Curse

Winstar · Aug 17, 2007, 07:56 AM // 07:56

Just prior to the release of the ATS system my comp died, and thus GW came to an end for a couple months. Having returned, I was excited about getting a chance to give them a shot. I'd heard the turnouts were not very good, but I never thought I'd see the sheer number of forefits that I did. Having done a few now the turnout in general is really dissapointing. Where the heck is everyone? I know that there are fewer people playing the game at this point, or at least many of the games better players have left, but there are still more than a handful of active guilds out there that GvG. Why is no one ATSing? Is it the schedual? Is it the time commitment to complete one? Are there certain tournament times that tend to be busier than others?

cheers,
Winstar

Akaraxle · Aug 17, 2007, 08:57 AM // 08:57

European times are pretty active, American times are mostly pugs fighting each other. Many guilds forfeit depending on their opponent, and many register even if they cannot play in hope of getting a bye.

Farin · Aug 17, 2007, 06:43 PM // 18:43

You mean Automated forfeits? It's pretty annoying to lose an hour just waiting for people who end up forfeiting, there needs to be higher penalties or up the registration costs by paying say 20-30 rating, just a thought.

linh · Aug 17, 2007, 08:01 PM // 20:01

Yeah, forfeiting should have some penalties, but if forfeit the 1st round only.

Div · Aug 17, 2007, 09:08 PM // 21:08

Maybe, if a guild doesn't show up for their first round match, they can't participate in AT for the next 3 days?

Farin · Aug 17, 2007, 11:40 PM // 23:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by linh

Yeah, forfeiting should have some penalties, but if forfeit the 1st round only.

Agree

Quote:

Originally Posted by holymasamune

Maybe, if a guild doesn't show up for their first round match, they can't participate in AT for the next 3 days?

Seems a bit too hard, guess it could work though. I still prefer having some 30ish rating "deposited" before starting the tourney and once you play the first match you get it back. Something along those lines

Andrew Patrick · Aug 18, 2007, 12:02 AM // 00:02

I'll pass the idea of penalties for not showing up to our Tournament Coordinator. Do you think a higher sign up cost, or actual penalties would be a better option?

linh · Aug 18, 2007, 12:25 AM // 00:25

If a guild forfeit the 1st round, the opponent has a default win but nothing actually changes. How about the winner will get rating while the forfeited guild lose rating as if the match would actually happen, and they also get Reward Point for that win ? This way the default win guild won't have to wait 30 mins for "nothing".
If both guilds forfeit in that match, no need to punish them because they don't waste others' time.

Farin · Aug 18, 2007, 02:43 AM // 02:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

I'll pass the idea of penalties for not showing up to our Tournament Coordinator. Do you think a higher sign up cost, or actual penalties would be a better option?

Would depend on the costs but penalties would be the way to go in my opinion.

skaspaakssa · Aug 18, 2007, 02:56 AM // 02:56

I've never done ATs - why are people forfeiting so much?

Div · Aug 18, 2007, 05:29 AM // 05:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

I'll pass the idea of penalties for not showing up to our Tournament Coordinator. Do you think a higher sign up cost, or actual penalties would be a better option?

Penalties are probably better. Unless by sign up cost, you mean putting in 10 rating that you'll get back after finishing the first match. Because tokens really mean nothing to serious PvP'ers. I have at least 1500 of them and I'm sure there are people with much more than me.

Oh, on a side note, are tokens going to do anything besides register for tourneys? Because if not then they're pretty pointless to have around

Thom Bangalter · Aug 18, 2007, 06:55 AM // 06:55

I'm pretty sure there are less than 100 american players left that you could consider competitive anymore.

so, have fun playing euro times. The time zone makes you realize why there's so fewamerican players left.

Yue · Aug 18, 2007, 08:29 AM // 08:29

The awesome pve in WoW makes you realize why there's so few american players left.

Xanthar · Aug 18, 2007, 10:00 AM // 10:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew Patrick

Do you think a higher sign up cost, or actual penalties would be a better option?

A higher sign-up cost would certainly deter guilds from entering the ATs and in that way reduce the forfeits. It sure wouldn't increase actual participation though which I think is what people are actually looking for.

The crux of the matter is that
A) AT participation takes a fair bit of organization and commitment. Not many guilds fit the bill
B) The rating loss of ending in the bottom half of the tournament and still fighting it through is massive. (Real life example - My guild went from rank ~200 to 1000+ in three ATs)

The first point means that only fairly good guilds participate at all, the second is that the fairly-good-yet-not-top-level guilds are very severely penalized for participating (try recruiting with a 1000+ rank and you'll see what I mean).

If I could make a suggestion it's that you separate free-play ranking from AT ranking - In effect having two parallel ranking systems for the different GvG formats. I'm quite certain that doing this will reduce the rank-saving forfeits that are so common at present.

Kaon · Aug 18, 2007, 01:06 PM // 13:06

Americans have finally done the right thing - leave gw.

Cron0s · Aug 19, 2007, 12:31 PM // 12:31

AT present some good ideas, but are wrongly put in practice. It's fun and cool to play gvg's in a tournament, and win tournament rewards, but the main AT system purely sucks.You never seem to get a match up against a guild that has around the same rating as yours.And it's not only that. But AT are curently only for top 200 guilds. A few losses there, and all you rating goes to hell.So then you have to go ladder way, because you can't afford to play again in AT's because YOU KNOW that you won't fight against a rank 900+ guild.
To give a small example. You spend a week to do some rating, you finaly get to reach a decent rank 600.Then the guildmates decide to participate in a AT. The first game is pure randomly chosen, so you get to fight against a rank 100 guild, then with a 0-1 ratio, you fight again against a rank 100 guild.After only 3 matches all you're rating gets screwed and it's back to the ladder.

And that's the main problem, Anet promotes AT's only for top guilds.So i find it very normal for weaker guilds to forfeit.Our first guild's AT was against HanD,Supernova Japan,Hella's Team,and a few other high guilds.So thats why only high guilds play in AT. I mean you get a +2 rating in a ladder game, after 5 win you raise about a +10 .You go in a AT, fight against a guild with a lot more rating then you, and you still lose about 13 rating.So were is the love ?

To get on point and answer the question.People don't play AT because it's more of a top 100 place, and there's no point to lose a huge amount of rating in just 2 matches.(and yes, the rating points are rubbish, a guild rating 1000 losing against a guild rating 1100 loses about 15 rating)

The only way to save AT would be to do the same fing Xanthar sugested. Make some kind of a free-play AT, with no major rating lose.Players would still be interested in the AT's because of the tournament rewards, and in this way there would be A LOT more guilds participating in the tournament with various ranks.

Cheers

Winstar · Aug 19, 2007, 05:33 PM // 17:33

If Anet is interested in promoting these tournaments to a broader audience then something needs to be done. As Cronos points out, one problem with the new system as it has worked itself out is that there are few lower ranked guilds really playing in these things. But this means that any lower ranked teams that do play face huge rating hits most of the time.

In the old ladder system teams who were not at the top of the ladder still had a chance to play matches which were rating wise significant against teams around them. Since the significant ratingswise matches are all in tournaments against high ranked teams, there are no significant ratingswise matches for lower ranked guilds to play in. Eseentially we are stuck in a 2 tiered system where most guilds are playing for 2-3 points a match and going nowhere while top teams compile lots of rating. I beleive the top teams should be rewarded for their efforts, but at the same time lower rank teams still should have some incentive to play. To keep this going as a competetaive game you need to have a broad pool of players encouraged to play and the automated tournaments are not doing it. Something needs to be done to encourge an expanding player base.

As an aside,what I do like about the tournaments, if you actually venture in to play them, is the chance to play matches against good teams again. If you are a new guild of good players looking to climb the ladder, the tournaments will give you solid games against comparable teams instead of bad matches forever while you plunk along the ladder. If you are a sort of perpetually low ranked team you get the chance to play better teams and if you watch how they play and pay attention to how they shut you down and beat you you can actaully learn something. But the ladder matches at this point basically ensures that will never happen, and if you want to play in the tournament you know it will always occur.

yule · Aug 20, 2007, 12:13 AM // 00:13

In my experience, it is just the fact that everyone gets spooked by the large rating losses that stops entry. That being said, while large rating losses are possible HUGE rating gains are also possible (such as Ozzy picking up a +21 against pT yesterday :P).
Pretty much, if you are outside the top 2/300 your rating is going to bounce around no matter what. If you choose to ladder grind you can possibly end up in the 300ish range by farming noobs and taking the -1 losses and fluctuate between 300-400. If you AT you take the -15s with the +15s and fluctuate from 300-1500+. If you are losing 15, then it is to a guild with about the same rating, you get over it, you should make those back anyway. Losing to top guilds isnt really that much of a problem (we lost 2 to Supernova in a AT), beating them is awesome...

As for forfeiting guilds, i really dont see it as a problem. We just take the free win, and go rated challenge while we wait for next round (as most guilds seem to do). Also it ups the amount of bonus reward points given to those that do stick around.

Penalties imo would be a terrible idea. I think the actual problem here is that tournament tokens arent worth anything, but they are the only thing to use faction on after UAX. I think that an elegant solution to this would be to make tournament tokens a way of transferring faction (as in, redeemable at the priest of balth), meaning there would be a small but tangible cost to entry, while also giving UAX people something to do with faction..

Farin · Aug 20, 2007, 05:13 AM // 05:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by yule

As for forfeiting guilds, i really dont see it as a problem. We just take the free win, and go rated challenge while we wait for next round (as most guilds seem to do). Also it ups the amount of bonus reward points given to those that do stick around.

Maybe not to you but for someone who doesn't wanna waste time it does. Having 2 guilds forfeit in a row followed by a 2 minute match is not very fun. One tends to think you can go ladder if they forfeit but when you have a certain amount of rating finding a match takes a ridiculous amount of time.

yule · Aug 20, 2007, 05:27 AM // 05:27

wouldnt you just get ridiculous amounts of waiting without ATs anyway, and then the 2 minute match, but without the reward points?