Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Masters division too crowded?

Status
Not open for further replies.
whats the harm in giving us better prizes for BRs? because it will drive attendance up? is that bad?

why dont we have promos like mysterious pearl instead of victory medal AGAIN? its not even necessarily more, but better prizes would be cool. playable promos or the like.
 
What Ryan said^^
I really don't think its that hard to get a new winners card for BR. Seeing the same card for almost 3 years now is a bit disappointing =/ Isn't there like 5 variations for Victory Medal in Japan =/
The only improvement is that all of top 4 walks away with something now.
 
what is the sense in trying to deliberately drive up the attendance at a SMALL event designed to fit into your average game store's play area by upping the prize/cut structure to make it more 'worthwhile' to travel? how are 'travellers' coming in and winning what are supposed to be small local events going to help grow OP in any new area?

i'd dare say that most stores are not going to be able to hold a 100+ player BR...but you want the prizes etc. upped in order to make the event series OUTGROW it's venues? doesn't it make more sense to hold more, smaller BRs as a 'first step' into OP as the 'big' events come later in the tourney year?

jmho
'mom
 
for someone who keeps stating how much they 'don't care' about the prizes at the smallest premier event series, you're sure making a big stink about them...=/


so is the event, consisting of the tangible prizes in combination with the intangibles, like seeing one's friends and having a fun day playing the TCG with them...'worth it' to you or not?

if you're going to go ANYWAY...meaning that the intangibles ARE what makes the event 'worth' attending...then why all the complaints about the prize and cut structure other than just wanting 'more'?

'mom


You're really going out of my way now :/

Yeah I go there to see my friends, that the main point and it IS worth it.
But even when I see my friends and play a tournament I'd like to see the one who wins it to get some real reward, he did a good joob and if there were a lot of competitors, he deserves it.

Just because I go there to see my friends doesnt mean I dont like prices.
I like prices, I think that prices are a driving point of tournament and that someone who did well at a tournament deserves a price that suits what he just did.

What makes a tournament fun is a combination of seing my friends and the tournament itself, just because my friends alone make up for the fun part does that mean that pui shouldnt try to put something in there as well?

You're using my friends as an excuse against me, that they should be enough and that pui doesnt have to provide anything :/

Again, I'm not GOING there for the prices but seing a fair amounth of prices would really make the tournament way better. Thats just my idea of a tournament, that people who did well get a fitting reward. And especially when people show up although the prices are really poor, doesnt that show that they appreciaty this game? Why does PUI have to be like this instead of giving something back to the players?

e:/

You can increase the prices without increasing the tournament, 4 extra boosters will get no one to drive to a tournament when he wouldnt have gone anyway.
No one expects boxes or anything, just a bit more to stop the prices from being ridiculus.

If you want to keep it small -> Limit the player numbers, everything else wont work.

Throwing in a bit extra stuff wont change the attendance much but it will make the playes who went there anyway feel less stupid.
 
they ARE giving back to the players: prizes will go up exponentially as the tournament season goes on.

but to expect huge prizes at what OP self-describes as the first step into organized play is to say the least unreasonable if not self-serving.

jmho
'mom
 
Giving back to the people who showed up for the CC not the people who showed up for the BR although its a small tournament.

I mean you guys have regionals which you can look forward to, we only have a shot at some scolarships at nats, but thats a different point. Its just addign to the frustration that prices overall are pretty low over here and since we're lacking regionals we're stuck with these kind of tournaments. And having some competition for a real price now and then would be nice.

I'm not expecting big prices, I expect prices that seam reasonable for a small tournament. Thats a difference.
 
then i guess your definition of 'reasonable' prizes for a 'small' tournament is at odds with that of OP...and again, your choice is to play, or not to play if it's not 'worth' it to you.

'mom
 
whats the harm in giving us better prizes for BRs? because it will drive attendance up? is that bad?

why dont we have promos like mysterious pearl instead of victory medal AGAIN? its not even necessarily more, but better prizes would be cool. playable promos or the like.

Can't I ask the same question in reverse? What's "wrong" with PIU just giving out 4 boosters and a victory medal to events that are supposed to be small, season openers that are mostly to build hype and introduce new players to the upcoming season?

Imagine how wack it would be if football started out with the playoffs in the beginning of the season. Yeah it would be cool, but would it help fan attendence/tv ratings/general interest in the sport during the regular season and later on into the season? Does it help football in the long run? (replace football with pokemon for this metaphor)
 
PokeMom: Is it not possible that EVEN though someone may go because of friends or whatnot that they can't have an opinion on wanting more prizes?! You're saying it's one or the other when in actuality, people may come because their friends are going to be there AND because there are prizes. Stop getting onto people for complaining about stuff when it's the complainers who get things done...not the people who don't say anything because it's "bad" to say anything. Pokemon isn't perfect, yes, it's a great game that we all enjoy, but it has room for improvement. Everytime players speak up about what they want to see, I see your posts ridiculing or talking them down because they have sour grapes.

This thread has even gone off topic as far as prizes go. It's the age divisions that are (or should be) on debate.

Raising the age limits in divisions could space out prizing better and more accurately age players together if done well. Retooling it to where Teens are in their own group could space it out right. Maybe 4 divisions could make it easier on players? I still think it should be up for valid discussion without people being looked at as whiners.
 
Please...

I've said it a few times, I play because seing my friends is worth it to me, but definitly not because of pui.
And this is why I will play, could you PLEASE stop saying something else?
You're trying to make me look like someone who goes there only for the prices, someone greedy who thinks of nothing but his prices, all the time and thats just wrong and annoying, please stop doing this. -.-
You're really twisting around what I'm saying, I've said it a few times, my friends ARE worth it to me...


And I know its my choice and I will play, but I think I still can complain about what PUI does wrong as long as I want.

Even for small tournaments the prices should be adjusted to the player numbers, you can have a "small big tournament". And this goes both ways, when only 3 people show up prices just be adjusted as well...
I just think that, even when the tournament is supposed to be small, when a lot of people show up the prices should be increased a bit, noting that would blow the tournament out of being a small tournament, just something that doesnt look as ridiculus as 4 boosters for the first out of 100 players.

I just dont get this "Accept it, otherwise we dont like because you're an evil person and we dont care if you never show up again" attitude, thats a pretty poor way to handle criticism.

I love this game, I love to see my friends, and I still would like to see prices that dont make the tournament look ridiculus...

@xcfrisco

And if the season starts with games that count nothing that would be any better? This metaphor just doesnt work at all, in football you have an entire "connected" season, not individual tournaments. I didnt even start about the points that BRs give in the long run...

@Austino

Exactly... Thanks a lot
 
I think this Battle Road argument is getting a little out of hand. Maybe we should be concentrating on bigger events, where the real problems are. Everyone knows BRs are smaller events, and it'd be great to have more prizes for them, but enough of that.

States, Regionals, Nats......There's where our real problems are as far as the Masters division being too crowded are. Even Cities are becoming ridiculous in some areas. I think in the end the problems all go back to prize support in one way or another. If there were more prizes and/or they were more widely spread among the top finishers at events, then it wouldn't be nearly as difficult as it is now to get through huge fields for prizes.

States: They are too crowded! Come on now, 176 Masters in California, are you kidding me? And 1st in that State is the same as like Idaho? Sure, there's extra rating points available with more rounds, but not really. When you have such a huge tournament like California States, sacrifices are often made to shorten the event. Can you blame anyone for that? Not really. I mean, it's only STATES, it shouldn't run all night. The thing is, if States are going to continue to be huge events with the same K-value as Regionals and Nationals, they should be treated like it! The only signficant prize is 1st place. Out of 176 players? They also "feed" no events and are hugely geographically bias events. If it were up to me, States would be the first event I got rid of from the tournament structure. Changes need to be made.

Regionals: I have always been a big fan of Regionals. I think they are a great part of the tournament series. That being said, there could be significant improvements made. The cut of 3rd/4th scholarships was a mistake, IMO. These are often huge events anywhere in the U.S. It's a once a year event, all run on the same day everywhere. I don't think there should be a round or top cut restriction on Regionals. They should all be ran with the intent of keeping them as legitimate as possible, even if that means an 8 round, T32 tournament. Can this be done in one day? I don't know, maybe we need to make Regionals a two-day event?

Nationals: I'm not sure where to even start here. The U.S. Nationals has reached attendance levels of epic proportions. The numbers have nearly equaled the Super Trainer Showdown days. I felt that T128 with 8 rounds was the right call given the circumstances this past season. I do not think it is a long-term answer, though. T128 is 7 elimination rounds, which I think is far too many. I believe that Nationals should have more swiss rounds and a smaller top cut. That being said, it might have to eventually be a three-day event. As for the prizes, well I think even our international buddies can agree that there could be some improvements here. Top 16 at U.S. Nationals is currently no invite to Worlds, and no scholarship. 16 out of nearly 700 Masters.....I think maybe a special Nintendo DS, or some kind of extra should be made for U.S. Nationals top cutters?

One other thought that is kind of related to U.S. Nationals I had.....Why is the Last Chance Qualifier easier than U.S. Nationals? Why is it easier than being consistent all season? I mean, I bet there's people who won 75-80% of their games in the U.S. that didn't qualify for Worlds, but there's people who go 6-2 in the Grinder and qualify. Then there's the people who go like 6-2 at U.S. Nationals, make it all the way to T32/T16 and whiff the invite. Just doesn't seem right. Grinder shouldn't be easier than a bunch of U.S. events.

In conclusion, as much as some people may not want to admit it, Masters should have more prizes than both Juniors and Seniors. Our numbers more than double both of them combined in most tournaments. People have been told before when complaining about the budget that it is divided into three parts - the age groups and thus, isn't like Magic: The Gathering. Pokemon doesn't throw it's entire budget into one age group, but maybe it should throw a little more into Masters.

We haven't got any information on the rest of the tournament series this season after Battle Roads, but I will say that it would be a dissapointment if we saw no changes. The Masters division has several long-time players who are dedicated. A truly great fanbase. I believe the opportunity is (and has been) there to experiment with the tournament structure. Just because there is the same budget, doesn't mean there has to be the same tournament structure.
 
You'll never see 4 divisions - that would just thin out the prizes even more (more divisions doesn't equal more budget), and then people would freak out even more.

You can't change up the prizes by location for the same event (such as States) because you don't know how many people will show up until the day of the event. Plus, if you dump extra prizes into one event, if there's anybody that has about equal driving distance between one better prized State and another less prized State, which one do you think they'll go to? It'll just drive that one locations attendance up further, drop the attendance at ones around it, and then you have a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The LCQ is easier because there's fewer people that show up for it, and there's no cut because there's no reason to have one. It's really that simple. I don't see that ever changing, because how do you change it? Other than to start slicing the Masters into more and more pods at Nationals and combining their cuts later and later, what really can be done about it?


When it comes right down to it, I find it hard to believe that people that are all ZOMG MORE PRIZES NOW PLZKTHX understand how the entire budget thing works. TPCi assigns the budget to POP for the year for prizes; it's not like the OP side of the world sits there thinking about how they can "hose" the players. Unless TPCi decides that the OP budget needs to be changed, you'll never see additional prizes, just shifting around of what prizes there already are.


[edit] Oh, and any suggestion that goes for increasing the number of days an event takes is even more ignorant of the budget issue - that would require the PTOs to fork out more money for venue rental. Good luck convincing them to do that. TPCi doesn't rent the space for the PTOs (as far as I know. Even if they did, that's more money that's gotta come from somewhere, and where would it be from? Either the prize fund or you'll see entrance fees magically appearing. Wouldn't that go over well?)
 
Hate the idea.

Don't need a "sr's tour " for us old guys thank you very much. Last year it it was a thrill to play
( and misplay the game away) to Yamado @ table 1 at worlds. And play Jason in t-16 at worlds second day. And pound Gino into submission even with his t-1 claydol and gardy w/ a dre also at worlds with close to 100 people watching.

Why take that away from me, or the current Florida state champ Jim Roll. Or Rob Downs- who I believe has won 2 regionals and a t-4 at Nats.

To DC, I don't agree with you at all. I have earned over 5k in scholarship $ which has helped with my daughter's education SO much. I support this game as much as anyone, love to compete, why shouldn't I be able
to have the chance to earn some scholarship $ for my kids if I play well enough at the right events?

Plus, what your saying hurts EVERY Poke-dad or Poke-mom who enjoys competing or is good enough to earn scholarship $. We can agree to disagree on this one ok? Especially considering the sources- you the most casual player out there and me, for my age one of the most competitive.

The current system works just fine for me, and enough of this talk of an old farts division please.

It's making me sick.

Hehehe. No problem, John. I don't feel all that strongly about it.

But I have to admit that I do feel a twinge of guilt when I beat someone who is a very good player and could really use the points/money.

Not guilty enough to give them the win (although I've been known to on rare occasions) but a little guilty anyway.
 
You'll never see 4 divisions - that would just thin out the prizes even more (more divisions doesn't equal more budget), and then people would freak out even more.

You can't change up the prizes by location for the same event (such as States) because you don't know how many people will show up until the day of the event. Plus, if you dump extra prizes into one event, if there's anybody that has about equal driving distance between one better prized State and another less prized State, which one do you think they'll go to? It'll just drive that one locations attendance up further, drop the attendance at ones around it, and then you have a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The LCQ is easier because there's fewer people that show up for it, and there's no cut because there's no reason to have one. It's really that simple. I don't see that ever changing, because how do you change it? Other than to start slicing the Masters into more and more pods at Nationals and combining their cuts later and later, what really can be done about it?


When it comes right down to it, I find it hard to believe that people that are all ZOMG MORE PRIZES NOW PLZKTHX understand how the entire budget thing works. TPCi assigns the budget to POP for the year for prizes; it's not like the OP side of the world sits there thinking about how they can "hose" the players. Unless TPCi decides that the OP budget needs to be changed, you'll never see additional prizes, just shifting around of what prizes there already are.

Agree on the age divisions. I think it's unreasonable to expect another one. That would mean even less prizes.....

I completely disagree with your statement that you can't change up prizes by location. Yes you can! You have a set number of prizes for a certain attendance number. This is set PRIOR to the events. What are you describing is inaccurate and will not happen.

LCQ, I don't know the solution, I was just pointing that out. I think a lot of people would agree with me that Grinding is easier than a lot of events in the U.S.

More prizes.....I suggested several things, including shifing of prizes. Cutting States would shift prizes. Cutting a little from Juniors/Seniors would add to Masters prizes. Those are shifts.
 
You can't change up the prizes by location for the same event (such as States) because you don't know how many people will show up until the day of the event.
You could do an educated guess, ship a bit more, and if it still isnt enough the shop keeper gives out his own stuff (and gets it back from pui) or prices will be send via mail.
Plus, if you dump extra prizes into one event, if there's anybody that has about equal driving distance between one better prized State and another less prized State, which one do you think they'll go to? The same that they'd go to if there would be no prices at all...
It'll just drive that one locations attendance up further, drop the attendance at ones around it, and then you have a self-fulfilling prophecy.
And it would be different if prices would be the same? Tournaments in the same area that are on the same date are another problem and should be avoided if possible, but that doesnt really have anything to do with the prices. And why should there be "one" tournament in this area that pulls everyone while the others stay small?



When it comes right down to it, I find it hard to believe that people that are all ZOMG MORE
PRIZES NOW PLZKTHX understand how the entire budget thing works. TPCi assigns the budget to POP for the year for prizes; it's not like the OP side of the world sits there thinking about how they can "hose" the players. Unless TPCi decides that the OP budget needs to be changed, you'll never see additional prizes, just shifting around of what prizes there already are.

And if we think that the budget is too small / not well used we can still complain can we? I dont really care about any budged, I just see that prices are unreasonable and this is what I am pointing out. Hopefully someone from PUI will read this and maybe he'll think about it and maybe I'll change something, nmaybe they'll get a bigger budget, maybe they'll use it more reasonable, or whatever.(just like before when all the mean, evil, puppy eating, greedy players complained that the cards that they already got would be banned, while everyone was telling us that we had no right to complain and basically no rights at all... :nonono:)
If they want me to help with this I'd gladly do it but otherwise THIS is their thing to take care of. And btw, I highly doubt that some extra boxes would leave some real marks in PUIs budget.


[edit] Oh, and any suggestion that goes for increasing the number of days an event takes is even more ignorant of the budget issue - that would require the PTOs to fork out more money for venue rental. Good luck convincing them to do that. TPCi doesn't rent the space for the PTOs (as far as I know. Even if they did, that's more money that's gotta come from somewhere, and where would it be from? Either the prize fund or you'll see entrance fees magically appearing. Wouldn't that go over well?)
But is it the players fault that something goes so out of proportions that it just doesnt work anymore? People dont complain because they've got nothing better to do, they complain because they feel that a time limit is destroying in important event, that prices make a tournament look ridiculus etc. And when the game grows so big that a tournament has to have an extra day, shouldnt there be an increase in player numbers as well? And should the budged be adjusted tothe player numbers?

If people complain then they mostly have a reason to do it.
No one complains about the size / time of nats (I'm not exactly sure what this discussion is about, I'm not from the US) because he has nothing better to do.
People complain because there is a problem that needs to be adressed and accepted.

Now if PUI would say "we know the prices for brs are a bit low (in comparison to the ever expanding player numbers) but right now we just dont have the money because there have been some issues / we cant just increase our budget like this / right now sales are going down, but we noticed that there is room for improvement and we'll think about it when things are looking better" or something like this, that would be fine with me. If they'd completly cut the prize support because the game isnt running smoothly or something like this, I would still keep playing, I'd probably increase my efforts.

The only thing I'm asking for is that a problem gets accepted and noticed instead of getting treated like the devil himself (or some kind of greedy monster) by some people here who try to talk down any critisism. And 4 boosters for the winner of a 100 player BR and a very odd price distribution IS a problem. You dont have to agree with this but please accept that I think this is wrong and that I feel like discussing this. And stop treating me like an evil monster just because I dont agree with everything PUI says.
Because NO ONE plays pkmn for profit, it doesnt work, you cant do it, especially over here in Europe. Because IF I'd play for profit I wouldnt give a thing about BRs but just show up for nationals and borrow some cards from my friends.

I'm really thankful that PUI seems to listen to what we players are writing here (*** card ban/league uxies) and this is why I even go through the trouble of doign this, I'd just wish to get the same treatment from the people on this board.

And now I'm going to [del]find some delicious puppies[/del] bed
 
Here it is: if you don't like the prizes, too bad. Complaining really won't change anything. If you don't think BR's are worth it anymore, that's fine. Don't go.
 
Here it is: if you don't like the prizes, too bad. Complaining really won't change anything. If you don't think BR's are worth it anymore, that's fine. Don't go.

Ive replied to this so often, just read my last posts...
And everyone would think this way the world would be a pretty sad place ...
Do u like using japanese cards ;)?
 
Enjoy the rest of the season Yoshi-....I know I am regardless of what the prizes are.

PCI would LOVE to have an unlimited budget...they would LOVE to give out the most exciting prizes in the world...they would LOVE change many things for the betterment of all the organized players. They are not the idiots you seem to think they are when running this game.

They DO listen to things players have to say. I believe Ryan Vergel said it best in and earlier post.

I appreciate the energy of a teenager who believes his/her cause is right and the way things ought to be...the problem with teenage arguments is that logic and emotion get all mixed up together and they fail to see the overall big picture.

I currently have former students attending Harvard, Yale, Oxford (on a Rhodes scholarship) and many many great universities around the US. One of my great joys as a teacher is I get to see them go from being brilliant teens to brilliant adults who come back to me and let me know that I really DID know what I was talking about when they were teens. The greatest thing about being a teenager is that it doesn't last forever.
 
Can't I ask the same question in reverse? What's "wrong" with PIU just giving out 4 boosters and a victory medal to events that are supposed to be small, season openers that are mostly to build hype and introduce new players to the upcoming season?

Imagine how wack it would be if football started out with the playoffs in the beginning of the season. Yeah it would be cool, but would it help fan attendence/tv ratings/general interest in the sport during the regular season and later on into the season? Does it help football in the long run? (replace football with pokemon for this metaphor)

giving out the same promo card for two sets of the same tournament for 3 years is boring, repetitive, uninspired, and brings the value of the card itself down due to multiple releases of the card.

ive never called for MORE prizes. i wanted to raise the point that even different prizes would be a good option. i can understand what POP is doing, even if i disagree with it. i dont really see a harm in making the prizes more appealing. winning a premier event, IMO, should warrant more than 4 packs. POP disagrees, as they associate even a small increase in prizes with an undesired increase in competition and participants. i dont really feel like arguing against this stance, so i wont.

instead:

the next thing we can think about, though, if not increased prizes is different prizes. promos, hats, deckboxes, sleeves, mats, these things are very casual and very appealing. id love to see a problem in giving out a DIFFERENT promo card (ANOTHER VICTORY MEDAL!?), different, cheap prizes. Keychains! Cell phone charms!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top