Community > Community Events

New Sunday Community Skirmish Rewards

<< < (8/15) > >>

Mean Machine:

--- Quote from: BlackenedPies on January 14, 2016, 01:22:28 am ---
--- Quote from: shaelyn on January 14, 2016, 12:29:50 am ---so SCS Rewards - I definitely don't see a downside to the titles, I don't think they'd be detrimental in any way.  perhaps though, the implementation could be tweaked for better appeal.  maybe an additional title for the 2nd place team would be a decent addition?

--- End quote ---

Titles aren't detrimental and they could even help advertise SCS. The issue I have, which was poorly stated, is that I wish the participation title sounded cooler. I hope that people will use the new title, but in my opinion "Skirmisher" isn't attractive enough for players to change from their current unlockable ones. If people are happy and want to use the title of Skirmisher then there's no issue

A title for second/third place would be good, and so would one for the organizers/casters/refs, but first there should be a better participation title. Suggestions can be taken and voted on using the forum system or by the SCS organizers (blind vote please). By brainstorming together I'm sure we can come up with good titles that players will gladly replace their old ones for, and help draw interest from prospective teams

--- End quote ---

While I agree that title "Skirmisher" doesn't sound anything special (which is just your and mine opinion and many players might like it), it does sound fitting. But I wouldn't even give them that to be honest. I don't agree with you that titles or any kind of rewards should be given just for participation. That doesn't make sense to me and it doesn't do anything towards motivating teams to sign up for event more than once and even then, they don't have to play seriously, because they just need to participate. Signing up and getting in a lobby is not really an accomplishment that should be rewarded.

You know, there are a lot of CAs that didn't apply because they have such a good heart and want to help people, they signed up to get a badge and maybe also for yellow name.

Thomas:

--- Quote from: Urz on January 14, 2016, 12:26:26 am ---
--- Quote from: Thomas on January 14, 2016, 12:06:03 am ---The largest competitive event? Did Hephaestus League not count? As far as I'm aware, not only was it the largest, but the most successful. Other events, such as Aerodrome have also done quite well and are a bit more innovative than a standard bracket. Sky League was about as popular as the R&D Invitational.
--- End quote ---

Sky League: 21 teams
Claiming the Fjords: 15 teams
Hephaestus Challenge: 14 teams
Anvalan Conflict: 14 teams
Sky Tournament: 12 teams
R&D Invitational: 8 teams

--- End quote ---

Sky League ejected more than half the teams in the first two weeks. The group phase was only a prelim to the main event of 8 teams, very similar to Rob and Dan Invitational. Hephaestus on the other hand kept every team around until it finished, and lasted a lot longer than any other tournament. Fjords isn't even worth mentioning as a tournament.


---------------------------------

Mod bias aside, getting back on topic is ideal.


Do titles mean more to new players or veterans? Was this idea implemented to draw people into competing in SCS? Was it put in place to reward people who already participate in SCS? Will such a reward make the SCS more or less competitive, and is that a good or bad thing? If you start adding in titles for repeatedly participating and winning, will that change how people feel about the SCS? Are the reasons this was put into place important, or are the results more important?

My general pessimism leads me to believe this idea is mainly self-serving and had little to no intention of getting people more involved in the SCS itself.


The title idea itself is fine enough, ulterior motives aside. It may get more people interested, it might not. It might just be to reward people who have already been participating and winning consistently. It very well could make the SCS more competitive, which I wouldn't like to see happen, but it's not necessarily a bad thing. We'd just need a new scene to help introduce teams into competitive in a relaxed atmosphere.

Nat Nyls:
Titles could bring in more people, like dev game prizes tend to do. On the other hand though, it could make SCS more competitive which I'm not so sure how to feel for an event that's normally an entry point for new teams. SCS has always been a very stress-free sunday activity, but with prizes up for grabs now, it may get a fair bit more tryhard. However, at the end of the day, they're just titles. I'm interested to see if it does bring in more teams, even for the first couple of weeks.

Urz: We understand how upset you were that you weren't picked to stream that event and this is very clearly personal. Blood and Brass was torn apart before the tournament was close to starting due to partially the community scared of the big bad BoCA who they thought would turn the competitive scene into a faceless setup. But I'm going to just put an explanation onto why they use anonymous accounts a lot of the time:

There is always a bias on who's setting up a tournament, subliminal or otherwise. With these accounts, you aren't entirely sure who you're talking to, hoping to eliminate this bias. However, since BoCA are perceived as the big bad wolf, come to blow down your competitive events, any agent account is immediately saw with a glaze of "fuck these guys".

Another note: There has been organisers who've received so much shit from Blood and Brass that they avoid playing whenever they can due to people saying horrible things to them, with severe harassment problems added in there. This is another reason agents accounts are preferred to be used.

And finally, the Sky League was done during a proper golden age of competitive. Along with pissing off Rob and Dan, the most professional streamers we have ever had, during that event and chasing them off, I remember the team I was with not enjoying the event in the slightest. You are not a nice person to work with.

BlackenedPies:
Here's a simple survey
http://goo.gl/forms/FmlCEmSDHh


--- Quote from: T Machine ---I don't agree with you that titles or any kind of rewards should be given just for participation.
Signing up and getting in a lobby is not really an accomplishment that should be rewarded.

--- End quote ---
Signing up is an accomplishment because few teams do. We want more players to join, and titles are a good way to show that you've participated in SCS. The title doesn't have to be flashy but it should be attractive enough for people to switch from their current titles. If everyone used the title then it would help advertise SCS. There should be future additional titles to show further accomplishments. Will you change your title to Skirmisher?

Skrimskraw:
are we really arguing over some titles?

Like really?

They are titles.

stop speculating about wether it makes it more competitive or not, if it does then the organizers can change it again, if it doesnt then win/win?

Everytime something is suggested people make up doomsday profecies, instead of just calmly wait and then give feedback, after it has been tested.
And this is not only for competitive events, but also why the dev app testing is so goddamn terrible. Goio players just arent willing to test and learn, instead of becoming angry and base knowledge on theories.

I imidiately think about science discussions.
In order to learn, you have to test and watch the results, not just theorize and accept the plausible solution.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page