Prize support is disappointing

[psychup2034]

Psychup2034: The bigger events can take a little pain, small events less so. The biggest events don't need more players.

Where are more new players going to come from? A densely-populated urban area? Or a sparsely-populated rural area? Clearly, more new players are going to come from the more densely-populated areas. While it's important for smaller OP communities to receive support, but if the goal is to get lots of new players into the game, it would be more efficient and effective to target more densely-populated areas.

I think all this talk about new players is detracting from the earlier point that currently, Championship Points awarded at events are not commensurate with the difficulty of winning the event. Most of the time, the difficulty of winning the event is strongly positively correlated with attendance. Note that I'm talking about Championship Points, not physical prizes such as booster packs.

Are you arguing that Championship Points should not be commensurate with the difficulty of winning an event? Are you suggesting that that it's optimal for the winner of Maine States (~30 Masters) to be awarded the same as the winner of New Jersey States (~130 Masters).

I can somewhat see the argument that keeping all prizes consistent regardless of region is needed for simplicity. However, your argument that awarding more competitive tournaments a commensurate amount of Championship Point is a disincentive for new players to join the game is ridiculous. How many new players do you know nowadays (in Masters) that start off and are immediately competing for a Worlds invite in their first year of play? I only know 1. New players join the game with Worlds as a dream, not an immediate reality. It's already much easier for a new player to place well at a event in a smaller area than a larger area.

I'll use Jimmy's example from before. The New York/New Jersey/Pennsylvania area has about 10 Worlds-caliber players. If they all showed up to an event, there's almost no chance for a "new player" to place Top 8. 5-6 of those Top 8 spots are already taken by those 10 players, and a couple solid local players will fill up the rest of cut. Maybe 1 new player will make cut, but that player cannot consistently cut at events with such a saturation of seasoned players. However, in a more sparsely-populated, rural area, where there are only a couple Worlds-caliber players, that new player has a much better chance of cutting, or even winning.

I'll give you an actual example now. At the Scotch Plains, NJ City Championships (sometime in December 2011), who made top 4 cut?

• Sava. R (NY State Champion 2012)
• Jason A. (NY State Champion 2011)
• Michael S. (Philly Regionals Winner 2012)
• Justin B. (Multiple-time Worlds invitee)

People who missed cut included three players who have multiple Worlds invites (top 4 Worlds, top 4 Nationals, top 8 Nationals) and the person who came in 4th at Fall Regionals this season. And you know who wasn't there? Jimmy O'Brien, Michael Diaz, Geoff and Ben Sauk, Darrell Moreno, and Dylan Bryan. How on earth is a new player going to be incentivized to play in this area if prize support doesn't reach a little farther down? (Hint: the answer is our awesome community, but a commensurate amount of CP awarded would be nice.)

Playing in a smaller area already has its advantages in the current system, for any type of player. The situation may be a little different in the UK, but at least from my experiences in the northeastern US, the advantage of playing in a smaller area should be balanced somehow.

 

[yoshi1001]

Would ribbons be an option for a non-card prize? They're relatively cheap to produce in bulk (certainly compared to things like hats), and what do you know, they're also something from the games. You can also wear them or stick them on the fridge.

 

[NoPoke]

Championship points are what players CRIED out for to replace the despicable elo and its silly approach of trying to uncover skill based upon play. CPs can never make a comparably good assessment of difficulty as they have no easy way of knowing who you played against. Furthermore to try and add that in to an inflationary system will make the justifiable complaints about having to travel even louder. Players and parents are already complaining about being compelled to travel!

25-30 is not what I'd call small. I don't know how resilient your 25-30 is to downward pressure on attendance; I can only presume that the game where you are playing is much more resilient to downward pressure than over here as you are convinced that you can still increase your attendance even when making your local events relatively less rewarding. Is it possible that some of that resilience is because premiere events are free in the USA? Over here a typical fee is $8 and most players leave with NOTHING. So lets add the reward of additional CPs to distant events and see how the small local events cope? Do you really need to try that experiment out before you can have an idea of what will happen?

TBH I'm not convinced that 25-30 should be called small in the USA, below average sure but that is a long way off being small.

===

Psychup2034: The areas that need new players most are the areas with sparse OP. Playing in a smaller area NEEDS to have some advantages to compensate for there being fewer opportunities to play.

 

[SMP88]

I just took a quick look at the states attendance thread for this year. Iowa had 37 masters and Ohio had 220 masters, yet the winners of each got the same prizes and CP. You can't begin to tell me that winning a 37 person tournament should be worth the same amount of points as winning a 220 person tournament.

 

[TT85NO1]

I just took a quick look at the states attendance thread for this year. Iowa had 37 masters and Ohio had 220 masters, yet the winners of each got the same prizes and CP. You can't begin to tell me that winning a 37 person tournament should be worth the same amount of points as winning a 220 person tournament.

I completely agree but that's how you roll the dice

 

[sdrawkcab]

I just took a quick look at the states attendance thread for this year. Iowa had 37 masters and Ohio had 220 masters, yet the winners of each got the same prizes and CP. You can't begin to tell me that winning a 37 person tournament should be worth the same amount of points as winning a 220 person tournament.

How else is someone from Iowa supposed to compete for a CP invite if they don't reward states with the same amount. (At least CP wise)

This varies from state to state obviously, but there are some locations where travel to multiple states isn't feasible.

Take Alberta for example. We had 8 battle roads (fall and spring combined) 4 Cities and a SPT.

If you won all 13 events in the province you would have 50 CP points. Meaning even a single 2nd place finish would prevent you from qualifying for worlds.

The closest regionals location is Vancouver, a distance comparable to New York to South Carolina.
--------

Sure winning a 37 player tournament isn't as hard as winning a 220 player tournament. However winning a worlds invite is sure a heck of a lot harder in a region with less players and that's without attendance-based distributed prize support.

 

[Mystery Thing]

How else is someone from Iowa supposed to compete for a CP invite if they don't reward states with the same amount. (At least CP wise)

This varies from state to state obviously, but there are some locations where travel to multiple states isn't feasible.

Take Alberta for example. We had 8 battle roads (fall and spring combined) 4 Cities and a SPT.

If you won all 13 events in the province you would have 50 CP points. Meaning even a single 2nd place finish would prevent you from qualifying for worlds.

The closest regionals location is Vancouver, a distance comparable to New York to South Carolina.

And even to get those 50 CPs, assuming you magically could run PERFECT all year long, a player from Edmonton will have done 18 hours of driving if we assume that all of the driving time in the Edmonton area and nearby cities/towns is zero, which it isn't, because that means you're calling 3 CCs all "local."

For a player from Calgary, they'll have done somewhere between 42 and 60 hours of driving, depending on how the CCs and BRs are set each year. So even Albertans' "local" stuff is hardly truly local.


The point is, it would be unfair to punish players just because they're in a location with a small player base. They already have a massive handicap due to lack of events; to undercut their CPs as well would be downright cruel.

If somebody thinks a small tournament shouldn't hand out so many CPs, why not just go play in it yourself? After all, it's easy points, right? :nonono:

 

[GodBlessAmerica]

If somebody thinks a small tournament shouldn't hand out so many CPs, why not just go play in it yourself? After all, it's easy points, right? :nonono:

Because it's totally feasible for I, from New Jersey, to travel to a place like Iowa for small tournaments that award a lot of CP.

 

[sdrawkcab]

Because it's totally feasible for I, from New Jersey, to travel to a place like Iowa for small tournaments that award a lot of CP.

Just as feasible as us traveling to Washington for the 200 player tournaments.

(not a lot of CP, just "easier" CP)

 

[Mystery Thing]

Because it's totally feasible for I, from New Jersey, to travel to a place like Iowa for small tournaments that award a lot of CP.

But the hardcore players that deserve to go to Worlds will do all the travelling it takes to get points, won't they? That seems to be the argument that everybody makes.

 

[Bilbo Baggins]

Top 128- 18 packs, Stamped top 128 promo, Play! Pokemon hat
Top 64- Booster Box, Stamped top 64 promo, Play! Pokemon hat,
Top 32- Booster Box, Stamped top 32 promo, Play! Pokemon Hat, Exclusive Plush, Scholarship for $250
Top 16- All of the above plus a scholarship for $500


IMO. Top 8-on is fine regarding prizes.

I see this happening when Masters has a 15-20 dollar entry fee. $5 entry would pry see only hats + stamped promos added. No way would they add that much scholarships without at least 15 entry fee.

 

[Weasel Zero]

I think we've slightly lost sight of what this thread was supposed to be about.

I think people don't comprehend the feeling behind that. Whomever came top 128, top 64, and even top 32 to an extent, they played over the course of 2+ days of straight pokemon tcg. Yes, we all love this game, but nevertheless its very taxing on most to play for such a long time. They proved themselves by winning most of their matches, showing all the effort of playtesting, strategizing, outplaying their opponents, deckbuilding, for CP points? Not good enough. Personally, I'd rather have a physical prize to show off. A Nats top cut exclusive mat, swag, hell even a gold catcher made of real gold stamped for Nats top cut.

I top 64'd this year. I got nothing, physically. Nobody here confuse that with me not being proud of myself for my accomplishment. I am, truly. Still, when you've worked so hard for something, partially succeed, and get nothing to show for it, it definitely leaves an empty feeling inside.

For people who say to just enjoy the game and to be grateful for what we are getting, that mentality is flawed when it comes to Nationals. I could just enjoy the game at home with local friends and not shell out to travel for competition and the potential reward that comes with doing so. However, I do travel to play. If the rewards continue to lack creativity and even stay non-existent to the deserving, maybe people will stop coming to Nationals. Incentive is just as important as other factors, such as game balance, friendly environment, MEDIA PROMOTION VIA TOP CUT RECORDING AND COMMENTARY, etc.

We have more power as a public that plays this game than we think. When Sableye came into the Black and White rules, we didn't just sit and accept that Nats would be this way. We threatened not even coming to Nats, as a mass decision from the majority. Lo and behold, a decision was made to rotate early. All I'm saying is we want to be appreciated a little more when achieving a victory. Because if we continue not to be, then maybe we won't attempt to achieve it anymore.

 

[jeffrey123]

I see this happening when Masters has a 15-20 dollar entry fee. $5 entry would pry see only hats + stamped promos added. No way would they add that much scholarships without at least 15 entry fee.

Get out of here.

15-20 for that small increase? Please

 

[NoPoke]

I'm not saying

For people who say to just enjoy the game and to be grateful for what we are getting, that mentality is flawed when it comes to Nationals

What I am saying is that Unless you enjoy the game you can never be grateful for what it offers. That starting from a point of dissatisfaction will always leave you complaining and dissatisfied. That reward and recognition are not tied to the existence or otherwise of a token or piece of paper. Not that I don't like the cards and trophies I DO. But my worth is not measured by how many I have. This is fortunate as I don't have that many

 

[Box of Fail]

I'm all for the stamped promos, myself. I would imagine they would be very inexpensive for POP. And it's not like PCL has to design an exclusive promo for nats akin to Tropical Beach. If they simply had a nats-stamped Supporter or something that said "Top 16 Nationals" that seems legit to me, and it would require minimal cooperation from the Japan side of things.

 

[SD PokeMom]

I'm all for the stamped promos, myself. I would imagine they would be very inexpensive for POP. And it's not like PCL has to design an exclusive promo for nats akin to Tropical Beach. If they simply had a nats-stamped Supporter or something that said "Top 16 Nationals" that seems legit to me, and it would require minimal cooperation from the Japan side of things.

and how do you know 'it would require minimal cooperation from Japan'? if it was so easy, wouldn't the good folks at OP have done it already?

 

[Box of Fail]

and how do you know 'it would require minimal cooperation from Japan'? if it was so easy, wouldn't the good folks at OP have done it already?

Well, OP prints prerelease promos and the like, so I don't see why you really need anything from Japan if all you're going to do is print a stamp on a card that's already in the format. We'd need the Japanese to create artwork and some effect for the card if it were a new card, but a stamped Supporter seems possible without much coordination at all.

 

[SD PokeMom]

a prerelease printed 'stamped' promo with a print run of thousands =/= extremely limited foil stamped 'top X' event cards. i'd imagine the approval process is absolutely not the same...

 

[Cyrus]

and how do you know 'it would require minimal cooperation from Japan'? if it was so easy, wouldn't the good folks at OP have done it already?

Can't answer your first question 'cause I know nothing about what BoF knows, nor do I know much about the approval process. However, regarding your second question: OP - like any other organization - could potentially overlook a very simple solution for months or even years simply because it was never treated too seriously (assumption). I think that's part of the reason why P!P values our input so much - because we as players give them a perspective that they may not have.

Last year, a lot of us pushed really hard for Championship Points. As radical of a change as that was, we received that, and it has benefited attendance since the first premier events of 2011-2012. Now, it's not like the idea never crossed our minds, and it isn't like the idea never crossed their minds, but it didn't actually take off until people started lobbying for it.

The same applies to prizes. As someone who's seen the United States prize pool transform over a nine year period, it honestly is disappointing to see us go from 150 or so free trips between the three age groups to 50-ish. It's disappointing to see scholarships taken away from Regionals and Worlds, and it's disappointing to never see scholarships adjusted for inflation*. Speaking of which, Organized Play: when your representatives say that you work with the same budget every year, does that include or exclude inflation adjustments?

[*Inflation: the devaluation of money over time. This is why Pokemon packs cost more money nowadays as opposed to five years ago.]

Like Pooka said, if you're playing this game for prizes only, then you're playing it for mistaken reasons. In the time you spent play-testing, you could have started up a small business, gotten a part-time job, or spent more time studying for classes (studying for classes, fyi, means better grades, which in turn means better scholarship $ opportunity). However, prizes are significant because they are a key distinguishing feature between casual and competitive play. They're also absolutely essential to the marketing component of OP, since they command a great deal of respect from the "outside world." If Starcraft wasn't treated and compensated like a professional sport in South Korea, do you think it would really be the same?

 

[psychup2034]

a prerelease printed 'stamped' promo with a print run of thousands =/= extremely limited foil stamped 'top X' event cards. i'd imagine the approval process is absolutely not the same...

Let me imagine out that approval process for you:

P!P: "Hey Japan, can we get some promos for players who top cut Nationals?"
TPC: "Er... sure, how much is it going to cost us?"
P!P: "Uh... nothing. It'll just cost us like $100 to get some cards stamped."
TPC: "Then why are you asking us?"

Asking for a different promo (like Tropical Beach) is another thing altogether, but I can't possibly imagine how long it would take for them to make a reverse holo and stamp a card that's already in the format.