Jump to content


April Test Tournaments


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

Poll: Seeding Options (62 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 5 battles in order to participate this poll.

Which seeding option should we use for Tier 5-6 Tournaments?

  1. Random (24 votes [38.71%])

    Percentage of vote: 38.71%

  2. Normalized Groups (15 votes [24.19%])

    Percentage of vote: 24.19%

  3. Groups of Death (23 votes [37.10%])

    Percentage of vote: 37.10%

Which seeding option should we use for Tier 7-8 Tournaments?

  1. Random (13 votes [20.97%])

    Percentage of vote: 20.97%

  2. Normalized Groups (19 votes [30.65%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.65%

  3. Groups of Death (30 votes [48.39%])

    Percentage of vote: 48.39%

Which seeding option should we use for Tier 9-10 Tournaments?

  1. Random (14 votes [22.58%])

    Percentage of vote: 22.58%

  2. Normalized Groups (12 votes [19.35%])

    Percentage of vote: 19.35%

  3. Groups of Death (36 votes [58.06%])

    Percentage of vote: 58.06%

Vote Hide poll

BluesAllDay #21 Posted 20 April 2017 - 01:51 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6375 battles
  • 1,010
  • [SRV]
  • Member since:
    10-16-2016

View Post_TheDragonCamper, on 19 April 2017 - 05:03 PM, said:

 

Well...if you ever wondered why socialism didn't work, this is it.

 

The least-worst out of a group of total incompetents gets rewarded just as much as the professionals at the very top - why waste the effort to get better when the rewards for your efforts are no greater than before.

 

why get better at something at all. If your doing it for rewards and are not willing to share the pie there should be no reward at all. If however you are improving for love then no reward is needed.

dogs look up to you,

cats look down on you,

pigs look you in the eye

and treat you as equal.

 


jjraidz #22 Posted 20 April 2017 - 01:53 AM

    Doggo

  • Players
  • 22391 battles
  • 733
  • [PURPL]
  • Member since:
    08-04-2014

View PostDreadnoghtus, on 19 April 2017 - 11:29 AM, said:

Looking forward to this, hard to win when you fighting and in a group with pramo 

 

Whats wrong with fighting the top clan ? The top clans should always win the best rewards. This system of putting the best against each other and only one wins the top prize while pubbie clans fight for a similar reward.

In the #1 clan in the North American Cluster


Rockracer #23 Posted 20 April 2017 - 02:09 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 5836 battles
  • 1,223
  • [MITO]
  • Member since:
    12-20-2016

View PostEvenSteven98, on 19 April 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

But for the love of all that is good and holy, please make the payout for winning not garbage.

This.


"I'm a soviet TD master"

Maybe.

 


Raclarin9 #24 Posted 20 April 2017 - 02:34 AM

    Private

  • Players
  • 12465 battles
  • 5
  • [MOMS]
  • Member since:
    08-06-2016

     Wow. Can nobody look at this math and tell it is all wrong?  If not, think about which Group you want to be in if you're a 73% team, the one with three other 70-percenters?  No.  You want to be in Group 2 of course.  Group 4 is not totally bad for a 70-percenter, but just think about all the fun the 30% teams will have.  They probably don't have a lot of fun anyway, but how many 50% teams want to jump into Group 4 and take their place?  Seriously, who came up with this idea, somebody from one of those super-clans? Hats off to you if you did.

     There is another way to do this, use handicaps.  The handicap would balance total average damage capabilities between teams by limiting the number of players allowed in the match.  If you have a clan that averages 1500 HP per game over the last 30 days, matched against a clan with an average of 1000 HP per game, the better clan would have to sit out at least 2 team members. That would match 5 players with a total average damage of 7500 HP per game against 7 with a total average damage of 7000 HP per game.  Alternatively, have the better players use lower tier tanks to balance the average damage capabilities. Whatever approach is used, match average damage dealing capabilities between teams and let tactics do the rest.

     I have seen Tier X tournament replays on YouTube where a clan with 6 players wiped out a clan with 7 two out of three times.  If you're good, you're good.  Take the handicap and show everybody your stuff.  Wins won't be "easy peasy" for the good teams, but it will make the tournaments more competitive and probably more fun for everybody.



_Dragongeddon #25 Posted 20 April 2017 - 02:58 AM

    LetsMakeTheForumsBurnSomeMore

  • Players
  • 22313 battles
  • 2,284
  • [PRAMO]
  • Member since:
    04-26-2015

View PostRaclarin9, on 19 April 2017 - 09:34 PM, said:

     Wow. Can nobody look at this math and tell it is all wrong?  If not, think about which Group you want to be in if you're a 73% team, the one with three other 70-percenters?  No.  You want to be in Group 2 of course.  Group 4 is not totally bad for a 70-percenter, but just think about all the fun the 30% teams will have.  They probably don't have a lot of fun anyway, but how many 50% teams want to jump into Group 4 and take their place?  Seriously, who came up with this idea, somebody from one of those super-clans? Hats off to you if you did.

     There is another way to do this, use handicaps.  The handicap would balance total average damage capabilities between teams by limiting the number of players allowed in the match.  If you have a clan that averages 1500 HP per game over the last 30 days, matched against a clan with an average of 1000 HP per game, the better clan would have to sit out at least 2 team members. That would match 5 players with a total average damage of 7500 HP per game against 7 with a total average damage of 7000 HP per game.  Alternatively, have the better players use lower tier tanks to balance the average damage capabilities. Whatever approach is used, match average damage dealing capabilities between teams and let tactics do the rest.

     I have seen Tier X tournament replays on YouTube where a clan with 6 players wiped out a clan with 7 two out of three times.  If you're good, you're good.  Take the handicap and show everybody your stuff.  Wins won't be "easy peasy" for the good teams, but it will make the tournaments more competitive and probably more fun for everybody.

 

You realize that sitting people off or using lower tier tanks not only balances damage dealing but also vastly decreases total hp pool right? 

 

I'll be honest here, during the months of the old randomized tournaments where the PRAMO teams got to steamroll in like, every battlegrounds tournament and pocket 2 million credits every weekend, the clan Discord chat was filled with complaints of how easy the competition was and why we almost never got clans like GRIM back then.

 

We found a LOT more enjoyment in playing against the top teams from top clans rather than smashing 40% teams, so yes, we are the 73% team that wants to be put with the 70%ers.


Edited by _TheDragonCamper, 20 April 2017 - 03:02 AM.


ALHAU84 #26 Posted 20 April 2017 - 02:55 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 25338 battles
  • 780
  • [AUWDE]
  • Member since:
    08-05-2014

View PostCC_Sly, on 19 April 2017 - 11:17 AM, said:

Heya Tankers.

 

We have a new tool in our belts for the Tournaments! That is now we have the option to select different group seeding options.

 

 

Random - This is what we have been using and is what it is. Random seeding.

 

Normalized groups - This is this first new tool we have. Normalized groups is basically making the average win rate of each group similar.

That means that If you take the average Win Rate of all of the teams in a group, add them together, and divide that number by the number of teams in that group. That number will be very similar to the other groups if we do the same with them.

 

Example

 

Groups of Death - This option is for making Teams with similar average Win Rates play each other in groups.

Basically this means, given enough participation and teams, a 50% team should not go up against a 65% team.

 

Example

 

Testing Schedule:

April 21st - Friday - Normalized Teams Test

April 24th - Monday - Group of Death Test

April 26th - Wednesday - Group of Death Test 

 

I am looking for feedback on how these seeding options work and if we should use them going forward! Let me know what you think!

 

 

 

I like all of those, man. Heck, just having options is always a plus. 


CC_Sly #27 Posted 20 April 2017 - 04:06 PM

    Community Lead

  • Administrator
  • 3087 battles
  • 1,441
  • [WGA]
  • Member since:
    02-02-2015

A reminder people - 

 

This is not a "We are doing this forever deal with it!" thread. This is a "Oh look! New options, this is what they do. Hmmm let's talk with the community about it and see what they think about these and how we can use them!" thread.

 

A quick note - I cannot adjust the prizing within a tournament. This means if we use Groups of Death I cannot award the 60%+ groups more than the 45% groups.

 

Please vote on the poll and continue to leave your constructive feedback! Thank you!

 

 


FORMER

  Please read the WoT Blitz Game and Forum rules.

   Forum Rules - EULA TOS

   Find us on Facebook & Twitter!

 


Raclarin9 #28 Posted 20 April 2017 - 05:29 PM

    Private

  • Players
  • 12465 battles
  • 5
  • [MOMS]
  • Member since:
    08-06-2016

View Post_TheDragonCamper, on 20 April 2017 - 02:58 AM, said:

 

You realize that sitting people off or using lower tier tanks not only balances damage dealing but also vastly decreases total hp pool right? 

 

I'll be honest here, during the months of the old randomized tournaments where the PRAMO teams got to steamroll in like, every battlegrounds tournament and pocket 2 million credits every weekend, the clan Discord chat was filled with complaints of how easy the competition was and why we almost never got clans like GRIM back then.

 

We found a LOT more enjoyment in playing against the top teams from top clans rather than smashing 40% teams, so yes, we are the 73% team that wants to be put with the 70%ers.

 

     OK.  You’re probably right about handicapping by limiting the number of tanks on the field.  It would be really hard to implement anyway.  Every match-up would require a different handicap. 

   The point I wanted to make is that WG shouldn’t try to use an unsound statistical approach to try to encourage more teams to enter the tournaments.  It won’t produce fair competitions. Hopefully they haven’t used this “win rate balancing” scheme to tweak the Match Maker, although that could explain a lot of the disparities folks have been complaining about lately. But that’s another issue altogether. 

     Ultimately, the handicapping needs to be done with the rewards.  If you’re in the bronze league, you play for the bronze prizes.  If you think you are a gold team, you go for the big money.  The rewards should naturally separate the better teams into competitive brackets.  Of course, there is a chance that a good team will just go for the easy money, but it’s like you said, how much fun is that?  I thought this was the whole point of the tournament ticket system anyway.

MayoNasalSpray #29 Posted 20 April 2017 - 05:33 PM

    ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

  • Players
  • 23034 battles
  • 3,283
  • [MSELF]
  • Member since:
    01-27-2015

View PostCC_Sly, on 20 April 2017 - 12:06 PM, said:

A reminder people - 

 

This is not a "We are doing this forever deal with it!" thread. This is a "Oh look! New options, this is what they do. Hmmm let's talk with the community about it and see what they think about these and how we can use them!" thread.

 

A quick note - I cannot adjust the prizing within a tournament. This means if we use Groups of Death I cannot award the 60%+ groups more than the 45% groups.

 

Please vote on the poll and continue to leave your constructive feedback! Thank you!

 

 

 

Well I was supposed to leave my feedback and that's exactly what I did... :sceptic:



Untrustworthy #30 Posted 20 April 2017 - 06:53 PM

    Junior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 36498 battles
  • 162
  • [AFT]
  • Member since:
    03-19-2016
From the looks of all the comments I see the Unicom clans getting scared to have to face other Unicom clans. I say bring on group of death. if only to make the top clans cry!


_Dragongeddon #31 Posted 21 April 2017 - 01:46 AM

    LetsMakeTheForumsBurnSomeMore

  • Players
  • 22313 battles
  • 2,284
  • [PRAMO]
  • Member since:
    04-26-2015

View PostCoffin_Driver, on 20 April 2017 - 01:53 PM, said:

From the looks of all the comments I see the Unicom clans getting scared to have to face other Unicom clans. I say bring on group of death. if only to make the top clans cry!

 

Did you not read my reply? Or perhaps you don't think I'm a unicum?

 

Alright fine, let me make it shorter for you: I welcome the competition. And the break from playing 50% teams who show up with 3-4 people in tier 9 tanks and never stood a chance.


Edited by _TheDragonCamper, 21 April 2017 - 01:47 AM.


_34 #32 Posted 21 April 2017 - 01:49 AM

    ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡° )

  • Players
  • 19549 battles
  • 1,276
  • [PRAMO]
  • Member since:
    11-04-2014
Sly - I think we ought to do away with the entire tournament ticket system. Participation has been extremely low, and everything is becoming too mission-based (looking at you, potential equipment changes). I feel confident that I speak on behalf of nearly the entire community when I say the new tournament system improved nothing.

_Dragongeddon #33 Posted 21 April 2017 - 01:50 AM

    LetsMakeTheForumsBurnSomeMore

  • Players
  • 22313 battles
  • 2,284
  • [PRAMO]
  • Member since:
    04-26-2015

View PostRaclarin9, on 20 April 2017 - 12:29 PM, said:

 

     OK.  You’re probably right about handicapping by limiting the number of tanks on the field.  It would be really hard to implement anyway.  Every match-up would require a different handicap. 

   The point I wanted to make is that WG shouldn’t try to use an unsound statistical approach to try to encourage more teams to enter the tournaments.  It won’t produce fair competitions. Hopefully they haven’t used this “win rate balancing” scheme to tweak the Match Maker, although that could explain a lot of the disparities folks have been complaining about lately. But that’s another issue altogether. 

     Ultimately, the handicapping needs to be done with the rewards.  If you’re in the bronze league, you play for the bronze prizes.  If you think you are a gold team, you go for the big money.  The rewards should naturally separate the better teams into competitive brackets.  Of course, there is a chance that a good team will just go for the easy money, but it’s like you said, how much fun is that?  I thought this was the whole point of the tournament ticket system anyway.

 

Right on the money. 

 

However, a 7 v 7 with same tier tanks is about as fair as it gets...the players are far superior on the other team? Then train your guys into just like them. 

 

Spoiler

 



_Dragongeddon #34 Posted 21 April 2017 - 01:51 AM

    LetsMakeTheForumsBurnSomeMore

  • Players
  • 22313 battles
  • 2,284
  • [PRAMO]
  • Member since:
    04-26-2015

View PostCC_Sly, on 20 April 2017 - 11:06 AM, said:

A quick note - I cannot adjust the prizing within a tournament. This means if we use Groups of Death I cannot award the 60%+ groups more than the 45% groups.

 

And as long as this is the case Group of Death is nothing more than bad communism.

BluesAllDay #35 Posted 21 April 2017 - 03:04 AM

    First Sergeant

  • Players
  • 6375 battles
  • 1,010
  • [SRV]
  • Member since:
    10-16-2016
It's unfortunate that tournament numbers are down. It's also just as unfortunate that many clans, clans with lots of people, cannot get seven players to compete in a tournament for no other reason than time. So once again many individuals will not be involved simply because they have no way to enter. Too bad.

dogs look up to you,

cats look down on you,

pigs look you in the eye

and treat you as equal.

 


Freejack1977 #36 Posted 23 April 2017 - 03:17 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 20409 battles
  • 29
  • [COD-X]
  • Member since:
    08-29-2016

Screen Shot 2017-04-22 at 7.30.21 PM.jpgAll I want to know why is WG discriminating against NA server in amount of prizes for Tournament our money isn't green enough?? I want to hear explaination from WG why Russian server has this 58 500 gold prizes with 181,000,000 credits.

 

While we getting some miserable scraps?! Is this a joke? Some people spent good money for this game to enjoy putting pitiful prizes while other servers enjoy 1000 times more is just absurd at best.


Edited by Freejack1977, 23 April 2017 - 03:22 AM.


EvilPixy #37 Posted 24 April 2017 - 05:38 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 14885 battles
  • 20
  • [ACES_]
  • Member since:
    09-19-2016
They could make it 500 gold for North America but it is irrelevant if they dont pay up in the first place. Still waiting to receive Fridays tournaments awards!

EvilPixy #38 Posted 24 April 2017 - 07:06 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Players
  • 14885 battles
  • 20
  • [ACES_]
  • Member since:
    09-19-2016

While we are it no tournaments in any other sport or games place teams 1st, 2nd then joint fourth? If there is no play off for third and fouth place then the teams that lose in semi finals should both receive the third place award not the fourth place award which is current WoT practice. You owe us gold, lots and lots of gold!

 



CC_Sly #39 Posted 25 April 2017 - 08:21 PM

    Community Lead

  • Administrator
  • 3087 battles
  • 1,441
  • [WGA]
  • Member since:
    02-02-2015

View PostEvilPixy, on 23 April 2017 - 09:38 PM, said:

They could make it 500 gold for North America but it is irrelevant if they dont pay up in the first place. Still waiting to receive Fridays tournaments awards!

 

7-10 business days from the end of the event is the standard waiting period we give for events and contests. This is for digital rewards only - physical prizing can take longer. 

 

View PostEvilPixy, on 24 April 2017 - 11:06 AM, said:

While we are it no tournaments in any other sport or games place teams 1st, 2nd then joint fourth? If there is no play off for third and fouth place then the teams that lose in semi finals should both receive the third place award not the fourth place award which is current WoT practice. You owe us gold, lots and lots of gold!

 

If there is a different prize for 3rd vs 4th place, then there should be a match for 3rd place played. If that is not the case - there was an error and it will be looked into. 


FORMER

  Please read the WoT Blitz Game and Forum rules.

   Forum Rules - EULA TOS

   Find us on Facebook & Twitter!

 


Duke_87 #40 Posted 27 April 2017 - 04:36 PM

    Senior Sergeant

  • Players
  • 24022 battles
  • 780
  • [MOMS]
  • Member since:
    07-05-2014
Technically, socialism didn't fail, communism failed, if we are talking USSR. 

Loving my wonderful, awesome, spectacular, OP, and freeeeeeee M60! But gawd the credit earnings suck! Really WG?





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users