My Main Complaint with MWC2013

General MWC related discussion stuff.
limp
Posts: 188
Joined: 02 Mar 2013, 01:59
Contact:

My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby limp » 30 Apr 2013, 04:00

Salary Cap limitations.

This would be a more interesting and applicable idea if more than a handful of people were active, but they are not, Myth is as stagnant as ever.

Currently, this system will do more to damage activity this MWC, as is puts limitations on the only facet of Myth left that has any sort of draw - MWC.

I understand that the salary cap is an attempt to spread out the talent to more teams, thereby making the pool of teams more competitive, but it is unlikely things will play out in this manner.

Unfortunately, this sort of discriminative method towards creating teams, will encounter a bevy of complications.

Most notably, the alienation of many players, and their potentiality to participate in MWC.

What if tiger, cyclops, pele, cosmictruth, ashen, jeff the meek, etc. etc. return to play this MWC, and teams have already been created to their maximum potential, filling all the spots available via the salary cap?

These players, which seem come around every year at the beginning of MWC registration, will be left to try and sneak into a team that left a spot open, (highly unlikely, as teams are trying to form as best they can from the beginning) or they will have to band together to form a lesser team of rabble with other players who couldn't find a spot, or will just say fuck it and not participate.

I mean for instance, if Broken Cow comes out of retirement and wants to play this MWC, he will be ranked 3 balls and I will not be able to add him as the rules currently stand. He will not want to form his own team, and will probably not play at all if he couldn't play on my team. How often will this happen? Probably a lot. With no salary cap this would not be an issue.

For the sake of competition will the salary cap help? Surely, it is spreading out the talent to more teams, or attempting to, but at what cost? As it stands right now, if I hadn't been playing Myth recently, and came back right now, I would not be able to participate with NC, the team I have played with for the past 6-7 years.

Honestly, I think everyone has already gravitated towards a self imposed salary cap of sorts. Everyone wants a few games of competitive and fun Myth every summer, and generally people want to come back and play with the same people they always do.

If you want to put a limitation on something, make the roster max at 8, and open it to 12 when the QR comes around, otherwise prepare yourself for a series of unnecessary arguments and headaches for some time to come.

There are normally what, 4 or so competitive teams that could realistically win the tournament? If I don't see at least 6-8 teams with the capability to win it all this time around, then there is absolutely *zero* point to any of this salary cap stuff.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1625
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 13:46
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Giant Killer General » 30 Apr 2013, 04:53

What I don't understand is why Grim would force the biggest change in MWC since its inception 15 years ago when he isn't even going to play in the tournament. He hasn't even been active in the community since last mwc, and even now he is barely posting anything on the forums to address the massive set of issues he has just created. Everyone is clamoring for the removal of the salary cap, and he isn't even playing, so what exactly is his motivation to continue to force it upon everyone?

Zak was the biggest proponent for a salary cap for MWC and even he is being pretty quiet about it now. There will no doubt be casualties in good players not being able to participate because they can't get on the team that they want to be on. Their motivation for playing will be gone when they can't play with the people that they want to play with.

I agree with everything limp says except one thing: the salary cap will actually decrease the competitiveness of the tournament.

Some people think that increasing the competitiveness of MWC is like some hugely complicated issue, throwing massive rule changes at it like a salary cap in a futile attempt to try to address even some semblance of the issue. However the problem is soooooo very simple. There were only 2 very simple problems with the competitiveness of MWC in the last 3 years, maybe going back even further. Prepare for your mind to be blown:

Problem #1) Ducky capping. Do not let Ducky captain. Had you just taken away Ducky as a captain then you would have seen a much closer mwc finals last year, and a better finals in mwc10 as well. Not to mention a better performance from his mwc11 team. Everytime Ducky captains is a complete waste of talent of everyone on his team. The creation of this problem is as much Ducky's fault as it is all of the people on his team that let him captain. They have been ruining mwc tournaments for the past 3 fucking years, it is unbelievable how stupid people are to keep letting him captain. Ducky didn't captain in the MWC09 finals, but cw did and was equally as horrible, so mostly these top teams just need some basic competence out of their captains.

Problem #2) My team rosters have been too strong, especially with Bullz. I do need some handicap, I am not going to lie. That was why SP was a weaker roster than Bullz. I am not prepared to say that SP was also too strong since we did get 5-0d earlier and our bottom bracket finals match was close. The cause of the blowout in the finals may have been primarily caused by just problem #1. Regardless though, I have now created a completely different, and weaker roster to compete with. That was really all that needed to be done to make it more competitive. I did all the work for everyone already, I have been planning it for months since after last mwc. My solution to this problem not only makes my team less dominant, but also frees up talent to improve other teams. I instead took a few players I felt I could maximize their potential and they would not have gotten onto another top team anyway. Yet now with this salary cap, that undoes all of the work that I did.

So that was it. I don't see Ducky anymore, and I already had fixed the 2nd problem. This mwc was already naturally on track to be one of the most competitive mwc's in many years, but then grim fucks it up in basically the worst way imaginable.

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 984
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 01:26
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Zak » 30 Apr 2013, 05:16

I like the salary cap, I don't like the player ratings.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1625
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 13:46
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Giant Killer General » 30 Apr 2013, 05:21

Yes well, I never said you changed your mind about it, I just said you were being quiet about it now. I certainly don't see you vehemently defending a salary cap in every post that someone complains about it like you were before. You would be the only person I have seen making a post in favor of it right now.

wwo
Posts: 832
Joined: 13 Dec 2012, 14:35
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby wwo » 30 Apr 2013, 05:55

I'm curious. Do you feel about the Raz-captained teams the same way you do about the Ducky-captained ones, i.e. wasted roster?

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1625
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 13:46
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Giant Killer General » 30 Apr 2013, 05:56

Of course, absolutely. I have said it so many times, those 2 are without a doubt the worst captains of all time.

wwo
Posts: 832
Joined: 13 Dec 2012, 14:35
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby wwo » 30 Apr 2013, 05:58

I wish I had a chat client. I used to do my term papers Plato-style as dialogs. There's still some valuable information and analysis in your head that needs to be extracted.

Asmodian
Posts: 1486
Joined: 22 Feb 2013, 07:28
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Asmodian » 30 Apr 2013, 06:07

limp wrote:There are normally what, 4 or so competitive teams that could realistically win the tournament? If I don't see at least 6-8 teams with the capability to win it all this time around, then there is absolutely *zero* point to any of this salary cap stuff.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1625
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 13:46
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Giant Killer General » 30 Apr 2013, 06:23

Everyone imagine this exaggerated comparison of 2 different myth tournaments:

There are 100 players that still play in myth tournaments, 50 of them are bonafide legit 5 ballers, the other 50 are 1 ballers.

There are 2 tournaments going on: tournament A and tournament B. Both have 10 teams of 10 player rosters each.

Tournament A has no restrictions on team rosters, so naturally there are 5 teams with 10 5-ballers, and 5 teams with 10 1-ballers.

Tournament B has a salary cap that attempts to perfectly even out the teams. All 10 teams have 5 5-ballers and 5 1-ballers each.

Which tournament is more competitive, tournament A, or tournament B?

Tournament A will attain much higher quality matches among the top 5 teams. However, tournament B will have a greater quantity of closer matches. Of course we all want the best of both worlds, but if you have to choose, is it more about quality or quantity?

Your answer dictates what your personal definition of "competitiveness" is.

NewMutator
Posts: 494
Joined: 16 Nov 2012, 02:37
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby NewMutator » 30 Apr 2013, 07:48

I understand not liking the idea of a salary cap, but I think the arguments against it are possibly overblown.

There's no evidence that it drives away players or that it makes for less competitive games. That's pure speculation, which isn't to say that it isn't true. Only that it reflects opinion more than fact.

Personally, I'm excited to see how players build their teams in response to the roster limitations. So far the teams don't seem like they are suffering much, and the fact that teams are smaller frees up more talent to form additional competitive teams. Already there are 3 cup contenders (plus deer!); who knows how many more potential-finalist teams can be formed from the outstanding talent?

It's too early to know if Grim's salary cap is a bad idea or not, though we are free to speculate. Player ratings can be tweaked; it seems Grim is amenable to reason on that end.

Players may come out of retirement, but so what? They find themselves in the same position that myself and countless other players have traditionally found themselves every MWC season -- struggling to find a spot with a team good enough to want to play.

Also, I don't know if pogue's team was a troll, but the roster looked amazing.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1625
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 13:46
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Giant Killer General » 30 Apr 2013, 08:05

There is evidence that it will drive away players. Here is the proof:

Most players in mwc only come out of retirement and get active again to be able to play with their certain group of friends.

If they can't play with that group of friends they will stay inactive and just won't play.

The salary cap will prevent some players from being able to play with their group of friends due to salary cap space restrictions.

Therefore the players in that situation will not play.

Another example: If grim screws my team roster, there is a very good chance I would not play.

NewMutator
Posts: 494
Joined: 16 Nov 2012, 02:37
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby NewMutator » 30 Apr 2013, 08:58

I wouldn't really call that proof. Again, to clarify, the argument is that it drives players away more so than it would otherwise, but there's no real way to know for sure. I can certainly sympathize with players that look at the rosters and decide not to sign up. Heck, that happened to me on more than one occasion. So, I don't really see the huge difference with years past, where players conceivably opted out because they couldn't find teams or weren't well-connected among the Myth elite. Your argument is actually that it's better to exclude those players because they're not as "good" as the players in this case, which, again, may be true, but isn't really verifiable.

One counterargument might be that with smaller rosters, it should be easier to form a competent team out of free agents. The core player base is small enough that players should be willing to play with a variety of other players. If they are not willing to do so, then the story about how they should be accommodated doesn't sound all that convincing.

limp
Posts: 188
Joined: 02 Mar 2013, 01:59
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby limp » 30 Apr 2013, 12:03

GKG - "so here is proof why a salary cap will alienate several inactive players from finding the team they want or have always played for"


Mutator - "you know you are right, but here is also why you are wrong"



if I had been inactive for TWS, and returned to myth in mid-May to find NC was over the salary cap and I could not be on the team, I would almost 100% say fuck it and fuck myth this year, and not play whatsoever.


this will be the general consensus on the salary cap and inactive players.

drunken_deer
Posts: 640
Joined: 20 Feb 2013, 05:49
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby drunken_deer » 30 Apr 2013, 12:33

There are a few Major Problems with Grim for introducing the Salary Cap. Regardless of opinion on its implementation.

1. Not all players are registered so releasing the ball data is a really stupid idea because captains who wish to draft a Small-Heavy squad can not optimize.
2. No one has voted for the other players to make the ball data accurate, where are the other two people to give ratings? Grim was very vague and did not give any names.
3. A Salary Cap should be introduced by collecting recent data and not old data. It would be prudent to simply play regular myth world cup and collect all the ratio's to give a much higher
indication of skill level (regardless of past history). This is why TWS should be made as a way of increasing/decreasing the salary cap to give a more accurate reading on last years data (as MWC will be played the year before). You make every player start as 3 balls in their first participation and adjust accordingly to avoid the next point.
4. As stated by GKG with a very valid point old school mythers will get shafted because of the salary cap.

Aki
Posts: 118
Joined: 19 Nov 2012, 03:42
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Aki » 30 Apr 2013, 13:26

To keep mwc alive it'd be better to scale down the UTs on maps so 7 person squads aren't required.

NewMutator
Posts: 494
Joined: 16 Nov 2012, 02:37
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby NewMutator » 30 Apr 2013, 15:43

I conceded he could be right, not that he was. We can speculate all day but there's really only one way to know.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1625
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 13:46
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Giant Killer General » 30 Apr 2013, 15:50

ln you are fucking crazy and so incredibly wrong its not even funny. leave this to the people who actually have been around since the beginning and know everyone in the competitive myth community very well. we know this fact to be true because we have been playing tournaments with these people for 10-15 years, we know them very well. get real.

NewMutator
Posts: 494
Joined: 16 Nov 2012, 02:37
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby NewMutator » 30 Apr 2013, 15:59

I guess I should have expected such a response. I will withdraw from commenting further.

East Wind tmnt
Posts: 272
Joined: 18 Nov 2012, 16:12
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby East Wind tmnt » 30 Apr 2013, 16:02

thisforumsucks wrote:Jaime's butt (Shaister) - 4
Daenarys' butt (Adrenaline) - 5
Brienne's butt (Rabican) - 3
Hodor's cock (Flatline) - 3
Ros' butt (Enculator) - 3
Theon's butt (Ska) - 4
Jon Snow's butt (Zak) - 3


switch wrote:On paper this is one of the strongest rosters ever assembled. Unfortunately, word on the street is that Zak's post-NC super team is only partially legit, and fielding more than a few retirees at that.



new school myth

adrenaline
Posts: 1637
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:38
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby adrenaline » 30 Apr 2013, 16:24

Lol no shit... i think switch has a bit of a drug problem maybe.

Hadzenegger
Posts: 120
Joined: 16 Nov 2012, 01:11
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Hadzenegger » 30 Apr 2013, 16:51

GiantKillerGen wrote:There is evidence that it will drive away players. Here is the proof:

Most players in mwc only come out of retirement and get active again to be able to play with their certain group of friends.

If they can't play with that group of friends they will stay inactive and just won't play.



this is all someone needed to say, was skimming the thread for this - i believe this is the first it was mentioned, soooo --


/thread

Asmodian
Posts: 1486
Joined: 22 Feb 2013, 07:28
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Asmodian » 30 Apr 2013, 16:54

According to the people who supported the salary cap and "the people who didn't sign up bc they had no chance of winning" said there would be a lot more players/teams that would play in the tournament who would otherwise not without a salary cap (you think these players would be the most excited to make teams right away under the format that they requested).

So...WTF are these new teams at?


This is why you don't listen to zak,newmutator or anyone else who has supported a salary cap, because they have NEVER formed a tournament team in a non-draft format and they just expect everyone to sign up regardless of the tournament rules. Wisdom before speculation folks.

Funny how the first example of a player being excluded from participating in mwc was going to be on Zak's team, Seeker.

punkUser
Posts: 1382
Joined: 16 Nov 2012, 23:13
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby punkUser » 30 Apr 2013, 16:59

I dunno, as limp said, the teams that have been forming so far seem pretty un-stacked to me compared to bulls, etc. so I really don't think this salary cap stuff is necessary, even if you goal is to have more "contender" teams. Maybe grim's scared that if he removes it some super-team will immediately re-form, but honestly I doubt that.

Regardless, for MWC I really do want to see those top few % of players going head to head in the highest level of Myth play. That only happens once a year, so why are we trying to eliminate it entirely? Seriously, just drop the salary cap thing or I think people will have to consider organizing something on the side.

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 984
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 01:26
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Zak » 30 Apr 2013, 19:48

Asmo wrote:
So...WTF are these new teams at?


This is why you don't listen to zak,newmutator or anyone else who has supported a salary cap, because they have NEVER formed a tournament team in a non-draft format and they just expect everyone to sign up regardless of the tournament rules. Wisdom before speculation folks.


The only "old" team in this tournament so far is deer. The current team formations are completely new.

lol I've never formed a team in MWC eh?

Anyways, if after 3 days of registration, we dont have 8 teams that can compete for the cup, grim should probably just give up! Makes sense.

drunken_deer
Posts: 640
Joined: 20 Feb 2013, 05:49
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby drunken_deer » 30 Apr 2013, 22:19

its still early days in registration, give it a couple of weeks for more teams to register...

wwo
Posts: 832
Joined: 13 Dec 2012, 14:35
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby wwo » 30 Apr 2013, 23:31

Without complete and more accurate ratings, how the fuck are you supposed to build a team you can feel safe won't violate a later ball revision?

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 984
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 01:26
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Zak » 30 Apr 2013, 23:37

That could be a good thing for players showing up at the last second for MWC, since teams that form early may have to remove players.

Asmodian
Posts: 1486
Joined: 22 Feb 2013, 07:28
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Asmodian » 30 Apr 2013, 23:53

wwo wrote:Without complete and more accurate ratings, how the *cruiser* are you supposed to build a team you can feel safe won't violate a later ball revision?


hence the salary cap sucks and has way too many flaws to it, but I'm guessing once grim moves a team from "registration" into the "TA" thread he is saying that with its current roster it is good to go. If that is not what he is thinking he will surely piss off too many players which will lead to a bad tournament.

Aki
Posts: 118
Joined: 19 Nov 2012, 03:42
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Aki » 01 May 2013, 00:03

Yes, ball ratings should be set in stone ASAP

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 984
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 01:26
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Zak » 01 May 2013, 00:10

Asmo wrote:
wwo wrote:Without complete and more accurate ratings, how the *cruiser* are you supposed to build a team you can feel safe won't violate a later ball revision?


hence the salary cap sucks and has way too many flaws to it, but I'm guessing once grim moves a team from "registration" into the "TA" thread he is saying that with its current roster it is good to go. If that is not what he is thinking he will surely piss off too many players which will lead to a bad tournament.



One would assume so, but that may be false considering what he has said:


grim wrote:Threat Assessments thread for TMNT:
GKG
East Wind
Arzenic
Monty
Asmodian
Ratking


grim wrote:5 balls
GKG

4 balls
East wind
Arzenic
Ratking

3 balls
asmo
Monty


grim wrote: Teams can only have a certain number of high rated players in their team. These are the limits:

- ONE 5 ball player and TWO 4 ball players or FOUR 4 ball players if there's no 5 ball player in the team.
- THREE 3 ball players in any case.
- Unlimited number of 1-2 ball players, just so long as you remember that there's a 10 player limit for teams.

c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊
Posts: 736
Joined: 17 Nov 2012, 11:40
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby c⁄J⁄Iılk c⁄J⁄Iån ◊§t◊ » 01 May 2013, 01:22

I would be interested to see if a team consisting of only the three 5 ballers could win mwc :geek:

adrenaline
Posts: 1637
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:38
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby adrenaline » 01 May 2013, 15:07

It would require each to show up to every single match... and for every gametype to be lmoth. In short... no. Not very likely.

bone
Posts: 10
Joined: 17 Feb 2013, 22:12
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby bone » 01 May 2013, 17:26

All I have to contribute is:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

ps- love you, grim!

User avatar
falcon
Posts: 249
Joined: 14 Nov 2012, 19:43
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby falcon » 01 May 2013, 19:37

All of you are killing myth.

par73
Posts: 2973
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby par73 » 06 May 2013, 22:36

GiantKillerGen wrote:Problem #1) Ducky capping. Do not let Ducky captain. Had you just taken away Ducky as a captain then you would have seen a much closer mwc finals last year, and a better finals in mwc10 as well. Not to mention a better performance from his mwc11 team. Everytime Ducky captains is a complete waste of talent of everyone on his team. The creation of this problem is as much Ducky's fault as it is all of the people on his team that let him captain. They have been ruining mwc tournaments for the past 3 fucking years, it is unbelievable how stupid people are to keep letting him captain. Ducky didn't captain in the MWC09 finals, so mostly these top teams just need some basic competence out of their captains.


Hilarious, and dead accurate.

SamTheButcher
Posts: 209
Joined: 17 Jan 2013, 22:50
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby SamTheButcher » 07 May 2013, 11:56

People have been ignoring it for whatever reason but I have already given a much better system for MWC with a salary cap. That addresses most of the issues. I'm going to point it out 1 more time. If people want to continue to be stubborn and ignore it so be it. But I dont see any reason for people to complain about it unless they are just totally against a salary cap of any kind. This IS the most fair and less restrictive system. It gives teams plenty of flexibility. It gives the most accurate Player ratings possible. It leaves room for returning Players, you can have as many Players on your team as you want under 75 points (which is a lot). It also naturally accommodates less active Players. A team doesnt have to not pick someone just because they cant make every match. It actually encourages a team to take a few Players that cant make every match. It makes every match even (on paper) since each team fields the same number of Player points. It makes it less about having a team full of top ranked Players being the main reason a team wins and makes it more about teamwork, dedication. strategy etc.

It makes the competition level max. As GKG said it depends on what peoples definition of more competitive is. This actually fits both definitions he gave.
Tournament A will attain much higher quality matches among the top 5 teams. However, tournament B will have a greater quantity of closer matches. Of course we all want the best of both worlds, but if you have to choose, is it more about quality or quantity?


Here is why this system is the most competitive under either definition:

Because both teams are fielding the same Player points the competition is as high as it can be. Because really the competition between a team of all 4-5 balls vs another team of all 4-5 balls (with the current rating) is going to have an equal level of competition and an equal chance of a team victory as a team of all 2-3 balls vs another team of all 2-3 balls. Think of it like motorcycle racing. The different divisions have certain restrictions so that all the bikes have the same engine size etc and are basically even. It doesnt matter what size bike is being raced since they are all the same in each class the competition level in a race is the same. It leaves the out come of the race almost totally to driver skill. With bigger bikes the races are faster but there isn't more competition. But if you allowed a 4 bigger bikes to race vs smaller bikes clearly it would come down to a race between the 4 bigger bikes with the smaller bikes not having any chance at winning. That wouldnt make for more competition it would make less. It would be a race between the 4 bigger bikes only. Instead of a even/fair race with ALL the bikes on the track. This is how MWC has normally ran. With this system everyone is racing with the same size bike (Player points) so it leaves the race up to driver skill (teamwork, dedication, etc)

What is wrong with this system?

System:

1) A Player Point ranking scale of 1-10.
2) A total Team Player Point cap of 75 Points. No limit on how many Players per team.
3) A 48 Player Point maximum fielded per game/match.
4) No subs.


1) Player rankings would be given by a 3 person Ranking committee. The Ranking Committee is chosen by a majority vote from a pool of the most active, accomplished, well know Players. Such as Ratking, Genghis, GKG, Paris, Adren, Asmo, Limp, Zak etc. The 3 members of the Ranking Committee independently assign each Player a ranking. They then compare their list. All Players that have at least 2 members giving them the same ranking are assigned that rank. For Players that have 3 different rankings the Committee members will discuss the rank and when at least 2 are in agreement that becomes that Players rank.


2) A total Team Player Point cap of 75 points. This is a generous number and should not be restrictive much if any to any team. For a comparison on a 10 point scale last years MWC runner up team "My Team" had approximately 69 Points. A total Player Points cap is preferable to a Player total number because teams with mid/low ranked Players will need to field more Players, therefore need more Players to reach their 48 Player Points per game.


3) 48 Player Points maximum fielded per game/match. That is the maximum number of Player Points you can have per game. The number of Players doesnt matter as long as it doesnt exceed the 16 Player game max. This makes things much more fair and competitive, but still allows teams a lot of flexibility on team creation. A team with mostly high ranked Players will be able to field less Players than a team of mid/low ranked Players. Creating a more even match up. Like this Team A) 6 Players 10,9,8,7,7,7 (48 points) -VS-Team B) 9 Players 8,7,6,6,5,5,4,4,3 (48 points) This would be a pretty even match up.

Some concerns that are addressed with this system.

Accurate Player Rankings: I think this system addresses that as much as could be possible and would be about 90% accurate.

Too much restriction on team building: 75 total Team Points is very generous and unless a team wants to get extreme and build a team of 10-12 + heavy hitters or a team of 15-20 mid/low ranks I dont think this will be too restrictive to any teams. Plus the point of a system like this is to keep MWC from being basically a 4 team tournament from the start as it has been recently. With 4 totally stacked teams and the rest of the teams having almost zero chance at winning. Therefore making anything but the semi-finals and on really mean anything or even worth doing.

Room for less active or returning Players on a team: With such a generous total Points cap and a 48 Player Point limit per match meaning that you most likely couldnt field your whole team (which is often the case anyway) You will have room and will most likely have a need for a group of less active Players that will come in and out of matches and games. You will have a pool of Players to choose from to be sure you have enough available at any match.


Over all fairness, competition and participation: With all teams being limited to fielding 48 Player Points per match/game. This puts all teams on an even Playing field and gives every team an equal chance at winning. It would have a lot more to do with a teams commitment, captain ability, team cohesion, strategy etc. Less to do with stacking teams with power Players. Which brings more competition to the whole of the MWC tournament not just the finals. Also with better competition throughout it makes victory much more meaningful and a bigger accomplishment than being basically being 1 of 4 teams to win. The more equality and fairness of this system would bring more Players into and encouraged to build teams for MWC.

Here are some examples of the types of fielded teams there could be. Where you can see how this system would even things out make it more fair for all teams and ultimately better competition and participation:

These are the fielded teams for a match/game not what the full team roster would be. Each team could have quite a few addition Players.

Team A) 6 Players 10,9,8,7,7,7 (48 points)
Team B) 9 Players 8,7,6,6,5,5,4,4,3 (48 points)
Team C)6 Players 9,9,8,8,7,7 (48 Points)
Team D) 7 Players 8,8,7,7,7,6,5, (48 points)

Any of those teams VS any other would all be fairly even and competitive match ups.

drunken_deer
Posts: 640
Joined: 20 Feb 2013, 05:49
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby drunken_deer » 07 May 2013, 12:05

sam there are 2 issues.

1, the problem is finding 9 players lower calibre to field on a single team. It seems kind of rediculous to attempt every match to have a 6v9 game on heavy hitters. Having too many players on one team can be a disadvantage as well (spread too thin).

2. Most Veteran Mythers are just way too fucking stubborn to give it a go. They are head deep in the sand in having diversity and with Paris at the helm now "against" the salary cap it seems little more than a brief idea to come into fruition. Even the mythers that are supporting the idea say that its way too premature in adapting a fair system to be properly implemented in the mwc.

SamTheButcher
Posts: 209
Joined: 17 Jan 2013, 22:50
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby SamTheButcher » 07 May 2013, 12:34

drunken_deer wrote:sam there are 2 issues.

1, the problem is finding 9 players lower calibre to field on a single team. It seems kind of rediculous to attempt every match to have a 6v9 game on heavy hitters. Having too many players on one team can be a disadvantage as well (spread too thin).

2. Most Veteran Mythers are just way too fucking stubborn to give it a go. They are head deep in the sand in having diversity and with Paris at the helm now "against" the salary cap it seems little more than a brief idea to come into fruition. Even the mythers that are supporting the idea say that its way too premature in adapting a fair system to be properly implemented in the mwc.


Your 1st point could have issues but I also think that there wont be too many teams that need to field 9 Players and also they dont HAVE to. The alternative though for a team like that is they cant field 9 Players and other teams that they VS could have much higher Players points. So although its not perfect it IS better than the alternative. At least with this system they have options and also any team they VS would have the same number of Player points.

Your 2nd point I think is totally true. What it comes down to is ego. Some people are too afraid to lose and put too much of their self worth into Myth. So they want to cushion themselves (stack their team) to help them avoid losing. Instead of having some tough even competition. With my motorcycle analogy which is exactly like the issue we are having with MWC. It comes down to they dont want to race unless they have the biggest bike on the track. They dont want to race with the same bike as everyone else. Why would someone want to do that? Its like they have been racing with bigger bikes for years and are afraid to give that up and race with the same bike as everyone else. Which takes away competition. Think about a motocross race where 4 people have bigger bikes than the rest of the racers. So it comes down to a race between those 4 bikes. Then when one of them won everyone would be like "BFD that guy had a bigger bike he should have won". VS the victory someone would have if everyone was racing the same size bike. Then people would think "that guys is good.".

They set up divisions and sizes in races for a reason. For more competition.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1625
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 13:46
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Giant Killer General » 07 May 2013, 13:08

Sam, there is nothing unique about your "system". It is just a different version of grim's salary cap rules. It is still a salary cap, just wrapped differently. It does NOT meet "both" definitions of competitiveness that I gave before, that is impossible. That is why no one cares about your system. Also no one wants to argue with you for 20 pages as you often do, on why your ideas suck, as they usually do. So that is why it is being ignored.

adrenaline
Posts: 1637
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:38
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby adrenaline » 07 May 2013, 13:56

I think most people learned months ago that reading sam's posts is basically a waste of time. I honestly don't know why he still bothers.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1625
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 13:46
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Giant Killer General » 07 May 2013, 14:31

I agree adren. I have found myself ignoring his posts after that 20-page defense of his about whatever bullshit idea for an archer plugin or whatever it was. I only just now skimmed it and realized he was kind of putting words in my mouth, and corrected it as such.

par73
Posts: 2973
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby par73 » 07 May 2013, 14:37

drunken_deer wrote:2. Most Veteran Mythers are just way too fucking stubborn to give it a go. They are head deep in the sand in having diversity and with Paris at the helm now "against" the salary cap it seems little more than a brief idea to come into fruition. Even the mythers that are supporting the idea say that its way too premature in adapting a fair system to be properly implemented in the mwc.


listen i am not at the helm against the salary cap, i am just against using it for mwc which is traditional, you show up with the people you want to play with. you shouldn't have "salary" restrictions, i have played two tournaments with restrictions in a row and they pretty much had a salary restriction, not to mention randomly selected teammates. you can't put some numerical value on friendship or interpersonal enjoyment, therefore i think the salary cap is a horrible idea for any and every mwc.

Whoever is hosting the end-of-mwc wrap up 2team tournament can implement something like a salary cap for a month long tournament or something.

SamTheButcher
Posts: 209
Joined: 17 Jan 2013, 22:50
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby SamTheButcher » 08 May 2013, 01:12

GiantKillerGen wrote:Sam, there is nothing unique about your "system". It is just a different version of grim's salary cap rules. It is still a salary cap, just wrapped differently. It does NOT meet "both" definitions of competitiveness that I gave before, that is impossible. That is why no one cares about your system. Also no one wants to argue with you for 20 pages as you often do, on why your ideas suck, as they usually do. So that is why it is being ignored.



GKG thats just BS what you are saying. Its a salary cap yea but its different than Grims idea. My idea is the most fair and is the same system that is used for a lot of games and sports. So you can say it sucks all you want but thats also saying every other game or sport that uses a similar system sucks also. Its an established system that is used by huge amounts of people in many different games. Even Myth itself works on a points system. The reason it is used is because it WORKS and is the most fair. For you to say is sucks is pretty ridiculous. Really I think it is more a case of you dont want anything to change from the way things have always been because you are too afraid and have too fragile of an ego to risk losing. Like when RatKing won the draft tournament you said something like. "He better watch his ego doesnt get to big." So basically "He better not forget his place. Its below me." Seriously man? Does it really matter? Are you that concerned about it? That shows right there how much value you put to your Myth standing and how afraid you are to lose it.

Then like my archer idea and other ideas. Most of the complaints were "It will make it easier for less skilled Players." It didnt matter if it added more realism to the game and it would be extra tools that everyone could use. And every other logical reason I gave and I went into great detail to try to get through to some people and just to see how stubborn some people would be. You and others were still against it. With the whole argument basically being "It will make it easier for less skilled Players." Which translates to "If anything changes someone might get better than me." I think is actually pretty pathetic to be against improvements to the game because of fear of suddenly losing your standing.

Or like when the extra zoom was brought up. What was the argument against that? "We cant have that ,that will make it easier for the less skilled Players." As if being better than someone balanced on a little more or less zoom? Even though it would be the same for everyone so no one is getting an advantage. There was no logical reason and it is the standard for most RTS games. But it was rejected because a few people were worried that some how they might lose an edge. I just cant hardly believe that improvements to the game are being shot down by a few fragile egos being afraid that someone might end up better than them at Myth. A fucking video game.

I give ideas to try to help with issues and improve Myth for everyone. And like with the archer ideas someone mentions a problem they thought would be there. Like it was some auto pilot thing. I pointed out where that wasnt a problem it gave Players more control and more options therefore making it even less like auto pilot and left more room for skill. Then after I point that out it goes back to "It will make it easier for less skilled Players." Which I think is lame as fuck. Mostly because its not even true. But the fear of change for some is so great they can see past it.

I think what it comes down to is there are a few top Players that want to stay on top and in control of what happens with Myth and they protect that position with everything they have. And try to quash right away anything that might change it.

Why else would a tried and true and fair system used by massive amounts of people for a lot of different games. A system that has been proven to work to make games the most fair and competitive be shot down? The only reason for the people screaming against it is that if everything was made fair for everyone those same people are afraid they would somehow lose.

You cant say "Well I want to team with my buddies." Cause the system totally accommodates that.

Its like the motorcycle analogy I gave. Some people want to keep racing 250cc in the 125cc class. And goes to your point on competition. If you have 20 people racing. 16 on 125cc and 4 on 250cc? Is that more competitive? When it is really just a race of the 4 250cc. With the 16 other having basically zero chance of winning? So the winner really just beat out 3 other people. Or would it be more competitive if all 20 were on 125cc? And the winner beat out 19 other people. Dont give me no BS about "it depends on your definition of competition" Its clear which would be more competition. All on 125cc. To deny it is total BS and you know it.

So yea I keep pushing things like this system and the archer thing. Because they are good ideas and the only argument against them that I cant settle basically boils down to "I dont want anything to change because I might lose my position." To me that kind of shit especially over a video game is just totally pathetic.

So go ahead run MWC with no salary cap or anything so there can be 4 totally stacked teams and it can be just a 4 team tournament and watch as everyone else not on those 4 teams continue to lose interest as they already have been. And you can have a 4 team circle jerk and brag about who shot their wad the farthest.

dac
Posts: 593
Joined: 24 Feb 2013, 02:40
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby dac » 08 May 2013, 01:37

sam i hate people who say this, but...

tldr.

its how most of your posts have been and is a big reason nobody knows what you're talking about or even understands what your system proposes.

i know you have a lot to say but you need to break it up into something i can read before i need a refill on my bourbon, and unfortunately your ideas as i start to read make me want to drink even faster.

par73
Posts: 2973
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby par73 » 08 May 2013, 01:53

funny we already have twice the number of teams you're talking about sam, maybe you could just be patient for the salary cap tournament following mwc.

Aki
Posts: 118
Joined: 19 Nov 2012, 03:42
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Aki » 08 May 2013, 02:53

par73 wrote:salary cap tournament following mwc.

seriously? i'm stoked

SamTheButcher
Posts: 209
Joined: 17 Jan 2013, 22:50
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby SamTheButcher » 08 May 2013, 02:55

par73 wrote:funny we already have twice the number of teams you're talking about sam, maybe you could just be patient for the salary cap tournament following mwc.


Thats true Paris but we have had a salary cap in place until now. Well see what happens after MWC starts. Plenty of teams start losing interest when they see they have no chance. Think about it if you were on a team and knew you had no chance VS a few stacked teams your going to know all your effort is wasted and, when you realize that, you would lose interest. You may not quit but you arent going to spend however many hours strating, practicing, etc basically wasted. Most people wont. Thats what happens to MWC.

I hope it goes good this year and people are a little modest with the teams and we have a pretty even competition. And interest level stays high for a majority of Players.

Pogue
Posts: 1205
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 16:26
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby Pogue » 08 May 2013, 03:08

dac wrote:i know you have a lot to say but you need to break it up into something i can read before i need a refill on my bourbon, and unfortunately your ideas as i start to read make me want to drink even faster.


Dac you are starting to sound more and more like me. Why don't you ditch that idiot GKG and come join my team. You know it will be more fun and dramatic. :D

P.S. just lol @ Sam. He's like Renwood but with longer posts :(

SamTheButcher
Posts: 209
Joined: 17 Jan 2013, 22:50
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby SamTheButcher » 08 May 2013, 03:17

dac wrote:sam i hate people who say this, but...

tldr.

its how most of your posts have been and is a big reason nobody knows what you're talking about or even understands what your system proposes.

i know you have a lot to say but you need to break it up into something i can read before i need a refill on my bourbon, and unfortunately your ideas as i start to read make me want to drink even faster.



Yea I rant sometimes. It seems like every simple seemingly self explanatory idea has to be explained in every minute and tiny detail to get through to some people based on the arguments they make.

adrenaline
Posts: 1637
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:38
Contact:

Re: My Main Complaint with MWC2013

Postby adrenaline » 08 May 2013, 03:34

pretty hard to get through to someone that doesn't want to spend 15 minutes reading through one of your posts.


Return to “Myth World Cup 2013”