ] |
I don't care/don't play in B at all. |
|
7% |
[ 5 ] |
|
Total Votes : 63 |
|
odi
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Jul 10, 2009 - 21:34 |
|
I'd love to see tourneys in B, but I think those prices are a bit too much. Just stick to something small first, say 50k and +FF (we really dont want anything too big, I remember some stunty tourney giving out an Iron Man player, that was ridiculous...
The scheduling sounds fine to me, if someone really wants to hire/fire players to play vs my skaven, that fine by me. But that would be a little too much of a hassle for me, I'll play vs what ever the scheduler throws at me. Ofcourse since skaven TR/TS fluctuates a lot, I might not even make itto the tourney, since my TR/TS can be anywhere between 96 to 220 it seems at any given point
My opinion is we should try it out, with a small tourney AND SMALL (if any) prices, if we are given a chance. It should be fun. |
|
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 01:17 |
|
Rijssiej wrote: | DukeTyrion wrote: | I would prefer to start with a simple TR capped tournament.
Remember, at the end of the day, someone is going to have to run the thing. |
Starting small is a good way to go indeed. |
While I agree starting small is the way to go, this idea is by no means ridiculously elaborate. And why would we want a tourney exactly the same as the kind offered in Ranked? |
_________________ <PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 01:31 |
|
Snappy_Dresser wrote: | Rijssiej wrote: | DukeTyrion wrote: | I would prefer to start with a simple TR capped tournament.
Remember, at the end of the day, someone is going to have to run the thing. |
Starting small is a good way to go indeed. |
While I agree starting small is the way to go, this idea is by no means ridiculously elaborate. And why would we want a tourney exactly the same as the kind offered in Ranked? |
Why would we want a tournament any different from Ranked?
Blackbox and Ranked are similar beasts, just without the picking. |
|
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 01:43 |
|
Because we have tournament just like the ones in Ranked. They're called Ranked Tournaments. |
_________________ <PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 01:50 |
|
Snappy_Dresser wrote: | Because we have tournament just like the ones in Ranked. They're called Ranked Tournaments. |
When asked why the do not play Blackbox, many of the coaches in Ranked say, because Blackbox doesn't have the tournaments that Ranked has.
So, if we want more coaches to join Blackbox, then wouldn't a good starting point be, to offer the same tournaments that they have in Ranked?
And none of them are called Ranked Tournaments, they are just Tournaments that happen to exist in Ranked! |
|
|
fly
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 04:04 |
|
what about not freezing teams in between draws... like, every round is one week, but if you've played your game, you still may schedule for blackbox and thus maybe get recovery or extra money. and what about: make the first draw participants a number dividable by two. and after the first week, knock off the teams with lowest and highest TS alternating, until you got a normal tourney tree (ok this may be very unfair, but box isn't very fair mostly anyways...)
i like both tourney ideas, and NO, i don't want a simple KO +FF moranked tourney.
another way to avoid player retirement, and stuff like that - would be to create more than one tourney with all the same name and have tourney tree hidden.(needs enough participants though) |
_________________ I play for fun. I play to win.
Do you play CPOMB 'cause you can't win otherwise?
No, that's a rhetorical question. |
|
Snappy_Dresser
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 06:39 |
|
DukeTyrion wrote: | Snappy_Dresser wrote: | Because we have tournament just like the ones in Ranked. They're called Ranked Tournaments. |
When asked why the do not play Blackbox, many of the coaches in Ranked say, because Blackbox doesn't have the tournaments that Ranked has.
So, if we want more coaches to join Blackbox, then wouldn't a good starting point be, to offer the same tournaments that they have in Ranked?
And none of them are called Ranked Tournaments, they are just Tournaments that happen to exist in Ranked! |
Frankly, if your only concern is poaching ranked coaches, then why not get rid of the random assignment of matches in Blackbox? Ranked coaches seem to like that.
We can do better than merely apeing what is in Ranked. why not be a little brave, and try to out do what has come before? That's how you attract new coaches.
And if they don't come? Their loss. Just make a good division and enough coaches will come. The only time that's having problems is when Europe is in bed (unfortunately for us NA west coasters), and there just aren't that many coaches in this time zone, BB or otherwise. |
_________________ <PurpleChest> the way it splooshed got me so excited
"I hear that shadow is a douchebag"
-Mr Foulscumm |
|
Zero1BB
Joined: Feb 18, 2009
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 08:28 |
|
Why not try to run a Blackbox tournament like a smack? you gotta do 2 rounds right then (paired by the box both rounds) then have the final? freeze teams where needed etc. |
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 08:31 |
|
|
On1
Joined: Jul 12, 2004
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 12:52 |
|
Snappy_Dresser wrote: | DukeTyrion wrote: | Snappy_Dresser wrote: | Because we have tournament just like the ones in Ranked. They're called Ranked Tournaments. |
When asked why the do not play Blackbox, many of the coaches in Ranked say, because Blackbox doesn't have the tournaments that Ranked has.
So, if we want more coaches to join Blackbox, then wouldn't a good starting point be, to offer the same tournaments that they have in Ranked?
And none of them are called Ranked Tournaments, they are just Tournaments that happen to exist in Ranked! |
Frankly, if your only concern is poaching ranked coaches, then why not get rid of the random assignment of matches in Blackbox? Ranked coaches seem to like that.
We can do better than merely apeing what is in Ranked. why not be a little brave, and try to out do what has come before? That's how you attract new coaches.
And if they don't come? Their loss. Just make a good division and enough coaches will come. The only time that's having problems is when Europe is in bed (unfortunately for us NA west coasters), and there just aren't that many coaches in this time zone, BB or otherwise. |
Snappy, one of the ideas with the random-scheduler, when it comes to tournaments. Is to restrict people from building a team using the tool named picking.
So [B] is sorta like [R], just without the element of picking. Now if you, like I can agree to some extent that numerous teams participating in [R] tournaments are somewhat bloated due to this picking-phenomenon. Then you would have no problem with [B] having same sort of tournaments, Let's just call it a fixed version. (less funny for those that exploit this flaw in [R]) |
|
|
On1
Joined: Jul 12, 2004
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 13:48 |
|
However i do have a little problem with the random-scheduler being applied each round in a tournament.
Let's say you have team A, B, C and D in a very small tournament (A being the most powerful, counting down to D)
I dislike that A and B would face each other from the start. (i guess that's the same as i read in an earlier post, that this would lead to a not so exciting final)
Also as i read earlier in this thread, it would lead to coaches checking the teams he might face, and adjust his roster to "pick" a certain team.
I don't have any solutions to this, apart from creating brackets. And not use the random-scheduler for the tournament draws. (But i am still trying to come up with something) |
|
|
TheCetusProject
Joined: May 25, 2004
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 16:05 |
|
Why must it be a knockout competition? |
|
|
def909
Joined: Oct 25, 2005
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 16:54 |
|
Why should the Blackbox scheduler be used for a [B] tournament anyway? Why not just make it a "normal" knockout tourney with scheduled games? |
_________________ DonĀ“t ask Nuffle for better dice, ask him to make you a better coach. |
|
pingus
Joined: Dec 11, 2007
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 17:08 |
|
def909 wrote: | Why should the Blackbox scheduler be used for a [B] tournament anyway? Why not just make it a "normal" knockout tourney with scheduled games? |
Exactly. In my opinion we don't need new tournaments, using [b] scheduler, we just need an ability to put our teams made in [b] into known tournaments, like smacks. Forget the TS, scheduler and complicated formulas and give us the old, good and tested tourneys. |
|
|
Rijssiej
Joined: Jan 04, 2005
|
  Posted:
Jul 11, 2009 - 17:13 |
|
Snappy_Dresser wrote: | We can do better than merely apeing what is in Ranked. why not be a little brave, and try to out do what has come before? |
What makes you think you can do better?
I think the official tourneys that run in ranked at the moment have been tried and tested and work really well. Why try to come up with something new that is likely to not work as good when there are good formats available. Just to try out? |
|
|
|
| |