Dude nice hype
forum
NAT 2015 Preparation / Discussion Thread
posted
Total Posts
59
I wouldn't be opposed to a 128 person bracket...Kaoru wrote:
An alternative would be increasing the tournament size and having a really large group stage.
Then again that's potentially a lot more work for the staff of this tournament
Nice idea in general to involve more people in the tournament, but in the previous edition of the tournament (In which I participated), there where not many participants of the rest of the region, and most of them where from the USA, and only 4 countries where represented on the tournament (USA, Canada, Mexico and Honduras). I am by no means making a rant about this or hating about this. I'm just making this as a suggestion. But maybe reserving at least a spot for the top player of each of the countries on the list and only if they meet the 10k requirement of course, and it might seem too much as well, but that would put more spice and little more variety of players to the tournament and make it feel more regional if we give the rest of the players in the less known region of North America a chance. Because there are a couple of good players in these other countries.MMzz wrote:
The idea of NAT started after USAT (A tournament for The United States) concluded. I wanted to have a tournament on a larger scale and more variety of players from the same region.
Just To Name a few:
-Ekik-
Genolo
Koromo
JFRN
JaaiMiTo
gmate
^I also agree on thisKaoru wrote:
100% agree that unranked maps need to be included and trust that the map selectors' discretion on these maps will be good.
Topic Starter
Reserving spots for top players is something I would love to do. Thr amount per country will be something i need to figure out, unless you guys have ideas.
Increasing the player size would be a big task. Running 64 double elimination is already pretty big. (Of course if we get more help 128 could happen.)
Increasing the player size would be a big task. Running 64 double elimination is already pretty big. (Of course if we get more help 128 could happen.)
Martinique and Guadeloupe belongs to France, does that mean I can participate? 
After researching most of the NAT from results from the past 2 years, I agree with most of the staff's ideas on improving the tournament. I never competed last year, but I have the prior knowledge of understanding each map pool for all the rounds from previous NATs. (Again, all of this is based on my personal opinions.)
Overall, the tournament is all set in stone. Guess I'll compete for the NAT. This sounds awesome.
I strongly agree. However, I do have second thoughts as it depends on the players primary play style. It could be a big disadvantage.MMzz wrote:
Freemod for tiebreaker maps. (High risk high reward scenario)
I don't want to sound like a jerk or anything. Since this is a single elimination tournament and not TEAM BASED, I think this should have a higher performance rank requirement. This makes seeding pretty difficult and unfair to most users that are "qualified yet low ranked". If there was a separate bracket or something, then this idea should stay neutral.MMzz wrote:
Performance rank of 10k or higher required to register.
This is a big one! I completely agree with this. Most players must be annoyed now a days (especially the older players) to have to play the same maps OVER AND OVER AGAIN. This is a great idea since it could benefit the artists of the song and the mappers with player's critiques on the map. This is only a bad idea if the selectors choose a map that does not fit with the map pool like a high star level map, high approach rate, or high overall difficulty. Things should be considered about this.MMzz wrote:
Unranked maps in map pools.
This I can agree with MAYBE if unranked maps are accepted in the NAT. The ranked maps in the map pool are not extremely difficult or frustrating. If it involves mods, then there could be some exceptions.MMzz wrote:
Not losing the match if you fail, win still possible if you can recover.
I definitely agree. Having more people to volunteer to organize a 128 player bracket would be great. There is always limiting the number of players to represent each country, yet it could be a pain.MMzz wrote:
Increasing the player size would be a big task. Running 64 double elimination is already pretty big. (Of course if we get more help 128 could happen.)
Overall, the tournament is all set in stone. Guess I'll compete for the NAT. This sounds awesome.
I think it would be cool to compete even if I suck.
Kheldragar wrote:
I think it would be cool to compete even if I suck.
Topic Starter
Those countries are located in the North America region. So they can participate.-Ryosuke wrote:
Martinique and Guadeloupe belongs to France, does that mean I can participate?
Regarding the 128 limit. If done, I would like to have a group stage rather than start with a 128 player bracket. (for the sake of managment) It would be different than what the world cups do. Either have 16 groups of 8 (Top 4 advance) or 32 groups of 4 (Top 2 advance). The choice will depend on time we have and seeding.
My idea is to basically have all 8 (or 4) players from the group in the same room and play an entire map pool or a good handful of maps, basically running as a qualifier. (More maps played, more accurate results) After that, the top 4 (or 2) advance to a 64 player bracket with double elimination until the tournament is concluded.
If not. We will just run a 128 player double elimination tournament. This will add a week or two onto the tournament though. (Unless our staff is huge and coordinated)
Is the NAT just north american region or is it north of the equator?
I think its safe to assume North American region.Storm- wrote:
Is the NAT just north american region or is it north of the equator?
I really like the idea of a group stage as a qualifier to make it into a 64-player bracket. The only thing you have to be careful with is the win condition to get into the next round. I would suggest assigning "points" based on each map's end ranking (e.g., in a 4 player group top score on the map would get 4 points, last place would get 1). You could tweak the point system to weigh a 1st place finish more heavily, too.MMzz wrote:
Regarding the 128 limit. If done, I would like to have a group stage rather than start with a 128 player bracket. (for the sake of managment) It would be different than what the world cups do. Either have 16 groups of 8 (Top 4 advance) or 32 groups of 4 (Top 2 advance). The choice will depend on time we have and seeding.
My idea is to basically have all 8 (or 4) players from the group in the same room and play an entire map pool or a good handful of maps, basically running as a qualifier. (More maps played, more accurate results) After that, the top 4 (or 2) advance to a 64 player bracket with double elimination until the tournament is concluded.
If not. We will just run a 128 player double elimination tournament. This will add a week or two onto the tournament though. (Unless our staff is huge and coordinated)
Also with the group qualifier set up this way, technically you could have A LOT more sign-ups without too much more work (e.g., 160 people sign up, have 16 groups of 10 where the top 4 advance to the bracket stage). The only added work might be tracking down the extra people and herding them all into a multi lobby, but players should take responsibility for this themselves.
Regarding unranked maps. I think it's a need because it does bring freshness to the map pool but you got to remember some unranked maps can display the skill levels of each player. You got to remember that world's end dance hall (rocketman remix) was still pending In the OWC but in was amazing and a great pick that brought out a lot of need skills to prove that they were the best. Regarding the elimination process. The point system previously mention is a great idea and since there will be a lot of people I think the best way is to have it spread out over 2 days in order to not have to rush around streaming. The tourney client isn't the fast lest thing to set up and requires some time so spreading the matches out is a must. I also think custom skins should be left entirely to the player. It's hard for me to just change skins and expect to play as well or better than usual. Skins that players use usually sit well with their eyes.
Performance rank of 10k or higher required to register.If it's 64 Player Tournament I feel that the requirement should be a lot higher as I feel that the first come first serve registration might "Bloat" the pool.
A custom osz package with every map from respective rounds bundled into one package.Some players don't want to break there scores that aren't FC's (Like DT pass, HDHR score, etc etc) I think that this would be great.
Unranked maps in map pools.Please HollowWings Mysterious Hymn Finals Tie Breaker Cutie Panther Watashi Doko Demo Iku Yo Please
I think they mean a custom skin for the tournament spectator client, there's no way they would or even could force players to play with a different skinAxE Shockwavq wrote:
I also think custom skins should be left entirely to the player. It's hard for me to just change skins and expect to play as well or better than usual. Skins that players use usually sit well with their eyes.
I thought the tourney client didn't accept custom skins
It probably doesn't. Most of the stuff listed in the OP is theoretical, and at the time we weren't sure if it was possible but decided to propose it anyway. Still no response into even getting the client to take a look as yet. (ty loctav)AxE Shockwavq wrote:
I thought the tourney client didn't accept custom skins
Hey kids, can you dig it?
Like the people above, I think incorporating a group stage is definitely a good idea, since the tourney is going to fill really quickly, so incorporating group stage will definitely accommodate more players.
Really excited for this =w=~ gotta get better before June it seems
Really excited for this =w=~ gotta get better before June it seems
Bumping to let you guys know that we are still accepting map suggestions and would appreciate input for any maps you guys wish to see in the pools, both ranked and unranked, recent and not-so-recent. Here's the form for anyone that didn't read the OP. Not long to go now.
I wonder if I'll be able to participate.
Give me Azer first round so I can lose asap.
Give me Azer first round so I can lose asap.
In the two years I've participated, I always got someone in the top 50 in the third round, doN'TWORRYFRIENDKheldragar wrote:
I wonder if I'll be able to participate.
Give me Azer first round so I can lose asap.
Topic Starter
Registration time is coming soon! More than likely going to open registrations on May 1st. Then have the tournament start in mid/late June (as usual).
Registration will be open to anyone above rank 10k and in the North American region.
There will be no limit to how many users can register but, only the top 64 performance players will be accepted. (The 64 includes the users who were awarded a guaranteed spot from last year. If they decline, the spot will be left open for everyone else.) This prevents flooding and allows everyone time to register.
I will post again if anything changes.
EDIT: Profile badge?
by KinomiCandy
Registration will be open to anyone above rank 10k and in the North American region.
There will be no limit to how many users can register but, only the top 64 performance players will be accepted. (The 64 includes the users who were awarded a guaranteed spot from last year. If they decline, the spot will be left open for everyone else.) This prevents flooding and allows everyone time to register.
I will post again if anything changes.
EDIT: Profile badge?
by KinomiCandy
Requested by MMzz to post over here. He also requested me to try making a badge for the upcoming NAT 2015 tournament, so I went ahead and made one together with MMzz. I finished the first badge and it didn't really feel right or look okay enough for me, so after a few hours of thinking, I decided to make a second badge. Feel free to use it by all means or not at all, it doesn't really matter to me.
Any changes or feedback would be appreciated, I can do any sorts of changes whenever I need to.
Any changes or feedback would be appreciated, I can do any sorts of changes whenever I need to.
Topic Starter
2nd one is great. Will use it. Thanks nomi.
DAMN RIGHT 'MURICA!!
I'd kill to see some anime songs (doesn't even have to be TV size), since the rather big amount of rhythm game or vocaloid songs is uninteresting.
I'd kill to see some anime songs (doesn't even have to be TV size), since the rather big amount of rhythm game or vocaloid songs is uninteresting.
soon™
xxdeathx wrote:
DAMN RIGHT 'MURICA!!
I'd kill to see some anime songs (doesn't even have to be TV size), since the rather big amount of rhythm game or vocaloid songs is uninteresting.
I really, REALLY hope this is not serious and you're joking.
The first half of that post made me cringe.
hahahahahahahahahahxxdeathx wrote:
I'd kill to see some anime songs (doesn't even have to be TV size), since the rather big amount of rhythm game or vocaloid songs is uninteresting.
also group stages sounds interesting
while the way he said it wasn't great, xxdeathx does have a point in there somewhere, that the map pickers should make an effort to prevent their own musical tastes from influencing their picks.
source of a song shouldn't matter for whether or not the map is good as a tournament pick
source of a song shouldn't matter for whether or not the map is good as a tournament pick
It would be cool if there were a sight reading contest in that there were a few maps that were made for the tournament that no one has gotten to play before
Topic Starter
9 days until sign ups! Official thread will be posted same day.
Inb4 I'm #65th in terms of pp.MMzz wrote:
9 days until sign ups! Official thread will be posted same day.
I'm actually looking forward to the mappools considering RLC and Lach's musical tastes, if it's tainted by anime songs they will at least be tolerable ones and not average garbage
i put ignite in every round, just a different map of it
guren no something-or-other too
guren no something-or-other too
Ignite, Miiro, Ai no scenario, let me hear, and VOICELach wrote:
i put ignite in every round, just a different map of it
guren no something-or-other too
Mmm, that's some good map pool