BoA3 | Discussion

[plfan]

i think its a very good tournament so far with great production, great work by Memb and all the other ones helping to organize, thanks a lot for your dedication!

However, i want to give some (hopefully constructive) criticism: When i compare with Boa1 and 2, the "group stage" of Boa3 is not as exciting (for me).

It's maybe just personal preference, but i probably prefer having the best eight teams fight it out in the groupstage (instead of an overload of 16 teams).

Look at Boa1: You have an epic series of Tyrant vs. Suomi already in the group stage, then also a (one-sided but with super hype beforehand) aM vs. Tyrant match already in groupstage!

Boa2: Epic sets already in group stage: Suomi vs. SY, Tyrant vs. SY, Tyrant vs Suomi

Many memorable series' (even before knockout stages start!!!). Now we have Boa3 group stage, what is essenstially a double elimination, where the big teams have some chill warmup games, waiting for the quarterfinals.

Having 16 teams instead of 8 is great imo. It can really help AoE Esport to grow. More teams, all with webcams and interviews makes me watch every single match in BoA3, because I want to know them all.
It's really a pleasure to meet such a great personalities. Big love to Polish Team with Dziamdziak playing with his kids!

 

[Lightysword]

Actually I was quite impressed how competetive even the lower seeded teams really were in comparison to the bigger teams. The Amigos for example can be a dark horse team that could give everyone a tough fight. Same goes for LOS and MyInsanity has proven in ROTC that they are a force to be reckoned with.
Also there really were not that many 3:0 sweeps and even in those sweeps some games were pretty good.

@MembTV: I noticed quite some improvement in the use of the player POV last weekend. I think you found a nice middle ground for me using the feature when it made some sense while still showing the bigger picture most of the time, so cheers for that

 

[LeoMontero]

with "same" 8 teams all the time how you motivate other players and we grow the community? im still very happy with many of the games, what matter for me is the quality of the games and even in some 3-0 series, some of the games were crazy, like that 1st game aM vs AI, so im very happy including as much players as possible.

Ask WWP about the chill games, they go to the deciders vs Capoch Chris Dragonstar Andy, do not chill too much.

Also we get sitaux annotoph margou daniel vs Slam miguel Dogao.

Then we get vietnam vs vietnam...

Pretty strong deciders and more, problem is that many people just want see same top 4 which i agree they usually provide great series, but other teams as well, and game/community grow a little bit more, hope people and players aprecciate that, because the work to manage these 3v3 all live is brutal.

and quarter finals will be epic too, WWP against Suomi or AM already, maybe GL against Los machos or MYi.
i think there are at least 12 teams that can compete, that are the 8 best seeded, plus AI, TMT, Vietnam B, and poland. maybe this last 2 are a litle behind, but they can give a fight.

 

[princecoconut]

How come the two bests teams of each group are in the same half of the tournament?
Shouldn't Suomi and AM for example be in opposite sides of the tournament table?

Seems a bit strange

 

[Springoftheking]

How come the two bests teams of each group are in the same half of the tournament?
Shouldn't Suomi and AM for example be in opposite sides of the tournament table?

Seems a bit strange

Probable seeding. If i remember correct, AM was 1st seed and Suomi 4th.

AM and Suomi didn't face each other in the group, so it doesn't matter that they were in the same group.

 

[RobChang]

Probable seeding. If i remember correct, AM was 1st seed and Suomi 4th.

AM and Suomi didn't face each other in the group, so it doesn't matter that they were in the same group.

They could never have met to be far. There are invisible walls in this group. You see that the group of 8 secretly seperates itself into two groups of 4 as in in first two rounds all matches were played as if it was 4 groups of 4. Only different to 4DE GSL groups to this system is, that you can definitely avoid rematches in deciders as you just match them between those groups of 4.

 

[LeoMontero]

if wwp wins, we have in quarterfinals, wwp vs suomi

 

[TheShaunPlays]

My 2 cents on Dannyboi not being able to play because he wasn't putting on facecam. As a viewer I want to see the strongest players, that is my priority. If players start dodging commitments willy nilly and it becomes a problem just add a fine system where players a docked a certain percent of the their prize money (the percent would be pre-determined in the rules and vary based on importance/severity/player situations). By player situations I mean a $20 fine to someone living in Germany is lot less than a $20 fine given to a player in Vietnam, that should be considered when adjusting fines.

Will it take effort to create a judiciary system? Yes. However I feel our priority should be to have the best players playing, this would achieve that. We are becoming more professional with player cams, interviews, production etc. Let's not neglect this aspect of professional play and fall behind.

 

[TopperHarley]

They could never have met to be far. There are invisible walls in this group. You see that the group of 8 secretly seperates itself into two groups of 4 as in in first two rounds all matches were played as if it was 4 groups of 4. Only different to 4DE GSL groups to this system is, that you can definitely avoid rematches in deciders as you just match them between those groups of 4.

This would mean that already from the start any matches between those four teams : GL, aM, WWP and Suomi were absolutely impossible in the group stage.

Imo that’s not the greatest system..

However i understand that with this kind of group stage more "lesser known" teams get more screentime which is an advantage for them

 

[Chrazini]

My 2 cents on Dannyboi not being able to play because he wasn't putting on facecam. As a viewer I want to see the strongest players, that is my priority. If players start dodging commitments willy nilly and it becomes a problem just add a fine system where players a docked a certain percent of the their prize money (the percent would be pre-determined in the rules and vary based on importance/severity/player situations). By player situations I mean a $20 fine to someone living in Germany is lot less than a $20 fine given to a player in Vietnam, that should be considered when adjusting fines.

Will it take effort to create a judiciary system? Yes. However I feel our priority should be to have the best players playing, this would achieve that. We are becoming more professional with player cams, interviews, production etc. Let's not neglect this aspect of professional play and fall behind.

Players are expected to use cameras during games. It is a rule that the players agreed to, and it is one we intend to enforce. We have been understanding when players have experienced technical difficulties, and if a player is unable to use the camera due to problems out of their control, then things could potentially be different.
However, when a player has access to a camera, has the ability to use the camera, but simply chooses not to use the camera, then that is an active choice from the player. They were aware of the consequences before the games. We would love to have Daniel play as much as everyone else, but the rules apply to everyone.

 

[TheCapybara]

Players are expected to use cameras during games. It is a rule that the players agreed to, and it is one we intend to enforce. We have been understanding when players have experienced technical difficulties, and if a player is unable to use the camera due to problems out of their control, then things could potentially be different.
However, when a player has access to a camera, has the ability to use the camera, but simply chooses not to use the camera, then that is an active choice from the player. They were aware of the consequences before the games. We would love to have Daniel play as much as everyone else, but the rules apply to everyone.

Whilst I understand the rules and implementation in this instance, I would hope that this is revisited and revised for future events. I think it's fair to say the player base has been pretty vocal about not liking some of the aspects of the group stage (enforced cams, requirement to play live at set times to name probably the two most problematic). The game is not professional enough at this stage to accommodate such requirements on such a wide-reaching scale.

 

[TopperHarley]

My 2 cents on Dannyboi not being able to play because he wasn't putting on facecam. As a viewer I want to see the strongest players, that is my priority. If players start dodging commitments willy nilly and it becomes a problem just add a fine system where players a docked a certain percent of the their prize money (the percent would be pre-determined in the rules and vary based on importance/severity/player situations). By player situations I mean a $20 fine to someone living in Germany is lot less than a $20 fine given to a player in Vietnam, that should be considered when adjusting fines.

Will it take effort to create a judiciary system? Yes. However I feel our priority should be to have the best players playing, this would achieve that. We are becoming more professional with player cams, interviews, production etc. Let's not neglect this aspect of professional play and fall behind.

literally everyone else put up the camera, whats the big deal for daniel to not do it?

is he really too much of a "I'm too cool for this' hipster kid that doesn't want to do what he's told to?

 

[RobChang]

This would mean that already from the start any matches between those four teams : GL, aM, WWP and Suomi were absolutely impossible in the group stage.

Imo that’s not the greatest system..

However i understand that with this kind of group stage more "lesser known" teams get more screentime which is an advantage for them

I mean they could both go to deciders.

@Chrazini Could you explain me how the matchmaking for the deciders worked? was it just random cause its neither 3rd vs 6th and 4th vs 5th of each group nor by seeding highest vs lowest of the 4 teams going to deciders.

 

[robo]

literally everyone else put up the camera, whats the big deal for daniel to not do it?

is he really too much of a "I'm too cool for this' hipster kid that doesn't want to do what he's told to?

I'm sure he didnt feel like he had a genuine reason to potentially handicap his team, more likely he did it just to annoy you as much as possible.

 

[Nicov]

I'm sure he didnt feel like he had a genuine reason to potentially handicap his team, more likely he did it just to annoy you as much as possible.

Why even bother <3

 

[dodageka]

This would mean that already from the start any matches between those four teams : GL, aM, WWP and Suomi were absolutely impossible in the group stage.

Imo that’s not the greatest system..

However i understand that with this kind of group stage more "lesser known" teams get more screentime which is an advantage for them

It’s because it’s really more like four groups of four teams that were for some games combined. The four teams you mentioned each were in their own group, so (almost) no chance of meeting - that could only have happened today or tomorrow in the deciders, but obviously highly unlikely to get such a matchup there

I mean they could both go to deciders.

@Chrazini Could you explain me how the matchmaking for the deciders worked? was it just random cause its neither 3rd vs 6th and 4th vs 5th of each group nor by seeding highest vs lowest of the 4 teams going to deciders.

It’s the two winners of the first match against the looser they hadn’t played afaik.

 

[Rorarimbo]

I mean they could both go to deciders.

@Chrazini Could you explain me how the matchmaking for the deciders worked? was it just random cause its neither 3rd vs 6th and 4th vs 5th of each group nor by seeding highest vs lowest of the 4 teams going to deciders.

It's based on current seeding. If first vs fourth or second vs third is not possible ( they played already) its first vs third and second vs fourth (talking among the 4 teams in the deciders).

 

[TheShaunPlays]

Players are expected to use cameras during games. It is a rule that the players agreed to, and it is one we intend to enforce. We have been understanding when players have experienced technical difficulties, and if a player is unable to use the camera due to problems out of their control, then things could potentially be different.
However, when a player has access to a camera, has the ability to use the camera, but simply chooses not to use the camera, then that is an active choice from the player. They were aware of the consequences before the games. We would love to have Daniel play as much as everyone else, but the rules apply to everyone.

My point is the current consequence they are aware of is detrimental to the viewer and tournament. If a player doesn't want to cam, fine them but let them play. If Liereyy decides the same and you ban him, how is it good for the tournament to not let him play? A fine system would allow players to evaluate their priorities. Viewers and the tournament will still have the highest possible play to watch.

Cams are not so good that I would give up top players for it. I would much rather see the absolute best players without a cam than miss some of them for the sake of a cam.

To clarify, I do like the cameras but I like watching the best players more. I think a fine system would be a good solution instead of a blanket ban.

 

[paradox303]

My point is the current consequence they are aware of is detrimental to the viewer and tournament. If a player doesn't want to cam, fine them but let them play. If Liereyy decides the same and you ban him, how is it good for the tournament to not let him play? A fine system would allow players to evaluate their priorities. Viewers and the tournament will still have the highest possible play to watch.

Cams are not so good that I would give up top players for it. I would much rather see the absolute best players without a cam than miss some of them for the sake of a cam.

To clarify, I do like the cameras but I like watching the best players more. I think a fine system would be a good solution instead of a blanket ban.

Players signed up and agreed to rules. Rules were enforced.

 

[Nicov]

Players signed up and agreed to rules. Rules were enforced.

If you can't stream with webcam, then you can't stream the webcam. You can fine the players, punish with some small prize reduction, whatever you like. The whole thing of simply not allowing someone to play is ridiculous. The tournament at this stage is supposed to showcase the best players to provide the best quality of games. As a viewer, I couldn't care less about the players webcam. It's fun to check it out every once in a while. But that's it. I want to see the plays.

No one will refuse to stream with webcam just because they are shy while there is money on the line. Sometimes things come up. Especially with forced schedules that might not suit every player from every team.

At the end of the day yes, rules are enforced. But at some point if such rules keep pushing the players then they will refuse to sign up or will give admin win unless they are full time aoe players (and we have only a few of those). Then no one wins.

It's such a relief that we didn't have to go through this kind of issue with aM. But I feel really bad for Daniel so I kinda feel the need to bring it up anyway.

 

[Chrazini]

If you can't stream with webcam, then you can't stream the webcam. You can fine the players, punish with some small prize reduction, whatever you like. The whole thing of simply not allowing someone to play is ridiculous. The tournament at this stage is supposed to showcase the best players to provide the best quality of games. As a viewer, I couldn't care less about the players webcam. It's fun to check it out every once in a while. But that's it. I want to see the plays.

No one will refuse to stream with webcam just because they are shy while there is money on the line. Sometimes things come up. Especially with forced schedules that might not suit every player from every team.

At the end of the day yes, rules are enforced. But at some point if such rules keep pushing the players then they will refuse to sign up or will give admin win unless they are full time aoe players (and we have only a few of those). Then no one wins.

It's such a relief that we didn't have to go through this kind of issue with aM. But I feel really bad for Daniel so I kinda feel the need to bring it up anyway.

You seem to ignore the fact that he could, in fact, stream with a webcam, but chose not to. It's a fine line. Once we allow one person to not use the webcam, just because, what stops the next person? No one really wants to be on webcam, so how is that fair to the rest of the players? You don't need to be a full-time Age of Empires player to show yourself on a webcam.

Feeling bad for someone that actively does not want to follow rules that they have agreed to is beyond me. We're not forcing anyone to do anything. You may or may not agree with the terms of the tournament, but they've been clear from the beginning and should not come as a surprise to anyone. Players that sign up for the tournament agree to these terms, and they will be expected to follow the rules stated - who would have thought? I know, baffling.

If these requirements are so absolutely outrageous, there's the option of not registering for the event.

 

[paradox303]

If you can't stream with webcam, then you can't stream the webcam. You can fine the players, punish with some small prize reduction, whatever you like. The whole thing of simply not allowing someone to play is ridiculous. The tournament at this stage is supposed to showcase the best players to provide the best quality of games. As a viewer, I couldn't care less about the players webcam. It's fun to check it out every once in a while. But that's it. I want to see the plays.

No one will refuse to stream with webcam just because they are shy while there is money on the line. Sometimes things come up. Especially with forced schedules that might not suit every player from every team.

At the end of the day yes, rules are enforced. But at some point if such rules keep pushing the players then they will refuse to sign up or will give admin win unless they are full time aoe players (and we have only a few of those). Then no one wins.

It's such a relief that we didn't have to go through this kind of issue with aM. But I feel really bad for Daniel so I kinda feel the need to bring it up anyway.

I can agree with a lot of what you say. I'm not in the player part of the discord for BoA so I can't pass comment on how active the player input has been in terms of reading the rulebook pre-event and delivering feedback to a why a rule could be a potential problem area. If something is so egregious it should be pointed out before the tournament has started. Rules are rules and TOs will enforce them.

I can pass comment though on the general culture of not knowing tournament rules, checking handbooks in the middle of tournament sets, maps in the middle of live sets between games is just simply not good enough. So we can say that players will be pushed away, but there is a massive amount of negative behavior that makes things way more difficult for admins and TOs.

 

[TheCapybara]

You seem to ignore the fact that he could, in fact, stream with a webcam, but chose not to. It's a fine line. Once we allow one person to not use the webcam, just because, what stops the next person? No one really wants to be on webcam, so how is that fair to the rest of the players? You don't need to be a full-time Age of Empires player to show yourself on a webcam.

Feeling bad for someone that actively does not want to follow rules that they have agreed to is beyond me. We're not forcing anyone to do anything. You may or may not agree with the terms of the tournament, but they've been clear from the beginning and should not come as a surprise to anyone. Players that sign up for the tournament agree to these terms, and they will be expected to follow the rules stated - who would have thought? I know, baffling.

If these requirements are so absolutely outrageous, there's the option of not registering for the event.

Hi babe xoxo

 

[ChipsAreTasty]

If these requirements are so absolutely outrageous, there's the option of not registering for the event.

I mean I don't get the problem with offering criticsm to the ruleset though? The thread is for any discussion related to the event so...

Also, Nicov literally talked about players potentially not signing up in the future so I'm pretty sure he already knows thats an option 11.

 

[Influenza]

am i the only one who thinks the webcams detract from the stream during the games and offer little outside of them