Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

3 Regionals? Seriously?

Requiring players to spend significantly more time and money to stay competitive is a very reasonable issue to discuss. Worlds invites should not only be up for grabs to those who live in a great location, or can afford all those vacations and time off from work/school. There is such thing as too much travel to events.

I dont think you are REQUIRED to do anything.... you can continue attending the ONE you attended in years past.

However for those who WANT to attend now at least have the option to.

In the past, they were all on one day leaving ALL PLAYERS optionless...

Ross, no one says you HAVE to attend multiple regionals. The great part about this, at least now you have an option to.

If I am not mistaken, They did not remove any events from the calander to make these events possible. Same events, just more opportunities to play in them.

If you want to make worlds, then yes, this effectively says you have to attend more events.
I love going to events, but I am a college student. Others have jobs. Younger kids have sports/other activities. Not everyone has the time/money to go to everything physically possible.

If I am reading this correctly, you are NOT happy with more opportunities for the Community to participate in events, because it makes it more difficult for you to get to worlds?

Isnt the goal to attend worlds? Why should Pokemon punish those players who show continuous support for attending their events?

I dont get it Ross... As a player, I am greatful for more opportunities to play in larger scaled events. Just because you cant make it to multiple the regionals doesnt mean I want Pokemon to restrict MY opportunities to play in them.

The short of it is, multiple regionals are GREAT for the Game and Community as a whole.

Jimmy
 
Last edited:
Why do I get the feeling that neither StL nor Wisconsin will be having Regionals in October? Bah. Time to start pricing flights from Minny to Ft. Wayne or Houston. Ewww. None of that is nice. I can has Dallas, please?


Wi will be in April as it will always be, I'll put my money on. as for St. Louis idk
 
Wi will be in April as it will always be, I'll put my money on. as for St. Louis idk


All regionals were always on one date in April, then P!P took half and put them in November. Now P!P is splitting them up to be split across 3 weekends. What makes you think WI will be special and stay in April
Don't make assumptions if you don't have proof to back them up.
 
All regionals were always on one date in April, then P!P took half and put them in November. Now P!P is splitting them up to be split across 3 weekends. What makes you think WI will be special and stay in April
Don't make assumptions if you don't have proof to back them up.


I am betting on it being in April, Fingers crossed.
 
Last edited:
Texas is Southern Plains. Not sure what the region is called but there is indeed one in Georgia.

You are missing the one in VA, not sure what this region is called, might be Atlantic.

Also missing Mountain West which I think jumps between CO and UT.

May I suggest referring to GA as the Southeast?

As for VA, I identified on my signature as the East, although Mid-Atlantic might be a more accurate term.
 
If Regionals still give paid trips to Nationals, then this is giving players more chances to try and get that invite. For me, Indy is waaay father away then any third regionals location, and i will be happy to spend a fration fo what it would take to get to Indy and have 3 shots at winning a trip there, all across dfferent formats which will promote adaptive and consistant players to do well.

If they are cutting paid trips for a third weekend (or second, i dunno if they give trips anymore) then I don't see this being a benefical move. This instead favors players who are in area niches even more heavily then the game has as of now.

Additionally, it will depend on how many Regionals places they consider for CP. If it's all three, i think this again sways my opinion to it being a good move to bolster players who do well consistantly in the major formats of the decks (a regionals for 3 different formats = awesome). I know myself i played in the HS-NVI regionals and did quite well, because i was comfortable with the format. When the second regs rolled along, same format as States, I skipped it ecause the Eel heavy meta didn't suit me and my two states trips ended in x-3s on weird luck. I really enjoyed the ability to play in a Regionals i felt comfortable in though, its the biggest tournament I ever get to go to, its the one i do best at and its my favorite. If i get three slots of Regionals to outway that i cant make Nats, i may actually have a shot at an invite.

If they retain two best finishes on the other hand, the effect is nullified slightly. It doesn't really make an advantage either way, but it detracts a potential advantage, which is a shame.

Finally, prize support. I love this game, and i want to stay with it for as long as it goes on. When luck heavy metagames are prevelant, i've got judging gigs from time to time. Another event is fantastic, but if an event series that will take 3 weekends, and a heavy financial investment for a pat on the back and a handful of packs, i'll stick to the local ones. I know scholarships are likely gone for good at regionals (a true shame), but i hope that they keep paid trips for top 2, brign trophies back (they are just soooo much better than medals) and have atleast 12 boosters shouldn't be too much. I say 12, a low ball number because i'd like to see some cool little trinket type things, stamped cards, dice, heck, exclusive figurines that you can show off beside a trophy and say "what a hall!" while leaving packs to trickle down through top 16 at least. Even if i got first, i'd gladly give up a full box for more packs through the rest of the top cut and some exclusives that dont cost too terribely much. I'd hate to see prize support dwindle even further and turn winning Regionals into an equivilant of winning two Cities ro something.

But, that is all competitve analysis. 3 Regionals really opens it up so that i can make at least two this year. I'M EXCITED!
 
All of you who are saying that this just adds another trip you OMG HAVE TO TAKE to have a shot at Worlds, well, sorry, but I laugh at you.

Unless the Best Finish Limit changes, you're COMPLETELY off base. If we assume it doesn't change, you STILL only get to count four tournaments, out of 3 possible STPS and 3 possible Regionals. Last season, you STILL only got to count four tournaments, out of 3 possible STPs and 2 possible Regionals.

They are giving you more options of what spray of tournaments you choose to go to. 5 opportunities or 6 opportunities, the number that will count is exactly the same.

If it comes out later that the BFL is increasing, then go ahead and complain your socks off then. But until that change occurs (if it does at all), you have ZERO reason to complain.
 
All of you who are saying that this just adds another trip you OMG HAVE TO TAKE to have a shot at Worlds, well, sorry, but I laugh at you.

Unless the Best Finish Limit changes, you're COMPLETELY off base. If we assume it doesn't change, you STILL only get to count four tournaments, out of 3 possible STPS and 3 possible Regionals. Last season, you STILL only got to count four tournaments, out of 3 possible STPs and 2 possible Regionals.

They are giving you more options of what spray of tournaments you choose to go to. 5 opportunities or 6 opportunities, the number that will count is exactly the same.

If it comes out later that the BFL is increasing, then go ahead and complain your socks off then. But until that change occurs (if it does at all), you have ZERO reason to complain.
You seem to be completely ignoring the fact that, the more tournaments you play in, the better your chances are in doing well at at least one of them.

TCGs are inherently somewhat luck based. No matter what you do, no matter how good you are, luck can shoot you in the foot. For example, despite getting 1st and then 4th at 2 separate State Championships, I barely whiffed cut at Regionals on resistance. Missing cut on resistance is purely luck based, and I couldn't control that. Because I was only able to attend 2 States and 1 Regional last year, I had NO chance to reach the best finish limit, and my poor luck at ONE tournament really killed my CPs. I couldn't get the the 4 tournaments all counting towards my CPs, and the one tourney I did poorly at (Regionals) gave me almost no CPs, and I had no way to try and make that up by playing in another Regional. Had I attended a 3rd States and a 2nd Regional, I would have had two more chances (out of a potential 5) to beat the variance and eliminate the luck factor, and probably pad my rating a substantial bit more.

The simple fact is, the more tournaments you go to, the more likely you are to hit the Best Finish limit. Think about City Championships. The limit was 5 (I think? I could be wrong here, it was around there, but I'm lazy and don't want to look it up). If I attended 5 Cities, I could in theory reach the best finish limit. But the odds, looking at pure luck, are pretty slim for that. If I attended 10 cities, my chances of making the limit are far higher. 15 cities? Way, WAY higher.

This applies to 3 Regionals. Attending 3 States and 3 Regionals give you 6 shots to earn points in 4 events. Attending 3 State and 2 Regionals gives you 5 shots to earn points in 4 events. Attending 2 States and 2 Regionals gives you only 4 chances to earn points in 4 events, meaning you CANT have a bad luck streak at ANY of these events, or your rating is in jeopardy. Now imagine going to 2 States and 1 Regionals like we use to have in the past; You had better do incredibly well at Cities if you want an invite going to that many Regs and States.

So, honestly, you really DO HAVE TO go to all 3 Regionals to have the best shot at a Worlds invite. You can get an invite without it, but you rely much, much more on luck if you don't go to all 3. And truth is, most people can't go to all 3. Many people couldn't even get to 2 this year.

The other issue is with the locations of events. If we aren't increasing the number of Regionals, that means far greater travel distances to attend the 3rd Regional. Imagine this scenario; I play in Utah. Last year, to get to both Regionals, you had to drive ~9 hours to Colorado (albeit, it'll be in Utah this year), and ~10 hours to Southern California, and you have to pay for at LEAST 4 nights of hotels. That's extremely expensive and time consuming. Now add another Regional. If my guess it correct, the 3rd one would either be NorCal or some place much, much farther, like Texas or Washington. That AT LEAST another ~10 hour drive (probably more), and another 2 nights in a hotel. That is incredibly, INCREDIBLY expensive, and to be quite blunt, the prize support at these tournaments does not, AT ALL warrant that kind of money being spent, considering that there are also 3 States, many Cities, and Nats to attend if you want to get an invite to Worlds.

Anyway, I guess the TL;DR of this post is that THE 3RD REGIONAL IS NOT OPTIONAL like you are making it out to be. A truly competitive player is essentially forced to attend the 3rd Regional or potentially forfeit their invite chances. And that's not cool.

(Thank goodness I'm not really going to be playing at all this year. Even if I was playing this year, I couldn't afford to be serious about it at all. The 2 Regs system was already sorta pushing it for me; 3 Regs just breaks my budget.)
 
The other issue is with the locations of events. If we aren't increasing the number of Regionals, that means far greater travel distances to attend the 3rd Regional. Imagine this scenario; I play in Utah. Last year, to get to both Regionals, you had to drive ~9 hours to Colorado (albeit, it'll be in Utah this year), and ~10 hours to Southern California, and you have to pay for at LEAST 4 nights of hotels. That's extremely expensive and time consuming. Now add another Regional. If my guess it correct, the 3rd one would either be NorCal or some place much, much farther, like Texas or Washington. That AT LEAST another ~10 hour drive (probably more), and another 2 nights in a hotel. That is incredibly, INCREDIBLY expensive, and to be quite blunt, the prize support at these tournaments does not, AT ALL warrant that kind of money being spent, considering that there are also 3 States, many Cities, and Nats to attend if you want to get an invite to Worlds.

The closest Regional to me is a 13 hour drive. Every single year. Nobody will ever get any pity whatsoever from me over having events not in their backyard.
 
Question: Does anyone know when and where the Regionals for California(North & South), will be at?
NorCal on October 13th & 14th and SoCal on April 13th & 14th. I'm keeping a list updated as I find more info here (ignore the one date thing as it's a video game focused site).
The closest Regional to me is a 13 hour drive. Every single year. Nobody will ever get any pity whatsoever from me over having events not in their backyard.
If only those pesky mountains weren't there!

Also, why four nights Raen? Friday Night + Saturday Night + Sunday Night = 3 nights. You could also use a bus and do overnight trips to make it one night!
 
For anyone living in the Northeast, the consequences are likely to be at least one 400+ mile trip to attend one of the Regionals if you plan on going to all 3. This season they were in Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. Make no mistake, if the BFL remains at 4 for States/Regionals odds are you WILL have to travel to all 6 events to remain in contention for a Worlds invite. Most people (even those in the top 40) can reflect on their performance at States/Regionals this season and say they weren't quite satisfied. And despite the added cost of traveling, we will probably not be seeing more prize support for Regionals. This year there was a great disparity between 1st and 2nd place, where 1st got nearly $1000 in products and the paid trip and 2nd basically got 2 boxes and a good luck handshake in the form of 2 byes.

3 Regionals means attendance will increase even further, approaching half the size of US Nationals in some areas. And unless you are the winner of this 300+ person tournament you are getting very little to show for it. Let's be real here, they give you a product that is basically costless for them to make and a few imaginary points given value by the people tangled up in this rat race for the invite.

Like it's been said by many, I don't play this game for the prizes. I play for fun which I find in its strategy and competition. But you can't expect people to spend thousands on transportation, food, hotels and only reward the <<1% who get 1st place at Regionals, top 4 Nationals, top 4 Worlds. TBH, those are the only worthwhile prizes left in existence. The byes and Championship Points don't count because they only get you to the NEXT tournament where you have a CHANCE to get worthwhile prizes if you place in one of the aforementioned rankings.

I can see the direction this game is heading with the current CP and invite structure. Players are given CP's for participating in Worlds, a minimum of 2. This means next year's cut-off should be at least 2 points higher and the 2012 Worlds participants have an extreme advantage. There will be 40ish players in the U.S. who the rest of the population is playing catch up with. We may just see the same people qualify every year because it is in some way a perpetual cycle. Players should have to prove their superiority in every format, not ride on last year's good performance. This goes for everyone, even those people whose names we see in the top 40 year after year. I'm sure they would agree. Even the top 4 get an absurd amount of CP's, even though they already have a paid trip to the next World Championship. That means if they decide to play competitively at all, they are already displacing 4 others who could have had an invite. Why impart this burden on these 4 players? Why award CP's for top 4 at Worlds at all?

With this trend, Worlds 2013 will be an ultra exclusive tournament qualified almost entirely by Worlds 2012 participants who decided to play competitively for another year and the lucky (but skilled!) few who can afford the time and money to travel to an obscene amount of tournaments (this means all 3 Regionals). And all this for a chance to not have to do it again, ironically.

I am not complaining. I am simply making observations and stating that you cannot cut prize support for a growing game and expect positive results for much longer. In fact, all these changes stand to benefit me, personally. I qualified for Worlds this year and I have the expenses to travel next season if I need to. I'm also very grateful to TPCi for the paid trip and hotel at Indianapolis.

I'm also aware that no one that can do anything about this is probably reading this, but that's OK. Maybe some changes will be revealed in September that fix things.
 
I dont think you are REQUIRED to do anything.... you can continue attending the ONE you attended in years past.

However for those who WANT to attend now at least have the option to.

In the past, they were all on one day leaving ALL PLAYERS optionless...

Ross, no one says you HAVE to attend multiple regionals. The great part about this, at least now you have an option to.

If I am not mistaken, They did not remove any events from the calander to make these events possible. Same events, just more opportunities to play in them.



If I am reading this correctly, you are NOT happy with more opportunities for the Community to participate in events, because it makes it more difficult for you to get to worlds?

Isnt the goal to attend worlds? Why should Pokemon punish those players who show continuous support for attending their events?

I dont get it Ross... As a player, I am greatful for more opportunities to play in larger scaled events. Just because you cant make it to multiple the regionals doesnt mean I want Pokemon to restrict MY opportunities to play in them.

The short of it is, multiple regionals are GREAT for the Game and Community as a whole.

Jimmy


Yes, more regionals/events in abstract is a good thing if we neglect travel. But as Raen's post clearly demonstrates, this does essentially force players who want to be competitive to travel much greater distances now. I think that is bad, and I'm not alone. Raen's post spells out that the 'they haven't taken anything away from you so what's the problem?' argument is flawed. This does hinder players who can't make that 3rd regional, which is going to turn into the farthest anyone has had to travel for a tournament outside of the summer than ever before.

Is this going to be good and welcomed by many players? Sure. But it is not great news for any player who a. wants to compete for worlds, and b. finds going to an event not during the summer 8+ hours away difficult. I think many players fit those criteria, not just me. I can't say that more or less players are happy about this decision, but it clearly is not one sided.

Yes there are absolutely pros to this announcement, but there are also cons. More events are great, but more necessary travel to be competitive is not. If Pokemon were able to increase the total number of regionals to be split up, that would certainly have helped the travel issue.
 
I'm biased so I'm going to fit the data to my own prejudices :)

I don't believe the issue is that players want fewer events. So that rebuttal isn't going to persuade anyone. I expect it is that players are now realising that pure inflationary systems force you to play or be left behind. Under elo you could sit out for a couple of events if you did well early on in any event series. Even though strong players complained about play-at-risk it was actually helping them by making it harder to be overtaken. Any individual player could catch up but the pool of players could only catch up slowly.

The CP system has very limited ability to prevent this need to play (aka travel) lots from getting out of control. The best finish limits can be reduced but the CP points are very coarse grained compared to elo so an unwanted side effect of reducing the BFLs is that you get more CP ties. A single point then makes a big difference in final standing at the end of the year which isn't a good thing. A CP bar could be introduced but this too is both a good and bad thing. Knowing that you have to get 50+ CPs at the beginning of the season may mean that many players just stop going to events as they view that 50CPs as too hard. 60+ for NA Juniors and Seniors (Eeek!). Conversely if the bar is too low then Worlds becomes USA vs the rest and European players will feel that the decisions are being made to disadvantage them. Attendance based CPs just adds more inflation into the system and will kill off areas that have low attendances as players will quickly realise that they have to go to the highest attendance events or once more get left behind. (By quickly I mean take a year!)

Elo had to go as players didn't understand all of the good things that play-at-risk produces in a rating system. Whenever something is not understood it isn't long before it is blamed for all the ill in the system. Elo could have been altered to make it a better match for a card game that has a big element of luck to it but given that players already didn't understand how Elo actually works the added complication to account for long range luck would in all probability just cause more complaint.

The CP system can be improved, and I have no doubt that it will be, but it is a much harder task than improving ELO. I don't know what changes are planned to accompany the increased event opportunity. I watch and wait with interest as I don't know what influence I can have on the decisions within POP.....

ps: POP do read these forums, and they do look out for well reasoned argument. But unless a blatant untruth is being promulgated they rarely comment.

[/rant etc I know its an "I told you so" post so please ignore]
 
Last edited:
List from post #16 updated and reposted to here!

Fall- (October 13th-14th)
Great Lakes (Fort Wayne IN)
Pennsylvania (Philadelphia PA)
Nor Cal (Don't know city)
Southern Plains (AKA Texas, Houston, etc.)

Winter- (January 19th-20th)
Florida
Northwest (Oregon)
Mississippi Valley (St. Louis)

Spring-
South Cal
Mid-Atlantic (Virginia)
Western Canada (British Columbia)

Still not known are-
Mountain West
Georgia
Ontario
Midwestern
New England
 
Last edited:
So you're arguing that they should hold fewer regionals so we can get less accurate results? That doesn't seem very competitive.

No, that's clearly not what Raen is arguing. If someone took the time to read and comprehend Raen's post, that person would know that Raen is not arguing that fewer Regionals should be held.

He is in fact arguing that when the same number of Regionals is being held, spacing them out over 3 weekends (instead of 2) puts an undue financial burden on most players. This is because in order to remain competitive for a Worlds invite, players need to maximize their attendance at events where there are a high number of Championship Points at stake. Players who attend 6 States/Regionals have an advantage over players who attend 5 States/Regionals because they get more chances improve their "top 4" performances. When the best finish limit is 4, playing in 5 or 6 events makes a tremendous difference.
 
I'm biased so I'm going to fit the data to my own prejudices :)

I don't believe the issue is that players want fewer events. So that rebuttal isn't going to persuade anyone.
NoPoke, even when your bias is showing, you're posts are worth reading :cool:
 
Back
Top