T90 Titans League | Announcement

doacid · Jun 23, 2022

_MbL_ said:
Nili is in my opinion one of the best when it comes to fair seeding

Aoezone if Nili made seedings for tournaments:

Michaerbse · Jun 23, 2022

doacid said:
Aoezone if Nili made seedings for tournaments:

View attachment 201328

MaSmOrRa said:
*cough*cough*

May I ask who did the manual seeding for the tournament?

The reason I ask, is because I see Spring seeded no. 28 and Nili no. 22

And we all remember the result between these 2 players the last time they met...

*cough*cough*

Memeluke said:
I don't understand why two players that are playing also seeded everybody, am I the only one who finds this weird? I know that they didn't seed themselves #1 on purpose or whatever but still...

Also maybe a lot of good players don't normally sign up because they don't want to be beaten by super troll strats in round 1 and being laughed at in front of thousands of live viewers after having to play a monster like TheViper immediatly.

...

Degaussed · Jun 23, 2022

_MbL_ said:
I’m not gonna be too harsh in case they send me straight to the gold league, but heres one of my opinion about the ATP system.

I think using this system might cause the seeding to be way off the reality compared to the player actual skill and current level. Just bacause one havent been in a lot of A tier or B tier tourneys I don’t think they should be punished for it.

Most top players wont participate in A-B tourneys because simply in AoE we dont have big enough prizes to make it worth in these tourneys when it comes to time invested. Playing / scheduling, putting time off for potential practice to potentially win 300-400$ Over 4-5 week period is what makes it mostly unattractive. Not only that, these tourneys often have weird settings with ****ing dinosaurs jumping on ur monk in the middle of the map, maybe not that bad, but you get the impression.

What should be focused on is ladder/S tourney performance combined with top player opinion on each rank. On top of that, a qualifier potentially. Nili is in my opinion one of the best when it comes to fair seeding.

I could make severeal more points, but id rather speak vocally about it rather than typing. If we keep using the system in the future were going to have some problems IMO. Looking fwd to the tourney regardless

You could look at ATP as punishing players for not playing in A and B tier tournaments, or you could look at it as ATP rewarding results + activity in tournaments. No ranking system used is going to be perfect, especially when there is difference in priorities for players - some prefer to play in as many tournaments as possible, some prefer to play in as few as possible and grind the ladder instead. For example, Yo is #18 on the ladder but #2 according to ATP, but you are #5 on the ladder and #20 according to ATP.

If we were to use ladder seeding, would it be fair to "punish" Yo who is focusing on tournaments rather than the ladder? I'm not saying one is better than the other, but in this instance the tourney admins have decided to go with the seeding system which ultimately rewards players for participating in tournaments. In the next S Tier tournament, they could go with something else.

Focusing ladder performance might be fine, but maybe some players want to play in tournaments instead? Or vice-versa? Or maybe a combination of both is what's fair? Maybe focusing only on S-Tier tournaments is a bit of a slap for the admins and people putting up the prize money for A and B tiered events and the players playing in them? If the competitive scene (including admins and tournament organisers) collectively decided how they want to seed events going forward, if you actually do want consistency and clarity for seeding, I think that is something that would collectively benefit everyone :smile:

Btw, it seems that a lot of top players actually do want to play in A and B tiered events: (I don't know how many of these players are full time, though, and how many have lower participation percentages because they have jobs and such)

Player	A & B Tier Participation %	S & A & B Tier Participation %
ACCM	66.67%	70.59%
Capoch	55.56%	61.76%
The_Dragonstar	51.85%	58.82%
Vinchester	44.44%	55.88%
TaToH	44.44%	55.88%
BacT	44.44%	55.88%
classicpro	44.44%	55.88%
Villese	40.74%	52.94%
dogao	40.74%	50.00%
miguel	40.74%	50.00%
DauT	33.33%	47.06%
Nicov	29.63%	38.24%
Mr_Yo	25.93%	38.24%
JorDan	25.93%	41.18%
Barles	18.52%	32.35%
slam	18.52%	35.29%
TheViper	14.81%	29.41%
Liereyy	7.41%	23.53%
Hera	7.41%	20.59%
MbL	7.41%	20.59%

SuperskinnyBLS · Jun 23, 2022

I would let Viper do the seeding, he is objective and has the best game sense. If he is willing to, obviously.

_Tomate · Jun 23, 2022

Degaussed said:
You could look at ATP as punishing players for not playing in A and B tier tournaments, or you could look at it as ATP rewarding results + activity in tournaments. No ranking system used is going to be perfect, especially when there is difference in priorities for players - some prefer to play in as many tournaments as possible, some prefer to play in as few as possible and grind the ladder instead. For example, Yo is #18 on the ladder but #2 according to ATP, but you are #5 on the ladder and #20 according to ATP.

If we were to use ladder seeding, would it be fair to "punish" Yo who is focusing on tournaments rather than the ladder? I'm not saying one is better than the other, but in this instance the tourney admins have decided to go with the seeding system which ultimately rewards players for participating in tournaments. In the next S Tier tournament, they could go with something else.

Focusing ladder performance might be fine, but maybe some players want to play in tournaments instead? Or vice-versa? Or maybe a combination of both is what's fair? Maybe focusing only on S-Tier tournaments is a bit of a slap for the admins and people putting up the prize money for A and B tiered events and the players playing in them? If the competitive scene (including admins and tournament organisers) collectively decided how they want to seed events going forward, if you actually do want consistency and clarity for seeding, I think that is something that would collectively benefit everyone

Btw, it seems that a lot of top players actually do want to play in A and B tiered events: (I don't know how many of these players are full time, though, and how many have lower participation percentages because they have jobs and such)

Player A & B Tier Participation % S & A & B Tier Participation %
ACCM 66.67% 70.59%
Capoch 55.56% 61.76%
The_Dragonstar 51.85% 58.82%
Vinchester 44.44% 55.88%
TaToH 44.44% 55.88%
BacT 44.44% 55.88%
classicpro 44.44% 55.88%
Villese 40.74% 52.94%
dogao 40.74% 50.00%
miguel 40.74% 50.00%
DauT 33.33% 47.06%
Nicov 29.63% 38.24%
Mr_Yo 25.93% 38.24%
JorDan 25.93% 41.18%
Barles 18.52% 32.35%
slam 18.52% 35.29%
TheViper 14.81% 29.41%
Liereyy 7.41% 23.53%
Hera 7.41% 20.59%
MbL 7.41% 20.59%

This table is just saying everything, i dont know if you actually were aware about what did you post.. Just name your ideally best 5 players, i bet at least 4 of them are in the top 10 bottom of A and B Tier of the list.

plfan · Jun 23, 2022

Imo the season 1 is to important to make it fully invitational. Its RBW Legacy Qualification on the line. Why we can't have open qualifications for this?

Don't get me wrong, idea of the Leauge with relegations and promotions is cool. I just don't like idea of ATP Rankings beeing the oracle which decides who can participate in such important tournament.

-R- · Jun 23, 2022

_Tomate said:
This table is just saying everything, i dont know if you actually were aware about what did you post.. Just name your ideally best 5 players, i bet at least 4 of them are in the top 10 bottom of A and B Tier of the list.

And 4 out of the top 10 on the list are players virtually everyone would put in their top 10 as well (ACCM, TaToH, Villese, Vinch), having played between 40 and 66% (!) of A/B tier events. It goes both ways.

Let's put it this way. In tennis if you only played grand slams, and won them all, you could well be the best tennis player in terms of skill, but if a guy won the entire Master's series (or won most and did well in grand slams, or won ATP 500/250 events...) he will still be ranked n° 1 above you. And if you take a break and skip a slam the following year, your rankings will also take a big hit, even if skill-wise you're as dominant as ever.

I'm not defending the system as it is (although my main criticism would be the fact that in this specific event everyone's gonna be seeded by it, with no qualifiers, is probably a mistake - there are qualis in tennis for a reason!), but I see it as a valiant and worthwile effort. If one day we get an actual event calendar, ideally with recurrent events, this would probably make the rankings more accurate or at least more predictable.

miguelzin · Jun 23, 2022

The problem is that if you make ladder counts then we will have some good old examples of people picking aztecs/chinese everygame tryharding and then after hitting 2500 they would just play 1 game every 15 days when no top player is queueing up

Degaussed · Jun 23, 2022

_Tomate said:
This table is just saying everything, i dont know if you actually were aware about what did you post.. Just name your ideally best 5 players, i bet at least 4 of them are in the top 10 bottom of A and B Tier of the list.

I bet those top four are still in the top ten of ATP ranks, despite three of them having other games/priorities taking up some of their attention recently.

My top four would be Viper, Yo, Hera and Liereyy, in some order, as would everybody's. The #5 player is highly competitive and debateable, but personally, based on his performance in the past 12 months I would put Vinch or Tatoh there, but you could put one of many names there.

Viper is #1 on ATP, Yo is #2, Vinchester is #3, Tatoh is #4. Hera is #10 because he missed The Open Classic, arguably under-performed in KOTD4, and focused a lot of AOE4 recently, which has meant he participated less in AOE2 events. Liereyy is #6, but I think he's been doing military service or something? Considering ATP rewards results and participation, it's not a surprise that players who haven't been playing that regularly have dropped.

For me, the table shows two things:

that if you're good enough and participating enough, you can get high on the ranks. ACCM is regular fixture in S-Tier tournaments, he's made the Semis of an S-Tier event and is frequently going deep into big events, and he's #7 on the ladder; he's a ****ing great player. He's also played in more tournaments than anyone and won as many tournaments as anyone in the last 12 months.
that you don't *have* to grind every tournament to get a good ranking (Viper, Liereyy and Hera all in the top ten despite splitting focus in recent time).

In my very personal opinion, we need to find the balance between rewarding the players competing in and winning these A and B Tier events (as well as the admins and those putting up the prize money) because it's these grass-root type events that helped the scene grow. But I also know we can't make players feel like they *have* to grind every single tournament to get the best possible ATP rank - player welfare is so important (and that extends to the issue of players in non-European timezones frequently getting shafted by event timings(!)). ATP is not a perfect solution, nor was it ever meant to be. It's purely a way of seeding events that focuses on participation as well as results. Every tournament has different ways of seeding, none of them are perfect, and this is just another :smile:

.

Qulala · Jun 23, 2022

wel, lots of discussion,
so its hard now to use it for the first time, since people cant really influence it anymore to be in the platinum league and its still hard to figure out how to rank S, A,B,C, tournament.

but once all weights for tournaments and all other modifiers are fixed and all seems fair, we have a seeding list that could be used for the years to come.
since tournament organisers and players know what criteria they have to meet to be interesting to atrract certain players, and players know exactly how to finish in a certain tournament to have enough ATP points to join a next one that uses the system or just raise their rank on the ATP ladder.

Good work Robo and others if they helped.

Huehuecoyotl22 · Jun 23, 2022

Many points have been brought up and repeated already, but I also want to add that many B tier and especially A tier tournaments are not financially unimport for most players.
Often winning a B tier tournament will give you a similar prize money to reaching the top 8 in a $10k tournament like The Resurgence and you often also have to spend less time in total on the tournament.

If you don't reach the top 4 in a B tier tournament you usually don't get any money and if you compare a $500-1500 tournament to a $50k tournament, then it's different again, but we also usually only have 1-3 $50k+ 1v1 tournaments per year.
So, yes, a KotD 4 or RBW 5 is financially much more important than everything else, so an even bigger factor for those could be implicated, but saying something is less serious, not competitive at all and financially unimportant is not true.

For example ACCM made $3648 from 1v1 tournaments in 2022 so far (excluding show matches, FFA and TG): $1400 in S-tier tournaments, $266 in A-tier tournaments, $1886 in B tier tournaments and $96 in C-tier tournaments. So if 2/3 of your tournament income does not come from S tier tournaments, and not participating in them would just mean having 62 % less income, I would assume you would rather play in A and B tier tournaments too (* I am aware that donations and subscriptions also contribute largely).

This is less about seeding, the ATP ranking and factors of tournaments there, but I want to emphasize that for many players A- and B-tier tournaments mean a lot, because big $50k+ S tier tournaments don't happen each month.
And when players stream the POV in those, they usually get higher viewer numbers than by just streaming ranked games. So for someone who streams almost every day, having 2-3 days with tournament content per week is another boost.

___Black___ · Jun 23, 2022

First of all I want to thank and reward those who make great things for AoE now and always : T90 and the Mods/Admin who are helping to make this possible, under no point of view this could be considered something negative, of course it is positive it help a lot to AoE and our community !! !, Thanks for that! .

On the other hand if I think it can be better,for sure, and there is something that I found a bit unfair and I would like to comment on it so that it is taken into account
It is quite unfair that the system considers tournaments where a lot of players did not even have the opportunity to participate, or even worse, where there were armed brackets that directly or indirectly benefited a group of players more than the rest. For example, There is a tournament that you are considering for the "ATP Ranking" and it seems to me that it should be removed due to the CORRUPTION that occurred on the part of the Host in this , Its: "King of Americas 3" the reasons,
-1): the tournament is not a free registration tournament, several players (including me) were prohibited from participating only by arbitrary decision of the Host, but much worse was when by arbitrary decision ,again by the host, he decided to ban and withdraw from the tournament and future tournaments even to a player who was already playing decisive instances in this, like he did with Capoch (yes, he decided to ban him from the tournament and future ones too).

- 2) in the tournament there were corrupt acts, against several players (you could ask themselves for more information), such as Capoch , Fedex, Lucky Rox ,they were removed from it by decision of the host, and then added or placed in a bracket that did not correspond to them, or even adding players who had been eliminated in previous phases and replacing those removed ( yes, a total disaster a total corruption) .

- 3): It was a tournament with big names yes, but not very serious where the Host of the tournament put together arbitrary brackets at will, "to get more audience " i guess, (or only god knows why he did it) but too far away to be considered a competitive, a fair or even a transparent tournament, and ended up removing players from the last instances, and adding others in decisive and final stages such as Quarter Finals / Semi Finals, again with no sense and arbitrary decisions

And of course this affects a lot the ATP ranking, because there are players who added fewer points than they should/could have added.
and there are others who added more, others who couldn't even participate against others who could do it.

Finally, If the ATP system is already reflecting some problems even adding competitive serious and prestigious tournaments, imagine how inaccurate it could become if this were mixed with corrupt tournaments like "King of Americas" type? where each player will receive more or less points based on a decision of the tournament Host ? This is something that should be fixed as soon as possible.
Regards.

Nicov · Jun 23, 2022

miguelzin said:
The problem is that if you make ladder counts then we will have some good old examples of people picking aztecs/chinese everygame tryharding and then after hitting 2500 they would just play 1 game every 15 days when no top player is queueing up

While I agree with this, admins can always put a rule like in JMB: play 25 1v1s 2 weeks before the seedings are definitive.

_Tomate · Jun 23, 2022

___Black___ said:
First of all I want to thank and reward those who make great things for AoE now and always : T90 and the Mods/Admin who are helping to make this possible, under no point of view this could be considered something negative, of course it is positive it help a lot to AoE and our community !! !, Thanks for that! .

On the other hand if I think it can be better,for sure, and there is something that I found a bit unfair and I would like to comment on it so that it is taken into account
It is quite unfair that the system considers tournaments where a lot of players did not even have the opportunity to participate, or even worse, where there were armed brackets that directly or indirectly benefited a group of players more than the rest. For example, There is a tournament that you are considering for the "ATP Ranking" and it seems to me that it should be removed due to the CORRUPTION that occurred on the part of the Host in this , Its: "King of Americas 3" the reasons,
-1): the tournament is not a free registration tournament, several players (including me) were prohibited from participating only by arbitrary decision of the Host, but much worse was when by arbitrary decision ,again by the host, he decided to ban and withdraw from the tournament and future tournaments even to a player who was already playing decisive instances in this, like he did with Capoch (yes, he decided to ban him from the tournament and future ones too).

- 2) in the tournament there were corrupt acts, against several players (you could ask themselves for more information), such as Capoch , Fedex, Lucky Rox ,they were removed from it by decision of the host, and then added or placed in a bracket that did not correspond to them, or even adding players who had been eliminated in previous phases and replacing those removed ( yes, a total disaster a total corruption) .

- 3): It was a tournament with big names yes, but not very serious where the Host of the tournament put together arbitrary brackets at will, "to get more audience " i guess, (or only god knows why he did it) but too far away to be considered a competitive, a fair or even a transparent tournament, and ended up removing players from the last instances, and adding others in decisive and final stages such as Quarter Finals / Semi Finals, again with no sense and arbitrary decisions

And of course this affects a lot the ATP ranking, because there are players who added fewer points than they should/could have added.
and there are others who added more, others who couldn't even participate against others who could do it.

Finally, If the ATP system is already reflecting some problems even adding competitive serious and prestigious tournaments, imagine how inaccurate it could become if this were mixed with corrupt tournaments like "King of Americas" type? where each player will receive more or less points based on a decision of the tournament Host ? This is something that should be fixed as soon as possible.
Regards.

This is absolutely true, and he forgot to say that this tourney did not have seeding system, which it is actually the heart of the problem imo.

Everyone can look into the handbook, discord or somewhere else if there was any seeding system so we all can see how the brackets were done. I asked the admins and i tell you, there was no seeding sistem. It was all a "personal mix" of last performances in Nacho's tourneys, max rating and actual rating. But they never did this seed public so we could not see how this formula was finally made.
If you check the brackets you will see there was no seed at all, with no logical brackets where 1 spot for the main event was leaded by a 2k1 2k2 with no real oponents ( less than 2k players in this bracket, so actually a free ticket to the main event), and another side of tbe bracket for a spot for the main event was leaded by a 2k5 like Capoch, who had to fight for his spot with a 2k1 2k2 like me. Another example would be Pela (2k1-2k2) fighting Fede(2k2-2k3) in another side of the bracket for another spot.

To summarize, a tourney with NO public seeding system never should be taken in consideration for this ATP ranking, and even the organizer should be banned from take part in the ATP ranking system for several months, years or forever in penalty for being corrupt in an A tier tournament.

-R- · Jun 23, 2022

I will not get into the corruption accusations as that's beside the scope of this thread (actually 90% of the discussion is), but maybe a good idea would be to exclude tournaments with geographical/national/ethnic/linguistic (?) requirements/limitations from the rankings altogether.

LowEloNobody · Jun 23, 2022

-R- said:
I will not get into the corruption accusations as that's beside the scope of this thread (actually 90% of the discussion is), but maybe a good idea would be to exclude tournaments with geographical/national/ethnic/linguistic (?) requirements/limitations from the rankings altogether.

These tourneys already get a rating hit (S/A/B/Etc) for being regionally based

LowEloNobody · Jun 23, 2022

Wow, this thread really had it all.

Arguing over the top players? Check
Top players actually posting on AoEZone? Check
Fighting with Robo? Check
Somehow Nili is now the good guy on AoeZone? Check
A SELECTIVELY BOLDED LATAM conspiracy? Check

Keep up the good work AoEZone! We have really taken DanielGate as inspiration and upped the level of the drama

Drama score: 7.4/10
Drama ATP ranking: 2.2/10

P.S. An Arena-only tournament getting a 1.1 multiplier is ridiculous. Should be at least 1.69

Influenza · Jun 23, 2022

yes, i've changed my mind, it makes sense for a random arena tournament to be worth 58% of the ATP of kotd4 despite it only having 1.3% of the prize pool and far less interest from the game's top players. Thanks for showing me the way @t90fan4502

MembTV · Jun 24, 2022

For a tournament that you can fight for a spot in redbull, so it make the event even more important just give 12-16 spots to the ATP ranking, remaining spots 12-8 just make a qualification.

You reward many people from his tournament success and the controversial is gone since there still a lot spots that you can fight for it, and you only need a qualification for 1st edition.

I think solution was easy for first edition, because if you give all spots based to a subjective ranking this kind of drama would happen everytime because, no matter what, there is no system that is perfect and the only way to solve it is doing mixed system.

And I repeat again stop considering kotd4 invitational, it was a ranked system we used, same as with this event but a diferent one, so if kotd4 was an invitational event this is even more since there is no qualifier.

YoungPanda95 · Jun 24, 2022

MembTV said:
And I repeat again stop considering kotd4 invitational, it was a ranked system we used, same as with this event but a diferent one, so if kotd4 was an invitational event this is even more since there is no qualifier.

This is from page 3 of the KotD4 handbook. These same 16 players are also listed as invited in the announcement post. :unsure:

zShades · Jun 24, 2022

YoungPanda95 said:
View attachment 201341

This is from page 3 of the KotD4 handbook. These same 16 players are also listed as invited in the announcement post.

Invitational means other players than Guests, are not allowed to play. Kotd is a mix between Invites + Qualifications

doacid · Jun 24, 2022

YoungPanda95 said:
View attachment 201341

This is from page 3 of the KotD4 handbook. These same 16 players are also listed as invited in the announcement post.

Half the players were invited (through his own custom ranking system) and half had to qualify. So unlike T90's league it wasn't just invitational.
I guess it's a matter of semantics, he says it wasn't invitational in the sense that they weren't just hand picked. To be honest, the way I understand the word, the players were invited indeed, through his ranking system.

Having players qualify is probably the best method there is, but it requires a lot of work from the admins.

The redeeming quality of the league is that players who are placed on a division lower than their skill (i.e. Sitaux) can move up to the higher one next season.

TopperHarley · Jun 24, 2022

YoungPanda95 said:
View attachment 201341

This is from page 3 of the KotD4 handbook. These same 16 players are also listed as invited in the announcement post.

But still the other 16 spots were there to fight for in the qualifiers.

I agree with Memb that this shouldn’t be called an invitational tournament as really everyone had the chance to qualify and win the main prize (as long as you had the skill).

This is not the case for the Titans league..

jbr_aoe · Jun 24, 2022

zShades said:
Invitational means other players than Guests, are not allowed to play. Kotd is a mix between Invites + Qualifications

It is entirely possible to have invited players and qualifiers in the same event, nothing in the meanings of either word prohibits the other.

The ATP literally states that KOTD4 is a mix of invited and qualified players - as per the KOTD4 handbook.

Ultimately this is all an issue with ATP and should probably be in that thread rather than taking the conversation away from TTL which I'm really excited about, it's a great way to try to grow the number of players playing professionally imo.

MembTV · Jun 24, 2022

YoungPanda95 said:
View attachment 201341

This is from page 3 of the KotD4 handbook. These same 16 players are also listed as invited in the announcement post.

i dont know why i bother, is pretty obvious what i mean.

@jbr_aoe is not invitational because they got qualified for their performance by a system that we ranked based on S tier events, so that my point, if that is invitational or half, then this event and any event that do not have a qualifier is invitational as well, since all rank system are subjetive.

Anyway whatever is done will try my best to support the event, good luck with it.

Menu

Shortcuts

Tournaments

Recorded Games

Today's birthdays

T90 Titans League | Announcement

Platinum League: $17,300​

Gold League: $5,200​

Platinum League​

Gold League​

Time

Calendar

AoE Live-Streams

Voobly Top 5 RM 1v1

DE Top 5 RM 1v1

Voobly Top 5 RM Team Game

DE Top 5 RM Teamgame

Voobly Top 5 DM 1v1

Voobly Top 5 DM Teamgame

DE Top 5 Empire Wars 1v1

DE Top 5 Empire Wars TG

Share

Platinum League: $17,300

Gold League: $5,200

Platinum League

Gold League