|
On February 09 2012 19:25 Sayle wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 06:53 hacklebeast wrote:On February 09 2012 03:23 dRaW wrote:
I am still wondering about this format of qualification, since it's more based on luck entrance than actual top players who are able to rank through ladder system (however iccup is really hard to rank now anyway). For example, the top let's say 20 people enter the same 3 qualifications, but they are in the same quadrant bracket for the tour, only 2 of them will advance and this could happen by chance that we lose a lot of top players. Similarly, we can get the lowest of levels if the other side is mostly mid C, etc.
So with that in mind, I am going to enter the first tour, if you are above B rank you should not enter ^^ If the top 20 enter the same 3 tours, then 8 will qualify in qualifier 1 leaving 12 to enter qualifier 2. Then 8 will qualify there, leaving 4, who will all get in at qualifier 3. Yes, there is some luck involved with the process, but it isn't as bad as the scenario you described. I would say the "luck" involved is about as much luck in any bracket tournament. You could have to play sziky first round, you may get a walkover. Actually, that's not quite true either. If the top 20 enter one tour and all end up on the same side of the bracket, only 4 of them will advance instead of the possible 8. If the other half of the bracket was full of C players, then you will get 4 legitimate qualifiers and 4 C rank scrubs going through. This is the worst case scenario of course, but highlights the point KC is trying to make. I think the seeding system that Gecko mentioned is a great idea in theory but will be tricky/time-consuming to implement. Also, it might not even necessarily be a bad thing to have the possibility of a couple of random C players qualifying. Adds an underdog story to the group stages ;p Edit: Also, this format of open qualifiers was used for GosuCup and worked pretty well. There were a couple of interesting tours where players like Cryoc (C+) made it to the last stage but I think overall only deserving players made it through.
the problem is u have a limit of try  whats if u face better rival in ur 3 try. gg nore -_-. seriously game change this plz. not make limit of try
|
also is not like we have 1000 good players on bw scene anyway ...
|
I think that this system should work alright. We usued a similar one for the GosuCup Season 1 qualies, as Sayle already said.
but maybe implement no limit in trying ? it is a good idea imo
|
Netherlands6142 Posts
If you implement No Limit I guess people could sign up all 8 times and then not show up a bunch of times, taking up one of the 64 valuable quali spots.
|
On February 09 2012 23:56 Pholon wrote:
If you implement No Limit I guess people could sign up all 8 times and then not show up a bunch of times, taking up one of the 64 valuable quali spots.
I'll rather just use backups tbh.
|
i can bet every tour have free places. just saying ...
|
United Kingdom3685 Posts
On February 09 2012 23:56 Pholon wrote:
If you implement No Limit I guess people could sign up all 8 times and then not show up a bunch of times, taking up one of the 64 valuable quali spots.
Surely there's a better way of dealing with this than limiting signups to just 3 per player. If you're concerned about no-shows, just punish those players directly. For example, if a reservation list player signs up for a tour but doesn't show up, he loses his spot on the reservation list and/or is not allowed to sign up for the next 2 tours or something. Find a way to punish the no-show players directly rather than affecting players who are legitimately trying to qualify but get unlucky in the brackets.
Either way, I agree that the 3 attempt limit is not a good idea.
|
On February 09 2012 19:50 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2012 19:25 Sayle wrote:On February 09 2012 06:53 hacklebeast wrote:On February 09 2012 03:23 dRaW wrote:
I am still wondering about this format of qualification, since it's more based on luck entrance than actual top players who are able to rank through ladder system (however iccup is really hard to rank now anyway). For example, the top let's say 20 people enter the same 3 qualifications, but they are in the same quadrant bracket for the tour, only 2 of them will advance and this could happen by chance that we lose a lot of top players. Similarly, we can get the lowest of levels if the other side is mostly mid C, etc.
So with that in mind, I am going to enter the first tour, if you are above B rank you should not enter ^^ If the top 20 enter the same 3 tours, then 8 will qualify in qualifier 1 leaving 12 to enter qualifier 2. Then 8 will qualify there, leaving 4, who will all get in at qualifier 3. Yes, there is some luck involved with the process, but it isn't as bad as the scenario you described. I would say the "luck" involved is about as much luck in any bracket tournament. You could have to play sziky first round, you may get a walkover. Actually, that's not quite true either. If the top 20 enter one tour and all end up on the same side of the bracket, only 4 of them will advance instead of the possible 8. If the other half of the bracket was full of C players, then you will get 4 legitimate qualifiers and 4 C rank scrubs going through. This is the worst case scenario of course, but highlights the point KC is trying to make. I think the seeding system that Gecko mentioned is a great idea in theory but will be tricky/time-consuming to implement. Also, it might not even necessarily be a bad thing to have the possibility of a couple of random C players qualifying. Adds an underdog story to the group stages ;p Edit: Also, this format of open qualifiers was used for GosuCup and worked pretty well. There were a couple of interesting tours where players like Cryoc (C+) made it to the last stage but I think overall only deserving players made it through. the problem is u have a limit of try whats if u face better rival in ur 3 try. gg nore -_-. seriously game change this plz. not make limit of try
lol we agree on something, this is all I was saying, there is a small chance that you can end up in the same initial bracket as say pro7ect michael and sziky more than once 
I do agree that we need a diversity in skill because it does make for more entertainment, and we'll just have to see if this format works or not.
|
Well, go practice and take those players out then;)
Also, the chances that they will qualify in that tour will reduce the chance of better players being in your bracket in the next one, right?
|
Alright, there are multiple reasons for having the qualification system the way it is.
1. Deters walkovers. Yes, there will still be walkovers, but far less than there would be otherwise. Individually punishment is a very scary path to take, as the only recourse ISL has is to eliminate the person from the tourny. Can you imagine the flack ISL would take from everyone if Bakuryu's cat got sick so he had to forfeit his game and was consequentially banned? (well, everyone except Bakuryu. I'm pretty sure he is incapable of anger.) Seriously, of all the punishments handed down in ISL, gambit cup, or nation war, how many were seen as a positive? I can only think of scan related ones.
2. Number of people. We want (nearly) everyone who wants a shot into ISL to get a shot. If we allow everyone to enter every qualifier, then they will. That means about 100 people will get a shot to qualify. That's not enough people. By limiting the number of qualification spots, it nearly doubles the number of people who get to participate.
3. Makes it more entertaining. People entering 6 qualifiers means people aren't eliminated until #6. This way we have eliminations 3-6. It's a minor reason, sure, but people play better, and it's more fun to watch when there is something is on the line.
At the end of the day, the system is still extremely generous in allowing the good players to qualify. Let's be honest, If you can't manage to get top 8 in any of 3 qualifiers, you aren't going to get top 8 in ISL proper.
|
At the end of the day, the system is still extremely generous in allowing the good players to qualify. Let's be honest, If you can't manage to get top 8 in any of 3 qualifiers, you aren't going to get top 8 in ISL proper.[/QUOTE]
this sound like you played a proleague games and tell what its right and wrong, most of those who are good ( not including me ) can lose 3 times to a different players.
|
If you lose 3 times in Qualifiers, you're out.
If you lose 2 times in Group stage, you're out.
If you lose 1 time in Main bracket, you're out.
Dunno, seems to make sense... if you lose 3 times in Qualifiers, how are you going to win so many consecutive times in the Main Bracket?
|
Nice, this is amazing for BW foreign scene!
|
Russian Federation484 Posts
3 times try is good.
please make not bad time for russians
|
i think that the format is alright, if a player is good he will manage to get to the group stage
|
United Kingdom3685 Posts
-- Nuked --
I made a mean post so I nuked myself. I still disagree with this system, but I'll keep it to myself.
|
On February 10 2012 04:23 Eywa- wrote:
If you lose 3 times in Qualifiers, you're out.
If you lose 2 times in Group stage, you're out.
If you lose 1 time in Main bracket, you're out.
Dunno, seems to make sense... if you lose 3 times in Qualifiers, how are you going to win so many consecutive times in the Main Bracket?
Have you heard of Jangbi? :p
Also, there is a shitload of time to practice between qualifiers and following rounds.
Nevertheless, this is a great iniciative and I'll participate and support whatever u guys decide.
It just seems to me that most top players would like to reduce variance on first round and qualify through a system which rewards skill more than luck.
|
On February 10 2012 05:27 GoTuNk! wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2012 04:23 Eywa- wrote:
If you lose 3 times in Qualifiers, you're out.
If you lose 2 times in Group stage, you're out.
If you lose 1 time in Main bracket, you're out.
Dunno, seems to make sense... if you lose 3 times in Qualifiers, how are you going to win so many consecutive times in the Main Bracket? Have you heard of Jangbi? :p Also, there is a shitload of time to practice between qualifiers and following rounds. Nevertheless, this is a great iniciative and I'll participate and support whatever u guys decide. It just seems to me that most top players would like to reduce variance on first round and qualify through a system which rewards skill more than luck.
To me, all this complaint on the system just seems like 'hey I have a chance of not qualifying this time around because it has a new system' because they knew they can qualify easily if they do a laddered one, just like ISL and ISL2.
But there's no perfect system out there. Do I like this system? Not really, but I do find it slightly better than just ladder scores because now it brings in the luck factor. Sure, tournaments are held to find out who is one of the best, but luck should also factor in at times. For example, look at Flash and how he dropped out of getting seed twice in a row in OSL. If OSL was purely skill based, he would have won so many times, might have even gotten himself a platinum mouse by now.
|
United Kingdom3685 Posts
TSL2 system was god-tier IMO.
|
On February 10 2012 06:01 Sayle wrote:
TSL2 system was god-tier IMO.
I'm still quite iffy on using the Ladder system today, but other than that it was one of the most well-used system that I've seen to date.
because back then, there were so many players in BW (because SC2 wasn't out) so they actually had to fight for the top spots to qualify for TSL. Look now: almost every top player is guaranteed to be seeded into ISL if they just spend time to ladder, which eliminates the fun. Might as well invite top 96 players without the ladder stage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
