Hanashi
High Poster
Let's play Avalon!
Posts: 50
|
Post by Hanashi on Aug 26, 2013 13:48:28 GMT -5
Well, unfair.
I don't know how bouts are randomized, but making a level 11 Squire fight a level 230 Squire only manages to do 2 things:
1) Discourage new players to enter tournaments, and 2) Give high level players a free ride.
I suggest to put a level range to fix bouts, the same way as in boxing. 100 level range seems fair enough.
Another suggestion is to give at least 1 small medal (or something!) just for participating, as an incentive to keep entering the tournaments.
Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but there it is.. what do you guys think?
|
|
green1
Regular Poster
Posts: 23
|
Post by green1 on Aug 26, 2013 13:53:30 GMT -5
I agree with you Hanashi. But I do know that there are different tournaments which have different set up for different level of squires. It also won't be fair to players that spend so much time to train their squires. Btw, my best squire is at level 45 so I understand why this is a discouragement for new players.
|
|
|
Post by spongy on Aug 29, 2013 6:07:40 GMT -5
I agree, but I don't think it'll be easy since, well, you know, japanese version works differently. I barely go to MR because it's boring if alone and so hard to level up (it's driving me crazy, especially when I lose my squire or my exp which happens often). My squires keep dying, so I don't have very good squires. I currently only have 1 squire, which is level 15. I don't know why but I keep entering any of my squire in almost every tournaments which I shouldn't do. Anyway, green1 is also right, it would be unfair for players who puts much effort in training their squires. This is just my opinion though.
|
|
|
Post by cloudstrife on Aug 29, 2013 16:15:57 GMT -5
Fully agree with you, Hanashi. I always wished there were several instances of the same tournamnet but for different level ranges with their own brackets. My take for a re-make of all the squire tournaments would be: Level 0-100 --> Beginner instance Level 101-300 --> Advanced instance Level 300+ --> Expert instance To give credit for veteran players who either play MR exclusively or spend a great deal of time training their squires, each instance gives different rewards. Unfortunately, developers don't see eye-to-eye and the trend seems to be the same.. One tournament.. Survival of the fittest.. Fiercely competitive.. Quite the contrast from PG.
|
|
kanzo
Zoa Poster
Don't feel like doing anything...
Posts: 391
|
Post by kanzo on Aug 29, 2013 19:22:01 GMT -5
I don't agree with this.
if they do make different class for different level squires, it will just become "unfair" for those players who play hard in MR.
They work hard to level up their squires just for more chance to win the tournament and more small medals, they deserve to win. For those players who don't work hard level up their squires, it's their choice, you can't complain about this cause you decided to not to level up your squires and it's really hard for you to win some medals.
All random is still the best option.
Also, can you imagine a low level player end up win the same amount of small medal with a level 400+ player just because it's pretty easy to dominate the low level group with some nice items? That will be really unfair for those high levels.
hope you can get my point.
|
|
|
Post by Lointaine on Aug 29, 2013 23:51:07 GMT -5
This is sort of an unrelated note; I did not participate at all in the recent tournament, but here is my opinion anyway...
I don't think veteran players should feel "upset" if a newer player has the same amount of medals as they do. Think of it this way; as an advanced player, you've probably won more medals in the Level 300 tournaments than in the lower levels (unless you bought more rooms and squires so you could compete in the lower levels in addition to your advanced ones). Shouldn't that fact alone give you a sense of esteem or whatnot? Heck, we can even give names for each tournament just so we can feel the difference! For example, taking off from Cloud's idea:
Level 0 - 100: Apprentice Wars (another fun note: I have played PG since early 2011, and I am at the highest level than all my squires at Level 96. And I know there are some players who have been playing for a shorter period of time, and their squires would belong in the highest tournament.)
Level 101 - 300: Master Warrior Battles
Level 300+: Conquering Champion King/Queen Competitions
With that being said, I don't see any reason why there shouldn't be separate tournaments based on experience levels, except that it'd be extra work for the developers, as well as it might possibly slow down the game even more. Also, it would only be fair for different *grand* prizes to be given out for each tourny - I'm sure some of you won't be able to sleep knowing that a Level 100 person got a...Paragon Frost Scythe or something as such - again, extra work for developers and may slow down the game.
|
|
Hanashi
High Poster
Let's play Avalon!
Posts: 50
|
Post by Hanashi on Aug 30, 2013 11:43:11 GMT -5
Also, can you imagine a low level player end up win the same amount of small medal with a level 400+ player just because it's pretty easy to dominate the low level group with some nice items? That will be really unfair for those high levels. First of all, there's no easy way to dominate anything. If you are to make a perfect Squire who will always win, let's say, the 0-100 tournament, you have to put some pretty nice items in there. And those are not falling from the trees, are they? So, no, there's no logic to say that low level tournaments will be easy to dominate. Actually, if level gets averaged, players will have to think harder and come up with better gear/stat combinations. *shifting brute force to brains sounds pretty amazing to me* Now, I learned a lot from this past tournament (thanks to Lilli and some pretty amazing fights), and that is: level alone cannot win a tournament. We all agree that gear plays a big role in winning a fight, except when the level difference is so big that unless the lesser level squire is absorbing damage, it will always lose. You can actually confirm this by reviewing the branches of the Starlight Cup qualifiers. Here's an example: So, if level gets averaged, fights will remain gear-dependent, just like it is now, but removing totally unfair bouts (Lvl. 376 vs Lvl. 2, seriously?). Please note that there's no way to be "unfair" with the players that work hard to level their squires because they will still have the chance to win, and if prizes are proportionate to the level, then what's the issue? The problem now is that hardcore players get everything and new ones get nothing but disappointment. It's not about greediness, but incentive. It's not about who spends the most time on MR or PG, but having fun and enjoying the game to make people stay. Regulate level:prize and give a consolation prize (small reward for participating--please remember that you have to send your squire out to fight and this means you can't have it to keep fighting in MR, thus hindering your ability to level up and get better materials). Giving prizes to new/low level players is not such a big deal, if you think about it. Tournament prizes do not seem to be incredibly awesome or impossible to get from other sources, anyway. Unless this game is striving to be totally unbalanced. And maybe I didn't explain myself very clear before. I wasn't actually talking about making separate tournaments, but setting up a randomizing rule where Squires with more than ~100/~150 level gap cannot face each other. I know this rule might create some dead-ends where a very highly geared level 90 squire reaches the final versus a level 400 squire. I give you that, but hey! I bet there are pretty smart people behind this game. I'm sure they can figure something out. Let's hear everyone's opinion on this matter! ;D
|
|
|
Post by cloudstrife on Aug 30, 2013 15:54:46 GMT -5
Would be great to have more feedback on this. Although nothing we say will change the dynamics of future tournaments unfortuantely, I challenge someone to come up with a system more fair than the one I suggested. Can anyone find any flaws in the system I suggested? Or improve it? To elaborate on my idea, different instances of the same tournament will give different prizes, as I mentioned. So players that have started playing MR years ago and worked really hard to train their squires will still have the incentive of playing in a tournament with much better prizes and an equal chance for obtaining medals. I'll put it bluntly and say that it's unintentional bullying to crush the hopes of a new player that just got their feet wet in MR and demolishing his/her plans to play MR more and train their squires real hard in the process.. Everyone deserves a chance. Squires should pick on squires their own size. EDIT: I would like to add that this tournament has actually been more fair towards new players. Don't get deceived by levels. This Starlight Cup tournament placed the level cap at 250. With the help of liquors (Gold, Platinum, etc..), squires with greater than 750 stat points were able to re-distribute their points. That being said, if any new players are reading this post, there will be tournaments in the future that have level caps, while some won't. So, all I can do is wish new players the best of luck and PM me in the game (I will put on exp block and help you level).
|
|
|
Post by Zorba, The Leaf on Aug 30, 2013 16:20:40 GMT -5
"Fair" is not an objective term. The suggestion to aid weaker squires by having them fight other weaker squires is an example of how the concept of fairness can be misused. Is it really "fair" to ensure that weaker players advance at a rate in early stages equal to the rate at which as stronger players advance? The strongest players would have no advantage in the initial rounds. Their strength is the direct result of hard work and a depth of understanding that they have achieved over months and months of play. Is hard work not a deserving virtue? How about commitment? Is it so undeserving?
Random match-ups are already a little unfair to stronger squires. Think about how tournaments of all kinds are organized worldwide. There are almost no tournaments in the world where seeding is not used. Seeding rewards successful competitors for their past performance by matching them against weaker competitors (according to past performance). Can you imagine Wimbledon where Roger Federer plays Rafael Nadal in the first round? How is that fair?
By randomizing, the developers have ALREADY given weaker squires a big advantage by dramatically increasing the likelihood that they will face other weaker squires in early rounds, and that stronger squires will be eliminated in early rounds by facing other such squires. If you look closely at the bracket image Hanashi hs posted and compare first round bouts, you will see this point illustrated very clearly.
You could say that the current system is not equitable, but equivalence and fairness are rarely the same thing.
That aside, in the name of "fairness" you are asking the developers to remove the very feature--random scheduling--which does the very thing you want; that is provide some protection in early rounds to weaker squires.
The only reasonably "fair" way to provide more opportunity for advancement and encouragement to weaker players would be to follow Lointaine's suggestion and segregate tournaments according to level, with prizes that would reflect differing quality. But segregation is usually not a good answer; and in this case it would be unfair to players that want to compete with higher level squires to learn from better competition. Although it does solve the real problem Hanashi has raised, which isn't fairness. Rather it is that new players with weaker squires are at such a disadvantage that the tournaments give them very little satisfaction or encouragement. I agree that this is a problem, and as I said; Lointaine's suggestion seems like the most reasonable way to deal with the issue. By the way, it would not increase the total number of bouts and therefore would not cause any performance issues.
This is a great topic and a good discussion, but the conclusions being drawn are not very well supported by reality.
|
|
|
Post by cloudstrife on Aug 30, 2013 19:46:12 GMT -5
The tennis analogy is a bit of a stretch.. I think it's a bit misguided to use it to compare to the discussion at hand as tournaments operate based on seeding; Not anyone can just join. I think where Hanashi and I are coming from is the notion that it is guaranteed 100% (I can bet any amount) that a new or relatively new player joining the game would not stand a fighting chance in a MR tournament. I think that is what Hanashi and are stressing. Hence, I proposed the idea of tournament segregation. Reality is when 100% of the population gives feedback, input, and an authorized decision - typically based on majority - is made as to whether the system needs to be changed. After all, as said, fairness is subjective. But then again, nothing's really ever objective? Not our judicial system. Not religion. Not science. All we really have is humanity or "puppetanity".. So, community, how should we interpret fairness? And after doing so, do YOU think the MR tournament is "fair"?
|
|
lefigami
High Poster
The underground drip Was just like her scuba days
Posts: 86
|
Post by lefigami on Aug 30, 2013 23:18:08 GMT -5
In my opinion I think that the tournaments are fair, I mean, it's random and we train squires, make strategies and send them, and then there's a winner in the end, that reflects effort and hard work of the owner of the squire. And there's also the maximum number of points set on some tournaments, like the last one, and some of them have a limit of 300 points that would be like level 100, as we can see on jp version, I think that everyone has a chance; the more effort you put, better results in the end. Sometimes it seems like a bad thing when one of our squires fight a low level squire, like if it is extremely unfair, I personally don't like those kind of battles, but if one of my squire wins, I know the nights and hours that I spent training them, so I don't feel bad at all.
|
|
lefigami
High Poster
The underground drip Was just like her scuba days
Posts: 86
|
Post by lefigami on Aug 30, 2013 23:34:42 GMT -5
And also, not so long ago I used to be a new player too and even knowing that my squires back then wouldn't probably go very far on tournaments, I really enjoyed them, I remember when I joined the game I got to see a tournament finals happening, I was really interested by that, and that amazing and strong squires fighting there made me want to train my squires so they could reach to there someday. So that, instead of making me feel disappointed or discouraged, gave me will to start my travel through rooms and keep moving forward lol
|
|
|
Post by Nelliel on Aug 31, 2013 1:32:47 GMT -5
Nell's opinion on the matter is that Tournaments are quite fair already, and losing as a Newer Player should be an incentive to work harder to advance further into tournaments~ Example would come from Nell's own experiences, Last Tournament Nell was roughly level 100 with Squires level 80-100 and in the first rounds Nell lost all matches which meant no Flowers of Purity (Which made a pretty useful weapon) So by this example Nell stepped up to the plate and worked hard gaining roughly 50+ levels just for the purpose of winning a few tournament matches~ Whether it comes down to "Fairness" or not Nell believes the most important thing is to have fun~ During Tournament seasons we all gather in Guild HQ 1 meet, chat, and try to have a good time~ Sometimes you are in the same room as your opponent and instead of bitter feelings try to make the best of things~
As such there is also a wide variety of Tournaments with different sets of rules~ Such as level limits at Levels 300, 250, 200, Tournament Ragnorak: This Tournament made it so Players were set into blocks based on weapon choices (So Sword vs Swords, Rapiers vs Rapiers, Lance vs Lance, Etc~)
Tournament Hallow's Eve: This Tournament made it so the Zombie Effect was active which meant after a Squire's Death they would regenerate HP and come back to life! This Tournament was based on total Damage done~
Tournament Christmas: This Tournament made it so that Squires added in a certain week were only allowed to enter~ Which meant that all Players had a chance to train Squires from Level 1 to however far they reached~ (This Tournament showed Effort! The amount of dedication to training was shown greatly)
Tournament Valentines: Since it was Valentine season only Male Squires were allowed to enter (Unsure if this was quite fair since Squire additions are random but~ Everyone had this handicap~ So of course we are expected to see interesting matches)
Tournament Dragon Cup: This was International first Tournament~ So Nell does not remember... But Nell believes that it was level limit 300 (Since first Tournament none were above 300~) So this also shows the amount of work put into Squire Training~ (Also Based on Research information a level 65 won vs 200+ Squires! for the Championship!) So certainly these matches are fair in some aspects~
|
|
|
Post by Lointaine on Aug 31, 2013 3:12:41 GMT -5
There will be a downside to everything, even if we did separate tournaments by levels, and as Zorba has said, segregation would not be good for those who actually want to challenge themselves by competing against more advanced players. For *that* problem, we could make it so that if your squires are at Level 300+, you may not enter them into the lower level tournaments, but for those who are at 299 or lower, you can enter your squires into the highest level battles at your own risk.
And of course, even if you're an experienced player, you can always buy new squires and level them up to enter them into the lower level tournaments too, if you wish. At that point, the tournaments will be more about who has spent the time and effort leveling up their squires, and less about randomized battles and who had the better weapons/resources. I don't think it would make sense for a Level 500 squire get into the tourny with Level 100s and under...after all, the whole point of segregation was to avoid that...
|
|
|
Post by Zorba, The Leaf on Aug 31, 2013 12:02:46 GMT -5
Sorry Cloud. Have to disagree with you here on most counts. To say that everything is subjective is saying that nothing is fair, which I don't believe either. Look at most sports and you can see objective criteria being used. Just ask Hussein Bolt. Timed by machines, whoever hits the tape first wins. cameras help the naked eye see the runner hitting the tape. That's just one example. If the Yankees hit 12 homeruns and the Red Sox hit zero, there isn't much subjectivity in who wins. If Hanashi's squire knocks down my squire, that's objective because it is based on a computer program. We aren't talking about figure skating here.
Anyway, you get the idea. Also disagree about the tennis tournment, it's exactly what we are talking about, that is how/when do we match weak players to strong players, far from a stretch it's perfectly relevant.
Last, and most importantly, it is incorrect to say that new squires have no chance in an MR tournament. If you mean to win an MR tournament, that is a matter of course. But the idea that they have no chance to win a bout is obviously false. Just look at Hanashi's table. Somehow two level 2 squires made it all the way to the final round. One level 2 squire actually won its first bout of the final round.
This is my point about the randomness. The tournament format is already slightly prejudiced in favor of weaker squires. Why must it be even more so?
|
|