Jump to content


Absolute Supremacy feedback


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

Berbo #1 Posted 07 November 2016 - 04:16 PM

    eSports Manager Europe

  • WG Staff
  • 30130 battles
  • 4,781
  • [BRBOT] BRBOT
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

Hello all,

 

We (believe it or not) always aim to improve the quality of our tournaments and fix the mistakes from previous editions.

We fixed some which we had in the previous one, like seeding or livestream etc but we failed in other like English stream or tournament was too long etc.

 

Please share your thoughts on what you liked and what you think it could be better and as always please try to be constructive when writing,

 

for example "remove arta" is not constructive, "you could potentially look into a limiting certain type of vehicles as we believe they're not adding to the gameplay variety and are so op, broken" - this could go through as constructive.

 

Thanks in advance!



Jonathan_Strange #2 Posted 07 November 2016 - 04:23 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 18481 battles
  • 366
  • Member since:
    09-15-2011

remove arta

Spoiler

 



Berbo #3 Posted 07 November 2016 - 04:33 PM

    eSports Manager Europe

  • WG Staff
  • 30130 battles
  • 4,781
  • [BRBOT] BRBOT
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

View Post_AtIas_, on 07 November 2016 - 04:23 PM, said:

remove arta

Spoiler

 

 

User banned

 

Spoiler


shishx_the_animal #4 Posted 07 November 2016 - 04:59 PM

    Colonel

  • WGL PRO Player
  • 29213 battles
  • 3,861
  • [FAME] FAME
  • Member since:
    04-06-2013

I believe that the current format really added some fun to the whole experience. It resembled like the final clan war to end all clan wars between Russia and Europe (this part was also awesome!). It added a whole new level of rivalry between the servers and maybe the next one (possibly advertised more) could prove a real hit.

 

I also think that most of the players can relate better to this format since not everyone is tracking ESL/WGL.

 

Oh, and bigger prizes too. :trollface:



RaeudigerRonny #5 Posted 07 November 2016 - 06:31 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 24671 battles
  • 4,768
  • [SANTI] SANTI
  • Member since:
    09-04-2013

- Make sure all your dates are the correct playing dates, before the start of the tournament, especially if its such a long-lasting tournament.

 

- Dont let the same map be played over and over in BO5/7/9-matches. Just mix them up and let eacfh team play Attacker/defender side only once. Especially campy maps such as Abbey get extremely boring if you have to play them multiple times.

 

- Get rid of campy maps alltogether (Abbey, Lakeville, Mountain Pass and such...)

 

- Cover the god dam Show-Match vs the russians on Twitch!

 

- Make sure the 3rd and 4th place dont get better rewarded than your 2nd place. (I know this is whining about better rewards, but still just calculate how much "Ingame-Currency" equals your 80$ prizemoney per player. 3rd/4th place got 34k gold per player....).

 

- Get a seeding by either average Personal Rating or last Tournament results for the group stages and make a random seed for the play-off-stage, as you seem toi enjoy the big battles inbetween. (And we all enjoy the RSOP whining). Or just make everything seeded by avg Personal Rating, so we at least have a clue by what logic you seed the play-offs. Last torunament already had that "fishy" tree with KB, Animals, RSOP and the likes (and our group in group stage with 8 "decent" teams, where other groups only had like 2-3 in each).

 

 



KJK #6 Posted 07 November 2016 - 08:00 PM

    Corporal

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 30321 battles
  • 103
  • [OMNI] OMNI
  • Member since:
    09-07-2011

First and foremost: thank you for running the tournament. It was definitely an improvement on the events of the past.

 

However, communication was somewhat lacking. We weren't sure if our battles will begin at the advertised hour or not (they were in fact moved twice). I know the reason: the number of teams, but it would be nice to know it with a lot more time to prepare, and I do not mean two hours - more like two days. For one stage a chaps of ours took a day off work just to find out that the battle will be played three hours later.

 

Also, could we have more of this guy please? :great:

https://clips.twitch...hinocerosTTours

 

 



matte40 #7 Posted 07 November 2016 - 08:56 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 17551 battles
  • 401
  • [-PJ-] -PJ-
  • Member since:
    06-11-2012

When I compare this tournament to the Absolute Superiority the biggest improvement was informing. In the Superiority we had to wait for information about the rules such as battle time and other important info for so long. We had no info about the starting time of the battles and so on. Now everything was up on the website right from the release of the tournament. Then again it could have been better. For example, second phase playoffs were scheduled for 16 and there were no info about the brakets or anything until at 13:42 you told that the battles will start at 19. Most of the people didn't notice it because you wrote it to the Information and Updates thread which you weren't using previously.

 

Another great improvement atleast for me and for the not-so-good teams was the first phase groups of 8 teams. Every team got to play 6-7 matches before they got out of the tournament. In the Superiority the bad tournament structure caused over 3/4 of the teams to get knocked out of the tournament after 1-2 matches. However the A Supremacy had bad structure too. I understand that you somehow have to make it so certain amount teams (16 in this case) goes to the second phase group stage but playoffs in the middle of the tournament is a very bad way to do it (I'll tell my idea soon). The playoffs caused so many potential top 16 teams to drop down from the tournament just because they had to face another top 16 teams. It was even likely to happen in this structure. For example Holownicy, probably the second best team in the tournament is on place 33rd-64th because they had to play against the best team in the tournament so early.

 

Livestream for the playoffs was definitely a great improvement. It was very interesting to watch the top teams playing in 14v14 format. I hope next time you'll also have it for the EU vs RU match although if there's a player from the EU streaming it's even more interesting to see and hear the Animals tryharding. :P EU vs RU showmatch was for sure good improvement.

 

That's pretty much the biggest improvements from Superiority. There's also things that were made worse imo or just need to get improved anyways.

 

Seeding for the first phase may not be needed as I understand that you don't want to give any advantage for the better teams. But for the later stages there should be seeding so not all group winners meet in one group in the next stage. Also, when there is a draw in a group, there shouldn't be any more players going to the next stage than what is told in the rules. If there's a draw on the 2nd place (when top 2 goes to the next stage) neither of the teams should go to the next stage. It's unfair for other teams and it messes up the seeding. Just like in playoffs "incase of a draw, both teams will be disqualified".

 

Team format could be changed from 14+6 to 14+8. Most of the teams in my first phase group didn't get 14 players for the matches, including my team. 2 more reserves would not chance the rewarding effectively but would give a chance for less active teams to have a fair fight.

 

Bo5 matches for the first phase group stage were kinda waste of time because 87,7% of the battles ended 3:0 anyways. There could be more matches but with Bo3 style. Teams get to meat more other teams. Also the rule which counts 2:0 match in Bo5 as a draw is bad. (For the second phase playoffs you didn't have it like this which is good but it should have been like it on the earlier phases too). You have told that it's there to prevent camping when either team is winning a match but I still think there are no need for that rule. When the match is 0:0 there are equal chance for both teams to take the lead so it's not unfair for either of teams. And as I've said before, stronghold attacks, CW landing battles, it's not like it's impossible to win against a camp. And even tho it's harder to win as an attacker, maybe you should try to win the first game so you don't need to attack.

 

Final match of the tournament could be played on several maps like in the EU vs RU as I guess it's a bit boring for the players to play the same map 9 times. And even if it's not boring atleast the team which can play many maps instead of only one map has a better chance to win. But then again, I think 2 time per map would be better than just once since some maps have an advandage for other side. Here is the draw-% for each of the maps that were played on the tournament (from first phase group stage to second phase group stage).

 

Abbey (4,6%), Cliff (3,1%), Siegfried Line (2,3%), Mines (2,0%), Karelia (1,5%), Prokhorovka (1,4%), Murovanka (0,8%), Sand River (0,7%)

 

Looking at that I really feel like you should get rid of Abbey. Also Siegfried Line and Karelia should not be on the map pool as I don't really feel like them being this kind of tournament map. Even tho Cliff and Mines has high draw percentage they are still one of the most tactical maps and most fun to watch so keep them on the map pool. There were also other maps on the map pool which weren't played even once for some reason. From those I remember Lakeville which you should indeed get rid of for the camping.

 

Next thing is the rewards I already mentioned on the Q/A topic. I know that it's not the same for everyone but atm I'd rather have gold and premium time for 110€ than just 70€ in real life. This could be fixed if you give some gold or premium time for the second team. I personally liked more the Superiority rewarding.

 

Last thing which could be better is the schedule. There shouldn't be CW or other tournaments (maybe 486 series without the playoffs or something small like that) running at the same time when there's this kind of big tournament running. Even tho the first phase playoffs were played on 20.-21. it was scheduled to be played on 20.-23. October. There were the WGLEU season 1 Finals on 23rd of October so I guess not all the best players joined the tournament because they thought they won't be able to play it. The reason for not other tournaments or CW is simply so that there are alot of participants and there can be big rewards because WG aren't giving away other gold.

 

I understand it's not that easy to just create a big tournament like this. That's why we are here to give our feedback and you should listen to it. One of the most asked change after the Superiority were seeding and you still only had it for the last stage (and even there not like you writed to the rules, which was stupid and made no sense at all). It's good to have it for the second playoffs tho, but the first phase playoffs really needed seeding. If your system can't make seeding for many teams, can't you do it manually? It can't take so much time.


So, as I've been complaining about many things in this tournament, here's an example what the tournament would look like if I could organize it. English isn't my primary language so the text isn't perfect and it may be a bit hard to read but I hope you still understand it.

 

Tournament rules:

Spoiler

 

Rewards:

Spoiler

 

Tournament structure:

Spoiler

 

Wow, alot of text. Thanks if you managed to read it through here. Hopefully you will keep doing these 14v14 tournament WG, It was a great experience.

 

Matte :)



Berbo #8 Posted 01 December 2016 - 01:25 PM

    eSports Manager Europe

  • WG Staff
  • 30130 battles
  • 4,781
  • [BRBOT] BRBOT
  • Member since:
    04-17-2011

View Postshishx_the_animal, on 07 November 2016 - 04:59 PM, said:

I believe that the current format really added some fun to the whole experience. It resembled like the final clan war to end all clan wars between Russia and Europe (this part was also awesome!). It added a whole new level of rivalry between the servers and maybe the next one (possibly advertised more) could prove a real hit.

 

I also think that most of the players can relate better to this format since not everyone is tracking ESL/WGL.

 

Oh, and bigger prizes too. :trollface:

 

We'll give our best to do inter regional game(s) again, with bigger prizes of course. :)

 

View PostDomstadtkerl, on 07 November 2016 - 06:31 PM, said:

- Make sure all your dates are the correct playing dates, before the start of the tournament, especially if its such a long-lasting tournament.

 

- Dont let the same map be played over and over in BO5/7/9-matches. Just mix them up and let eacfh team play Attacker/defender side only once. Especially campy maps such as Abbey get extremely boring if you have to play them multiple times.

 

- Get rid of campy maps alltogether (Abbey, Lakeville, Mountain Pass and such...)

 

- Cover the god dam Show-Match vs the russians on Twitch!

 

- Make sure the 3rd and 4th place dont get better rewarded than your 2nd place. (I know this is whining about better rewards, but still just calculate how much "Ingame-Currency" equals your 80$ prizemoney per player. 3rd/4th place got 34k gold per player....).

 

- Get a seeding by either average Personal Rating or last Tournament results for the group stages and make a random seed for the play-off-stage, as you seem toi enjoy the big battles inbetween. (And we all enjoy the RSOP whining). Or just make everything seeded by avg Personal Rating, so we at least have a clue by what logic you seed the play-offs. Last torunament already had that "fishy" tree with KB, Animals, RSOP and the likes (and our group in group stage with 8 "decent" teams, where other groups only had like 2-3 in each).

 

 

 

- Dates were correct from what I can recall, as for the length of the tournament it was damn too long, next one I hope will not take more than a 7 days (max 10)

- That is impossible, we don't have this feature in our admin tool, I'd love to have this option though

- This is a bit subjective, some maps will always be campy or not attractive

- We tried, there was a lack of interest from EN contributors and the one that wanted cancelled 2 days before the stream

- Money rewards are higher than gold ones, we're thinking of only giving money to 1st place and to balance out other rewards more correctly. I see your point

- Also not available at the moment, if we ever get this feature we'll try to do skill based seeding, we want this too I can assure you.

 

Thanks for the feedback!

 

View PostKJK, on 07 November 2016 - 08:00 PM, said:

First and foremost: thank you for running the tournament. It was definitely an improvement on the events of the past.

 

However, communication was somewhat lacking. We weren't sure if our battles will begin at the advertised hour or not (they were in fact moved twice). I know the reason: the number of teams, but it would be nice to know it with a lot more time to prepare, and I do not mean two hours - more like two days. For one stage a chaps of ours took a day off work just to find out that the battle will be played three hours later.

 

Also, could we have more of this guy please? :great:

https://clips.twitch...hinocerosTTours

 

 

 

We're glad you enjoyed it. We hope each one will be better than a previous one.

 

I'm aware of the seeding day and change in hours, that was our slip up. Totally should've been done in a better way as for this guy, yes it's a possibility to have him again but not sure will he call you a beast again.

 

View Postmatte40, on 07 November 2016 - 08:56 PM, said:

 

Matte :)

 

First of all, supremacy and superiority is just the name change, the idea and concept is the same.

 

We had issues with TMS which prevented us from showing battle times on the tournament page, but everyone got a notification and I'm pretty sure it was written in the rules, also EVERY day almost we start at 19:00 so I guess it wasn't a shock for most of guys.

 

We tried with 2 play offs and it didn't really work out well, the best scenario could be GS+GS+Playoff for the future.

 

Seeding a lot of teams would create a massive amount of manual work and would be prone to a lot of mistakes, that's why we only do it on the last stage when the team count is small.

 

Thanks a lot for taking time to write a very detailed and extensive feedback and my apologies for not replying earlier. I put a note as a reminder but each time something distracted me until today :)

 

Regards!






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users