disapontment post

[RefluxSemantic]

Why are we even doing tournaments that ban 11/14 of the civs anyway?

Because if someone is willing to donate 500 dollars for one specific tournament, why not? It's the same reason we are hosting the NR20 tournament.

Because it takes resources away from hosting actual good tournaments. Not saying its wrong to host the TWC tournament, but I think you can argue it actually is wrong.

[n0el]

Not really.

[Riotcoke]

I still think if people are casting for free, especially when there's like 5 casters, they should get some sort of say to what's accepted. As at the end of the day nobody seems to like this setup as the twc is honestly just boring to cast.

[bwinner]

I still think if people are casting for free, especially when there's like 5 casters, they should get some sort of say to what's accepted. As at the end of the day nobody seems to like this setup as the twc is honestly just boring to cast.

you are never forced to cast though

[Riotcoke]

I still think if people are casting for free, especially when there's like 5 casters, they should get some sort of say to what's accepted. As at the end of the day nobody seems to like this setup as the twc is honestly just boring to cast.

you are never forced to cast though

That's a really shit way of looking at it though, if you had the people stop casting who've said TWC sucks, you'd have like 1 caster. So you can't host the tournament

[bwinner]

I still think if people are casting for free, especially when there's like 5 casters, they should get some sort of say to what's accepted. As at the end of the day nobody seems to like this setup as the twc is honestly just boring to cast.

you are never forced to cast though

That's a really shit way of looking at it though, if you had the people stop casting who've said TWC sucks, you'd have like 1 caster. So you can't host the tournament

Why not? It's still better to host it with 1 caster than not at all Imo. In the past there was also almost interjection casting.

[lordraphael]

Why are we even doing tournaments that ban 11/14 of the civs anyway?

Because if someone is willing to donate 500 dollars for one specific tournament, why not? It's the same reason we are hosting the NR20 tournament.

Because it takes resources away from hosting actual good tournaments. Not saying its wrong to host the TWC tournament, but I think you can argue it actually is wrong.

if someone puts up 500 dollars he can pretty much dictate the rules. If ESOC matches that amount the influence of said persone obviously diminishes. Can argue about the rules all day long ( i dont like them ) but if its the will of the donor of said tournament. He/ she has the right to demand that IMO. players can say it sucks and maybe the donor listens to them but he/ she doesnt have to.

[RefluxSemantic]

Show hidden quotes

Why are we even doing tournaments that ban 11/14 of the civs anyway?

Because if someone is willing to donate 500 dollars for one specific tournament, why not? It's the same reason we are hosting the NR20 tournament.

Because it takes resources away from hosting actual good tournaments. Not saying its wrong to host the TWC tournament, but I think you can argue it actually is wrong.

if someone puts up 500 dollars he can pretty much dictate the rules. If ESOC matches that amount the influence of said persone obviously diminishes. Can argue about the rules all day long ( i dont like them ) but if its the will of the donor of said tournament. He/ she has the right to demand that IMO. players can say it sucks and maybe the donor listens to them but he/ she doesnt have to.

At that point, it's not a donation anymore is it?

[lordraphael]

Show hidden quotes

Why are we even doing tournaments that ban 11/14 of the civs anyway?

Because if someone is willing to donate 500 dollars for one specific tournament, why not? It's the same reason we are hosting the NR20 tournament.

Because it takes resources away from hosting actual good tournaments. Not saying its wrong to host the TWC tournament, but I think you can argue it actually is wrong.

if someone puts up 500 dollars he can pretty much dictate the rules. If ESOC matches that amount the influence of said persone obviously diminishes. Can argue about the rules all day long ( i dont like them ) but if its the will of the donor of said tournament. He/ she has the right to demand that IMO. players can say it sucks and maybe the donor listens to them but he/ she doesnt have to.

At that point, it's not a donation anymore is it?

depends on your POV its a donation to host a specific tournament after your imagination.

[Riotcoke]

Show hidden quotes

I still think if people are casting for free, especially when there's like 5 casters, they should get some sort of say to what's accepted. As at the end of the day nobody seems to like this setup as the twc is honestly just boring to cast.

you are never forced to cast though

That's a really shit way of looking at it though, if you had the people stop casting who've said TWC sucks, you'd have like 1 caster. So you can't host the tournament

Why not? It's still better to host it with 1 caster than not at all Imo. In the past there was also almost interjection casting.

Because how is one caster going to cast the whole tournament, people don't have unlimited free time

[Kaiserklein]

At that point, it's not a donation anymore is it?

It's not just a "donation", it's someone "funding" the event. That's how ESOC puts it and I think it accurately describes the situation.
I think it's fair the person funding the tournament has a say on its rules.

[lordraphael]

At that point, it's not a donation anymore is it?

It's not just a "donation", it's someone "funding" the event. That's how ESOC puts it and I think it accurately describes the situation.
I think it's fair the person funding the tournament has a say on its rules.

ye thats more accurate.

[Riotcoke]

Maybe the rules just need to be more interesting and not so limiting. For example GUA's rules may be silly but they're more exciting to watch than the same three match ups on repeat.

[jesus3]

which in turn lowers the motivation of actual competitive players to test their skills against equally strong players in a fair setting

[Kaiserklein]

which in turn lowers the motivation of actual competitive players to test their skills against equally strong players in a fair setting

That's the case with twc tourney too though

[Hazza54321]

A tournament that limits the number of civs you can play is always gonna be boring. Gua tourney is an exception as its a variety of civs and MUs you hardly see which imo is nice to both play and watch. Just wanna say thanks again @giveuanxiety

[bwinner]

Show hidden quotes

I still think if people are casting for free, especially when there's like 5 casters, they should get some sort of say to what's accepted. As at the end of the day nobody seems to like this setup as the twc is honestly just boring to cast.

you are never forced to cast though

That's a really shit way of looking at it though, if you had the people stop casting who've said TWC sucks, you'd have like 1 caster. So you can't host the tournament

Why not? It's still better to host it with 1 caster than not at all Imo. In the past there was also almost interjection casting.

Because how is one caster going to cast the whole tournament, people don't have unlimited free time

Well when it's not caster, it's not casted, but you can still play the tournament

[Riotcoke]

Show hidden quotes

I still think if people are casting for free, especially when there's like 5 casters, they should get some sort of say to what's accepted. As at the end of the day nobody seems to like this setup as the twc is honestly just boring to cast.

you are never forced to cast though

That's a really shit way of looking at it though, if you had the people stop casting who've said TWC sucks, you'd have like 1 caster. So you can't host the tournament

Why not? It's still better to host it with 1 caster than not at all Imo. In the past there was also almost interjection casting.

Because how is one caster going to cast the whole tournament, people don't have unlimited free time

Well when it's not caster, it's not casted, but you can still play the tournament

It's a shit tournament then if like 1 game in casted throughout

[Goodspeed]

Funding a prize pool isn't the same as funding an event. A lot of (volunteer) work goes into it. Those resources could be allocated differently. Anything ESOC does should be for the entire community, not just one person, unless that person actually paid ESOC for its work. Volunteers should be working on things they enjoy working on, or things they feel are important for the community.

What if I gave ESOC $500 to fund the prize pool for a tic tac toe tournament? Would it allocate resources to organize it? Unlikely. It has nothing to gain.

It's fair that donors have a say in the rules, but the line should be drawn at wildly unpopular, high impact rules such as banning 11/14 of the civs.

[Riotcoke]

What GS is saying is 100 percent correct, the people organizing the event never see any of the money, and if they dislike the event why should they run it?

[Cometk]

A tournament that limits the number of civs you can play is always gonna be boring. Gua tourney is an exception as its a variety of civs and MUs you hardly see which imo is nice to both play and watch. Just wanna say thanks again @giveuanxiety

I don’t see how this is true... wb mono-civ cup or underused cup? There are plenty of ways to make limited formats fun.

[Riotcoke]

A tournament that limits the number of civs you can play is always gonna be boring. Gua tourney is an exception as its a variety of civs and MUs you hardly see which imo is nice to both play and watch. Just wanna say thanks again @giveuanxiety

I don’t see how this is true... wb mono-civ cup or underused cup? There are plenty of ways to make limited formats fun.

Underused cup was a one day event so was alright, it also only barred 5 civs. 9 civs to choose from is much better than 3.
Mono-civ was good as people got to choose the civ that they played, rather than be curtailed into 2 boring civs to play a useless civ.

[Cometk]

Well there you go, it’s not always boring.

[Goodspeed]

Maybe what is and isn't boring doesn't have to be clearly defined, and ESOC can make arbitrary decisions based on the hype for a certain format within staff and the community as a whole.

[Kaiserklein]

Funding a prize pool isn't the same as funding an event. A lot of (volunteer) work goes into it. Those resources could be allocated differently. Anything ESOC does should be for the entire community, not just one person, unless that person actually paid ESOC for its work. Volunteers should be working on things they enjoy working on, or things they feel are important for the community.

What if I gave ESOC $500 to fund the prize pool for a tic tac toe tournament? Would it allocate resources to organize it? Unlikely. It has nothing to gain.

It's fair that donors have a say in the rules, but the line should be drawn at wildly unpopular, high impact rules such as banning 11/14 of the civs.

I was showing the difference between someone donating 500 bucks to esoc, and someone asking esoc if they'd wish to organize some 500 bucks tourney with special rules. So yeah, in the second case, it makes sense that the donator would have wishes regarding the rules.

But yeah, I agree unpopular rules shouldn't be accepted. However, keep in mind that 1) it's not 11/14 civs banned 2) iwillspankyou just wanted to see some twc gameplay, she didn't really decide of the rules herself 3) in hindsight, I'm sure the rules can be easily improved