Jump to content


Feedback on structure of the tournament

Tournament structure

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

__K__U__ #1 Posted 28 November 2016 - 09:56 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 46289 battles
  • 15
  • [_KLS_]
  • Member since:
    04-24-2016

Hi WG,

after playing for KLS and as leader of my clan in the tournament recently I have uncovered and collected a few bits of feedback and improvements on the tournament from my clan. Some things I really liked about how you set it out; random groups, random maps(to a certain extent which I will elaborate on later) and when the tournament was happening which was WAY more manageable for the timing for me and my clan. These things were very good and did create a nice quick way of playing in a tournament. However, there were a few things that I feel and some others in my clan feel could change. Such as the following:

- The grouping; instead of groups playing eachother randomly between teams why not have a structured and fairer setup. Maybe for example, instead of playing a random team from that group, play EVERY team from that group and maybe a points based table should be implemented. Something like 3 points for a win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss. Then the top team from that group should be allowed to progress. This gives a much fairer way of teams being promoted to the next stage etc. As well as this, instead of allowing 1 team from each group to be promoted allow two teams to progress but say instead of having 6 per group, maybe have 8.

- Draws resulting in disqualification; This seems like an unfair way of determining whether one of the two teams should be promoted. Say two of the best clans in a region were pitted randomly in that group on knockout only to be a draw and have neither progress. I can't deny this is not the fairest or best way to do this.

- Instead of best of 3 have a set 5 games and the team with the highest amount of points at the end of this would be the winner. Not only will this increase the chance of the out come of the games being based on skill rather than luck, but it will create a more fun element for the players.

- The map selections; instead of map selections being random, why not have 5 games which are mixed. Ie. One team picks a map that they want to play on twice and another a map they want to play on twice. Then the final map is determined randomly. This way a team could prepare for this map that they feel suitable. Maybe you could even say 10 mins before a game that both teams enter which maps they want to play on. Admittedly, this won't work later on but for the first say 5 stages this may be more fair on both teams. Then after that you guys at WG can decide what maps they play on completely. 

 - Personal preference(not necessary at all) but no supremacy maps: I'm not sure whether supremacy maps are viable at all considering the speed and tactics of the game. Surely wouldn't it be more fun and more competitive to have an encounter battle base on tactics rather than who can capture the most bases to get points. 

Anyway, regardless of whether I am heard or ignored on this forum by WG, thank you for listening to me and my clans ideas and thoughts on improving clan tournaments. 

Sam

 


 "Once a Kleak, always a Kleak."

 


WARDOG72 #2 Posted 28 November 2016 - 11:20 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 47701 battles
  • 13
  • [PUMAS]
  • Member since:
    08-02-2015

View PostSamJeffries, on 28 November 2016 - 10:56 PM, said:

Hi WG,

after playing for KLS and as leader of my clan in the tournament recently I have uncovered and collected a few bits of feedback and improvements on the tournament from my clan. Some things I really liked about how you set it out; random groups, random maps(to a certain extent which I will elaborate on later) and when the tournament was happening which was WAY more manageable for the timing for me and my clan. These things were very good and did create a nice quick way of playing in a tournament. However, there were a few things that I feel and some others in my clan feel could change. Such as the following:

- The grouping; instead of groups playing eachother randomly between teams why not have a structured and fairer setup. Maybe for example, instead of playing a random team from that group, play EVERY team from that group and maybe a points based table should be implemented. Something like 3 points for a win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss. Then the top team from that group should be allowed to progress. This gives a much fairer way of teams being promoted to the next stage etc. As well as this, instead of allowing 1 team from each group to be promoted allow two teams to progress but say instead of having 6 per group, maybe have 8.

- Draws resulting in disqualification; This seems like an unfair way of determining whether one of the two teams should be promoted. Say two of the best clans in a region were pitted randomly in that group on knockout only to be a draw and have neither progress. I can't deny this is not the fairest or best way to do this.

- Instead of best of 3 have a set 5 games and the team with the highest amount of points at the end of this would be the winner. Not only will this increase the chance of the out come of the games being based on skill rather than luck, but it will create a more fun element for the players.

- The map selections; instead of map selections being random, why not have 5 games which are mixed. Ie. One team picks a map that they want to play on twice and another a map they want to play on twice. Then the final map is determined randomly. This way a team could prepare for this map that they feel suitable. Maybe you could even say 10 mins before a game that both teams enter which maps they want to play on. Admittedly, this won't work later on but for the first say 5 stages this may be more fair on both teams. Then after that you guys at WG can decide what maps they play on completely. 

 - Personal preference(not necessary at all) but no supremacy maps: I'm not sure whether supremacy maps are viable at all considering the speed and tactics of the game. Surely wouldn't it be more fun and more competitive to have an encounter battle base on tactics rather than who can capture the most bases to get points. 

Anyway, regardless of whether I am heard or ignored on this forum by WG, thank you for listening to me and my clans ideas and thoughts on improving clan tournaments. 

Sam

 

 

I agree very much on the first part of your exposition, but not on the map selection and supremacy, because I prefer map selection to be random, it's more fair like you said, if you train very much on one map that only gives you advantage over other teams, train on every map. And I happen to like supremacy, so.. But the rest is correct, losing one time (I mean to one team that was better than us 2 times in a row *-( )  and your are out isn't that fun.. 

Edited by WARDOG72, 28 November 2016 - 11:22 PM.


TAYPOT #3 Posted 28 November 2016 - 11:53 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 36937 battles
  • 3
  • [7GD]
  • Member since:
    04-02-2014

Personally, I think the structure of this tournament was fine.  For many clans (including mine) it would have been the first tournament experience and it was a useful and brief introduction on how things work.  The whole thing was done at reasonably short notice and while not necessarily a true reflection of skill, it certainly made putting a team out achievable.  The ideas posited above make very good sense but the thing would have been running for hours... ok for some but maybe difficult for many others that have responsibilities elsewhere.  If a longer duration should be applied in the future (and I think this would be a thing of beauty) then more notice must be given and possibly to be commenced at an earlier time.  I notice that some of the functionality of the tournament area was not used: I assume that future tournaments will utilise it and maybe the winner of a group stage would progress to further knockout stages.  If this were to happen then I'd imagine different stages would best be completed on different days... maybe Saturday and Sunday or consecutive weekends.  If there is a notable gap between stages then the option should be given to clans to alter personnel ( maybe a limited substitution system) to cater for players who can't make all advertised dates.

Personally, I can't stand Supremacy and would have preferred encounter.  Having said that I can understand WG wanting to promote this newest mode of play.  Additionally while removing some of the skill from battles, it did seem to shake things up a bit.  A more random factor is introduced with Supremacy which many may like... especially teams who couldn't field T10 tanks or had a smaller turnout than expected.  I think a certain amount of levelling would have been introduced.

As was loudly suggested prior to the tournament, creating separate tournaments with different tier limitations is definitely a good idea.  At the beginning of the tournament area a simple selection of which tier a team would prefer could lead into separate tournaments.  Not sure how achievable this is from a programming perspective, but it certainly makes sense.  So different tournaments for tier 10, max tier 8 and maybe max tier 5?  It might even simplify administration and allow for slightly more complex tournament structures. 

I suspect, as a clan, SWG have no particular preference as to whether random maps are used or not.  Different maps certainly, but I think giving teams a clue prior to battle makes very little difference.

Overall, this was a nice little eye-opener.  It ran smoothly and our players enjoyed themselves.



Berbo #4 Posted 29 November 2016 - 10:08 AM

    Associate eSports Manager Europe

  • WG Staff
  • 170 battles
  • 120
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

View PostSamJeffries, on 28 November 2016 - 09:56 PM, said:

- The grouping; instead of groups playing eachother randomly between teams why not have a structured and fairer setup. Maybe for example, instead of playing a random team from that group, play EVERY team from that group and maybe a points based table should be implemented. Something like 3 points for a win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss. Then the top team from that group should be allowed to progress. This gives a much fairer way of teams being promoted to the next stage etc. As well as this, instead of allowing 1 team from each group to be promoted allow two teams to progress but say instead of having 6 per group, maybe have 8.

- Draws resulting in disqualification; This seems like an unfair way of determining whether one of the two teams should be promoted. Say two of the best clans in a region were pitted randomly in that group on knockout only to be a draw and have neither progress. I can't deny this is not the fairest or best way to do this.

 

Hey there!

 

Thanks for taking time to write this, as you can see we're looking into it and as a matter of fact I'm currently gathering feedback and sending it to Minsk.

 

Just help me understand your points:

- Playing between teams in groups wasn't random. It was a single elimination system where you advance if you win. I see you're suggesting a round robin where you play every other team but that is something already in the system. I'm pretty sure we'll use it soon. 

- Currently I don't have options to change rules for draw situations, can you show me example of this in the tournament, group number?

 

Thanks!



Winters_2014 #5 Posted 30 November 2016 - 03:28 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9583 battles
  • 523
  • [SPRTA]
  • Member since:
    07-20-2014

View PostBerbo, on 29 November 2016 - 10:08 AM, said:

 

Hey there!

 

Thanks for taking time to write this, as you can see we're looking into it and as a matter of fact I'm currently gathering feedback and sending it to Minsk.

 

Just help me understand your points:

- Playing between teams in groups wasn't random. It was a single elimination system where you advance if you win. I see you're suggesting a round robin where you play every other team but that is something already in the system. I'm pretty sure we'll use it soon. 

- Currently I don't have options to change rules for draw situations, can you show me example of this in the tournament, group number?

 

Thanks!

 

what I found good and bad about the blitz brawl is:

 

Good:

 

- No round robin like twister cup had during the first rounds. It is to time consuming and most clans don't even turn up (punished the clans that don't turn up maybe? They are irritating because that means 30 minutes of waiting). It is nice to fight all other clans in a second round though. Than a point system like in soccer can be added: win=3, loss=0 and a draw 1.

- best of 3 unlike the one game of the twistercup. There is a second chance when good clans meet, but 3 games don't take to long and there is a lot more time since it isn't with round robin like I stated above.

- supremacy tournament! I'm not a fan of supremacy myself but it does make clans change their strats wich is good for variation. I would suggest a supremacy tournament and encounter tournament should always be split, never in 1 and the same tournament.

 

"Bad" points:

 

- the prize was so bad, I know it was a small tournament. But I would suggest 150 gold and 2 days of premium account instead of the current prizes.

-it wqs hard for me to find my own group. It always logged when I was trying to find it, maybe I missed a button, but I didn't manage to find my own group with crashen the app (playing itself went really well though).

 

Suggestions:

 

-maybe a point system where clans earn points when winning in tournaments and vica versa for loosing. The points can be shown in the clan their description and in a server top 10 or something like that. It would give clans something to strive for ;).

-make tournaments over different tiers and restrict the enemy to have a max and min amount of tier points like twister cup had. Try to make something that can see wich players have wich toptier tank to avoid a guy with tier 6 in a tier 10 tournament.

-allow spectators to give the reserve players a chance to watch their mates play. I would suggest only for reserve players because there is no cheating possible then. But the reserve players had to be ingame for 2 hours doing nothing now, the least they could do was watching their mates, isn't it?


Proud member of SPARTA-phalanx!!!

 

https://www.youtube....mEKPx_G42XzDOlg


__K__U__ #6 Posted 30 November 2016 - 06:09 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 46289 battles
  • 15
  • [_KLS_]
  • Member since:
    04-24-2016

View PostBerbo, on 29 November 2016 - 10:08 AM, said:

 

Hey there!

 

Thanks for taking time to write this, as you can see we're looking into it and as a matter of fact I'm currently gathering feedback and sending it to Minsk.

 

Just help me understand your points:

- Playing between teams in groups wasn't random. It was a single elimination system where you advance if you win. I see you're suggesting a round robin where you play every other team but that is something already in the system. I'm pretty sure we'll use it soon. 

- Currently I don't have options to change rules for draw situations, can you show me example of this in the tournament, group number?

 

Thanks!

 

Thank you for taking the time to reply. :) 

 

The grouping was single elimination which I think isn't the best way to do this, maybe instead of letting one team from each group progress allow two but increase the size of the groups. Like I said before as well, and this links to a lot of my points, both teams should still be given a second chance to prove their worth by enforcing a group based tournament. Ie. 3 points for a win, 1 for a draw and 0 for a loss. If you are using a round robin system, I think this would be much better in my opinion.

The way teams are drawn should be based around skill; average win rate, average tier, average damage etc. Maybe each groups average for these stats should all be the same so that the groups are made fairer. And like I said, if there were no single elimination and teams could still progress with draws, there would be no issue i described before (two of the best teams from a region being eliminated through a draw). I don't think it's necessary to give an example. 

 

Anyway, thanks again for listening, 

Sam


 "Once a Kleak, always a Kleak."

 


__K__U__ #7 Posted 30 November 2016 - 06:11 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 46289 battles
  • 15
  • [_KLS_]
  • Member since:
    04-24-2016
Oh and one other thing I forgot to mention originally, the screen for viewing all teams and their groups was glitched not only for me but for many other of my players in KLS. We would scroll down and it would freeze until we exited. :/

 "Once a Kleak, always a Kleak."

 


RA1D_DRIZZELL_ #8 Posted 02 December 2016 - 07:44 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 33460 battles
  • 54
  • [RA1D]
  • Member since:
    02-01-2015

View PostSamJeffries, on 30 November 2016 - 06:11 PM, said:

Oh and one other thing I forgot to mention originally, the screen for viewing all teams and their groups was glitched not only for me but for many other of my players in KLS. We would scroll down and it would freeze until we exited. :/

 

true, we had same bug

Proud Member of #1 German CW Clan

      


Berbo #9 Posted 02 December 2016 - 11:02 AM

    Associate eSports Manager Europe

  • WG Staff
  • 170 battles
  • 120
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

I know it's an extra work for you guys but if it's not too difficult please try to capture all bugs that happened so we have something to show to devs, it eases our life a lot when reporting your feedback.

 

Thanks!



RollingSwarm #10 Posted 04 December 2016 - 03:01 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 41093 battles
  • 432
  • [SW4RM]
  • Member since:
    09-11-2014
There is a bug at the moment re: team invites. From my understanding, invites are sent and received - but once first notification appears then disappears there no other way to click into the section to accept the invite. This issue wasn't present for Brawl 1 but caused us a bit of a headache getting everyone in for Brawl 2. Our team leader had to send multiple times and co ordinate with recipients to ensure they were online and ready for when the invite appeared. 

Somewhere between Rage & Serenity'


theluckstar #11 Posted 06 December 2016 - 11:34 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 17476 battles
  • 14
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
Honestly, I don't think it's a good idea to have touchpad and K&M players fighting in the same tournament. I've been playing WoT PC version for many years before. From my experience, using a mouse to aim has a huge advantage in shooting on the move. This is not fair for touchpad players. I'm fine if WG set another seperate tournament for K&M players, but please don't mix them together.

The_Mighty_Wombat #12 Posted 09 December 2016 - 09:06 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 37240 battles
  • 2,531
  • [-GNA-]
  • Member since:
    11-07-2014

The prize pool and team prize is misleading.

It states in the description teams win

1350 gold and 1.8m credits.

So a team on 7 should win more gold each then a team of 9.

Fix the description and state

each player wins 150gold and 200k credits.

 

In Blitz Brawl 2, 

If the prize pool was distributed evenly to winning teams 

Then split to each player.

Then the gold prize would of been about doubled.

 

Please fix the description and just clearly state what each player wins.



Berbo #13 Posted 09 December 2016 - 11:27 AM

    Associate eSports Manager Europe

  • WG Staff
  • 170 battles
  • 120
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

View PostDans79Vet, on 09 December 2016 - 09:06 AM, said:

The prize pool and team prize is misleading.

It states in the description teams win

1350 gold and 1.8m credits.

So a team on 7 should win more gold each then a team of 9.

Fix the description and state

each player wins 150gold and 200k credits.

 

In Blitz Brawl 2, 

If the prize pool was distributed evenly to winning teams 

Then split to each player.

Then the gold prize would of been about doubled.

 

Please fix the description and just clearly state what each player wins.

 

It's stated that 1350 will be divided by 9. As teams are made of 9 members.

All rewards are per team.

 

Team of 7 shouldn't win more as we never said a team gets a full amount of 1350.

Not sure what is misleading (considering you read everything fully)

 

Also I dont understand how the gold would be doubled? Could you please explain



The_Mighty_Wombat #14 Posted 09 December 2016 - 05:18 PM

    First Sergeant

  • Player
  • 37240 battles
  • 2,531
  • [-GNA-]
  • Member since:
    11-07-2014

image.jpeg

ingame new never stated that it was split 9 ways even if you have 7.

 

If the total prize fund was distributed out to the winning teams, each team would win more then stated as not the full amount of teams registed.

Then if the teams were less then 9 it would be more to the individual.

 

Displaying the "Prize Fund" is pointless and make it look like there is more to win.

Saying the prize is per team is pointless as "the team" receives less if they dont have 9 players.

Just state the correct facts.

Each winning team player earns **** gold and **** credits.



Berbo #15 Posted 10 December 2016 - 10:58 AM

    Associate eSports Manager Europe

  • WG Staff
  • 170 battles
  • 120
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

View PostDans79Vet, on 09 December 2016 - 05:18 PM, said:

image.jpeg

ingame new never stated that it was split 9 ways even if you have 7.

 

If the total prize fund was distributed out to the winning teams, each team would win more then stated as not the full amount of teams registed.

Then if the teams were less then 9 it would be more to the individual.

 

Displaying the "Prize Fund" is pointless and make it look like there is more to win.

Saying the prize is per team is pointless as "the team" receives less if they dont have 9 players.

Just state the correct facts.

Each winning team player earns **** gold and **** credits.

 

That's why we have the tournament page and the rules, news are there to inform about the dates and the event in general and are never the main source of regulations. There's a very low amount of tournaments in the last several years where we posted full rules in the news. Here as you can see there's only some points mentioned, not even 1/3 of the rules.

 

Best regards



_Ripper4you_ #16 Posted 10 December 2016 - 12:44 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 49607 battles
  • 402
  • [EG-]
  • Member since:
    04-06-2013
It will ever be a limit on tournament team select preparation before battle for same tank spam like on Object 140?

Amadeusz_Fighter #17 Posted 10 December 2016 - 01:37 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8700 battles
  • 832
  • [PADUT]
  • Member since:
    12-09-2014

View PostBerbo, on 29 November 2016 - 11:08 AM, said:

 

Hey there!

 

Thanks for taking time to write this, as you can see we're looking into it and as a matter of fact I'm currently gathering feedback and sending it to Minsk.

 

Just help me understand your points:

- Playing between teams in groups wasn't random. It was a single elimination system where you advance if you win. I see you're suggesting a round robin where you play every other team but that is something already in the system. I'm pretty sure we'll use it soon. 

- Currently I don't have options to change rules for draw situations, can you show me example of this in the tournament, group number?

 

Thanks!

 

The price for winning team is not worth the credits they spent for playing tournament battles.... whyyyy?! :arta:

Amadeusz_Fighter #18 Posted 10 December 2016 - 03:35 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Player
  • 8700 battles
  • 832
  • [PADUT]
  • Member since:
    12-09-2014

View Postvlad9935, on 10 December 2016 - 01:44 PM, said:

It will ever be a limit on tournament team select preparation before battle for same tank spam like on Object 140?

 



peterjanik222 #19 Posted 31 January 2017 - 02:25 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 2721 battles
  • 1
  • [EC-RO]
  • Member since:
    05-28-2016
Hi people

____B_V____ #20 Posted 05 February 2017 - 11:17 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 27294 battles
  • 6
  • [W_H]
  • Member since:
    12-25-2015
Hi,
I am a desktop player.
We played yesterday t10/desktop blitz brawl.
Only 10 teams registered for the tournament. Our first enemy had 3 touch device players. We won it, with 6 vs 7, but if they won it, what then : ticket and disqualification but we would get nothing from it.
The main thing is, the most clans do not have enough pc players for a complete team ( we have 7 but one guy couldnt play), so the desktop tournament will not work, and should be stopped.
Our best cw team consists of 4 pc players and 5 touch players, you punished us with this decision.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users