EPTOn July 13 2011 04:25 Menkt wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
I don't even... I'm really interested to see you take only a few other University students with jobs on the side and with little to no budget to organize a tournament to this scale and succeed in just a few short months. The UBC Starcraft club isn't a corporation like the GSL or NASL. It's also shocking how much you overestimate the organizer's ability to control players; they need to take their time to adjust their settings and whatever they need to do to prepare. To have every single match have a referee in them is just absurd. It's only a handful of people organizing the thing.
Also to make it to have people that bring their own computer be the only ones to play is just idiotic. This is a sponsored tournament where they wanted to see numbers in both players and spectators. Why would they enforce ONLY BYOC just to simplify things a little bit at the cost of a lot of solid players?
Also, what are your credentials? Why do you get the authority to say what a tournament should and shouldn't look like? If you can do what you expect with the same resources the UBC SC Club had, I'd be impressed.
+ Show Spoiler +
On July 13 2011 03:51 D_K_night wrote:
I'll talk about what went wrong, and what could be done to make things right for the next tourney.
#1) The on-stage presentation was so-so, thanking the sponsors, talking a little bit about the game, but presentation could have been cut shorter at least 10 minutes, going on and on without a specific agenda. We don't need to hear all the stuff about how so-and-so discovered Starcraft. Looking around me the audience and players were itching to hurry up and just get this tourney going. The whole LAN spiel was completely groan-worthy, guys you know better than that. SC2 doesn't support LAN - why even suggest that it does?
Here's a something which killed the credibility of the presenters. You can never make make mistakes where: Person A says something, then suddenly Person B goes "oh um, actually it's this". Guys, you didn't have all your ducks in a row. Practice. Rehearse your presentation as a group. You're university students from UBC, you know better.
#2) Brackets of Code S, A, and so on. The worst part of this was leaving things up to the players to organize their own matches. Lack of structure causes things to fall apart. It should have been at the very minimum, arranged in terms of Player A vs B, timelines to play the match, timelines to setup your computer, if you those are not met - it's an autoloss, walk-over, etc.
Basically it was "Oh, everyone in Code X just gather in this chat room, and decides amongst yourselves who plays who". It was a shock for me to discover that there was no structure whatsoever on who was going to be paired up against who.
#3) Internet access. One of the most basic requirements of the tourney, is a simple and straightforward method of connecting. So UBC requires a username/password to access their wifi, but why was ethernet only provided in just one room? And then there was the fateful outage where everyone's connection was killed.
#4) Vetoing of maps. Way too much loose control of the event. Just having the players repeatedly veto each alternating map until only one is left, is an enormous time-waster and was extremely clumsy for all concerned to do. AGAIN - you're the organizers. Take control. State clear, concise, strong rules, eg "You're playing on these maps in order, and you may veto only 1 each".
#5) BYOC. This needs to be stated very clearly and concisely, and it wasn't. If this is a "Bring Your Own Computer" event - then you enforce that. No ifs, ands, or buts. You don't make a concession and say "oh, and here's 4(?) or 7(?) shared computers for those who don't have laptops or can't bring their desktop PC". And what happened to the 7 shared PC's? More like, there were only 4. Each organizer had a different take on how these PC's were to be used. You really can't do that. I should be able to get the same answer from every organizer, regardless of who I talk to.
If you're going to be providing shared PC's, at the very base minimum, the following should have been done, and it was shocking to me that it wasn't:
1) Tally up a list of who's bringing a computer/laptop
2) Tally up who isn't, and needs to use one of the shared machines
3) Tailor the player schedule based on who needs to use a shared machine
When I arrived at the reception, I was expecting to be asked "did you bring your own computer" and was shocked when the question was never asked. Also the way people just leapt at the shared PC's and quite frankly - weren't interested in sharing. What's the point?
You, the organizers - are supposed to run the show and run with an iron fist, the list of people who would use the shared PC's - at what times, on which matches, then get OFF the PC and make way for the next person. The entire thing struck me as "too nice" and basically got overun by the players who weren't the slightest bit interested in sharing a shared PC.
With things the way they were - was there truly ever any reason why...people couldn't just play from home? Everyone was connecting on Battle.net after all. Why not just allow people to play from home?
Again - set the player schedule. Take attendance. Set deadlines on setting up your laptop/PC. You should be able to run multiple games simultaneously according to the schedule.
It should have looked at the minimum, like this:
1) Attendance taken, late players/no-shows crossed off the list with instant auto-loss.
2) Players arrive, setup their machines, headphones on, logged into Battle.net and confirmed that they are ready to GO.
3) Organizers setup the custom matches with Referee, and both players confirmed
4) Lunch break set @ noon, all players break for lunch
5) Matches resume according to schedule
Lessons learned here?
- Be organized. Everyone should be on the same page, whether it be presenting, running the matches, etc. Set an agenda/player schedule, and stick to it.
- Be strong with the rules. No exceptions.
- Set deadlines, timelines, etc.
- COMMUNICATE and rehearse. Get things right on tourney date. Take it seriously.
I'll talk about what went wrong, and what could be done to make things right for the next tourney.
#1) The on-stage presentation was so-so, thanking the sponsors, talking a little bit about the game, but presentation could have been cut shorter at least 10 minutes, going on and on without a specific agenda. We don't need to hear all the stuff about how so-and-so discovered Starcraft. Looking around me the audience and players were itching to hurry up and just get this tourney going. The whole LAN spiel was completely groan-worthy, guys you know better than that. SC2 doesn't support LAN - why even suggest that it does?
Here's a something which killed the credibility of the presenters. You can never make make mistakes where: Person A says something, then suddenly Person B goes "oh um, actually it's this". Guys, you didn't have all your ducks in a row. Practice. Rehearse your presentation as a group. You're university students from UBC, you know better.
#2) Brackets of Code S, A, and so on. The worst part of this was leaving things up to the players to organize their own matches. Lack of structure causes things to fall apart. It should have been at the very minimum, arranged in terms of Player A vs B, timelines to play the match, timelines to setup your computer, if you those are not met - it's an autoloss, walk-over, etc.
Basically it was "Oh, everyone in Code X just gather in this chat room, and decides amongst yourselves who plays who". It was a shock for me to discover that there was no structure whatsoever on who was going to be paired up against who.
#3) Internet access. One of the most basic requirements of the tourney, is a simple and straightforward method of connecting. So UBC requires a username/password to access their wifi, but why was ethernet only provided in just one room? And then there was the fateful outage where everyone's connection was killed.
#4) Vetoing of maps. Way too much loose control of the event. Just having the players repeatedly veto each alternating map until only one is left, is an enormous time-waster and was extremely clumsy for all concerned to do. AGAIN - you're the organizers. Take control. State clear, concise, strong rules, eg "You're playing on these maps in order, and you may veto only 1 each".
#5) BYOC. This needs to be stated very clearly and concisely, and it wasn't. If this is a "Bring Your Own Computer" event - then you enforce that. No ifs, ands, or buts. You don't make a concession and say "oh, and here's 4(?) or 7(?) shared computers for those who don't have laptops or can't bring their desktop PC". And what happened to the 7 shared PC's? More like, there were only 4. Each organizer had a different take on how these PC's were to be used. You really can't do that. I should be able to get the same answer from every organizer, regardless of who I talk to.
If you're going to be providing shared PC's, at the very base minimum, the following should have been done, and it was shocking to me that it wasn't:
1) Tally up a list of who's bringing a computer/laptop
2) Tally up who isn't, and needs to use one of the shared machines
3) Tailor the player schedule based on who needs to use a shared machine
When I arrived at the reception, I was expecting to be asked "did you bring your own computer" and was shocked when the question was never asked. Also the way people just leapt at the shared PC's and quite frankly - weren't interested in sharing. What's the point?
You, the organizers - are supposed to run the show and run with an iron fist, the list of people who would use the shared PC's - at what times, on which matches, then get OFF the PC and make way for the next person. The entire thing struck me as "too nice" and basically got overun by the players who weren't the slightest bit interested in sharing a shared PC.
With things the way they were - was there truly ever any reason why...people couldn't just play from home? Everyone was connecting on Battle.net after all. Why not just allow people to play from home?
Again - set the player schedule. Take attendance. Set deadlines on setting up your laptop/PC. You should be able to run multiple games simultaneously according to the schedule.
It should have looked at the minimum, like this:
1) Attendance taken, late players/no-shows crossed off the list with instant auto-loss.
2) Players arrive, setup their machines, headphones on, logged into Battle.net and confirmed that they are ready to GO.
3) Organizers setup the custom matches with Referee, and both players confirmed
4) Lunch break set @ noon, all players break for lunch
5) Matches resume according to schedule
Lessons learned here?
- Be organized. Everyone should be on the same page, whether it be presenting, running the matches, etc. Set an agenda/player schedule, and stick to it.
- Be strong with the rules. No exceptions.
- Set deadlines, timelines, etc.
- COMMUNICATE and rehearse. Get things right on tourney date. Take it seriously.
I don't even... I'm really interested to see you take only a few other University students with jobs on the side and with little to no budget to organize a tournament to this scale and succeed in just a few short months. The UBC Starcraft club isn't a corporation like the GSL or NASL. It's also shocking how much you overestimate the organizer's ability to control players; they need to take their time to adjust their settings and whatever they need to do to prepare. To have every single match have a referee in them is just absurd. It's only a handful of people organizing the thing.
Also to make it to have people that bring their own computer be the only ones to play is just idiotic. This is a sponsored tournament where they wanted to see numbers in both players and spectators. Why would they enforce ONLY BYOC just to simplify things a little bit at the cost of a lot of solid players?
Also, what are your credentials? Why do you get the authority to say what a tournament should and shouldn't look like? If you can do what you expect with the same resources the UBC SC Club had, I'd be impressed.
You can organize a tourney just fine on a shoestring budget. There's a difference between something with a lot of structure and organization, versus something that's simply too loose. All of the following info was known going in:
- How many players, what league they would be in
- Event time frame
Based on just those two factors above, that alone gives you the groundwork for a schedule. How is defining timelines and adhering to a fixed schedule in any way controlling? It's not that hard. It's just project management, nothing super complicated here.
Every organized tourney has all the necessary prerequisites in place:
- confirmation of player arrival
- X amount of time given to player to setup his gear - think about all the pro tourneys that give you only 15 minutes to setup your mouse/keyboard. Let's be more generous and allot 30 minutes to set everything up per player. That simply means the players need to arrive 30 minutes ahead of time - build that into the project plan. Inform the players/organizers. Keep everyone up to date.
Were you actually there at the event? Did you see what happened with the few shared PC's and how that worked out? What about the room where all the Desktop PC's were setup? Not really a "spectator" scene, was it?
How about this. PM me, and we'll take this offline. You come forward with your ideas on how things could be better, and I'll come forward with mine. Let's make a call to each other, and you can judge for yourself, my "qualifications".
