Post by (MSW) Enbee on Feb 7, 2014 23:35:17 GMT
Something that's bound to come up is disagreement or criticisms of some of the rules we have set. It's perfectly reasonable, after all, that 32 players will not agree 100% on everything. However, I would like to try and mitigate any disagreements or criticisms by offering some insight into the thought behind them.
1. No AS frags - first, let me acknowledge that defeating the AS requires a certain degree of skill. Regardless though, the amount of frags that have dropped from player to player vary significantly, and as such ownership of AS frags more or less reflects varying degrees of luck. Owning an AS is rewarding enough. There is no need to make unlucky players feel even worse about not having them by forcing them into a competition that can be perfectly fun without them.
2. Maximum 3 nano units - this one is tricky, and I believe it was the most debated. For me, I wanted to limit them even more, but I was out voted. My vision for this tournament is that it should be fundamentally based on showcasing strategic prowess. A lot of nano units boast a higher PV, and with no PV limits or ranges in place, nano users can somewhat easily outclass their thriftier brethren. It's hard to find the balance between not punishing players who can't afford nano units while simultaneously attempting to avoid limiting the creativity of nano users.
3. Legendary Mammoth Limit - plain and simple, I wanted this tournament to avoid stun locking. I understand how much work goes into getting this beast to R9. I really do. However, the reward for that is showcased in numerous other facets of the game, such as boss strikes, standard PvP, and storyline missions. Providing an additional rewarding facet would be nice, but not if it comes at the expense of spoiling a tournament with stun locking. Future tournaments may consider banning this unit outright, but it's still being discussed at the moment.
4. Air unit limit - Multiple air unit formations are highly susceptible to long, drawn out battles, which I think is best to be avoided. I understand that there is a degree of strategy involved in fighting formations with multiple air units, but I can't personally get past the amount of tedious battles that may still persist anyway.
5. Allowing units to be nano rushed back - I made an executive call on this one and I'm willing to deal with the repercussions. My rationale is that this tournament should reward strategy and skill. If a player believes they have an unbeatable formation that hinges on a unit they only have one of (say a a tier 10 reward, for example), they deserve a chance to take that formation all the way to the championship. It should be the onus of other players to crack the code on beating that formation, so to speak.
6. Best 2 of 3 - don't feel a need to explain this...
Please feel free to comment and share your thoughts.
1. No AS frags - first, let me acknowledge that defeating the AS requires a certain degree of skill. Regardless though, the amount of frags that have dropped from player to player vary significantly, and as such ownership of AS frags more or less reflects varying degrees of luck. Owning an AS is rewarding enough. There is no need to make unlucky players feel even worse about not having them by forcing them into a competition that can be perfectly fun without them.
2. Maximum 3 nano units - this one is tricky, and I believe it was the most debated. For me, I wanted to limit them even more, but I was out voted. My vision for this tournament is that it should be fundamentally based on showcasing strategic prowess. A lot of nano units boast a higher PV, and with no PV limits or ranges in place, nano users can somewhat easily outclass their thriftier brethren. It's hard to find the balance between not punishing players who can't afford nano units while simultaneously attempting to avoid limiting the creativity of nano users.
3. Legendary Mammoth Limit - plain and simple, I wanted this tournament to avoid stun locking. I understand how much work goes into getting this beast to R9. I really do. However, the reward for that is showcased in numerous other facets of the game, such as boss strikes, standard PvP, and storyline missions. Providing an additional rewarding facet would be nice, but not if it comes at the expense of spoiling a tournament with stun locking. Future tournaments may consider banning this unit outright, but it's still being discussed at the moment.
4. Air unit limit - Multiple air unit formations are highly susceptible to long, drawn out battles, which I think is best to be avoided. I understand that there is a degree of strategy involved in fighting formations with multiple air units, but I can't personally get past the amount of tedious battles that may still persist anyway.
5. Allowing units to be nano rushed back - I made an executive call on this one and I'm willing to deal with the repercussions. My rationale is that this tournament should reward strategy and skill. If a player believes they have an unbeatable formation that hinges on a unit they only have one of (say a a tier 10 reward, for example), they deserve a chance to take that formation all the way to the championship. It should be the onus of other players to crack the code on beating that formation, so to speak.
6. Best 2 of 3 - don't feel a need to explain this...
Please feel free to comment and share your thoughts.
?
thanks to all competitors past and present and also the directors for making it happen.