Jump to content
  • Sign Up

PvP Discussion: Automated Tournaments


Recommended Posts

@XxUrielxX.5390 said:

@Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:This thread is to discuss the Automated Tournaments system. As a start, I’ll talk about what we’re working on for tournaments right now.

Swiss Style Tournaments
We’re changing the format of tournaments to Swiss. Swiss style tournaments will give teams more matches in the tournament. One loss doesn’t necessarily mean you’re done. After a number of Swiss rounds, we’ll cut to a Top X number of teams for a single elimination bracket. The finals will be changed to best 2 of 3. The number of Swiss rounds and the number involved in single elimination will be determined by the overall number of participants.

Actually Swiss Rounds are a really Good, even the best idea. It gives the community the chance to play more games and improve probably their teamplay, giving a chance to build new teams.

The main problem is to see how long it will take to complete the tournament, and what kind of Swiss system you're planning to put, and whats the % of teams qualified in the final bracket (is it top 2 for 8 players, 4 for 16, 8 for 32)? Then it will determine how long it is, because with 32 players there will be 5 games + 3 more for the best team (8 games and it means more than 2h) can be too long for some players.

Then Which swiss system will you use to calculate the goal average to determinate the teams who will go to the Top X in case of draw?

Other thing that lacks the game from the beginning, is the visibility of the events. Just to put on the right corner of the game, an announcement and even by clicking on a link to the broadcast. It should have been done years ago, with the other tournaments : Proleagues, Challengers, and other tournaments. That's a thing that would have brang more participants anyway.

And last thing is, even if there were given some answers, we need a spectate mode or to create something to spectate the games. Im not talking about streamers that does it actually, but a way to spectate games , at least the finals

I disagree, how can it be too long if it's only once a month dedication? cmon lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • ArenaNet Staff

@Thane.9421 said:At one time as I understand it, there was a tournament system in place where players could actually start a tournament. I'd like to suggest something like this be implemented again, where it launches once a required number of teams sign up, say. My primary reasoning is that the data seems to suggest a team queue would not work, but ATs currently aren't enough of an attraction to keep 5 man teams playing PvP. By introducing player-started ATs, you're creating a system where teams can be matched against other full teams without actually using the queue system.

I could see various options with rewards; from being purely given out by the tournament itself, to having teams have to pay an entree fee and basing rewards out of the prize pool generated by the entree fees. Even if there were no rewards at all, this would be an easier way for teams in the community to get in touch and get scrims happening etc. than the current completely word of mouth situation which seems to be stagnating heavily.

We discussed the viability of player sponsored tournaments internally a while back. Our thoughts were that players could pay a fee, a % of that fee would go towards prize money and the sponsor could choose the format. (Conquest, 2v2, Stronghold, Courtyard, etc etc.). Additionally, I wanted players to be able to donate gold to the prize pool.

We have pretty big concerns that the system just wouldn't get used. And it's not a small task to implement such a system. Given all the priorities we have, we decided to set the idea aside.

So I'm curious, how many would actually use such a system and sponsor their own tournament? Who would donate gold to a tournament?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ArenaNet Staff

@Faux Play.6104 said:

@Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:This thread is to discuss the Automated Tournaments system. As a start, I’ll talk about what we’re working on for tournaments right now.

Swiss Style Tournaments
We’re changing the format of tournaments to Swiss. Swiss style tournaments will give teams more matches in the tournament. One loss doesn’t necessarily mean you’re done. After a number of Swiss rounds, we’ll cut to a Top X number of teams for a single elimination bracket. The finals will be changed to best 2 of 3. The number of Swiss rounds and the number involved in single elimination will be determined by the overall number of participants.

Tournament Capacity
We’re restructuring tournaments to greatly increase the number of teams that can be supported. While this isn’t terribly important with current tournament participation, we want to be ready for our next set of plans.

Special Tournaments
The tournament system was designed in a way that allows us to add one-off tournaments fairly easily. This means, we can do things like add 2v2 or Stronghold tournaments fairly easily. Once we’ve finished with Swiss and tournament capacity, we will start making use of this feature.

Looks great. Has there been any thought to allowing tourney matches to count towards players ratings?

Because of the radically different format, I feel like it's appropriate that it doesn't contribute to your skill rating.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ArenaNet Staff

@"Aden.9306" said:I don't suppose you guys could sprinkle in more Automated Tournaments during Spvp's prime time throughout the week and on weekends. Like when the maximum amount of people are playing Spvp, so we don't need to wait five hours between tourneys.

We added a 4th recently. One thing we're considering is looking into having an "On Demand" tournament. Perhaps it launches when X number of teams register. The other thing we'd have to consider is that the current reward levels are acceptable because of the limited number of them. But we could do something like greatly reduce the rewards for "On Demand" tournaments to compensate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm curious, how many would actually use such a system and sponsor their own tournament? Who would donate gold to a tournament?

I would definitely sponsor tournaments, though I suspect having one player have to pay the entire fee rather than having a pay-to-register format wouldn't be quite as popular. The attraction of pay-to-register is each player chipping in a small amount with a possibility of a larger reward if they win. That being said, even if the player started tournaments had no rewards at all, if they were visible somewhere like in the lfg panel, it's still a way of encouraging 5v5 team play.

Another suggestion based on a similar system I've seen in another game: allow the player starting the tournament to either name the tournament (like we can name private arenas) or outright have the tournament include their account/character name. Basically, it becomes a prestige thing to be seen sponsoring pvp tournaments.

In connection with this, is there any way we could see in-game messages zone-wide when an AT or player sponsored tournament is, say, 15 minutes out? Particularly if the zone-wide message lists the name of the tournament, including the sponsor's name, if player sponsored. A big part of what's cause player-run tournaments to fail or have low turnout in the past, imo was simply people in game having no idea they were happening, unless they were really into the pvp scene.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@choovanski.5462 said:

@Ithilwen.1529 said:I might sponsor a tournament. I'd want to be able to specify things such as solo only and no class stacking.

a solo only tournament?

wow just wow

Yes, everyone throws there name in the hat, ( or Goblet of Fire, ) and they get teamed how they get teamed. It would test individual skill and flexibility. The ability to adapt to an unknown team.

I really like the idea of removing the special advantages of a pre-made and stacked classes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:

@Thane.9421 said:At one time as I understand it, there was a tournament system in place where players could actually
start
a tournament. I'd like to suggest something like this be implemented again, where it launches once a required number of teams sign up, say. My primary reasoning is that the data seems to suggest a team
queue
would not work, but ATs currently aren't enough of an attraction to keep 5 man teams playing PvP. By introducing player-started ATs, you're creating a system where teams can be matched against other full teams without actually using the queue system.

I could see various options with rewards; from being purely given out by the tournament itself, to having teams have to pay an entree fee and basing rewards out of the prize pool generated by the entree fees. Even if there were no rewards at all, this would be an easier way for teams in the community to get in touch and get scrims happening etc. than the current completely word of mouth situation which seems to be stagnating heavily.

We discussed the viability of player sponsored tournaments internally a while back. Our thoughts were that players could pay a fee, a % of that fee would go towards prize money and the sponsor could choose the format. (Conquest, 2v2, Stronghold, Courtyard, etc etc.). Additionally, I wanted players to be able to donate gold to the prize pool.

We have pretty big concerns that the system just wouldn't get used. And it's not a small task to implement such a system. Given all the priorities we have, we decided to set the idea aside.

So I'm curious, how many would actually use such a system and sponsor their own tournament? Who would donate gold to a tournament?

i been hosting tournaments and getting things like this done once every 4 months with a price pool of 400-500g for first place winner out of my pocket not charging any team a fee. I would LOVE this idea ALOT and help bring some pvp back to the game however i also agree it might not be something that should be focus on at the moment but would certainly be something to add into the game down the road.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:

@"Aden.9306" said:I don't suppose you guys could sprinkle in more Automated Tournaments during Spvp's prime time throughout the week and on weekends. Like when the maximum amount of people are playing Spvp, so we don't need to wait five hours between tourneys.

We added a 4th recently. One thing we're considering is looking into having an "On Demand" tournament. Perhaps it launches when X number of teams register. The other thing we'd have to consider is that the current reward levels are acceptable because of the limited number of them. But we could do something like greatly reduce the rewards for "On Demand" tournaments to compensate.

i would also like some tournaments more often i agree with aden, i feel like the 5 hour in between is a lot and usually the time for these tournaments are REALLY late for example (3:15am for a tournament) highly doubt ill be able to get my team to play at that time due to sleeping,work and family matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:

@Thane.9421 said:At one time as I understand it, there was a tournament system in place where players could actually
start
a tournament. I'd like to suggest something like this be implemented again, where it launches once a required number of teams sign up, say. My primary reasoning is that the data seems to suggest a team
queue
would not work, but ATs currently aren't enough of an attraction to keep 5 man teams playing PvP. By introducing player-started ATs, you're creating a system where teams can be matched against other full teams without actually using the queue system.

I could see various options with rewards; from being purely given out by the tournament itself, to having teams have to pay an entree fee and basing rewards out of the prize pool generated by the entree fees. Even if there were no rewards at all, this would be an easier way for teams in the community to get in touch and get scrims happening etc. than the current completely word of mouth situation which seems to be stagnating heavily.

We discussed the viability of player sponsored tournaments internally a while back. Our thoughts were that players could pay a fee, a % of that fee would go towards prize money and the sponsor could choose the format. (Conquest, 2v2, Stronghold, Courtyard, etc etc.). Additionally, I wanted players to be able to donate gold to the prize pool.

We have pretty big concerns that the system just wouldn't get used. And it's not a small task to implement such a system. Given all the priorities we have, we decided to set the idea aside.

So I'm curious, how many would actually use such a system and sponsor their own tournament? Who would donate gold to a tournament?

Can't say I would sponsor, but I'd participate and pony up the gold.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ithilwen.1529 said:

@Ithilwen.1529 said:I might sponsor a tournament. I'd want to be able to specify things such as solo only and no class stacking.

a solo only tournament?

wow just wow

Yes, everyone throws there name in the hat, ( or Goblet of Fire, ) and they get teamed how they get teamed. It would test individual skill and flexibility. The ability to adapt to an unknown team.

I really like the idea of removing the special advantages of a pre-made and stacked classes.

we've done this before in pugquest and its aids. the team that has 3 people that are not totally bad will win, cuz other teams will have only 2 people that are not totally trash.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How are you going to handle seeds after the Swiss system? For example, assuming we get ~25 teams and we have to play 4 rounds of Swiss, there will be 2 teams that are 4-0 and 7 that are 3-1. I'm also assuming you guys will want to do an 8 team Playoffs bracket, as 16 seems like a lot. There would then be 1 team who is 3-1 who doesn't make it into the playoffs, meaning there has to be some way to differentiate between all the 3-1 teams.

My personal suggestion is that you should keep track of match score difference. The first reason is this is an excellent way of determining the strongest teams in a tournament, allowing for proper high level seeds. For example, the best team in the tournament will win 500-0 3 times in a row and then 500-200 in their last Swiss game. Meanwhile, the 2nd best team might win 500-0 twice, a 500-150, and a 500-350 they barely won. You would be able to say the first team gets the "1st" seed in the playoffs.

This is more important in my opinion in determining the 3rd and 4th seeds. In an unlucky case of Swiss matchups, the best and 2nd best teams might play each other, causing one of them to be 3-1. Therefore, there would be a chance that they don't play each other in the finals. However, this could easily be solved using the score difference ranking system. The best team would likely get seed 1 from having more score difference than the 3rd or worse team that is also 4-0 at seed 2. Then, the 2nd best team would be 3-1 at 3rd seed due to having much better score difference than the rest of the teams that are 3-1. This allows the 3rd and 1st seed (2nd best and best) teams to play each other in the BO3 finals, which is what we want.

tl;dr use overall match score difference to determine seeds after the swiss system

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ArenaNet Staff

@"Darek.1836" said:How are you going to handle seeds after the Swiss system? For example, assuming we get ~25 teams and we have to play 4 rounds of Swiss, there will be 2 teams that are 4-0 and 7 that are 3-1. I'm also assuming you guys will want to do an 8 team Playoffs bracket, as 16 seems like a lot. There would then be 1 team who is 3-1 who doesn't make it into the playoffs, meaning there has to be some way to differentiate between all the 3-1 teams.

My personal suggestion is that you should keep track of match score difference. The first reason is this is an excellent way of determining the strongest teams in a tournament, allowing for proper high level seeds. For example, the best team in the tournament will win 500-0 3 times in a row and then 500-200 in their last Swiss game. Meanwhile, the 2nd best team might win 500-0 twice, a 500-150, and a 500-350 they barely won. You would be able to say the first team gets the "1st" seed in the playoffs.

This is more important in my opinion in determining the 3rd and 4th seeds. In an unlucky case of Swiss matchups, the best and 2nd best teams might play each other, causing one of them to be 3-1. Therefore, there would be a chance that they don't play each other in the finals. However, this could easily be solved using the score difference ranking system. The best team would likely get seed 1 from having more score difference than the 3rd or worse team that is also 4-0 at seed 2. Then, the 2nd best team would be 3-1 at 3rd seed due to having much better score difference than the rest of the teams that are 3-1. This allows the 3rd and 1st seed (2nd best and best) teams to play each other in the BO3 finals, which is what we want.

tl;dr use overall match score difference to determine seeds after the swiss system

Our current plan is that we use opponent's win percentage. But in cases where opponent win percentage is the same, we could use score differential as a second tie breaker.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

@Saiyan.1704 said:@Ben Phongluangtham.1065

Any chance for an Android/Iphone App that gives AT Time Notifications much like how the app GW2 Even Timer works? Assuming AT times remain static indefinitely, this side-project could be one of the easiest apps to make for people who can't easily login GW2 for a time update.

This is FANTASTIC. Or even something of a timer to add onto the wiki page if there already isn't one there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ArenaNet Staff

@Saiyan.1704 said:@Ben Phongluangtham.1065

Any chance for an Android/Iphone App that gives AT Time Notifications much like how the app GW2 Even Timer works? Assuming AT times remain static indefinitely, this side-project could be one of the easiest apps to make for people who can't easily login GW2 for a time update.

There wouldn't be immediate plans to do this ourselves. I could talk to the API folks about exposing more tournament data so that someone else could. But I don't have a lot of knowledge of what's involved in that, so I can't make any promises.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah we need a more static AT schedule. You want to plan a certain moment in the week to practice with your own pvp team, but this is much harder when the AT times change all the time. Also a public timer of it would help many players that are planning to participate frequently in AT's, but also people that never heard of it and want to try it out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

@Ben Phongluangtham.1065 said:

@"Aden.9306" said:I don't suppose you guys could sprinkle in more Automated Tournaments during Spvp's prime time throughout the week and on weekends. Like when the maximum amount of people are playing Spvp, so we don't need to wait five hours between tourneys.

We added a 4th recently. One thing we're considering is looking into having an "On Demand" tournament. Perhaps it launches when X number of teams register. The other thing we'd have to consider is that the current reward levels are acceptable because of the limited number of them. But we could do something like greatly reduce the rewards for "On Demand" tournaments to compensate.

2017, currently on 2019 can we keep an update on this?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • ArenaNet Staff

@zoopop.5630 said:

@"Aden.9306" said:I don't suppose you guys could sprinkle in more Automated Tournaments during Spvp's prime time throughout the week and on weekends. Like when the maximum amount of people are playing Spvp, so we don't need to wait five hours between tourneys.

We added a 4th recently. One thing we're considering is looking into having an "On Demand" tournament. Perhaps it launches when X number of teams register. The other thing we'd have to consider is that the current reward levels are acceptable because of the limited number of them. But we could do something like greatly reduce the rewards for "On Demand" tournaments to compensate.

2017, currently on 2019 can we keep an update on this?

It's still planned, but it will be post swiss. Unfortunately, I can't be more specific than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...