It would be nice if AoE reached a point where there was a separate pro ladder. Kinda like the FIDE chess ladder which doesn't take performance from casual games into account. That ELO + Tournament history would be my favoured seeding method
+1It would be nice if AoE reached a point where there was a separate pro ladder. Kinda like the FIDE chess ladder which doesn't take performance from casual games into account. That ELO + Tournament history would be my favoured seeding method
I mostly agree with you, although Valve just announced that they'll use teams seeding themselves for the Major in CS:GO (biggest tournament of the year).The more the game grows, I feel the less viable a player seeding gets. When we are e-sport #1 things have to and will look very different obviously.
Why I am totally against players rating themselves? Are we a sport now or a friendly amateur thingy... I dont know any sports where player rate themselves for the world ranking. Imagine tennis players chosing who is the best in the world ranking by themselves? It is super biased. And whoever says it is not and they have to be objective forgets that it isnt. Yes maybe there is not a big question about #1 but then... You should not be ranked 2nd or 5th because you are nice or just not a nice person. You should be placed because of results and nothing else.
Valve just announced that they'll use teams seeding themselves for the Major in CS:GO (biggest tournament of the year).
nimanoe said:
Valve just announced that they'll use teams seeding themselves for the Major in CS:GO (biggest tournament of the year).
Very interesting thread.
Why I am totally against players rating themselves? Are we a sport now or a friendly amateur thingy... I dont know any sports where player rate themselves for the world ranking. Imagine tennis players chosing who is the best in the world ranking by themselves? It is super biased. And whoever says it is not and they have to be objective forgets that it isnt. Yes maybe there is not a big question about #1 but then... You should not be ranked 2nd or 5th because you are nice or just not a nice person. You should be placed because of results and nothing else.
So for me there should be something like a circuit in Cs:Go or even tennis. Big tournaments you get more points then in a lower one. The points should be evalueted by the guys attending. How you do that has to be figured out. Lets say 18 players play and those are the top 18 guys you should gain more points by qualifying/placing well there than if only one top 50 player is even in this tournament. You gain over a year the points and then is for example january again. You gained your points on 17th january 2018 by winning a tournament then you lose those point on 18th of january 2019.
It would be objective it would courage people to play in tournaments to get up in the ranks to be qualified for bigger ones etc. And the top players would not have to play a super big amount if they dont want to if they place well in the top tournaments, if there is the argument of burn out to be in the top ranks.
Players seeding each other only works in quite small (but not too small so you can actually remove the outliers) tournaments though, where everyone actually knows everyone, and obviously in a perfect world we would have something super objective like ELO might be in some big game like chess.
This would be very good if there actually was something like a circuit. But right now its kinda more like automatic matchmaking: It doesnt exist, and its a long way from existing.
Maybe Escape could do something like that in the future, but right now an uncoordinated community would not easily agree on the method of ranking different tournaments. Everyone hypes their own tournament and think its the best event ever so it would be tough to make all or even most of the potential hosts agree to use it. For example, some tournaments might have fun settings and/or very well-liked host so top players sign up in great numbers, even though the settings might be a bit troll-y. Should arabia matter more than arena? Should double-elimination matter more than single-elimination? Should Bo9 matter more than Bo3? Should online or lan matter more or both equally? Is it fair that some events are invite only? Or that china / the west is excluded from some events? If some tournament host, or the players involved, would not agree that the current seeding is realistic for his particular tournament, he would simply use his preferred ad hoc solution, whether its elo or players ranking each other or whatever.
I agree, the community would have to enforce something like a circuit and it obviously has to come from a big player who has several tournaments with a big prize pool.
.......
All this would take time probably all of year 2019 to figure things out. However I would think that it would make it more fair more understandable for the public and not biased.