| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
Barry
Skirmisher
35 Posts
    
 | | 05/02/2008 4:38 PM |
| Aye Sienar you have a point there. One of the reasons I hate written media for these types of conversations is that I tend to leave things out.
In comparison, you dont see Tiger playing at a qualifier for the open anymore either. Theres no point for him to. I think that the biggest part of the problem with the dual system is the prize. If your going to have a dual system, I believe that they (top 100) should be announced at the start of the qualifier season and those shouldnt be allowed into the qualifiers (or dropped at end of swiss, perhaps) These tournaments are becoming in a sense not qualifiers, so much as they are competition for the qualified to get a ticket. Perhaps removing the prize would solve alot of the complaints. Perhaps remove the cash prize for the championship and top 50 get plane tickets.
As far as numbers in the championship, I have no clue about that part. Im not really sure that an increase in numbers is best for a championship. Id rather see the top 2 from each qualifier and thats it. That would probably increase the numbers at qualifiers.
Barry | | | |
|
Kevizoid
Warrior
311 Posts
Southern California
| | 05/02/2008 5:35 PM |
| What is all this "becoming" stuff. There has been like maybe 2 instances in like 3+ years where someone has taken up multiple spots. Why is it assumed that this is widespread? This isn't so much a problem so much as how the system is build.
I personally think it should be top 50 + top 4 at qualifiers. Already qualified slots slide down in both instances. (and yes Keith I know, not fair for first tourney blah blah. You can only get so fair. This is by far the most fair system IMO). qualifier dates are also as they are now. | |
SoCal Colluder | |
|
sienar
Sergeant
635 Posts
| | 05/02/2008 7:45 PM |
| Posted By Barry on 05/02/2008 4:38 PM
Aye Sienar you have a point there. One of the reasons I hate written media for these types of conversations is that I tend to leave things out.
In comparison, you dont see Tiger playing at a qualifier for the open anymore either. Theres no point for him to. I think that the biggest part of the problem with the dual system is the prize. If your going to have a dual system, I believe that they (top 100) should be announced at the start of the qualifier season and those shouldnt be allowed into the qualifiers (or dropped at end of swiss, perhaps) These tournaments are becoming in a sense not qualifiers, so much as they are competition for the qualified to get a ticket. Perhaps removing the prize would solve alot of the complaints. Perhaps remove the cash prize for the championship and top 50 get plane tickets.
As far as numbers in the championship, I have no clue about that part. Im not really sure that an increase in numbers is best for a championship. Id rather see the top 2 from each qualifier and thats it. That would probably increase the numbers at qualifiers.
Barry
Problem with a "pay later" system is a fair number of people need that plane ticket to even get to Gen Con or XP.
There is no way I would endorse a system that had a series of tournaments that many of the most loyal customers to the game were barred from playing in - that had any amount of prize support they were deemed "too good" to be allowed to vie for.
You cut out the top 100 players, you may find a few issues with attendance.
***
The only change I've seen proposed that looks any better than the current system would be a sliding scale of invites to number of participants at a qual - say 1 invite per 8 players.
Tiger Woods has the free cash flow he doesn't need to worry about the cost of a trip to a tournament. I won't speak for others, but for me, if I fail to win a qualifier, I have to consider whether or not I can afford to go. | |
[http://www.hordelings.com/frontend/profiles/profile.php?user_id=22] | |
| 
Vrecknidj
Warlord
9936 Posts
United States
| | 05/03/2008 5:55 AM |
| Posted By sienar on 05/02/2008 7:45 PM
***
The only change I've seen proposed that looks any better than the current system would be a sliding scale of invites to number of participants at a qual - say 1 invite per 8 players.
Tiger Woods has the free cash flow he doesn't need to worry about the cost of a trip to a tournament. I won't speak for others, but for me, if I fail to win a qualifier, I have to consider whether or not I can afford to go. Which reminds me that I think I'd like to change what I suggested in my post on the first page. I've done some research; I gathered all the qualifer attendance data from January 1, 2004 until this week. Based on that, here's my suggestion.
Number...........Number
of players........of invitations
.........4..............1
......5 - 19..........2
......20 - 39........4
........40+...........8
What I'm aiming for here is the "sweet spot" of attendees. It appears, from looking at a couple years' worth of qualifier attendance data, that a few things are true. First, attendance is slowly dropping (overall--there are exceptions). Second, there are quite a few qualifiers where the number of attendees is rather close to 16.
I'm guessing here, but I'd think that one way to drive up attendance would be to offer more invitations. As far as the plane ticket goes, I'm still only considering that to be a first-place prize. And, as far as product goes, I would assume that this is the store's responsibility, and that as the number of players goes up, this takes care of itself.
I don't know if it really would alter attendance, and the only way to find out is the empirical test. The one bit of support I have so far is that when there were more invitations, there was greater attendance. (If this fact turns out to be false then, of course, I have lost that bit of support for my hypothesis.)
The average attendance overall is 22.47; this includes the Great Britain and Canadian qualifiers, and the Grinder. All of these tend to dwarf the non-Grinder qualifiers in the United States. The median attendance, worldwide is 20. Based on the data so far, the cut-offs seem to be 20 and 40 (and not "nice" numbers like 16 or 32).
Average Qualifier Attendance (not counting the Grinder, or the XP early-qualifier)
US, 2004: 19.9.
World, 2005: 22.29 (w/o Montreal, this drops to 20.8).
World, 2006: 26.5 (w/o Birmingham, Montreal or Niles, this drops to 23.0).
World, 2007: 18.3 (w/o Niles and Montreal, this drops to 17.21).
World, 2008, so far: 14.89
Dave
| |
Knowledge Arcana editor issues 5-9, Phoenix Lore Magazine editor, assistant editor for Rite Publishing;
My Trade Thread and My Reference Thread; Winner of WBC IV, IX and XIII; Rule #0: bshugg is always right! | |
|
Sirohk
Commander
3709 Posts
USA
| | 05/03/2008 8:20 AM |
| Dave, nice analysis.Â
Your data suggests that by having only top two get invites it has driven down attendance at Qualifiers.Â
I wonder why?Â
Could the the new rules be driving it down? Folks just ain't ready for competitive play. Or all the current flux with the rules as they iron thm out.Â
Could it be the limited number of sets currently available? People prefer variety.Â
Could it dwindling interest in this game? I really doubt this one.Â
Could people feel that its not worth going to a Qualifier as they think they don't have a chance now that only top 2 get invites?Â
Could this be compounded by the fact that as there are less invites, more top players are going to more and farther distance qualifiers and therefore there is the perception that folks have even a further less of a chance of Qualifying?Â
Although there are indeed a few more qualifiers this year. And maybe those that get invites via being in top 100 or such and maybe there will be a second Grinder at GenCon. So hopefully...
Overall IMO I think attendance for the Championship will go up. At least I hope so if this game is continuing to grow as we think / hope.Â
| |
Sirohk, the Bard of Heartstone
Knight of the Rahshasa's
And Crusader of the Zakya, Ak'chazar, Naztharune, and Naityan Rakshasa's | |
|
Turboman
Warrior
210 Posts
| | 05/03/2008 9:19 AM |
| Posted By Sirohk on 05/03/2008 8:20 AM
Could people feel that its not worth going to a Qualifier as they think they don't have a chance now that only top 2 get invites?Â
I'm going with this one. | |
| |
| Duke of Spoils
greyhaze
Warlord
5473 Posts
| | 05/03/2008 9:34 AM |
| Posted By Sirohk on 05/03/2008 8:20 AM
Could it dwindling interest in this game?
This one is me and 3 gamers I play with regularily. However, 2 of them do seem to be getting back in to it.
| |
Greyhaze's DDM Spoilers
Champion of Darkenbeast , Raistlin Majere, Nightmare WDQ25/60, Warduke WD60/60,
Anti-Champion of Guns, "Knight of Bugbears", and Joke Champion of Venger.
Called Shots: Ghast in Against the Giants, Darkenbeast in Demon Web. | |
|
Vrecknidj
Warlord
9936 Posts
United States
| | 05/03/2008 10:14 AM |
| Posted By Sirohk on 05/03/2008 8:20 AM Dave, nice analysis.Â
Your data suggests that by having only top two get invites it has driven down attendance at Qualifiers.
I wonder why? Could the the new rules be driving it down? Folks just ain't ready for competitive play. Or all the current flux with the rules as they iron thm out.Â
Could it be the limited number of sets currently available? People prefer variety.Â
Could it dwindling interest in this game? I really doubt this one.Â
Could people feel that its not worth going to a Qualifier as they think they don't have a chance now that only top 2 get invites? This is my own inclination. I know some folks who find it very distressing that, from a certain perspective, their odds have been cut in half. I try to remind them that inviting the top 100 is quite a blessing, but, I've found that to be not as persuasive as I'd like. Could this be compounded by the fact that as there are less invites, more top players are going to more and farther distance qualifiers and therefore there is the perception that folks have even a further less of a chance of Qualifying? Although there are indeed a few more qualifiers this year. And maybe those that get invites via being in top 100 or such and maybe there will be a second Grinder at GenCon. So hopefully... Overall IMO I think attendance for the Championship will go up. At least I hope so if this game is continuing to grow as we think / hope.
Dave | |
Knowledge Arcana editor issues 5-9, Phoenix Lore Magazine editor, assistant editor for Rite Publishing;
My Trade Thread and My Reference Thread; Winner of WBC IV, IX and XIII; Rule #0: bshugg is always right! | |
|
Wraithborne
Commander
3424 Posts
West Virginia
| | 05/04/2008 8:40 AM |
| Posted By Vrecknidj on 05/03/2008 10:14 AM
This is my own inclination. I know some folks who find it very distressing that, from a certain perspective, their odds have been cut in half. I try to remind them that inviting the top 100 is quite a blessing, but, I've found that to be not as persuasive as I'd like.
It's only a blessing to those that don't live 100+ miles from the nearest scene to play. For someone in my boat, qualifiers are the only shot they have. I had considered makin a 4 hour drive to Cinncinnati this year, but Top 2 just didn't seem woth it.
I've wanted to try and build a scene here for some time, the semi-local FLGS is already a premier store, but I would be the one organizing everything and that kinda time just isn't availabe to me at the moment.
| |
Hey Woman, Hey Woman!! Listen here. Since your ol' man ain't got no heart, maybe you'd like to see a real man. I bet you stay up late every night dreamin' you had a real man, don't ya'? I tell you what, bring your pretty little self over to my apartment tonight and I'll show you a real man!
Ghouls: 1 Player Characters: 0 | |
| Knight of the
Round Table
Thenameless
Warlord
8472 Posts
The Fortress of Solitude
| | 05/06/2008 8:46 PM |
| Posted By JAdams44978 on 05/02/2008 3:46 AM
I wish people would stop whining about calluding and team play. Get over it! Let them come to our qualifier, all of them! It will make our victory over them much more sweeter. Qualifier and championships have nothing to do with fostering the "game community" because when money and fame are on the line then anything goes. Bringing new people into the game should limit itself to unrated or just simply local events and should having nothing in common with the qualifer season when those new players should expect a different atmosphere altogther. Suck it up people!
Welcome to the boards. I like the first part of your post best. Just because a qualifier is in a given area, does not mean that only locals have the "right" to attend and win/place at these qualifiers. In 2005, Vancouver had no qualifier, so as avid players of the skirmish game, our play group had to go to Washington in order to compete. Now that Vancouver has a qualifier, I would also understand if other people from out of town came in to have a shot at going to GenCon. And, should a local Vancouver person win this qualifier with "invaders" present, I definitely agree that it would be that much sweeter. | |
Over 270 successful online DDM trades. | |
| Duke of Spoils
greyhaze
Warlord
5473 Posts
| | 05/06/2008 9:08 PM |
| | I don't feel that invasion is the issue. Everyone should get an opporunity to get the prize. The issue is more about some getting many more chances than others (and getting squeezed out as a result). | |
Greyhaze's DDM Spoilers
Champion of Darkenbeast , Raistlin Majere, Nightmare WDQ25/60, Warduke WD60/60,
Anti-Champion of Guns, "Knight of Bugbears", and Joke Champion of Venger.
Called Shots: Ghast in Against the Giants, Darkenbeast in Demon Web. | |
|
Fundin Strongarm
Sneak
57 Posts
Windsor, Ontario, Canada
| | 05/07/2008 10:56 PM |
| I would like for somebody who thinks top 4 is better and that slots should pass down would have gained some reasonable number of participants. Just how many more people would having changed both of those things last year would we have? Right now, we're living in perception-land. We *think* there would be a measurable increase in number of people at the champs. But I haven't seen any data to back that up.
I'm not sure there would be that many more participants with top 4 AND pass downs but I'm pretty sure top 2 with no pass downs is going to hurt. Bad.
Could the the new rules be driving it down? Folks just ain't ready for competitive play. Or all the current flux with the rules as they iron thm out.
Could it dwindling interest in this game? I really doubt this one.
Could people feel that its not worth going to a Qualifier as they think they don't have a chance now that only top 2 get invites?
Could this be compounded by the fact that as there are less invites, more top players are going to more and farther distance qualifiers and therefore there is the perception that folks have even a further less of a chance of Qualifying?
I think all of these are factors.
I'm with Kevin on the Qualifiers-on-one-Day thing. Horrible idea. Many Qualifiers need outside people to make them viable.
Also with Kevin (and others) on passdowns -- Top 50 and Top 4 at Quals, all getting passed down. I've no problem with people trying to get that plane ticket even if they've already qualified (even without passdowns). There is no 'stealing' here. Besides, the issue IN PRACTICE is so very minor with regards to the number people involved/affected.
I'm more concerned that I haven't seen anything about ANY Qualifiers getting GenCon passes -- that was a nice bonus for getting top 2. | |
| |
| Master of the
Awesome Sauce
Teflon Jeff
Warlord
6234 Posts
Idaho. Yes, we have Gamers in Idaho.
| | 05/08/2008 8:39 AM |
| Posted By Fundin Strongarm on 05/07/2008 10:56 PM I would like for somebody who thinks top 4 is better and that slots should pass down would have gained some reasonable number of participants. Just how many more people would having changed both of those things last year would we have? Right now, we're living in perception-land. We *think* there would be a measurable increase in number of people at the champs. But I haven't seen any data to back that up. I'm not sure there would be that many more participants with top 4 AND pass downs but I'm pretty sure top 2 with no pass downs is going to hurt. Bad. Could the the new rules be driving it down? Folks just ain't ready for competitive play. Or all the current flux with the rules as they iron thm out.
Could it dwindling interest in this game? I really doubt this one.
Could people feel that its not worth going to a Qualifier as they think they don't have a chance now that only top 2 get invites?
Could this be compounded by the fact that as there are less invites, more top players are going to more and farther distance qualifiers and therefore there is the perception that folks have even a further less of a chance of Qualifying? I think all of these are factors. I'm with Kevin on the Qualifiers-on-one-Day thing. Horrible idea. Many Qualifiers need outside people to make them viable. Also with Kevin (and others) on passdowns -- Top 50 and Top 4 at Quals, all getting passed down. I've no problem with people trying to get that plane ticket even if they've already qualified (even without passdowns). There is no 'stealing' here. Besides, the issue IN PRACTICE is so very minor with regards to the number people involved/affected. I'm more concerned that I haven't seen anything about ANY Qualifiers getting GenCon passes -- that was a nice bonus for getting top 2.
Check out the thread in the tournaments section about my being paranoid. It has some interesting information.
| |
Official Delegate, Wizards of the Coast
Against The Giants Called Shot: Huge Green Dragon
Icons Called Shot: Gargantuan Prismatic Dragon
"Rejoice, for bad things are about to happen." | |
|
Lord_rock
Underboss
1549 Posts
Portland OR
| | 05/08/2008 8:51 PM |
| the only thing I would like to say on this topic is top 4 should qualify and top 100 slots should pass down. In no other way do you get as many people into the game and that should be enough motivation for everyone.
Why did they change it to top 2 in the first place and why shouldn't top 100 ratings pass down? | |
Rock Bottom Pricing:
Arcane Archer 30, Centaur Hero 67, Human Cleric of Bane 25, Gold Champion 34, Death Knight 52, Goblin Blackblade 9, Silentwolf Goblin 7, Orc Raider 10, Dwarf axefighter 9, Healer 9, Thaskor 65, Aspect of Demogorgon 71, Ogre 9, Fire Giant 79, Human Wanderer 7, Drunken Master 18, Barghest 12, Longstider Barbarian 27, Longtooth Barbarian 22, Frost Giant 76, Ravenous Vampire 42, Large Earth Elemental: priceless | |
|
Vrecknidj
Warlord
9936 Posts
United States
| | 05/09/2008 2:51 PM |
| I wonder if one of the reasons for no GenCon passes this year is the whole bankruptcy thing. It's probably easier for WotC to just stay out of that mess. The plane ticket, after all, is only tangentially related to GenCon (if it turns out to be related at all).
Dave | |
Knowledge Arcana editor issues 5-9, Phoenix Lore Magazine editor, assistant editor for Rite Publishing;
My Trade Thread and My Reference Thread; Winner of WBC IV, IX and XIII; Rule #0: bshugg is always right! | |
| Knight of the
Round Table
Thenameless
Warlord
8472 Posts
The Fortress of Solitude
| | 05/09/2008 9:51 PM |
| Posted By Vrecknidj on 05/09/2008 2:51 PM
I wonder if one of the reasons for no GenCon passes this year is the whole bankruptcy thing. It's probably easier for WotC to just stay out of that mess. The plane ticket, after all, is only tangentially related to GenCon (if it turns out to be related at all).
Dave
You know, it was fun going up to the counter and picking up your free pass though. | |
Over 270 successful online DDM trades. | |
|
Vrecknidj
Warlord
9936 Posts
United States
| | 05/10/2008 6:44 AM |
| Speaking of qualified players stealing spots, I offer the following for you. Let's say yet another miracle happens and I do well in Niles. Here are some scenarios I've been considering.
What if, at the end of Swiss, the standings are as follows?
1) Me
2) Speed Racer
3) Racer X
4) My son
In this case, I won't drop after Swiss because I will probably be paired against my son in the first round of the playoffs and I bet I'd end up losing that match.
However, if the standings are as follows:
1) Me
2) Speed Racer
3) Racer X
4) The Fonz
5) My son
I will certainly drop from Swiss, giving my son a shot.
Am I a bad guy because I would do this?
I wouldn't be stealing anyone's slot, as a matter of fact, in that first scenario I would lose my first-round playoff match and someone else would get a slot. Does it matter that this person would be my son?
What do you think?
I believe that people do this for their friends. I hear about it. So, it's okay, right?
Dave | |
Knowledge Arcana editor issues 5-9, Phoenix Lore Magazine editor, assistant editor for Rite Publishing;
My Trade Thread and My Reference Thread; Winner of WBC IV, IX and XIII; Rule #0: bshugg is always right! | |
| Duke of Spoils
greyhaze
Warlord
5473 Posts
| | 05/10/2008 8:10 AM |
| | I ain't touchin' this one Dave. It's how things work right now that forces people in to sucky choices like this, if invites pass down, you wouldn't have to worry about it. | |
Greyhaze's DDM Spoilers
Champion of Darkenbeast , Raistlin Majere, Nightmare WDQ25/60, Warduke WD60/60,
Anti-Champion of Guns, "Knight of Bugbears", and Joke Champion of Venger.
Called Shots: Ghast in Against the Giants, Darkenbeast in Demon Web. | |
|
Fundin Strongarm
Sneak
57 Posts
Windsor, Ontario, Canada
| | 05/10/2008 8:52 AM |
| It's fine. You want to drop to give your son or anyone else a shot, that's fine. You want to stay and try for the travelfare, that's fine too. It'd be nice if slots passed down or top 4 got a slot or both -- your choice would be fine either way then too.
As for GenCon passes, I realized after I wrote it that I'd forgotten about the bankruptcy stuff. | |
| |
| Knight of the
Round Table
Thenameless
Warlord
8472 Posts
The Fortress of Solitude
| | 05/10/2008 4:37 PM |
| | Vreck, I'd have no problem with that. Even if your reason was a more "nefarious" let another local team-mate in to have a chance, and not just your son. Fact is, one has to win to get into that position. You can't lose all your games and be first after Swiss. If you're first after Swiss, it becomes your luxury to do with that position as you please. You can drop to let in a friend or son. You can drop because you have a stomach ache. You can drop because you're burned out. | |
Over 270 successful online DDM trades. | |
| Master of the
Awesome Sauce
Teflon Jeff
Warlord
6234 Posts
Idaho. Yes, we have Gamers in Idaho.
| | 05/10/2008 8:55 PM |
| As it stands, I have no problem with that, Dave, because it is your option. I've seen people concede matches at the end to try to help other tiebreaks, true story. It's not aginst the rules (it certainly wasn't coerced) so it's legal. The only rules I'm concerned with are the ones for the game, at least governin others actions. I may hold myself to a different stanard, but I don't see any plausible reason to hold other to them when they are not part of the rules of the game we've all agreed to follow by way of playing the game.
| |
Official Delegate, Wizards of the Coast
Against The Giants Called Shot: Huge Green Dragon
Icons Called Shot: Gargantuan Prismatic Dragon
"Rejoice, for bad things are about to happen." | |
|
Vrecknidj
Warlord
9936 Posts
United States
| | 05/15/2008 4:25 PM |
| So, before the hacker attack, I had posted the results. I came in 5th and didn't need to drop.
However...
My matches went like this.
1) Beat Shawn
2) Conceded to Dan
3) Conceded to Josh
4) Beat Herb
5) Beat Brett
I rode in with Dan and Josh, and intended to concede to any of my friends to give them an edge. Dan and Josh played each other in the first round of the playoff, so one knocked out the other. But, in my own way, I "manipulated" the system (or whatever). Still, I don't have a problem, many people concede games at many levels of tournaments for many reasons and I'm comfortable with what I did.
Dan and I actually played it out, for fun. I kicked his butt. Josh and I went out to lunch. (Before you ask, no, Josh didn't buy my lunch.)
Dave | |
Knowledge Arcana editor issues 5-9, Phoenix Lore Magazine editor, assistant editor for Rite Publishing;
My Trade Thread and My Reference Thread; Winner of WBC IV, IX and XIII; Rule #0: bshugg is always right! | |
| Master of the
Awesome Sauce
Teflon Jeff
Warlord
6234 Posts
Idaho. Yes, we have Gamers in Idaho.
| | 05/16/2008 9:01 AM |
| Glad you had fun, Dave, and congrats on getting another one qualified.
| |
Official Delegate, Wizards of the Coast
Against The Giants Called Shot: Huge Green Dragon
Icons Called Shot: Gargantuan Prismatic Dragon
"Rejoice, for bad things are about to happen." | |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 | You must be signed in to participate in the
games. |