[KotD2] Feedback

DenmarkChrazini

Longswordman
Dec 31, 2013
314
759
108
26
Denmark
Voobly
Chrazini
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
1787
Wins
46
Losses
26
Streak
3
#1
kotd2-header.png

Feedback
Suggestions, criticism, assessments, ideas, proposals, propositions, tips, advice and other words with similar meaning are all welcome. We value your feedback immensely and would like to know what you think.
 

Aland Islandskw1k000000

Well Known Pikeman
Feb 18, 2015
996
472
78
Voobly
kw1k
View profile
Ladder
RM - Team Games
Rating
1703
Wins
84
Losses
74
Streak
1
#2
Super hyped for the event, should be a great one same as KOTD in 2017.

One suggestion would be that there should be some games as "Hidden Free pick", specially Semi Final onward. I know this may create some mirror match up but in last stages we should be accommodating the skill element a bit more as well.

Hidden Free Pick: All previous picks and bans in the set all nullified.

Semi Final - BO7

  • Ban 2 civs each so in total 4 civs banned
  • Pick 4 different civ each
  • Game 1-4 from drafted pool
  • Game 5-7, Hidden free pick but no repetition of civ for each player
Final - BO9

  • Ban 2 civ each so in total 4 civs banned
  • Pick 6 different civ each
  • Game 1-6 from drafted pool
  • Game 7-9, Hidden Free pick but no repetition of civ for each player

1541344647965.png
 

GermanyMichaerbse

Known Member
Oct 14, 2017
100
239
48
28
#6
Copying my feedback to the right thread. ;-)

Awesome stuff! Seems like there is currently no week without having to watch multiple tournament games.

Feedback:
- Webcam stuff is interesting, let's see how this works out.
- I think the streaming rules are OK - paying per subscriber is a good solution. $0.5 per subscriber may be a bit too much though. That's more than $1k for T90, if I'm not mistaken. Maybe a staggered fee would have been better.
- I dislike the "remaining civ" stuff for rounds 1-3. Lower seeded players will go all-in in the first round and may make a surprise beating a favourite, who is tactically picking civs. But then they have absolutely no chance in the next round anymore. In the other case, e.g. TheViper will go for Vietnamese, Teutons, Saracens, ... in the first round (yes, this is exaggerated) and may be even more unbeatable later on.
In short: potentially more excitement in the first round but way less excitement for rounds 2 and 3.
Also playing after your next opponent may give you the chance to pick civs based on his options for the next round. Somehow gives an incentive to schedule as late as possible.
 
Likes: Manu

GermanyFaultier321

Well Known Pikeman
Dec 28, 2016
259
270
78
Voobly
Faultier321
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
1715
Wins
572
Losses
613
Streak
7
#7
Copying my feedback to the right thread. ;-)

Awesome stuff! Seems like there is currently no week without having to watch multiple tournament games.

Feedback:
- Webcam stuff is interesting, let's see how this works out.
- I think the streaming rules are OK - paying per subscriber is a good solution. $0.5 per subscriber may be a bit too much though. That's more than $1k for T90, if I'm not mistaken. Maybe a staggered fee would have been better.
- I dislike the "remaining civ" stuff for rounds 1-3. Lower seeded players will go all-in in the first round and may make a surprise beating a favourite, who is tactically picking civs. But then they have absolutely no chance in the next round anymore. In the other case, e.g. TheViper will go for Vietnamese, Teutons, Saracens, ... in the first round (yes, this is exaggerated) and may be even more unbeatable later on.
In short: potentially more excitement in the first round but way less excitement for rounds 2 and 3.
Also playing after your next opponent may give you the chance to pick civs based on his options for the next round. Somehow gives an incentive to schedule as late as possible.
I dont see a problem in this, as it will be reset in Round 4. Makes the games more exciting, with almost guarantee to see a bigger variety of civs. It still means that we will see top 9, or for players who have to play a lot of BO5s, top15 civs at least, which means we will see a lot of second tiers civs like Italians, Celts, Japanese which i personally find very exciting. And for sure no player will go Vietnam, Sara, Teutons in the first three games, since those are not top15. Players will be smart and even if they pick second tier civs in the first game, they will for sure pick some strong "backup" civs, that they only plan to use if they loose the first one or two games. Picking your civs wiesly will just be another element for the first rounds.


Only problem i see in the settings is why remove sexy ass deer with boring zebra ? :frown:
 

Netherlandsnimanoe

Knight
Bronze Supporter
Jan 15, 2014
2,193
1,562
138
23
#8
- I dislike the "remaining civ" stuff for rounds 1-3. Lower seeded players will go all-in in the first round and may make a surprise beating a favourite, who is tactically picking civs. But then they have absolutely no chance in the next round anymore. In the other case, e.g. TheViper will go for Vietnamese, Teutons, Saracens, ... in the first round (yes, this is exaggerated) and may be even more unbeatable later on.
In short: potentially more excitement in the first round but way less excitement for rounds 2 and 3.
Also playing after your next opponent may give you the chance to pick civs based on his options for the next round. Somehow gives an incentive to schedule as late as possible.
Agreed, and on top of that it also punishes players who have a tougher bracket, to make it even harder for them. For example in KotD1 TheMax had to play Lyx and MbL in the first two rounds, while slam had to play Melkor and Spring. TheMax won twice with a 3-2 record, while slam won 3-0 twice.
If the rules for KotD2 would apply TheMax would've lost 10 civilizations when he had to play slam, while slam only lost 6. And since slam had an easier route to the Quarter Finals he probably would have more good civs left, while TheMax lost most of his best civs.
 

Finlandbuhanisson

Longswordman
May 29, 2015
345
875
108
#9
I think it's not a coincidence that it is over 1k for T90, though... Still it's better than entirely closed streaming policy: everyone can make the decision for themselves. Yes, I cant see any reason why a big streamer would pay hundreds of dollars for the streaming rights when they can host an event of their own instead, but after all it is a Membtv event and this is a compromise that still might allow some small/non-english streamers to get more viewers for a relatively small cost.

Great tournament btw, rly hyped for this!
 

GermanyFaultier321

Well Known Pikeman
Dec 28, 2016
259
270
78
Voobly
Faultier321
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
1715
Wins
572
Losses
613
Streak
7
#10
Confusing thing about the handbook, think there might be a mistake:

For the semifinals on page 4 it says, players pick 9 civs each after the global ban, although it seems to be a BO7 and says 14 different civs played.
 

DenmarkChrazini

Longswordman
Dec 31, 2013
314
759
108
26
Denmark
Voobly
Chrazini
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
1787
Wins
46
Losses
26
Streak
3
#13
@Michaerbse @nimanoe
The idea with the first three rounds was to create a wide variety in civilisations and make the players take strategic choices before the games. We believe that there are enough viable civilisations for the players to choose from to keep the games fair and competitive throughout the first three rounds.

@Faultier321
Thanks for pointing out the typo in the semifinals. It will be fixed in the upcoming version. The zebras will however stay as they are :wink:

@scripter64 @Poxo
The link will be updated later today, thanks for pointing out the issue.
 

UnknownLanchi

Halberdier
Dec 19, 2016
827
978
103
#14
The idea with the first three rounds was to create a wide variety in civilisations and make the players take strategic choices before the games. We believe that there are enough viable civilisations for the players to choose from to keep the games fair and competitive throughout the first three rounds.
This part still not convinced for me, but i guess you ask top players' opinions already, if they think yes then ok.
 
Oct 6, 2017
46
47
23
#17
Best of 5 – 10 different civilizations played.
1. Players pick any civilizations.
From this wording, I assume it is non-mirror no repeat 10 civs draft for rounds 1-3.
2. Players may not repeat civilizations from the drafted pool or from previous rounds.
Which civs are removed from a player's pool, a) the ones he played in previous rounds (max 5 per round) or b) the ones that were played by him or his opponent in previous rounds (up to 10 per round)? May be make the 2nd point more clear.
 

Unknowntia

Member
Aug 22, 2013
273
21
18
#18
How is the sign up rating derived? Cause im slightly confused with the 2143 while my current rating is 2200
 

DenmarkChrazini

Longswordman
Dec 31, 2013
314
759
108
26
Denmark
Voobly
Chrazini
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
1787
Wins
46
Losses
26
Streak
3
#19
How is the sign up rating derived? Cause im slightly confused with the 2143 while my current rating is 2200
The elo in the registration thread doesn't have any influence on the seeding later. We will carefully take everyone's elo into account the day sign-up closes. The information in the registration thread is only a rough guide.
I have, however, updated your elo to in the registration thread.
 
Mar 28, 2018
46
44
23
#20
I see a potential problem with the civdrafting of the first 3 rounds. The civ matchup of the third round could be pretty onesided. Especially if the player with the better remaining civs just tries to pick the the best civs out of his opponents pool ffirst just to make it worse and chooses his top civs in the end.
I'd suggest to ban all civs used in previous rounds by both players for both players. Should make it a little more even.
If it's intended that players plan their civ choices over the three rounds keep it as it is but be aware that it could produce onesided sets between equally skilled players
 

Nepalarchxeon

Well-Known Member
Jan 6, 2014
183
341
68
#21
If it's intended that players plan their civ choices over the three rounds keep it as it is but be aware that it could produce onesided sets between equally skilled players
I agree with you on the possibility of one sided games but I also see people taking advantage of this if they can come up with a good strategy. 1st round games could be more competitive but later rounds slightly less so. A slightly less skilled player could pick stronger civs against a stronger player.

Also, since only 15 civs have to be played, aside from a few top civs rest should be quite competitive.

I have a question to @Chrazini. Are the civs drafted in previous rounded also excluded or just the ones that have been played. For example: If some one beats opponent 3-0. Are the remaining 2 civs available next round?
 

DenmarkChrazini

Longswordman
Dec 31, 2013
314
759
108
26
Denmark
Voobly
Chrazini
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
1787
Wins
46
Losses
26
Streak
3
#22
I agree with you on the possibility of one sided games but I also see people taking advantage of this if they can come up with a good strategy. 1st round games could be more competitive but later rounds slightly less so. A slightly less skilled player could pick stronger civs against a stronger player.

Also, since only 15 civs have to be played, aside from a few top civs rest should be quite competitive.

I have a question to @Chrazini. Are the civs drafted in previous rounded also excluded or just the ones that have been played. For example: If some one beats opponent 3-0. Are the remaining 2 civs available next round?
As stated in the rules:
If a round ends before all drafted civilizations have been used, they may be re-picked in later rounds.
 
Jan 31, 2010
3,889
857
128
27
Norway
#23
I want to make a post about seeding and qualification.

I think rating/ladder is a really bad idea to use as seeding in general. The ladder can be manipulated in a lot of different ways, such as choosing your oppoonents, so you only play those you think you have a good chance against, and avoiding anyone you think you might lose to. It also means people can sit on their rating once they're in a comfortable seeding position, and start using a second nickname if they want to play games, which in turn means the players you play on your second nickname will lose more points than they should, meaning they might end up with a lower seed than they should have, or even worse, not qualify at all.

Timezones also makes it harder for certain players to find players they'd normally beat, and might affect rating in a negative way for them. And maybe you want to lend your friend a hand and give him some points to help out? How to prove this is not the case?

I would suggest maybe let top 24 be qualified based on rating, but 25-40 should play a BOX to qualify for the remaining spots. Obviously this could be done differently, just giving a suggestion.
I think a lot of people from the rating 33-40 might be very few points away and might be unlucky due to the manipulation of the ladder, and it's very likely that during the last days before the deadline this intensifies even more. A player really trying to make it into the top 32 might have very low chances because he might not find any players to play with during the last days as the top 32 don't want to risk their rating, and he will have to take risk playing lower rated players, or alternative nicknames of the higher rated ones. With the current ladder setting being random civ arabia mostly, this also improves "randomness", which contributes to the bad idea of using it as seeding/qualification.

If we had automatic matchmaking and only one nickname each, it could make sense, but with the way the rating system works, I am not a fan of using it for seeding especially. I think in the last KOTD I was seeded 7-8th or something, because I had a bit of a lower rating, just as an example. More players were seeded differently that they should have been as well in my opinion. Obviously you could say it's my fault due to "trolling", as you like to call it, but there are so many other factors to the ladder as I've mentioned.

I think seeding as well should be done by the players. You could invite all the 32 qualified players to seed eachother, and use the average seed from that. It's more likely to be accurate than rating. Obviously players would have to seed seriously as well, which I'm sure they would.

To sum it up, players don't treat the ladder in a way that it is justified to use for seeding, and it can be manipulated in many ways, so I think it's not a good fit for seeding and the current qualification rules.
 
Dec 19, 2016
41
3
13
Portugal
Voobly
leo_nunes
View profile
Ladder
RM - 1v1
Rating
1641
Wins
90
Losses
93
Streak
3
#25
I like Viper's ideia, just a bit more though, first 16 automatically qualify, and from 17 to 48 a simple round with best of 3/5 to decide the other 16 who will join.

Seeds from 17 to 32 would be given some advantage (so the 17th faces the 33th, the 18th faces the 34th and so on)

So this way you have a fight to automatically enter, and then a fight to go as a favourite for the qualification phase.
 

Time

Your time
G M T
Your zone

Upcoming Events

Improvement Cup 3v3 LB Semifinal
Wednesday 20:30 (GMT +01:00)
Peter sings a song vs Lunacy
ECL SE Asia 1v1 JorDan vs Tim
Friday 12:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL SE Asia 1v1 JorDan vs Tim
Improvement Cup 4v4 WB Final
Saturday 11:30 (GMT +01:00)
new Chapter vs Australia
ECL SE Asia 1v1 Villese vs St4rk
Saturday 13:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL SE Asia 1v1 Villese vs St4rk
ECL South East Asia 1v1 Ro16
Saturday 15:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL South East Asia 1v1 Ro16
Improvement Cup 3v3 WB Final
Sunday 02:00 (GMT +01:00)
CSPD vs Australia D
ECL South East Asia 1v1 Ro16
Sunday 15:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL South East Asia 1v1 Ro16
ECL SE Asia 1v1 TaToH vs ReallyDiao
Tuesday 14:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL SE Asia 1v1 TaToH vs ReallyDiao
ECL SE Asia 1v1 MbL vs yinghua
Wednesday 15:00 (GMT +01:00)
ECL SE Asia 1v1 MbL vs yinghua
King of the Plebs 2
March 7th 17:00 (GMT +01:00)
RO16 1400-1700 ELO Tournament

Age Of Empires On Twitch

There are in total 34 streamers online
Click here for details
Age of Empires II 430 viewers
Age of Empires II 278 viewers
Age of Empires II 203 viewers
Age of Empires II 150 viewers
Age of Empires II 69 viewers

Whats new?

Top