Going forward with the World Cups

posted
Total Posts
23
show more
Kephin
In order to have better competitiveness between "stronger" countries and "weaker" countries, the mappool should consist lots of uncommon maps but fit the standard and the quality set by the tournament management.

As one of Indonesian MWC 7K 2017 member, in previous 7K world cup, I regret to say that I successfully predicted almost 70% of the maps selected as the Finals Mappool. Even before the world cup starts, I encouraged my "possible teammates" to practice those maps beforehand and thus, gave us more advantage in the Finals.

The previous map selector did a good job though, especially in the Group Elimination Stages. The maps chosen are not complicated in terms of pattern and timing, thus increasing the influence of "out-of-the-game" problems such as anxiety. Even the "stronger" teams worried that the single miss might affect the score significantly and led the team to defeat.

I expect this year's MWC 7K will have much more maps that looks easy but deadly, in order to have intense matches especially between "stronger" countries and "weaker" countries.
SillyFangirl
i like turtles
Evening

juankristal wrote:

The room of error is smaller, yes, but it is for both teams!
While I wholly understand the situation for small signup numbers, I believe that you need to understand the situation with 2v2 matches having smaller room for errors, be boring.

Room for error is important for weaker teams as RNG could allow them to chip some points out of the stronger ones. While it does, too affect the weaker team, the room of error at least, creates the chance

The spearheading situation I talked about happens more often when you have too less RNG in a match.
While I don't truly advocate too much RNG in a tournament to reflect true skill, too less of it makes the revelation of results "meh", and I think it's more towards the latter at this point.

PS: glad that you liked the idea for player restrictions
Gekido-
Would it be a bad idea to wait and see how many players sign up from each country to determine if the format should be 2v2 or 3v3? I'm fairly certain that the turnout will be low enough that 2v2 is most likely necessary, but in the case that enough people sign up, 3v3 should still be an option.

I have to agree that 2v2 helps weaker teams more than it hurts them, at least from previous experience. There were many cases from several teams where there were two strong players (possibly stronger than the two top players from the other team), but the third player was significantly less strong, which led to that team losing. Of course, it wouldn't help much against top countries like SK or China or whoever, but most of the top countries have more than two strong players anyways so 2v2 wouldn't hurt the weaker teams anymore than 3v3 would honestly.
Pope Gadget
2v2 for ln maps and 3v3 for rice maps hue

also "RNG" (luck, because RNG is an incorrect term here) should be as close to 0% as possible. tournaments are designed to test skill, and a predictable match can still be an entertaining one with a generous amount of variety. besides, luck in maps usually boil down to bad patterning or immoral SV usage anyways.

also restricting players to only a number of plays may be a decent idea if there weren't teams of only 3 in what you want to keep as a 3v3 tournament
projectc1
imho i prefer 3 vs 3, 2 vs 2 sound very awkward for me consider there's plenty 7k ranked map, more player learning 7k and more player getting good at that key (i can only tolerate in 2014 because it's still new)
but

Gekido- wrote:

Would it be a bad idea to wait and see how many players sign up from each country to determine if the format should be 2v2 or 3v3? I'm fairly certain that the turnout will be low enough that 2v2 is most likely necessary, but in the case that enough people sign up, 3v3 should still be an option.
this suggestion also fine.
but hey at least hyoe for MWC 7k tbh i thought you guys are gonna delete 7k mwc since there's not many country who register at all last year and italy being forgotten
i can only think the reason why not many country register into 7k mwc is because most of them already know who's gonna win
Evening
I was referring "RNG" as in deviation in scoring and also player compromising to get the 3rd player for the team, hence the results being slightly unpredictable, it was bad wording on my part.

Not sure how you would include variety without compromising accurate skill measurement and also being entertaining (subjectively).
Personally don't see these kind of matches being entertaining if they are straightforward and predictable.

I do agree that world cups' intentions are to test skill level. However, I feel that it should focus on a balance of luck and fairness rather than trying to restrict it to a 0% luck case in which is just total fairness.

I doubt skill level measurement can be done well in tournaments due to the small amount of maps that can be accurately used to compare between teams. This also includes bad luck and bad timing slots in which factors in the measurement, in which, shouldn't. It can be done more effectively through other means and it shouldn't be what the vision of this tournament to be.

I understand that all players cannot go through an ideal world cup that will leave them all satisfied, but I just don't agree with the notion of having the main idea of the tournament to be as accurate as possible in determining skill level.

While there are currently luck incorporated within the previous 7K MWC, I felt that the luck wasn't enough or at least, should be maintained, if possible anyways.
Pope Gadget

Evening wrote:

Not sure how you would include variety without compromising accurate skill measurement and also being entertaining (subjectively).
Personally don't see these kind of matches being entertaining if they are straightforward and predictable.
If a mappool is diverse enough that it's possible for each team to attack each other on every front, but it's clear that a team is elevated in experience compared to the other, then an alternative source of entertainment comes from seeing players excel at maps and going above and beyond to get ludicrous scores that even the most knowledgeable won't be able to predict. Having luck in this situation screws the star from shining, which is especially damning as it's out of their control, since that's what luck is.

Evening wrote:

I do agree that world cups' intentions are to test skill level. However, I feel that it should focus on a balance of luck and fairness rather than trying to restrict it to a 0% luck case in which is just total fairness.
This will only frustrate players because, again, they feel it's out of their control. The mappool has to be enjoyable to get the best out of people, and having them go into a game without a clue on what to do differently is going to make the players swear at the selectors, then potentially ruin the atmosphere of the whole match.

I'm still curious about what you constitute as 'luck' which isn't outright bad patterning or immoral SV usage, as I put it in my previous post.

Evening wrote:

I understand that all players cannot go through an ideal world cup that will leave them all satisfied, but I just don't agree with the notion of having the main idea of the tournament to be as accurate as possible in determining skill level.
I mean no offense but can you repeat this? I don't want to reply to something I don't think I understand fully.
Kephin
is it possible to implement restriction at forming a team?

for example, a team consisted of 6 people is limited as:
1 person whose global rank is between 1-100
3 person whose global rank is between 101-1000
2 person whose global rank is between 1001-5000
Pope Gadget

Kephin wrote:

is it possible to implement restriction at forming a team?

for example, a team consisted of 6 people is limited as:
1 person whose global rank is between 1-100
3 person whose global rank is between 101-1000
2 person whose global rank is between 1001-5000
well that would just be unfair to the people who've worked their asses off to get to where they are today
juankristal

Kephin wrote:

is it possible to implement restriction at forming a team?

for example, a team consisted of 6 people is limited as:
1 person whose global rank is between 1-100
3 person whose global rank is between 101-1000
2 person whose global rank is between 1001-5000
As Pope mentioned this isn't a possibility.
coldloops
some ideas to make the tournaments for "intense":

- increase the map pool size, more maps means more choices and better representation of different skillsets.
- no map bans, bans sound nice in theory but in practice they are very predictable and only reduce the map pool, which goes against my first point.
- reduce the time between map pool showcase and the matches, 1 week to grind the maps is too much, I want to see more sight reading and less memorising.
- the loser picks, instead of alternating who picks a map, the loser of the current map picks the next, this should reduce sweep matches.
- technical draw, if the score difference between teams is smaller than 5k (i dunno how much exactly), the game is a draw.

I don't know how I feel about 2v2, but if that increases the amount of countries then I think it is a positive change.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply