Cup Mode logics

Category dedicated to the ESWC: news, tracks selection...

Moderators: ESWC-Sylvain, TM-Patrol

Post Reply
Florent
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1594
Joined: 09 Aug 2005 14:07
Contact:

Cup Mode logics

Post by Florent » 04 Feb 2009 22:53

I would like to open this topic with the idea of game design. More with arguments than feeling. A mode, or more generally, a solution, is good when both things are able to meet: logic and feeling. I understand there is a bad feeling for a certain number of high skilled competitors. I would like to present the logical part of the mode. Not to be against their feeling at all, but to explain where we stand, and maybe elaborate a common vision where feeling and logic can gather.

The cup mode is made to be able to have some advantages, like:

For players
1. Be able to finish the competition for all
The goal of this is to enable the 2nd, 3rd and 4th to battle for their place instead of having the race finished by the first. To illustrate this point, I would like to ask you to imagine one race where everybody would stop running when the first arrives. It is not an argument, but maybe a way to make people more sensible to this point.
2. Be able to catch up
There is always a moment when you want to tell yourselves that you are going to be better now, and that you want to put your best. To keep this possible until the end is surely more engaging that having your last rounds of competitions with no change to catch up when you are too much behind. Moreover, the match is then won sometimes by somebody, "champions" that will just run more slowly to be sure to win their remaining points. I don't think it is a sport attitude for a champion.
3. Diminish training a little
Frostbeule said he trained like crazy to win the San Jose. I don't think that to ask player to train so much is good. A sport champion is different from an athlete. There is a part about being good at the event, not making always the same speed on the track. A sport player need to be good on the right day, not in his bedroom days before. Less training is probably a good thing for champion to exist. Asking player to train and train for each competition is too much. A champion should be able to train less than the other and still win. He should have talent, not time.
4. Have more spectators
This point, for player, is in my opinion very important. I think that champions that express themselves here should take care of spectators. Some of them could wine about loosing a big competition, but big competitions exist also because of spectators. In France, Bercy is used because of it's spectator capacities. There is money because of the audience of the champions. Sponsors are not looking to sell stuff to the champions only. Anyway, even before all this, I think that playing for other people to watch is really positive. The performance of an actor, a musician or a competitor creates an entertainment and emotions for other people. If champions does not care for the match to be enjoyed, I find it sad.

For spectators
1. You can watch the cars
With some modes, people need to compute the scores to look if the victory is going to be made. They need to think that if the leader finish 2nd in the next run, then he could just finish 3rd in the one after and win. And during the race, you just don't look at two cars, but look at the mistake that the leader can make to eventually lose the little points he needs.
2. You can always hope that you favorite racer will win
I have seen potential winner be at the fourth place. With the possibility to climb all the way up, you can hope from the first run to the latest. Spectators like to believe in one racer. They just not look at the whole match and want for the statistically best runner to win. They just want to prove to other spectators that their favorite player can be a magician and turn on fire.
3. There are bigger chances of more exiting moments
We had story with Frost losing 4 rounds in a row when he was finalist. It could make him angry, sorry to him, but it is a story. It is something for people to remember. You can also have a great time when a racer finally nail down the race. For the 100 meter, people would not really look the same way at the latest race if all the previous races were used for an average. The explosion, the world looking at this race, is the event. The events make the story. For a great mode to be entertaining, you need to reduce the number of no matches. And the cup mode helps it. Now, champions should be the winners, and I rarely see them far of the podium with the cup mode as well. It is a question of balance. Carl just won the lan in France and Frost made second to Dreamhack. I think it is good illustration that best can reach the top.

Now, it is normal that the statistically best racers ask for a mode where they have many way to protect themselves of mistakes. They will not want to risk to lose. On the contrary, statistically bad racer would ask for lol maps, and it would not be a reason, because they are more numerous to listen to them either. It is still a balance where nobody but logic could be the judge.

Now, for the discussion. I started to do it on a french web site by telling that I think there could be a trouble with the cup mode and that
A. the catch up speed probably have to be reduced
The modification, in my opinion, could be that the points of the first finalist to cross the line can be deduced from the ones that arrived before. And that the ones arrived after gets 0. So, if a finalist finish 2nd, only the first would get 4 points (instead of 10) I think it will raise the interest of the beginning of the match without removing the interest at the end. The logic is that if a player won 4 points ahead the follower, then he should lose 4 points to him when he is beaten the same way. However, I don't think it is good to "remove" points to the people behind. Somehow, in a competition, you don't remove rank acquired of previous matches because people play badly the later ones.
Or
B. An alternate mode could be better
I suggest, for example:

The leader mode
A player needs to win 3 maps to win. To win a map, a racer need to win 3 times the map, at first place. End of story.
It gives:
-Each map is an exciting moment
-Longer matches when they are more interesting
-Battle until the end
-Simple to watch and simple scores
-If you dislike a map, it reduces the impact.
-Option: the latest can continue to battle for other places

I don't say this mode is good, I just say there are good arguments, it would need a good feeling to be great. If some players thinks it could have a chance to be interesting, it would need to be tested in a little competition to have feedbacks from racers and spectators (that I would gladly be part of, for this mode or potentially other interesting tests)

If there are other suggestion, with logical arguments, I will read it. I am here to discuss. Keep in mind that my role toward big competitions is limited to an opinion. They use the mode they want.

Edit, I add this mode suggestion:
Monomap leader mode
1vs1vs1vs1. One map of three laps. Only the first get one point. The first to be at 5 points win the match.

User avatar
xai
happy cruiser
happy cruiser
Posts: 162
Joined: 13 Nov 2008 15:46
Owned TM-games: TMU(F),TMN(F)
Manialink(s): xai

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by xai » 05 Feb 2009 18:42

Good arguments, although I think solution 2 will make matches a bit too long, we don't want Nadal vs Federer match length in ESWC I think. For the rest I think Cup Mode will turn out quite ok. People always seem to moan if something new comes out, they moaned when Trackmania Forever seemed to have some bugs, but everyone still plays it! Just stop discussing about Cup Mode being bad and accept the fact that the ESWC can't please everybody.
Weeeeeeeeeeee

rapt
cyclist
cyclist
Posts: 32
Joined: 02 Nov 2007 18:51
Owned TM-games: TMN

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by rapt » 05 Feb 2009 19:11

The various solutions offered on sites esportfrance in comments of a news who spoke about mode cup ===> http://www.esportsfrance.com/actualites ... 17053/#com
(to see very the comments of the different persons).

After several reactions, everybody agrees to say that he has a problem on the rises of points.
It is abnormal that in 2, 3 runs the finalist becomes taken back up because he is not possible augment his points any more. (and what other players belong to 3 against 1 that is since 1 of them 3 finishes in front of finalists 3 earn it points there is a problem?).
More over the decisive map (when a player is finalist) the part of chance takes a too much mattering place and becomes too big.

Here is a list of severals solutions:

-Solution 1 :
To make a match there 1vs1vs1vs1 with 5 rounds by maps and to play 5 maps the pack (in a preferred unpredictable order).
At the end the player having most points wins.
Simple to follow and easy to understand for all.
(This solution seems to be favourite of all the players).

-Solution 2 :
One would keep the principle of mode cup with modifications:
Once a player is finalist, others would play only for 6 points (first place), 4 and 3 points.
Once 2 players would be finalist they would play for 4 and 3 points.
This would always allow nice rise but in "rules" in comparison with the number of points which one is possible earn during a run before being blocked on finalist's status.
It would allow to attenuate a bit the phenomenon of " magical rise ".
(A system in this gout there would re-establish chances in relation to THE decisive map and chance to have a bug on THE run.)

-Solution 3 :
Simply to return has the ancient mode! 1vs1vs1vs1 pointlimits at 40 per maps and 3 maps.

-Solution 4 :
Make of the 1vs1 in 5 or 7 points by maps there bo3.
With a map chosen by every players and if chacuns reach a map they make a third map who would be determined by the players.
Each player eliminate a map and the last map of the pack not eliminate would be the third map.

-Solution 5 :
By making of the 1vs1vs1vs1, play two first maps normally, then at the end of the third map who has least points is eliminated and finished fourth of match. Also the last of the fourth map ends third of match.
And there has a duel on the fifth map as the first place of match.

Other solutions were offered on the site esportfrance, some complicate explained or not very comprehensible for persons lambda (spectators)in my opinion:)

I hope that it will allow to advance and that a solution in the problem of mode cup will be found.

Please excuse me for my English.

Best regards.
Last edited by rapt on 05 Feb 2009 22:52, edited 1 time in total.

Frostbeule
happy cruiser
happy cruiser
Posts: 173
Joined: 06 Oct 2007 23:17
Owned TM-games: TMN, TMU, TMUF, TMNF

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by Frostbeule » 05 Feb 2009 21:40

xai wrote:Good arguments, although I think solution 2 will make matches a bit too long, we don't want Nadal vs Federer match length in ESWC I think. For the rest I think Cup Mode will turn out quite ok. People always seem to moan if something new comes out, they moaned when Trackmania Forever seemed to have some bugs, but everyone still plays it! Just stop discussing about Cup Mode being bad and accept the fact that the ESWC can't please everybody.
yeah but many agree that it was better before. dont get me wrong, i think cup mode is ok, and with the solution of playing 5 rounds on each map it's a nice system. what i oppose is the use of the 'finalist' system which i think is very unfair. so if eswc could just ditch the the whole finalist thing we would all be happy.

Florent
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1594
Joined: 09 Aug 2005 14:07
Contact:

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by Florent » 05 Feb 2009 22:48

Frostbeule, it would be interesting if you can start talking about the interest of having a match were some great events happen. I agreed on the fact the catching up could be slower, but as long as you don't enter the discussion about sport quality points (and you seem to carefully avoid it by not answering my arguments) it looks a little like you mainly want to secure your podium.

It is not to insult you, but when I read this:
Dreamhack
At first it seemed to be a walk in the park for ESWC champion Frostbeule, leading with about 30 points over 2nd place, but when frost just had to win one more round, 15 year old Karjen started winning round after round and the finally he won the whole tournament resulting in frost smashing his controller in the floor so that the batteries flew away. Too bad this game wasn't played on stage, I would've loved to see the rage, and it would've been a great video.
San Jose
He dominated all rounds and finally won the whole tournament in a secure way.
I think Dreamhack was a greater time than the San Jose boring final that I watched. Even if I understand that you disliked it, I maybe can guess that some others liked it (maybe Karjen himself)

Best players can win with the cup mode (like Carl just did) But in the most popular sport on earth, football, when finals starts, you can hardly tell who will win the match at the end. If you try to do this with TrackMania, you will kill great events and the future of the eSport with it. I would like to see you concerned about this.

Again, I agree that the catching up could be slower. It is based on arguments. This is why I pick the solution 2 in the list of Rapt.

Frostbeule
happy cruiser
happy cruiser
Posts: 173
Joined: 06 Oct 2007 23:17
Owned TM-games: TMN, TMU, TMUF, TMNF

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by Frostbeule » 06 Feb 2009 00:12

I think Dreamhack was a greater time than the San Jose boring final that I watched. Even if I understand that you disliked it, I maybe can guess that some others liked it (maybe Karjen himself)

You seem to think that matches cant be exciting with Rounds being used. Perhaps you didn't see the epic loser bracket final at San Jose where all 4 players (Carl Lign Ghost Pezi) ended up with less than 10 points between each other.

I'm sorry if I bored you by winning the final with such a big margin, but perhaps i deserved to win with that much? I trained over 5 hours per day for 1 month preparing for that event, and it seems like you think I just got lucky winning with such a large margin at the final. With Finalist mode, I would've had to prove that I was the best once more, and this time it would've been 1v3, because the other players would know that if I won 1 more round, i would be the winner, so they would have to take a lot more risks, and I would have to take a lot more risks as well to be able to win that last round. I just think that consistency is what should count in a race. the 130 points that i got in that final would've just been tossed away, how is that fair? You seem to think that just because someone is leading with a lot of points coming to 'Finalist' it shouldn't be any problem winning just 1 more round. But it's A LOT harder than you think, just ask Karjen how hard it was when I won 4 times in a row against him at the Dreamhack Online Qualifications.
Best players can win with the cup mode (like Carl just did) But in the most popular sport on earth, football, when finals starts, you can hardly tell who will win the match at the end. If you try to do this with TrackMania, you will kill great events and the future of the eSport with it. I would like to see you concerned about this.
Do you know how good the top level at Trackmania is nowadays? At the very top level, it's quite hard to say who will win and who will lose. And as long as people keep playing the game, the level till rise, and it will be even harder to see who will win. The game is still young, and I think it will just become better. I don't think introducing 'Finalist' is necessary for having great matches (see my example earlier).

Look, I understand why Cup mode was introduced. You just want to make the game as exciting as possible for the audience, and that's great. All I'm saying is that you need to think about the players and make them happy as well. And Trackmania is exciting without the 'Finalist' mode, I _know_ that, as a spectator.

Now the best solution that I have seen (that is not Rounds) is by playing 5 rounds on all 5 maps and then it's over. This is good because a) consistency is rewarded (the best is always the one that wins) b) you can still catch up (for example the last map is the leader's worst map, and it's the best map for the one trailing behind) and c) you don't get the awkward moment where the winner can't celebrate his/her victory because you have to wait for the other ones to finish (which is also bad from a spectator point of view because as a spectator you want that spontaneous reaction from the player immediately and you don't want to wait for the other ones to finish because after all, what matters is 1st place, and nothing else).
Last edited by Frostbeule on 06 Feb 2009 01:31, edited 1 time in total.

Zooz
TM-Patrol
TM-Patrol
Posts: 5326
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 08:58
Owned TM-games: TMO, TMS, TMNF, TMUF
Manialink(s): zooz
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by Zooz » 06 Feb 2009 00:48

I agree that consistent driving is important... After all, it's what seperates the great player from the good player in TM.

On the other hand, it's not the most interesting for the audience. They want drama and crashes. Just look at Formula 1 ;)
In fact, this discussion reminds me of the medals idea for F1 that they're proposing now. Instead of points for the races, it'll be like the Olympics, most gold medals wins, if it's a draw, most silver medals wins, etc. Similar problem as here I think, it's simpler and rewards winning more strongly, but it throws consistency out the window.

I like the "fixed number of rounds" idea too, it's what the Giant Cup TMU uses and it works well there. It's still not as good for the spectators as current Cup mode, though.

I'm pretty sure it's impossible to find a compromise here, drama/crashes/wins and consistency are basically opposites.

bmg4ever
pedestrian
pedestrian
Posts: 11
Joined: 19 Sep 2007 12:50
Owned TM-games: TMN, TMU, TMS

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by bmg4ever » 06 Feb 2009 05:59

ith Finalist mode, I would've had to prove that I was the best once more, and this time it would've been 1v3, because the other players would know that if I won 1 more round, i would be the winner, so they would have to take a lot more risks, and I would have to take a lot more risks as well to be able to win that last round.
Thats exactly the point i will focus on with my small post. I will try to define what cupmode statisticly is.

The first player who reaches the finalist Status can do this with a maximum point margin of 55 points after 10 consecutive won rounds, which is on this level quite unrealistic, but k thats max.
So now for him starts a new game, a 1v3. Its infact versus 3 cause for the 1 finalist player so far only beating all 3 is worth anything.
This new game is now a game with maxrounds 9 (in the ideal case of having a 55 point margin)

This case would be quite doable, nobody would ever doubt that.

Lets take a more realistic but still very good example for the first player reaching finalist status.
Now the point margin by reaching finalist is 30 points, then the new 1v3 is a match with maxrounds 5. 5 rounds to beat all 3 drivers on a rly high level with 3 top drivers, who need to drive rounds near WR, which they are all able to do, to avoid loosing. Thats really hard, of course its not impossible and youre still somehow in the lead, but its now even harder to win a single round then before.

Now lets come to the point when 2 players reach finalist. Then you have 1v1 encapsulated in a 2v2 situation. Now it becomes really supposable that in at least the next 3 rounds 1 of both finalist will finish a round first (ye i know relying only on math it are just 2 rounds). Thats not a huge rounds count for a really important match. Going into other game scenes every CS player will tell you that a MR9 match is quite random or that a BO3 in maps is less random then a BO1. A Warcraft 3 player will always tell you that a BO1 (only 1 Map) instead of a BO3 is totally random and totally screwed up to lucky mapchoice for certain matchups.
And this is not even a real maxrounds 3 match, you can win the first 2 vs your 1v1 but you CAN loose the last 1 and decisive round.

At least the situation you CAN (not must) have in the end is that if u have counted on the points u would have had still a clear winner, loosing in the end in a quite random "submatch" with a really low amount of played rounds (quite random due to the fact that the amount of counting rounds for that can be really small).


Regarding the examples you make (dreamhack aso.) THIS is exactly the event u would like to see, THE story you would like to tell. To see the so far strongest player failing in the end, which everyone playing this game day by day, week by week would declare to have been the best due to his consistency.
If a tournament organization is there to do their best to create this scenario, it would make me really sad, cause for me a SPORT QUALITY POINT are also fair circumstances for the participants with a low amount of randomness, where GREAT GAMES are made by GREAT PLAYERS on the same level and not by "WANNA HAVE A GREAT AND CLOSE GAME ALSO IF SBD IS JUST PERFOMING BETTER RULES".

Korre_elmuro
sunday driver
sunday driver
Posts: 50
Joined: 29 Dec 2007 14:16
Owned TM-games: TMN

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by Korre_elmuro » 06 Feb 2009 09:00

I totally agree with Frostbeule on this matter... Rounds & consistency ftw!! :) It's just the best mode imo, cuz it awards the best trained players...
Don't hate the l33t!
Team YoYoTech

Florent
Developer
Developer
Posts: 1594
Joined: 09 Aug 2005 14:07
Contact:

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by Florent » 06 Feb 2009 09:25

Frostbeule
1. One round final is epic
you wrote "epic loser bracket final at San Jose" I am happy that you say it was epic. It means that you prefer when all is decided in the last round. Now, try to make this situation happen more often and you will have a more epic sport. When I looked at the LB final on the maniachannel, I was happy of the coincidence at having all player into 10 points. Unfortunately, the final was really really boring beside of it. Don't be sorry, you were just the victim of a bad mode.
2. The catch up thing is about having chances of going to victory in any situation
you wrote that you can catch up with round mode just to accommodate the arguments. I am sure you know that it is not what we are talking with "catching up" A discussion rely on the fact that people accept to keep some consistency in the concepts. It looks like you want to trap it by changing the meaning of it.
3. Crazy training is bad
Like you said, you trained like crazy to win the San Jose. I don't think that to ask player to train so much is good. A sport champion is different from an athlete. There is a part about being good at the event, not making always the same speed on the track. Like a car race in the real world, the victory is not achieved in their bedroom before going to the race. They need to be good on the right day. You are asking for more train, and I think it is bad, because it takes too much time. This is an argument, for example. Please come on that ground.
4. If the best always win and you can tell who is the best on first match, why looking the end?
you wrote "consistency is rewarded (the best is always the one that wins)" So, if you can tell who is the best even before going to the final, it means that you don't need to make it. "The best is always the one that wins" could mean that you are looking for a situation where if you do the same match five times in a row, that you will always win the same way. It would mean that it is predictable. It is not interesting. Sport is not about taking size of the player to determine the winner. A sport is about making exceptional thing at exceptional moment. A football match is not evaluated with the time that the players have the ball. It would be boring. A football match rely on rare moment in a long period of time. Nobody can tell that one goal could be made over and over in the same situation. Perfect consistency is a default for a sport. You need a balance. The best should win, but the best can change from one match to another. If he is before coming to the competition, then there is no competition, there is just an evaluation. A time attack of 20 minutes on 5 tracks would surely be enough to have you beloved consistency.

I will edit my first post with the added arguments and will wait for you or Zooz to come on that ground as well. With a slow catch up, I think it is a great improvement to the competition, because a great event will be a greater catch up. I am not looking for player frustration, and this is why I slower catch up time is probably the only main important point. The fact that the race still have to be finished is a respect for the 3rd and 4th player. They can get the attention of the audience as well as the first that will be on stage with all the lights etc.

"Rounds & consistency ftw!!"
Please... The goal of this topic is to discuss about the logics ftw!!

ESWC-Sylvain
ESWC Staff
ESWC Staff
Posts: 89
Joined: 03 Oct 2007 12:09
Owned TM-games: TMN
Location: Paris
Contact:

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by ESWC-Sylvain » 06 Feb 2009 10:56

We follow very carefully this debate about the mode cup used since the beginning of the new season of qualification. And for my part I am agree with what explained Florent in his first post about Cup mode.

The cup mode offers more advantage than the previous mode used:

- It is more simple to understand for a spectator: reach the 100 points and then finish one more time the map at the first place and you will be the winner.

- For a spectator it is more interesting and fun to watch this kind of game where big comeback is possible and where until the end of the match nothing is totally done. It’s not interesting to watch if at the middle of a match the winner is already known and if the players don’t take risk to finish the match.

- For players it is also more fun because a comeback is always possible if you are enough good to become finalist before the first finalist win a last race.

- Some players say that there is a lot of pressure for the finalist to win the last race before being joined by another player. But it also puts a lot of pressure on the other players whose have the obligation to finish at least first to have a chance to win the match.

- If you are consistent you will be the first to become finalist, and will have more chance to win the last race than other players. So consistency is also important in the cup mode. Without it you will have less chance to become finalist first and so to win a last race.

But we understand also the frustration of some of the players whose lost in a tournament the first place because another player came back on them at the end of the match, or because it was on their baddest map. Maybe a few things can be improved on the Cup mode and we will study a few solutions including those exposed here to avoid the remaining problems.

Frostbeule
happy cruiser
happy cruiser
Posts: 173
Joined: 06 Oct 2007 23:17
Owned TM-games: TMN, TMU, TMUF, TMNF

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by Frostbeule » 06 Feb 2009 12:35

Florent wrote:Frostbeule
1. One round final is epic
you wrote "epic loser bracket final at San Jose" I am happy that you say it was epic. It means that you prefer when all is decided in the last round. Now, try to make this situation happen more often and you will have a more epic sport. When I looked at the LB final on the maniachannel, I was happy of the coincidence at having all player into 10 points. Unfortunately, the final was really really boring beside of it. Don't be sorry, you were just the victim of a bad mode.
Yes, I was the victim of a fair mode, that's really bad dude. (Maybe Cup mode wouldn't have happened if one of your beloved french players had won, ouch!)
Florent wrote:3. Crazy training is bad
Like you said, you trained like crazy to win the San Jose. I don't think that to ask player to train so much is good. A sport champion is different from an athlete. There is a part about being good at the event, not making always the same speed on the track. Like a car race in the real world, the victory is not achieved in their bedroom before going to the race. They need to be good on the right day. You are asking for more train, and I think it is bad, because it takes too much time. This is an argument, for example. Please come on that ground.
Where have I said that people need to train more? All I'm saying is that you have to invest a lot of time in what you do if you want to become good at it. Now you want to put a lock on how good players can become, just so the matches will be closer. I think that's wrong.
Florent wrote:4. If the best always win and you can tell who is the best on first match, why looking the end?
you wrote "consistency is rewarded (the best is always the one that wins)" So, if you can tell who is the best even before going to the final, it means that you don't need to make it. "The best is always the one that wins" could mean that you are looking for a situation where if you do the same match five times in a row, that you will always win the same way. It would mean that it is predictable. It is not interesting. Sport is not about taking size of the player to determine the winner. A sport is about making exceptional thing at exceptional moment. A football match is not evaluated with the time that the players have the ball. It would be boring. A football match rely on rare moment in a long period of time. Nobody can tell that one goal could be made over and over in the same situation. Perfect consistency is a default for a sport. You need a balance. The best should win, but the best can change from one match to another. If he is before coming to the competition, then there is no competition, there is just an evaluation. A time attack of 20 minutes on 5 tracks would surely be enough to have you beloved consistency.
No, you can't tell who will win before going to the final anymore, the game has created such a great level of play that there's many players who can win. This is why i tell you that 'Finalist' is not necessary and matches are close without it (and more fair).
Florent wrote:I will edit my first post with the added arguments and will wait for you or Zooz to come on that ground as well. With a slow catch up, I think it is a great improvement to the competition, because a great event will be a greater catch up. I am not looking for player frustration, and this is why I slower catch up time is probably the only main important point. The fact that the race still have to be finished is a respect for the 3rd and 4th player. They can get the attention of the audience as well as the first that will be on stage with all the lights etc.
So they have to play while the 1st place gets light on him and his prize? Kind of distracting on the rest of the players. I think it's a lot more fun to end it with a bang (yes I've spectated a lot of cup mode matches)

Zooz
TM-Patrol
TM-Patrol
Posts: 5326
Joined: 13 Aug 2005 08:58
Owned TM-games: TMO, TMS, TMNF, TMUF
Manialink(s): zooz
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by Zooz » 06 Feb 2009 12:38

Florent wrote:Frostbeule
1. One round final is epic
you wrote "epic loser bracket final at San Jose" I am happy that you say it was epic. It means that you prefer when all is decided in the last round. Now, try to make this situation happen more often and you will have a more epic sport. When I looked at the LB final on the maniachannel, I was happy of the coincidence at having all player into 10 points. Unfortunately, the final was really really boring beside of it. Don't be sorry, you were just the victim of a bad mode.

2. The catch up thing is about having chances of going to victory in any situation
If all is decided in the last round, that means everything before it didn't matter very much for the end result. It may have been a factor in you reaching a position where you have the opportunity to win, but if EVERYTHING is ALWAYS decided in the last round, this will always happen and so it won't matter how you did it. And there are a lot of problems with having 1 round decide everything, which is why there are no 1 round competitions.

One landing bug will ruin it, if you happen to sneeze you'll ruin it, if you stupidly crash in the first turn from being nervous you ruin it, if someone else gets lucky, that ruins it, and all before it won't have mattered. And especially if it's 3 vs 1, there's a lot bigger chance of this happening to you (1) than to ALL of the others (3).
-----
....Ok, that was me as a driver. Now let me rewrite that as a spectator since that's what you seem to want us to do.
-----
If all is decided in the last round, that means the game isn't over until the end. Anything can happen. Having 1 round decide everything is great, just look at F1, they only do 1 race on a track too, and it's hilarious when a top driver is ahead and then has a breakdown a few laps before the end, and some midfield driver wins.

In TM, one landing bug will do that, or sneezing. And it's especially funny if they crash in the first turn already, motivating the others to take risks to grab the now available win. Or if someone who is 2nd attempts a lucky wallhit near the end and somehow does it and wins the tournament, that makes great drama. It isn't over until the end, it's great to watch it that way and see the reaction of the drivers when the finish is there. And it's nice that the others have such a good chance when one driver is dominating, it will not become boring because there's Finalist mode, where it's a 3 vs 1 giving the other 3 drivers a very good chance to catch up and win. Only one of them has to finish ahead of the nr 1, and it will be close until the end when the 1st driver inevitably loses which is funny.

See? Opposite interests. Let me illustrate it with this binary scale:

Code: Select all

|----------|                 |----------|
| Drivers  |                 |Spectators|
|----------|                 |----------|
     0                             1
:roflol:

So, I think the issues here are:
1. Which is more important, drivers or spectators? (spectators it seems)
2. If it's spectators, what mode do the drivers dislike least? If it's drivers, what mode do the spectators dislike least?
Florent wrote:3. Crazy training is bad
I can agree with that one. It's what makes me and many other players not even try to go for ESWC. However, training and skill are closely related. More skill means more effective training. Without training, skill isn't brought out properly. Training improves consistency, but it also improves peak performance (for 1 run), at least up to a point. So even if everything depends on 1 run players will still helltrain.

It's also basically impossible to restrict training time. You can release the maps close before the tournament, but that means everyone will need to have time to nolife as much as possible during that time. And you can't limit someone's access to TM during a month :P

You really seem to like football analogies :mrgreen:

Sulli
wheelbarrow operator
wheelbarrow operator
Posts: 16
Joined: 01 Nov 2007 21:58
Owned TM-games: TMN, TMU

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by Sulli » 06 Feb 2009 14:21

Zooz wrote: So, I think the issues here are:
1. Which is more important, drivers or spectators? (spectators it seems)
That's one of the things which disturb me, it seems like organization is doing what is good for spectators, and driver's opinion is useless ('cuz we don't pay the entry @ ESWC ? :()

Sulli
wheelbarrow operator
wheelbarrow operator
Posts: 16
Joined: 01 Nov 2007 21:58
Owned TM-games: TMN, TMU

Re: Cup Mode logics

Post by Sulli » 06 Feb 2009 15:29

Frostbeule wrote: (Maybe Cup mode wouldn't have happened if one of your beloved french players had won, ouch!)
I don't think it's about it, but imo I prefered to see this looser bracket final for sure, but frost show his entire skills in big final, it was simply amazing, I don't think someone played better like this for the moment, it was a big moment. I were on teamspeak with some top french players like maxou, overdose or others, and we were impressed. TMTV spectators were impressed too, it wasn't boring, just merveillous.

Now for the debate, I have my opinion and it won't change, "finalist" thing sucks, I don't know why we have to win a last round, simply useless. 5 rounds per maps on the 5 maps is the best solution to show who is the best on the whole mappack.

I also found a video on youtube, there's a little interview with gaLLo, after participating to the tournament, he didn't know himself who will win, he thought it will be closed between frost and xeno (I understood this), noone knows frost will play at the top. And we also have the live reaction from frost after his victory, it's suddent and better for spectators to understand. With cupmode we have to wait the 3 first players to give reactions, there's less pressure, less adrenaline, simply strange.

Video for those who didn't see it : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQuBGQWtrfA

Post Reply