EPTSC2 is being compared to poker all the time, some agree some don't but in reality from a pro sports point of view, it's a lot more like snooker. Imho the most suitable structure for SC scene would be like that of snooker.
Infusing Cash into Starcraft 2 - Page 19
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Eluadyl
Turkey364 Posts
SC2 is being compared to poker all the time, some agree some don't but in reality from a pro sports point of view, it's a lot more like snooker. Imho the most suitable structure for SC scene would be like that of snooker. | ||
|
red_hq
Canada450 Posts
Blizzard requires you to fix your prize pool, not sure if they just mean minimum the email was very unclear. Your fixed prize pool requires you to have a solid prize pool ie: $700 invariant of how many people sign up to a buy-in. I am not sure if you can increase it but that means if you expect 64 people at $10 ea and only get 50 you're in the hole for $140. It is still unclear if you set the prize pool to $640 and get 128 people whether or not you can even let those extra people sign up is still unclear. And you can't have a SnG either because blizzard also asks you to set a date. But I will be sure to post any more developments I come across with blizzard here. | ||
|
Destiny
United States280 Posts
| ||
|
SnapCall
94 Posts
If someone wants to earn money by playing a SC2/poker tournament, there HAS to be someone else in this tournament losing money. So why would someone participate in a tournament to lose money? A: The player is aware of it, but participates anyway because he wants to play. B: The player does not realize he is losing money. Why A is true for poker: Some sort of currency is essential to play poker. While it is possible to play with playmoney, the game is way more exciting when played with real money and there are people, who are willing to lose some bucks in exchange for some entertainment. Why A isnt true for starcraft: As long as free sponsored tournaments exist there is no reason to participate in a buyin tournament with no/little chance to get in the money at all. Why B is true for poker: short: (huge) element of luck long: A losing player (a player who has a negative expected value) will occasionally win money in a tournament. A winning player( a player who has a positive expected value) will regularly lose money in a tournament. This means you cannot determine if you are a winning or a losing player based on your results as long as you dont have a huge sample size of tournaments played(we are talking about thousands of tournaments) Why B isnt true for starcraft: short: no(/little) element of luck long: If you lose to a player on balanced maps, no build order loses involved you can be pretty sure he is better than you. If theres a tournament full of people, who are probably better than you, you know you will lose money by participating. So basically what will happen is, in week 1 the 64 best players will participate in the 64 man tournament(lets assume top8 get paid) with the highest buyin. after that, at least 32 players will realize they have almost no chance at getting top 8 in that field. In week 2 there will only be 32 players left ( + some idiots who won money in the second highest buyin tourney). So there are less than 64 players participating, generating a smaller prizepool and a tougher field, thus making it unprofitable for even more players. The 32 players who dont participate anymore will move down to the second highest buyin tournament, making this tournament unprofitable for other players, which will then move down also. So every week every tournament is getting tougher, until no one can play any tournament profitably. | ||
|
freeto
United States122 Posts
So basically what will happen is, in week 1 the 64 best players will participate in the 64 man tournament(lets assume top8 get paid) with the highest buyin. after that, at least 32 players will realize they have almost no chance at getting top 8 in that field. In week 2 there will only be 32 players left ( + some idiots who won money in the second highest buyin tourney). So there are less than 64 players participating, generating a smaller prizepool and a tougher field, thus making it unprofitable for even more players. The 32 players who dont participate anymore will move down to the second highest buyin tournament, making this tournament unprofitable for other players, which will then move down also. So every week every tournament is getting tougher, until no one can play any tournament profitably. this is the main problem im seeing. if the very best players are participating in the top tier buy in tournaments then almost all the players who dont think they can beat the best will move to second highest. then the players below the players winning the second tier buyins will move to the 3rd, and so on. this would mean there would need to be a lot of tournaments in order to give everyone a chance at winning money, and im just not sure theres enough people willing to participate or organize these tournaments, but your poll does look promising so i hope im wrong  | ||
|
Destiny
United States280 Posts
Poker does indeed have a great deal of luck involved (or at least enough of the illusion of luck to keep bringing fish back into the game). The only way for a few to make money playing SC2 in these sorts of tournaments is for many people to lose money, again, this is true. However, with the buy-in and payout structure mentioned earlier in my post, I believe it's possible that people from a wide variety of skill levels will be able to profit from these tournaments, or at least will believe they can. Let's say they first tournament is launched. In this hypothetical tournament with my previous pay-out structure outlined (top 8 receive money), it's almost a guarantee that those top 8 will want to participate again, as their next tournament buy-in will essentially be "free". The next 8 will probably want to participate again as well, as they were only 1 place away. So 16 are probably going to re-register. The next 16, from the ro32, may feel like they could get "in the money" with a lucky bracket reshuffle. That leaves us with the final 32 that you mention. In a perfect world, skill will be distributed appropriately through-out the buy-ins. People of greater skill will play in higher buy-in tournaments (as there is more money to be won) and people of lesser skill will play in smaller tournaments. If someone is playing in a $25 tourney and they keep struggling to get past the ro64, or can never get past the ro32, perhaps dropping down to the next tourney (where they see some players finishing in the ro16 or ro32 that they KNOW they can beat) would be appropriate for them. The only people who would really feel like they could NEVER compete would be people playing in the absolute lowest buy-in tournament who are unable to get out of the ro64. The prize money near the top could serve as motivation to improve, but they could also just play in the tourney for the chance of getting a good bracket shuffle so they can make it to or near the money. These players would be playing for such low stakes ($5 or less) that they wouldn't feel like absolute shit for throwing away the money, especially when you take into account how much money we throw at entertainment in our daily lives. | ||
|
Mr. Wiggles
Canada5894 Posts
Or, could you possibly implement something similar to requisites for each tournament? i.e. You must place in the top 8 or 16 (Somewhere where you make money) of a lower buy-in tournament before you can move up to the next level of "buy-in", with exceptions for pros of course. This would make people want to play in the tournaments, to get the feeling of "progression", but would also limit them from joining 50$ tournaments and losing in the first round, putting them off the idea forever. Also, just because of how the community sees it, instead of "buy-in", should we call it "Tournament join fee" or something. It seems lots of people attach connotations to "Buy-In" that put them off the idea. I've never really played poker for money, so I would appreciate it if you told me if these suggestions were any good, or already implemented, or if they're total crap. Thank you. :p | ||
|
AresHero
United States39 Posts
| ||
|
red_hq
Canada450 Posts
Meaning I am hosting a $5 Buy-in! So if you support the idea of SC2 buy-ins show your support, and show how viable it is by signing up here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=182313 | ||
|
DrBoo
Canada1177 Posts
I think that there's already a lot of local tournys doing this but they're obviously not as well publicized and talked about since they're usually not streamed. | ||
|
azzu
Germany141 Posts
| ||
| ||
