Tournament Rules Hot Discussion

darkfader1988

I see alot of discussion going on lately on why tournaments tend to fail, and or how we could possible make a new tournament more of a success, i just wanted to share my own 2 cents with you guys.



What if the solution is to simply let every participant (or team) vote on what they would like to allow and disallow in the tournament after they signed up, votes will be send to a specific person. Read on;

At the closing of the tournament signups the person in question will count all the votes on all aspects that were laid out, and once the sign up period is over the guy that got all the votes will publish the votes for everyone to see (So there can be no confusion or foul play).

People wont back out as fast then because they all get a vote on stuff, this will also nicely show how the majority of the community feels about specific aspects of the game that have been controversial.




Simple as that. Pretty much as democratic as it gets.
I personally think this would be the best solution for highest success chance of a tournament.



Stage 1. Sign up, Voting has yet to be started, everyone gets a list of abilities, doffs, consoles, classes/factions/mixed etcetera where they can vote on (Allowed, Disallowed, Neutral Or something)

Stage 2. Sign up period closed, votings will be publicly published for everyone to see. Everyone agrees that it has been democratically decided and there will be minimal withdrawals from the tournament.

Stage 3. Lets roll the tournament!



What'ya think?

hurleybird

I think the majority of the PvP community is unfortunately either to ignorant to tell a good rule from a bad one, or too selfish to not just push rules that benefit themselves. Leave it up to the majority and you'll get crappy rules that no one agrees on.

There are players who don't fit into either category, and by only allowing them in the democratic process you could come up with something close to perfect. Problem is, the ignorant people will scream "elitism" while the selfish ones will scream "bias" -- in their eyes, any set of rules that doesn't benefit themselves is biased.

You're better off just making a set of rules without voting, that leaves as many builds open as possible and only polices things that are game breaking.

antoniosalieri

hurleybird wrote: »

You're better off just making a set of rules without voting, that leaves as many builds open as possible and only polices things that are game breaking.

That ends up being the problem... and i think it has been the problem the last few tourys.

Even the people that would like to consider themselves "elite" can't agree on what is game breaking and what isn't. Hence the arguing over details. At some point it breaks down.

What we need is a "Tournament mode" setting to the private challenge menu... that turns off all console abilities, and doffs.

No more arguing at that point....

I think bort even mentioned not long ago that they have the tech for that. (or at least that it wouldn't be hard to do)

darkfader1988

Good points, but even so, with a voting system, its basically 49% to 51% versus (amount of votes), do you not assume that at least half of the player base can make up a sensible opinion on these factors?

antoniosalieri

darkfader1988 wrote: »

Good points, but even so, with a voting system, its basically 49% to 51% versus (amount of votes), do you not assume that at least half of the player base can make up a sensible opinion on these factors?

Yes I think it would have a better chance of working then the way its been happening now. With random people/fleets coming up with a set of rules... which gets modded 10 times and then gets argued about the entire run of the tourny.

Every team gets one vote should work... the team registers and puts forward there vote. I don't see how it would be any issue... if some people don't trust the other players they intend to play against, they could simply not enter. I imagine the rules would look pretty standard at the end of your vote cycle.

hurleybird

darkfader1988 wrote: »

Good points, but even so, with a voting system, its basically 49% to 51% versus (amount of votes), do you not assume that at least half of the player base can make up a sensible opinion on these factors?

Honestly it depends on the sample size. For example, we already know of one fleet that thinks that ES is cheese but Temporal Inversion isn't. Ridiculous, right? That's an established PvP fleet no less. The more you open up a democratic process, especially once you open it up to groups that aren't very established at PvP, the more of these odd ball types you let in until the system disintegrates.

antoniosalieri

hurleybird wrote: »

Honestly it depends on the sample size. For example, we already know of one fleet that thinks that ES is cheese but Temporal Inversion isn't. Ridiculous, right? That's an established PvP fleet no less. The more you open up a democratic process, especially once you open it up to groups that aren't very established at PvP, the more of these odd ball types you let in until the system disintegrates.

Do you really see more then one fleet voting for a no ES rule.... or not enough voting for a no time junk rule ?

I agree that there are some people with warped ideas of whats right and wrong...

But if 8 fleets register a team... do you really believe 5 of them would put forward a no Extend rule ?

loganwilliams1

The problem with tournaments is ego. You have fleets that think they're "THE BEST" in organized PvP. I'm not going to name fleets here, but these fleets try their best to bludgeon others into thinking as they do "or else".

When tournament time rolls around they push to impliment rules that limits other team builds while having little or no impact on builds they've put together weeks in advance. Voting, why bother? There are several fleets out there with sister or ally fleets that will vote the same way anyway. Any "vote" simply means more of a way to make sure their "rules" are implimented, sealing their chances.

People wonder why I don't fight in organized pvp. Perhaps this is helping to clear up some of the haze. You want a fair tournament?? Anything goes. Bring whatever build you want to the table on the day of the tournament. Once everyone has met and signed in, randomize the teams, send them to a teamspeak channel of their own and wait to be up. You want to test the skill of players to work together, not who can come up with the cheesiest theme build. If you absolutely must sort winners by fleet then add total damage, healing, and kills into a matrix and apply to the appropriate fleet at the end of the thing. This will make for two winning categories but who cares? I think it's perhaps the most "fair" way to run a tournament.

xtremenoob1

hurleybird wrote: »

Honestly it depends on the sample size. For example, we already know of one fleet that thinks that ES is cheese but Temporal Inversion isn't. Ridiculous, right? That's an established PvP fleet no less. The more you open up a democratic process, especially once you open it up to groups that aren't very established at PvP, the more of these odd ball types you let in until the system disintegrates.

This was tried a few months ago.

"The friendly fleets" poll their votes to shay the tournament to their benefit.



Just an idea, instead of trying to get a tournament (for now,) maybe setting up pew days with minimal rules. Everyone meets on bootcamp and just pews for fun? Isn't that what we all want anyway? Maybe build some unexpected friendships. Give some of the newer pewers a chance to Q&A with some of the more developed groups.


I don't really care. The pew has gotten a bit meh in the game.


Anyway, Bootcamp, pew, ???

darkfader1988

loganwilliams1 wrote: »

The problem with tournaments is ego. You have fleets that think they're "THE BEST" in organized PvP. I'm not going to name fleets here, but these fleets try their best to bludgeon others into thinking as they do "or else".

When tournament time rolls around they push to impliment rules that limits other team builds while having little or no impact on builds they've put together weeks in advance. Voting, why bother? There are several fleets out there with sister or ally fleets that will vote the same way anyway. Any "vote" simply means more of a way to make sure their "rules" are implimented, sealing their chances.

People wonder why I don't fight in organized pvp. Perhaps this is helping to clear up some of the haze. You want a fair tournament?? Anything goes. Bring whatever build you want to the table on the day of the tournament. Once everyone has met and signed in, randomize the teams, send them to a teamspeak channel of their own and wait to be up. You want to test the skill of players to work together, not who can come up with the cheesiest theme build. If you absolutely must sort winners by fleet then add total damage, healing, and kills into a matrix and apply to the appropriate fleet at the end of the thing. This will make for two winning categories but who cares? I think it's perhaps the most "fair" way to run a tournament.

Thank you for your input, positiv denken logan! abe positiv denke! sie haben keine F?higkeiten!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!