2011 Season information

[MonsterOfTheLake]

You can win a maximum of 12 points total through both BRA and BRS. That's out of at least 18 total events you can play.

There are 4 dates (I believe) for Regionals and States this year. You can only earn those high level points for those 4 dates.

BRs shouldn't be as competitive as you're stating they might be based on those restrictions.

That's not true, 8 events count so you're looking at 16 points total.

Winning 8 BRs in a season is also worth more than winning Nationals (8*2 = 16 > 14).

Everyone's strategy for the season, as it stands, has to be to attend as many BRs and Cities as possible to earn your 8 BR wins and 5 Cities wins, giving you (8*2)+(5*6) = 46 points. Best part? You pretty much have unlimited goes at it!

@Dav - Again, I'm really pleased that you've listened to the players and come up with such a system. My only gripe is that the points, as they are currently assigned, are bad for competitive play. It's simply going to make BRs unplayable for new players and award those with access to numerous small-sized events as opposed to those who do well at big events. The point spread really needs a retouch, like when BRs had to be reduced to 4K events.

 

[kwisdumb]

If scholarships for regionals are removed and that's not just a mistake, OP has just made the biggest misstep of all time.

Not sure how I feel about the system. I don't like Planeswalker Points and this seems very similar, so there's that. We'll see how it goes I guess. Some of the points are definitely skewed.

 

[vanderbilt_grad]

This is everything the players wanted. And proof that TPCI does listen, no matter how stupid and annoying our ranting may be. I thank them from the bottom of my heart.

Now guys, PLEASE don't complain, this is the start of something amazing.

Fully agree.

Right off the bat, let me say that I LOVE these changes, and my criticism is based solely on the point appropriation.

But this is simply unacceptable. Playing in a Regionals final should NOT amount to 4-5 Battle Road wins. We're going to have the same problem we had when we first introduced BRs, in that some people will simply attend many BRs, which are not competitive at all, and beat substandard opposition to earn as many points as someone who has won a 200+ person event. Battle Roads ideally shouldn't even give points, we've been told over and over again that they were events to help new players make the step up from league.

If winning a Battle Roads (4K) is worth 2 points, then winning a Regionals (32K) should at LEAST be worth (32/4) * 2 = 16 points. Even that isn't a very good appropriation, given the number of Battle Roads with virtually no players (as opposed to Regionals, which are all set to be 2-day behemoth events this season). I sincerely hope they readjust the points awarded, otherwise we're gonna end up with another 07 fiasco.

You are limited to how many points you can get from BRs. You get points only for 8 BR top finishes.

To address some of the concerns.

This is a transitional year. We have a lot of changes to implement, and incorporate. Long term, more will be done with Championship, and Play! Points than you'll see this season.

We accept that our point spreads may be high or low in some cases for some events, and have plans to mitigate such issues without negatively affecting you, the players. I would ask that you bear with us, and provide constructive criticism via our support portal where you believe it's necessary.

I don't think there are many people who've been playing this game for more than a couple of years who aren't acutely aware that we are constantly tweaking our program so that it suits our business needs, and the needs of our players as best as possible.

Thanks much!
Prof. Dav

Thank you for posting!

 

[ultimatedra]

I think the whole "You must be invited to nationals" bit is for the VGC - as it was last year for us.

 

[Pidgeotto Trainer]

I like that changes are being tried out to the system. There is no more incentive to dropping from a tournament which is definitely a good thing.

I agree with other posters that it looks like the numbers are too skewed for small events. It seems too easy for the best player in a small small area to rack up tons of points. For 1st place, there is no longer a difference between winning a large city or small city, whereas before the extra games you would play in a bigger tournament would give that player more points.

Battle Roads are also valued too highly now as has been said. I'm quite fortunate to not need to worry about it this year, but as a college student without a car, it would have been very hard for me to make 5+ Battle Roads in the Fall and Spring the last few years. (I've played in none the last 3 years). This system seems like it would hurt someone in a similar situation a lot more now.

Overall though, the ratings changes I think are good. I'm curious too if they will carry over or not. Not sure if that's wise.

I am disappointed scholarships for regionals are gone, and that we still get medals instead of trophies. I think there should at least be trophies for 1st place. Points will come and go, but that player (whatever their age) who breaks through for a big win, maybe the only big win they'll ever have, will always have that nice looking trophy to remind them of that day. Medals are fine for cities, but I'd really like to see trophies for at least 1st place (for states and regs).

The scholarships for regionals are probably the most 'accessible' for players, so it's unfortunate those are gone. Maybe they'll still be around for Spring Regionals?

 

[ARMondak]

If they remove scholarships, that's not being cheap, that's just being plain disrespectful to the players. They should be tax-deductible, actually benefiting both Pokemon and it's customers. Scholarships are also a big draw to parents, which in turn will lead to more money spent on their product.

 

[ShadowGuard]

In general, I like this change. Elo wasn't exactly the best for using in Pokémon, and Championship Points with a cap for a maximum number of events seem to be fair. However, problem is still that now not only top cut and prizes, but also rating is given out by luck-dependant TieBreakers. It would be a lot better to give out points to all "X-1 or better" instead of using placements.

Last season I got about top 10 in Europe after CCs, with going all of my 7 CC attends X-1 or better but making the cut at only 3. With the new system I wouldn't even been anywhere near the top 50.

If you go 4-1 and don't make the cut at a CC event, you walk away with nothing. This means, if you get T1-donked in R1 of a 31-player-event, there's nothing left for you to play for and you could as well drop and play some fun matches. That's a more than huge problem in the new system, but it can be fixed, so the general approach is great as long as P!P keeps working on making the rating better and fairer. ^^

If scholarships for regionals are removed and that's not just a mistake, OP has just made the biggest misstep of all time.

You know that outside NA there never was Scholarship for Regionals, right?

Not sure how I feel about the system. I don't like Planeswalker Points and this seems very similar, so there's that.

No, this is different. At Magic Planeswalker Points, a player who goes 3-4 at two tournaments gains the same as one who goes 6-1 at one tournament which obviously isn't correct because 3-4 isn't a good finish at all. At Pokémon you can't just attend big events to gain points, you also have to do well.

 

[losjackal]

I'm not seeing the problem....MonsterOfTheLake, you're making it sound like it's easy to get these Championship points. If only 8 Masters show up to a BR, 6 are walking away without any points. If these same 8 travel to 3 other BR's, if they trade off winning then each person will be lucky to walk away with 1 point. With your average 16-32 players, there will be many above average players who never finish Top 2 and thus not get any points from a BR series...

 

[eriknance]

initial impressions:

- in terms of mere simplicity, this system makes a lot more sense to me than ELO ratings did. it also fits the Pokemon TCG a lot better. in the past, losing to a bad player because of a bad start could be brutal points-wise, but champion points only recognizes where you ended up, not what happened to you while you got there. with this in mind, I really like this new system.

- this challenges players to be present at more events, which is good for the growth of the game. BRs will actually have decent attendance for once! however, it does put more pressure on performing well at low-level events, even with the whole "best of X" system in place.

- I can finally stop complaining about the players who skip entire months of a season with the expectation of racking up points at bigger events. if you want to be the very best, go to more events! you never see Ash sitting around at a day job do you?!

- really, really, really wish that P!P would have given us this information sooner than the DAY BEFORE THE SEASON STARTS, especially given the extra weight added to BRs. I already scheduled myself into a bit of a bind because of the lateness of this info. I was planning to leave the BR early tomorrow and didn't plan on making the BR Sunday, both of which I could have done differently if I knew this stuff just days earlier.

- I still like how this complements the luck factor in the Pokemon TCG. if you aren't making the top cut, then you don't deserve champion points. but now, you don't get penalized for those games where you have a bad opening or get donked.

- no scholarships at regionals is truly a bummer. D:
Posted with Mobile style...

 

[GodBlessAmerica]

You know that outside NA there never was Scholarship for Regionals, right?

You know that a US Regional Championship gets more attendance than some European Nationals, right?

 

[Pidgeotto Trainer]

you never see Ash sitting around at a day job do you?!

Posted with Mobile style...

Ash didn't have a day job. Real people do...

 

[SaiaSandstorm]

I'm not seeing the problem....MonsterOfTheLake, you're making it sound like it's easy to get these Championship points. If only 8 Masters show up to a BR, 6 are walking away without any points. If these same 8 travel to 3 other BR's, if they trade off winning then each person will be lucky to walk away with 1 point. With your average 16-32 players, there will be many above average players who never finish Top 2 and thus not get any points from a BR series...

Thus we reach a point where an equal amount of players from each region will get invites rather than the truly skilled players, especially if you live in an area where most of your players are skilled and normally get invites with E-LO...

Johnny from Nebraska will get the points he needs, even though the players he went up against were weak..

I don't like it one bit.

 

[GodBlessAmerica]

Johnny from Nebraska will get the points he needs, even though the players he went up against were weak

I half disagree here. While it will unfortunately reward players in areas without difficult competition, this has been the case with the ELO system as well. This "Johnny" character you created would be able to accumulate points be consistently beating bad players.

However, if someone gets Top 32 in an area like New England, going X-0 in swiss, and loses in top 32 getting only 1 C Point, vs "Johnny" winning Regionals after getting into Top 32 with a record of X-3 in swiss
getting 10 points, that is a little dumb

 

[losjackal]

And so many people disappointed (or angry!) that P!P removed scholarships....

15 Regionals last year, with 2 recipients per age division. 15 * 3 * 2 = a total of 90 people in the entire program who benefitted from that, worth $112,500.

Given you wanted to add another Regionals to the calendar for other important reasons, what would you have done:
a) doubled the budget, so $225,000 total because you have twice as many Regionals now
b) halved the awards, so 1st place only gets $750 now and 2nd place gets $500
c) eliminate them altogether and use the money differently

Maybe (c) was the best option for right now.
(not sour grapes either....I'm speaking as a parent whose child did win scholarship money last season)

 

[SaiaSandstorm]

I half disagree here. While it will unfortunately reward players in areas without difficult competition, this has been the case with the ELO system as well. This "Johnny" character you created would be able to accumulate points be consistently beating bad players.

However, if someone gets Top 32 in an area like New England, going X-0 in swiss, and loses in top 32 getting only 1 C Point, vs "Johnny" winning Regionals after getting into Top 32 with a record of X-3 in swiss
getting 10 points, that is a little dumb

Not true, if the players are low ranked in E-LO he's not gonna earn squat after a certain period of time. With this system, you can keep getting Championship Points no matter what...

 

[eriknance]

Ash didn't have a day job. Real people do...

I was mostly being sarcastic. i agree with what you said in your post about how this system can be hard on people who just don't have the resources to go to every BR/CC. I still see this as a better system overall, and I say this even though it'll hurt me because I usually can't make multiple BRs or CCs (having multiple jobs hurts in this respect). however, if the Pokemon TCG is important enough to players, then they'll find a way to get to those tournaments. even with my hectic schedule, I care enough about this game to figure out a way to make it to those events.

What I'm saying is that the best players in this game should show that they're the best by performing well at numerous events on a consistent basis. athletes train year-round to be the best, and so should the players of this game. the previous system didnt truly encourage this aspect, so I'm looking forward to how the new system works out. it encourages players to go to more events, which can only help the game grow. I'm looking forward to stepping up my game, starting ... erm, tomorrow. @_@
Posted with Mobile style...

 

[ShadowGuard]

You know that a US Regional Championship gets more attendance than some European Nationals, right?

Uh... wait, if I remember correctly, European Challenge Cup got quite the numbers of a US Regionals (~200 masters), but all the winner got was booster box and a medal. There were events of that size in Europe, we just didn't get the prize support you got.

 

[lol_of_time]

Great.... if top cut or placing = points then, I can see people dropping from the event to mess around the resistance....... then there goes your money, and time. I hope this system works for the better.

 

[Cardkeeper]

Regionals Scholarships were cut to pay for the Victory Cups.

 

[Ice'Cold]

Post from last year when we were discussing this...

I'm definitely not a fan of a system that discriminates against players geographically. (being able to attend something like the Georgia marathon is flat out unfair for people who don't live in an area like that).

Cap "Battle Points" per series, such that player X (Kettler I'm looking at you) who lives in a state where they can attend 7+ battle roads easily cannot earn more than a player who can attend fewer battle roads. I'm thinking their best 3 is a good number. Yes they have more chances to make a strong performance but at least the player in the other area has an opportunity to earn just as many points. Cities could be best 2, and states/regs/nats would obv be just the 1.

I'm also a fan of not resetting ELO each year (making rankings meaningful again) but having a minimum participation requirement over the year in order to qualify for worlds invites.

Totally called that one, just saying