I love how you guys are complaining about this now, where this has been standard in California for years.
But in previous years it was a GOOD thing. Bigger tournaments=more rounds=more points. Now it doesn't so it is a bad thing.
I love how you guys are complaining about this now, where this has been standard in California for years.
I love how you guys are complaining about this now, where this has been standard in California for years.
P!P needs to remove top cut caps immediately-- and they should have done so years ago. The change in the point system has just made this issue more severe and widespread, so now it is getting the attention it should've gotten at the beginning.
The proper way to determine the size of a top cut should always be directly linked to attendance, and nothing else-- X players = top cut of X. The level of the event should have nothing to do with the size of a top cut. I don't care about factors such as time at a venue or store compensation. Top cut can be moved to a local restaurant, for example, if the venue's hours or the TO's compensation budget doesn't allow further play there. How hard is that to do? I see it all the time. TOs could also select better venues to begin with, start earlier, etc., and P!P could help the TOs out by increasing their compensation allowance, which would make it easier to find those better venues. Yes, that would mean budget changes, but so what? P!P is responsible for giving the playerbase the best tournament experiences possible, and it is ridiculous to hear year after year that money issues are causing tournaments to be grossly compromised and illegitimate. I get so tired of always hearing about how factors unrelated to the actual GAME are responsible for so many of the problems we are forced to deal with.
Missing cut solely due to a cap is ridiculous, and it really does make traveling to events seem like an unworthy gamble, especially since Japan keeps making decisions that seem designed to plunge the game back into the stone age (horrible first turn rule change, printing of cards like Tyrogue and Pokemon Catcher, allowing cards like Zekrom, Pachirisu and Shaymin to be in the same format together), which results in so many stupid losses. How is it good for the game when you can get donked round 1 by Zekrom at a tournament with 60+ people, go undefeated the rest of the day, and STILL miss cut? At least under the old system you could get solid ELO points that MEANT something if you bubbled. Now you get ELO points that largely DON'T matter, and absolutely none of the points that do matter.
Just so you know, it was never intended for Zekrom, Pachirisu and Shaymin to be in the same format, and it certainly isn't Japan's fault. They are playing in a BW~ on format, which eliminates tyrogue, pachirisu and shaymin, hence completely balancing out zekrom and the format.
It is TPCi's fault that we are in the current format, where new cards can interact with older cards in somewhat overpowered ways. If they adopted a release structure like yugioh, where english sets were kept the same as the japanese ones, and were released 1 set apart, the game would be better.
On topic: the simplest solution is just to remove the top cut restriction for BR's, and just have it like other tournements.
No, ZPS were all in the same format in Japan. It is Japan who made these cards, and put then in the same format. A bigger top cut is a good idea, but does hurt venue time dramatically.
Personally, I think that would be great...if it weren't for the three trophy cards now given at BRs. With those, I feel that the two losers from Top4 need to face off to fairly determine the winner. Besides, top cut is where all the other players have the opportunity to watch the games and see what is winning in their local market. It allows you to learn and build for your meta. Without that opportunity it creates an environment of a 'stacked deck' wherein the same people will have a greater chance at winning as the meta is kept more secret, and that would eventually turn people away from Pokemon.
Prof Clay hits the nail on the head.
I have locations that I rent tables and chairs in order to seat all the players that come there for a City Championship.
I just can't afford to do that with a Battle Road. I'd be spending more money than what I get compensated.
And, while I see a number of TOs saying they don't care if they lose money running tournaments, I'm sorry, but that is just not a sustainable model. Plus I'd have a hard time explaining it to my wife where are mortgage money went!
Its getting so competitive, we're going to have to organize league tournaments to replace BRs as entry level events for new players.
because in a points based system you are rewarding the win and not how hard it was to get there. It is important not to dilute that concept or bad things happen....I think we are getting off topic, the bigger issue is why does a 70 player BR give the same amount of points for getting 1st than one that only has 8 players, that to me just doesn't seem fair or even to the player who won over 70 players.
Drew
Discuss whether a BR should give out points is a silly argument. They do, and I don't see that changing.
I think we are getting off topic, the bigger issue is why does a 70 player BR give the same amount of points for getting 1st than one that only has 8 players, that to me just doesn't seem fair or even to the player who won over 70 players.
Drew
The prizes are WAY too small.
I don't even WANT to play through top 8 if I'm just getting 2 propoints and 4 packs. really really not worth it in the interest of time.
---------- Post added 10/06/2011 at 01:21 PM ----------
Some areas just have more players... there's no reason we should reward them more just because they live in a more populous area.
ELO rewarded larger tournaments, propoints doesnt. Those of you in big areas had the benefit for years. Give us a chance.