CONGRATS TO INVITATIONAL QUALIFIERS and Circuit Feedback Thread!

Stratos

Banned deucer.
When Zach and TRC played last night, the final spot in the Doubles Invitational was decided. So let's give a BIG HAND to everyone who advanced to the invitational!

TheFourthChaser
finally
makiri
Haruno
Lohgock
Pinoy Pwnage
U-Turn Out
Pwnemon
Pocket
Laurel
srk1214
Tricking
Braverius
TGMD

If you made it to invitationals, please respond ASAP that you are going or not going to play so I can plan the invitational based on the number of entrants.

To everyone who participated in the circuit, what were your thoughts? Would you like to see more tournaments? Less? How about point rewards? More or less top-heavy? More or less total point giveout? Would you like to see more people make next year's invitationals? How did you feel about the minitour format, the seasonal format, the major format? This circuit is very much a work in progress so we're open to any feedback here. Post your thoughts, for a better America!
 

Bughouse

Like ships in the night, you're passing me by
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
Of course I'm playing.

I think the format worked pretty well. The main things I'd critique about the format is that it probably weights the 3 main tournaments too heavily relative to minitours and that I'm not positive 4 should auto qualify from the Major (maybe 2 would be better).
 

Haruno

Skadi :)
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
In

Problem with vircuit is pwnemon sux. Also finally made invitationals so that means some scoring balancing is to be desired since how the fuck did he get in while equally competent if not better users like yohoe and optic gaga failed? Some successes are I got in and kylecole didn't. Other than that. It was pretty good.
 

Tricking

MALDINI
is a Top Tutor Alumnusis a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Top Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnuswon the 6th Official Ladder Tournamentwon the 7th Official Ladder Tournamentis a defending SPL Championis a Past SPL Championis a Past WCoP Champion
World Defender
Of course, i will play.


I've only taken part to the Major which was well-organized with deadlines and stuff, i guess that the number is fine considering that it's the Playoff stage, but as i've said... i can't say so much since i've played only one tour.
And maybe as Srk1214 said, i would reduce the number of people that get the auto-qualify from the Major to only two and not four as it was.


With this said, congrats to all the people who reached the Invitational (and sorry to the ones i haxed out).
 
in terms of feedback, i think this was one of the most well-hosted tournament circuits i've seen. every minitour / seasonal / major was hosted incredibly well with little controversy or fuss, so great job to those who hosted the various events within the circuit.

i like double elimination =)

congrats to all those in invitational especially zach, and another sorry to benja (rip)
 
also i agree with srk in regard to main 3 tour weighted too much over the minitours but i disagree with the major 100 should be 2 thing, i reckon 4 is fine :toast:
 

GlassGlaceon

My heart has now been set on love
Pwnemon
Circuit critiques:
1. Less major hax on my part so that i dont feel bad for people and give them wins
2. less major hax on opp's side so they dont curbstomp me with manual hail stall because of freezes LOL
3. Less lucky italians
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some less important critiques:
1. I'd like to see more people in the next invitational
2. tbh i'd like more bo5's but this one is a longshot. i think bo3's are too short and the luck-based part of the game can really screw them over. also i just wanna be able to say that i won a round by bringing the same team 5 times :E
3. id like more standard doubles minitours with no gimmicks attached but thatss prolly just me so w/e
4. great job to the guys hoting this, you worked hard.
 

finally

how can you swallow so much sleep?
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnus
hello, i am the true prophet of the the hentai cult
user haruno is the illegitimate representative who i have come to not only denounce but also dethrone
i request immediate pairing up against user haruno so that i may clear the hentai cult of this heretic's name

overall happy with minitours and major

comments for a better america:
perhaps more community input on what the minitours were.
don't know about the extra round for seeding which was in majors. perhaps i missed some mathematical step on why it was necessary, but i would take it out next time
really like srk hosting, he's an exceptional host
really like xzern hosting, he's an exceptional host
wish there was less net-decking overall (but i don't think you can stop this one)
i am actually okay with 4 people qualifying from majors because i like a big invitational (and want a bigger invitational pool of people next year!). inclusion ^_^
do not know about bo5. i get the way it reduces hax, but i got other stuff to do in life :[

i think pinoy wants in, but idk for sure. ill ask him next time i see him
ill post more if i think of more
 

Stratos

Banned deucer.
Something which was brought up on IRC by Haruno and srk1214 was that minitours don't have nearly enough weight in the overall scheme of things, and that the 3 big tournaments basically decide who makes it in, whereas someone like Level 51 who had a sterling minitour record but sucked big fat D in the big 3 don't get in.

I personally think that the minitours did their intended job, which was not to let people get into the invitational if they do awful in all 3 major events but to give you the final push needed to make 100 if you were close. You were supposed to be fully able to make invitationals without playing them, but you'd need to do a little better in the big tours. The goal was never to circumvent the big tours. You can see them accomplish their intended purpose looking at the cases of U-turn and TGMD, who would have each had 90 points without minitours, and in matt and sj, who would have gotten in with minitours.

To me the important concern would not be the minitours but the big three. Perhaps we should add a fourth. Perhaps we should make point rewards less top-heavy. Perhaps it's just a quirk of our playerbase—only two users top cut both seasonals—or perhaps it's a format flaw.
 

Braverius

snowls
is a Past SPL Champion
wish there was less net-decking overall (but i don't think you can stop this one)
You could stop it by not allowing people to change teams in the middle of a best of three, seriously do not know why that is allowed and don't know what it does for anyone except turn an already somewhat matchup-reliant format into an even more matchup-reliant format. Fishing for information and using it to determine how to play your board should be a big deal in a bo3. Information should be part of the actual battles rather than part of the preparation. In singles I get why the switching teams thing is in place, but in doubles it is pretty dumb. Banking on good matchups just one time is way too risky to be logical (it's still risky if you're allowed to switch teams but you can play "team mind games" and jfc that phrase shouldn't ever be a thing), and I honestly think it would encourage players to build more well-rounded teams rather than direct counterteams (it'd also punish players who aren't very versatile, which isn't a bad thing either!)

Not too many thoughts on the circuit points-wise and such considering I haven't taken a close enough look at that and haven't played in enough tournaments to know.

Also, will play in the invitational. Thanks for the hard work you've put in srk/pwne!
 
I'm in

Personally I would like a little more minitours (about 10) since they were the most fun and if there are more, other people could also get a chance to make the invitational
I also wish that more people were in the invitaional
 

Braverius

snowls
is a Past SPL Champion
Explained it kind of poorly, let me try to clarify-

If you use the same team for three games, you get a new phase of the game with the information trade and figuring out how to improvise based on what you know (opponent's items, moves, spreads, etc). It takes a skilled player to use information, weigh risk/reward in situations where they do not have information, and set up a gameplan based on what they know and to adjust mid-battle and mid-set.

If you're allowed to switch teams between matches, you entirely lose that phase of the game as players aren't allowed to adjust. In addition, anyone who brings the same team twice in a row is typically at a serious disadvantage against someone who switched it up (assuming what the other person brought at least had a neutral matchup on paper) because of the information gained. Therefore, you pretty much have to switch teams all three games, and the only "positive" thing this adds is the whole team-calling thing I mentioned above, which isn't really important or useful or fun; it's not a facet of the game anyone needs to worry about really and therefore it doesn't add anything.

I guess saying it makes it more matchup reliant is a bit silly considering that there's nearly the same chance of it happening technically, but being allowed to switch teams the odds of at least one game being decided by a matchup are higher because you're giving it two extra chances to happen with three games. It only loses you a game compared to a set in theory, sure, but your chances of winning if you have a botched game are theoretically not that strong anyways, so I think if you put this straight into numbers, 'using the same team for the series' comes out on top.

I just don't see a clear positive to switching teams up. It alleviates the heavier damage for those occasions where matchup would decide a set, sure, but it also takes away a part of the game that makes it more challenging and strategic during the matches and the series- and that part of the game is something I think could help decide battles in the favor of the better player more often than a poor team matchup would deny the better player a game.

edit: tl;dr talk with benja ended in "this is probably a matter of opinion of what people prefer, teambuilding vs playing" and i can respect that if the majority fall into teambuilding.
 
Last edited:

Stratos

Banned deucer.
I'm definitely open to trying it the more I think about it. As you said, it doesn't really add much to the matchup aspect, but it adds the information game. We could do a tour with no switching teams and see how it feels at the very least. Only downside is if u get a bad matchup g1 its kinda lame
 
Last edited:

TheFourthChaser

#TimeForChange
is a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnusis a Two-Time Past SPL Championis a Past WCoP Champion
Yea I'll be playing.

I think the format for the circuit was run pretty well, the only thing I would change is a certain user getting some activity wins that allowed them to qualify for invitationals. Kinda shady.

I think the weighting of the tournaments is fine, minitours don't need to weigh more compared to bigger tournaments imo. I think this is kinda funny because I like how Premier Challenges became more relevant in VGC but those are weighed too much compared to the bigger tournaments (or at least Regionals), it's better to have smaller tournaments weigh more without being too much is basically what I'm saying.

I guess my biggest problem would be...this right now. "Hey good job qualifying but if you don't post in this thread you aren't playing." I get that it's better to reduce the amount of activity wins within this tournament but I don't think it outweighs the possibility of someone missing the tournament because they didn't post itc. Otherwise, I don't have many complaints I think it was run pretty well.
 
Firstly a big thanks to everyone who had a part in running this. Its been great to play in and gratz to all who made it.

I would like to see a third seasonal added and only the top 2 getting auto qualification in major. It would mean less players get in with one good performance and gives all the tours more significance, while another seasonal would help in getting a larger pool of invitational people.

Otherwise, this was super fun.
 
tbh I liked the circuit tho I personally feel the minitours weren't important like seriously you had to do good in the big 3. I'd personally be happy with another Seasonal so more people get in.

Also I agree with Zach on the team lock, like it adds a new layer of skill. Tho i'd be harder to pull off, like I think it should be tested with a tournament to see if it'll work or not.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top