Elements PvP Tournament - Suggestions and Feedback

[TheonlyrealBeef]

I'd appreciate if tournaments were posted at least 24 hours in advance, I know TOs have other things to do, but in a 7 day span surely 6 days should suffice? :< This week's tournament both was posted and started during a single sleeping period for me <_<

[Spielkind]

I'd appreciate if tournaments were posted at least 24 hours in advance, I know TOs have other things to do, but in a 7 day span surely 6 days should suffice? :< This week's tournament both was posted and started during a single sleeping period for me <_<

the same here, tourney-topic posted on 8.11 10.40PM and started 7AM... if you would at least let the monthly schedule up to date, then me would have known there will be a tourney, cause i thought there will be no one this week (what will be ok, when TO´s are busy cause they have life too)... sad fact is its during my available time...

[Calindu]

I'd appreciate if tournaments were posted at least 24 hours in advance, I know TOs have other things to do, but in a 7 day span surely 6 days should suffice? :< This week's tournament both was posted and started during a single sleeping period for me <_<

Not our time is the biggest problem(we have time problems too), but the timezones of our 2 active TOs(I am in European timezone, dd in American timezone), making meetings and speaking about tourneys hard if one of us can't get up early or stay up late, it's pretty easy to get the time when you simply have to add 8 or 9 hours to the last time the tourney was.

[Submachine]

Not our time is the biggest problem(we have time problems too), but the timezones of our 2 active TOs(I am in European timezone, dd in American timezone), making meetings and speaking about tourneys hard if one of us can't get up early or stay up late, it's pretty easy to get the time when you simply have to add 8 or 9 hours to the last time the tourney was.

I think TOs should trust each other enough to let a single TO post a tourney. If ddevans, Vineroz, n00b and Higurashi wouldn't trust you then they wouldn't have hired you and this is true for all the TOs vica versa. You guys are all veterans, you know what are you doing and are trustworthy enough to let a single any of you do his/her job without being asked. My suggestion is the following system that I want TOs to review:

1. TOs schedule a day of the week when the next tourneys will be posted. This should be always the day when tourneys are posted.
2. Any of the TOs who is active that day posts the tournament rules after balancing them.
3. Later on as TOs get online, they can modify and review the posted tourney rules, adding further balance. (All TOs have the rights to Edit tourneys)
4. 2 or more TOs saying that the uploaded tourney is bad and can't be balanced is very much unlikely when we take into account that all of you have a lot of experiences.

Edit: Please don't take this message as rude, I trust all of you guys and I just want to make a point, so please, really please: answer me how you think I am wrong here.

[Fippe94]

From chat before the last toruney, posting it here so more can see it:

Fippe94: This reminds me of a suggestion I thought of: If there are less than 16 players, run the tourney anyway, but with half rewards (only rewards to 1,2,3 and those rewards should be the current 2,4,6 rewards)

Rewards could of course be the current 1,3,5 prizes too or something else, but less participants = less rewards, since I guess that having 6 prizes is one of the resons we have the >= 16 players rule. (Don't want it to get too easy to get a prize)

So my suggestion is to do this when we have 8-16 players, so that the players who actually show up still have a chance to play, and we have had several tourneys been canceled because of too few participants.

[ddevans96]

From chat before the last toruney, posting it here so more can see it:

Fippe94: This reminds me of a suggestion I thought of: If there are less than 16 players, run the tourney anyway, but with half rewards (only rewards to 1,2,3 and those rewards should be the current 2,4,6 rewards)

Rewards could of course be the current 1,3,5 prizes too or something else, but less participants = less rewards, since I guess that having 6 prizes is one of the resons we have the >= 16 players rule. (Don't want it to get too easy to get a prize)

So my suggestion is to do this when we have 8-16 players, so that the players who actually show up still have a chance to play, and we have had several tourneys been canceled because of too few participants.

We are currently discussing something like this.

[Vangelios]

for me it only matters reach the final, winning is better but only the codes are a joy, I am in favor of 1,2,3 places received codes and no prize for the rest.

[Submachine]

The tournament monthly schedule is surprisingly outdated.

[ddevans96]

I'll update it before the upcoming tournament.

[dragonsdemesne]

For Jan 4. tourney:

I just want to say that in over 2 years of playing in tourneys, today's ruleset was the most complicated of them all, and there were a ton of illegal decks, because everyone kept forgetting one of the 9001 rules in the quest to find a deck that was even remotely competitive.  The rules themselves weren't bad, it's just that there were too many of them all at once to keep track of.  I think at least 4-5 people had illegal decks, including myself, and I can only remember one time ever where I had an illegal deck in all the tourneys I've played, as I'm normally quite careful.

[Vangelios]

well I entered this tournament just for fun, because I had only 50% of ups needed, so I'm not even a little sad to be eliminated, but really agree with demesne, the rules are complicated in this tournament and my deck was also illegal, and LO said it was legal, was Sipike he realized that was illegal.
 .

[dragonsdemesne]

Yeah, even the TOs couldn't keep track of legal decks in this one; at least twice, one of mine and one of somebody else's decks were advanced when they should not have been.