Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Re: Pete. (aka. Gaming the system-- who's to blame?)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Flaming_Spinach

Flaming_Spinach

Feature Editor
Pete de Shaw said:
The POP team encourages all of our State and Regionals winners to play. The purpose of providing trips and travel stipends is to get more of our best players to play in Nationals. That being said, there is no punishment for picking up your stipend then choosing not to play in Nationals. However, we will be looking at this. If it turns out that this behavior is common, I will have to seriously consider removing these prizes from future seasons.

I will be completely unsympathetic to anyone who registers for the event with an awarded bye but then drops before playing a round. This just smacks of gaming the system and I will not hesitate to instruct the computer operators to delay the drop until that player completes as least one actual game. I don't know why anyone would want to do that unless it has something to do with getting the promo card and t-shirt. If that is the case, how about coming to one of us with the problem rather than playing a game with our registration process? I think you will find that the end result will be far more pleasant for everyone.
Click to expand...



Pete, I must start by saying I agree with you. I believe a National Championship should be a showcase of all the best players a country has to offer. And, specifically for the US, should be a tournament that features players from the entire country. North, South, East and West. Seahawks fans and Patriots fans. Floridians and Californians. Texan cowboys and Idahoan potato eaters.

Cubs fans and Sox fans.


…


However, something I fail to understand is why you blame the players for gaming the system when the system itself benefits those players who game it.

There are certain advantages to sitting out a tournament. The system benefits those who do. That cannot be denied. Why, then, do we make enemies out of those that take advantage of the benefits the system?

That’s like blaming my aunt Margret because the banks collapsed in ’08.



Oh, let’s not blame the banks because they gave financing to everyone and were completely complacent with how they threw around billions of dollars. The real enemies are those that accepted financing when they should have known their retirements would not cover their mortgage payments for more than five years.

The banks are blameless. Margret is at fault.

Gimme a break.



One of the Top16 at Canadian Nats dropped after he made the cut. If that’s not indicative of some deeper problem with the system, I don’t know what is!



On to the point of the matter, If you want to fix the way this game is played… If you want players to stop going 2-0DROP or showing up two rounds late to get easy matches to get the most rating points… the answer is not to punish the players that game the system for their own benefit, or talk about SotG on some internet forum.

The answer is to change the system which so heavily benefits those who abuse it to the highest degree.

ELO was a good experiment. But it doesn’t work for this game.

Something else needs to take its place.




Ask yourself: Gaming the system -- Who's to blame? The players? Or the system itself?

Think about it.



Thanks for your time,
Spinach
 
ELO = the collapse of the banks due to Credit Default Swaps?

Over the top, much?
 
Keep all Premier events K value low and that way people wont game the system.

For example:

BRs 4k
Cities 8k
States 16k
Regionals 16k
Nationals 16k

etc.
 
Last edited:
Let me start by saying that I enjoy the game a great deal and through it have met awesome people who are both good and exemplify the SOTG. But the game does have some flaws that have to be pointed out. I think the reason people sit out at nats in order to preserve their ranking has nothing to do with the fact that they're trying to cheat the system but rather because the game itself has WAY TOO MUCH LUCK involved. Let's say a player with 1860 rating goes to nationals. First round say he plays an inferior player with like 1500 rating and gets T1 donked. He has now lost his rating without getting a turn. Is that fair? This is amplified by the fact that with players allowed to play trainers/supporters going first as Grandma Joner pointed out in his nationals report this makes it so that good players can easily lose to worse ones based off a coin flip. I have tested the format myself with good players and find going first to be far too great of an advantage. In other words I feel like as though in addition to fixing the ELO system we need to have the going first situation fixed as well for the benefit of the game.
 
Last edited:
Jason said:
Keep all Premier events K value low and that way people wont game the system.

For example:

BRs 4k
Cities 8k
States 16k
Regionals 16k
Nationals 16k

etc.
Click to expand...


that doesnt solve the problems. everyone would play by those k values so everyone who has a high points now would still have high points just not as high but he would be just as high when you compare it to everyone else. All that does it lower the cutoff level cause people can earn less points. It doesnt prevent them from getting enough points before nats.


Also I think nats should be owrth more points. Makes it where its easier to hop up many spots if you do good at nats.

put it htis way. The 32 person state championship I went to is now equal to the natioal tourney that is latter this week.
 
Absolutly absolutly agree, I planned to make a topic on this anyway but oh well, here we go. I think some things with the ranking system are just wrong. And yes, I have sour grapes, but its not like this will help me out now...

How is it possible that people can get punished for making topcut?! If a player makes the cut from there on it should only be possible to gain points not to loose them. It just makes no sence. Ill forever have this thought in my head "Had I dropped before T32 at nationals despite having an awesome matchup, Id have had a worlds invite." But no I played, ate 2 turn 1 losses and now im 51st because I managed to loose points while going 5-3 at nats because all my opponents basically had a ranking from 1600 or lower =_=

I lost my invite because I decided I didnt want to be a chicken... I considered dropping but In the end my pride got in the way, I wanted to give my friend a good game and I felt like Id be able to win.
Lesson learned, next time Ill drop and anyone of my friends who withnessed this will remember this as well. No point in throwing away your invite.

I also think we need pass downs back. The ranking is not accurate, it cant be, pokemon is a game of luck (partially), its just how it is. So whats the point of throwing away invites when people who probably deserve an invite just as much would actually use it? Yes, you have to draw the line somewhere, but at least making use of those invites you have anyway seems fair. (And dont get me started on how its unfair for europe)

And Id also love to have nat champions not counted when invites are given out, every nat champion will be up there and xx invites will always go to waste like this.

btw, if youd like to have this discussion on the professor board instead, tell us, but I think having it here would help getting more opinions and a better discussion. I personally think the system has some big flaws and Id like to hear other peopls opinion on it.


@Pop
Over the top but I think it works anyway, doesnt it?
 
Sitting out an event is not "gaming the system." It's a passive action meant solely to preserve points that have already been earned; no games are played, no points are gained, no points are lost. Nothing is being done to any system at all. If a player's primary goal is to go to the World championship and the primary way to get there is by rating, why should that player continue to play in games that can do nothing but work against him or her?

Take a player with a rating of 1875 prior to National, for example. That player is almost certainly getting a rating invite at the end of the season. If he or she decides to play in National, no amount of wins or gained points are going to affect the invite, although losses will. Why should everyone be expected to gamble away a sure invite to the premier event of the year just to "placate" those who feel that sitting an event out equates to "gaming"?

ELO is definitely not a good fit for Pokemon, and it never will be. It was designed for chess and other games that are entirely devoid of luck. That word "luck" gets thrown around a lot, to the point of losing its potency when it is brought up in a post like this. People look at those who complain about luck as being arrogant ("he thinks all his losses are due to luck alone!"), simply deluded, bitter, or over-exaggerative. Luck is a reality though whenever you have completely random elements at play in a game, such as card order, coin flips, what gets prized, what ends up in the opening hand, etc..

Coin flips can be avoided by a player as much as possible-- e.g. a player decides not to run any cards at all in his or her deck that require flips-- to cut down on his or her own personal luck reliance, but that doesn't mean anything when the opponent IS running flip cards. No player can pick his or her opening hand or prizes or the order of every card he or she will ever draw in the game. Randomness dictates what happens in games to at least some degree, and occasionally a very, very LARGE degree, which is why ELO ultimately fails.

The opening coin flip is also 100% unavoidable now that we don't have Sableye (and Overeager was broken anyway). A lot of games end on turn 1 because of a coin flip and the (frankly bad) new rule allowing first-turn T/S/S. Sitting at an 1875 rating and losing to a Tyrogue before drawing a card is a loss of a game and a loss of points that resulted from sheer chance-- the 50/50 odds of a coin flip primarily, yet also the odds of drawing only 1 Basic, etc.-- and resulted in the losing player doing absolutely NOTHING, not even drawing a card, yet ELO "ignores" this and deducts huge points from the 1875 player's rating as if it was the same as the next guy's game which goes to time and is a nailbiting 1-1 prize affair. That's absurd.

If we have to play in a format where an opening coin flip can take up to 32 points from our rating at any single point throughout a large event, why are we being looked down upon for opting NOT to enter specific tournaments when our performance can only hurt our chance at an already-assured invite?

Also, why is it wrong for a player to use his paid trip to simply attend National for everything but the main event itself? National is a lot more than just that central tournament, and I don't see how it is harming the game for a player to spend time immersed in Pokemon for a full weekend just because he or she didn't feel like entering the main event.
 
Yoshi- said:
@Pop
Over the top but I think it works anyway, doesnt it?
Click to expand...

No.
Going way over the top undercuts your argument
It's like playing the Hilter game.
You're not taken seriously if you compare the issue to the worst thing in the world and then say "see, isn't that horrible?"
No, I don't see. I'm blinded by the horribleness of the over the top comparison that I no longer see your complaint as real, but more as kabuki theatrer
 
Comparing someone's comparison to the worst possible comparison while using the responsive comparison to call the initial comparison unjust with the same logic... I am so confused right now
 
You want unfairness, Latin America invites to worlds depends not on your rating, not on a perfect performance, not of the best 4 players at nationals, depends most of the time on having a Visa.

Also a centralized source of tournaments, not available for everyone in the country, only players that live in or near the capital get to enjoy premiere events more than twice a year, giving them a huge advantage in scores, the rest must travel 10 to 20 hours by bus to have a chance to compete.
 
Ignore the overblown analogy, guys: he's got a good point, so just stick to it.

Pete, the heart of the problem isn't a game on the bye system (squirrely as it is), but a fundamental failure on part of the ratings and rankings system. Settle that issue once and for all, and I guarantee you that these musings about exploiting byes will disappear.
 
Flaming_Spinach said:
Pete, I must start by saying I agree with you. I believe a National Championship should be a showcase of all the best players a country has to offer. And, specifically for the US, should be a tournament that features players from the entire country. North, South, East and West. Seahawks fans and Patriots fans. Floridians and Californians. Texan cowboys and Idahoan potato eaters.
Click to expand...

I do believe nationals should consist of all the best players and all the state/regional champs, however it isn't going to make a difference when they just drop after 1 round.

By saying that, I think Pete is really going to anger a lot of players. TPCi have been cutting down prize support so much over the past few years, and now he is thinking of cutting $300 from the states prize support and blame it on the players? I almost just punched my computer screen. (that's over the top, pokepop)

But seriously, people are going to "game" the system. The ELO system is screwed up enough as it is, and the better players need to do whatever they can to stay ahead in the rankings so they can avoid donks and reserve their place in Worlds. People do it in Magic, and there isn't nearly as much luck involved as pokemon is.

So to answer your question, the system. I wasn't around before the ratings system was incorporated into the game, but from what I heard, sportsmanship dropped significantly. If we went back to invites based on performance at Nationals/Gym Challenges, there wouldn't be any voluntary dropping, there wouldn't be people winning states and not playing in Nationals.
 
Last edited:
Possibly the issue could be prevented by gaining more points than you would lose.



If a player vses another and wins, they might get 22 points. If they lose, they might lose 15 points.

This will lead to slightly inflated ratings, but it would encourage everyone to play. If everyones rating is going up (faster than normal) then people will be less likely to sit on their laurels, in case someone overtakes them.
 
I think the "system" is great. I live in CA and winning anything is hard. The numbers here for a city here is as large as some peoples states. I have to play either 200+ Masters States or a 100+ regionals just to win a trip to nats to possibly win a invite to worlds, where as in other states its less than 100 to do that. Invites on rating give me a reason to play and try to win all season in stead of just wait all year and lose my chance. In CA with so many good players it would be crazy to never get a chance because I don't live in a less than 100 states area. Rating balances areas with to many players play for that chance and areas where not enough play. We need the balance for it to be fair. My BF has gotten in on rating last year (played a lot and won a lot) and this year won CA states this year (is going to nats and playing all the way) and some of the other good players here deserve it just as much but there 1 in 200+ so there only way is rating.


I agree it sucks that players are taking the money and not playing. I would love to get that chance to go and play with some money help and it makes me sad to know someone else took it just to drop (don't blame them though). Why not just make it where nats is more worth it? Hand out more invites via nats and less via ranking. Split North America so the countries are all separate. I mean rethink rating and trips and invites don't abolish them.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't America have more turnout than, like, most of asia pacific combined? Maybe you guys do need an extra area...



You can't always blame the player if the way to legitimately get the best results is to not use the system as intended. If you can get more success by not playing, then people will not play.
 
I thought unless you're like ranked in the top 10 or so before Nats, you pretty much had to play to get any chance of a ratings invite to Worlds...and even then it's a crapshoot since Nats has a highish K rating doesn't it?

That being said, I do agree it's rather poor that one would go to Nats just to collect the stipend and dropping; I mean, unless you live close by, how do you even afford to not spend the $300 or so they give in travel money to even get to Nats, considering air fare, gas prices, etc?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top