New Tournament Reward System

[Submachine]

We are in the second phase of improving our suggested system. You can join the conversation from here. The results of the first phase are that byes count as wins and that only 2 wins are enough for a mark code.

The first phase started here.

We are currently planning to rework the reward system for tournaments. Instead of set prizes, players would get points based on their standings, which they can later exchange for codes. The points would be given out as follows:

Standing	Given points	Absolute minimum
#1	7 + 2 for every victory	11
#2	5 + 2 for every victory	7
#3	3 + 2 for every victory	5
#4	1 + 2 for every victory	1

The earned points could then be exchanged at any time for the following prizes:

Nymph/Mark code	20 points
1000 electrum	1 point

With this system, we would phase out Double Elimination tournaments and would only host Single Elimination.

Before we can get this system to work, we need to hear the public opinion about this. All numbers mentioned above are subjects for discussion. Are the rewards too high? Is there a better formula? Share your thoughts!


kae Edit: sorry I botched quoting this post, restored it as best as i could

[kaempfer13]

To clarify, victory refers to matchvictory atm (so winning a match 2-0 gives 2 points, losing 1-2 gives nothing).

[InsignificantWeeaboo]

Would all previous tournament standings be translated into points, or will it be implemented by the next tournament?

[Submachine]

We would only use this system after we agreed on the details. When that happens, we will also update the general tournament rules.

[worldwideweb3]

what does absolute minimum mean

[PlayerOa]

what does absolute minimum mean

Suppose it tells us that 1st place has to win at least two matches to get 1st, and therefore 7+4=11 points will be the absolute minimum amount of points rewarded.

Initial thought is that it seems like this system might remove some of the glory of winning a tournament, but it's hard to tell before trying it out.

[kaempfer13]

turnout for 4man tournament (and potential turnout for up to 7 people if you got a bye). in 4man tournament (or getting a bye) for instance the 4th place may just be with someone who happened to get a bye and won nothing, thus he only gets the base reward for 4th place. if you won a match in r1 and then end 4th in a 5-8 man tournament you get 3 points instead (1+2 from winning a single match)

[immortal feud]

whats the reasoning for losing the gold match 1-2 and not getting points for that victory?

[moehrpi]

I like to idea to phase out double-elimination tournaments. However, my understanding was that its purpose was to prevent people winning a tournament with just two matches played. Instead of making it more challenging it takes away some of its prestige. I share Oa's scepticism. Granted it isn't what it's been years ago.

Firstly, I do not like the distribution of points. Point in case: A tournament with 8 people grants a total of 32 points, 16 of which goes to the winner. Slightly worse for the champion, but acceptable. 16 points for the other three feels like a lot too much. In a 4-man tournament the winner gets less than half of total points. Doesn't seem so great either. A 12-man tournet could give out the equivalent of two Nymphs. I don't think that's the way we want to go down.
Also, you might prefer not to have a bye which screams bad design.

Yes, I am strongly leaning towards the initial distribution, because no one cares about electrum.

What to do?
Tweaking numbers is always an option. For instance: 2 points for winning in Ro8, 4 for winning in semis, 2 for place 3 decider, 8 for winning the whole thing: 1st takes 14, 2nd takes 6, 3rd takes 4 and 4th takes 2 for a total of 26 points even when you play only two matches. Well, not really that big of a difference. Might need some tinkering...
Or just pick arbitrary numbers: 16, 7, 3, 1 or 16, 8, 4, 0.

I personally like the rewards for (current) single-elimination tournaments: the winner takes it all. But also embrace modifications to strive for an holistic system.

Or one could always revamp the entire tournament mode for fewer than 8 players.
For instance:
4 players: round robin, three rounds.
5 players: round robin, five rounds.
6 players: two groups, winners of their groups play for first place, runner-ups of their groups play for third place. four rounds but prone to ties with tie-breakers that would take an addiional three rounds? :x round robin, five rounds.
7 players: two groups, five rounds with the potential for tie-breakers  round robin postpone the tournament.

At least the mode for 4 players is superior.

[Wyand]

I understand why ppl don't like DE, but playing SE tournaments with 4-7 players is silly.

Solution.

4 players. Everyone plays with everyone. 3 games/player, 6 games altogether.

5 players. Two unlucky guys plays a preliminary, then the same as 4 players.

6 players. Two groups with 3 players, everyone plays with everyone, 2 games/players, 3 games altogether. Winners of the groups play final, 2nds of the groups play for 3rd place.

7 players. Preliminary, then 6 players method.

8 players. Normal method, starting with quarterfinals.

9-15 players. As usual. Preliminaries, then quarterfinals.

Now, moving on to points. Please, don't steal away the glory of winning a tourney. Winning a tourney must be always = ICON + NYMPH/MARK CODE!

1st place = ICON + NYMPH/MARK CODE.
2nd place = 1/3 CODE. (3x 2nd places = 1 NYMPH/MARK CODE.)
3rd place = 1/5 CODE. (5x 3rd places = 1 NYMPH/MARK CODE.)

You cannot combine 2nd and 3rd place stuff to the get a reward earlier. I absolutely understand the "get points for wins" idea, winning a 4 players
tourney and 8 players tourney is not the same if there is only single elimination. Though I think my group-based approach is more balanced.

[kaempfer13]

In Order to more strongly reward the winner while still accounting for the size of the tournament meaningfully we could use sth more like this:

Standing	Given points	Absolute minimum
#1	7 + 4 for every victory	15
#2	5 + 3 for every victory	8
#3	3 + 2 for every victory	5
#4	1 + 1 for every victory	1

(with the slight inflation of points with this system i would price marks at 25 points then, if we were to use those numbers)

[Wyand]

We went from 55 percent (11/20) to 60 percent (15/25). C'mon!