Moderator: Community Team
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
P4Ssoa wrote:You say, "We don't think much of it." So you see yourself as the whole community? Or you think you can speak for the whole community?
Did you even take a look at it greenoaks? Because if you didn't, I would say that's very unrespectful... I put a lot of time in writing that post.
You may think you contribute a lot to this forum or whatever, but unrespectful comments like yours make me want to stay out of the forum. I don't care if my idea gets put to the ground, if it happens on a respectful way, with good arguments.
Maybe the community doesn't care, maybe the community is just too inactive, maybe they don't care about tournaments at all,...
In my opinion, when the improvements are implemented, it would be a very big step forward for this website.
IRT: Doomyoshi:
Thanks for commenting. I hope you can read more later!
I would say they start a tournament because it's fun. When it's fully automated it wouldn't be worth a medal though. Everyone can start a tournament in that case. People would make tournaments, because they want to play in a tournament with a certain setup then. Just like the normal games, but then in a bigger picture.
I'm not sure if automated tournaments is a good idea though...
Greenoaks, with 7903 posts I am sure you know your way around this website. With 33 tournament wins, I'm sure you also know everything about tournaments. But you really disappoint me with the content (or better yet lack of content) in your last reply. It's clear that the threshold for posting isn't very high for you.
Night Strike wrote:So why should everything be coded into the site instead of controlled by the users? I don't understand the necessity.
P4Ssoa wrote:A special platform could hold more tournament features then the current forum setup.
Night Strike wrote:P4Ssoa wrote:A special platform could hold more tournament features then the current forum setup.
Incorrect. No single system could be coded to provide the variety of tournaments that posting them in the forum allows. Currently, an organizer is limited by only what they choose to deal with, excluding a few specific rules. There are some features that can be included and will be over time, but I don't see the need to code the system to do the work for you. "Professional" just means the site does the work instead of the organizer. CC Tournaments are designed to be user-driven content, not site-driven.
blakebowling wrote:Of course, before any of these changes are made, I will get feedback from the TO's to see exactly what they want/need from such an update.
Night Strike wrote:blakebowling wrote:Of course, before any of these changes are made, I will get feedback from the TO's to see exactly what they want/need from such an update.
Thought that was what we TDs are for. And the features that we truly want are supposedly already on a list for the future.
blakebowling wrote:Night Strike wrote:blakebowling wrote:Of course, before any of these changes are made, I will get feedback from the TO's to see exactly what they want/need from such an update.
Thought that was what we TDs are for. And the features that we truly want are supposedly already on a list for the future.
As far as I'm concerned, the TD's are TO's as well (for the most part). I also thought it was obvious that the TD's would be included in the feedback.
P4Ssoa wrote:Ps: Greenoaks, if you had an old nokia 3310, (the bastard almost never breaks.) you will never have that shiny iPhone then?
Night Strike wrote:You're to the point that you may be making it too easy for players to join tournaments. Going to the forum at least requires enough effort that most people will play in the tournament without disappearing. If all you have to do is click a button to join, then you're probably going to have more people who won't actually join their games.
saxitoxin wrote:Serbia is a RUDE DUDE
may not be a PRUDE, but he's gotta 'TUDE
might not be LEWD, but he's gonna get BOOED
RUDE
Serbia wrote:Night Strike wrote:You're to the point that you may be making it too easy for players to join tournaments. Going to the forum at least requires enough effort that most people will play in the tournament without disappearing. If all you have to do is click a button to join, then you're probably going to have more people who won't actually join their games.
For me personally, this is the biggest argument against any automated join system for tournaments. I know blake mentioned earlier that he'd like to see a "Join" button option, but I'd be very much against that for the reasons Night Strike just laid out.
general cod wrote:Good points for and against - It's good to discuss these and other topics as this will only to help improve players experiences. 'If it isn't broke why fix it' is my weak comment to add
P4Ssoa wrote:I agree, that's something to think about. But could requirements for joining not partially solve this problem?
greenoaks wrote:we have a limited amount of resources to make changes and many, many changes that could be made. pointing out that things are fine as they are is quite reasonable, and helpful to determine where those limited resources could be deployed.
Night Strike wrote:P4Ssoa wrote:I agree, that's something to think about. But could requirements for joining not partially solve this problem?
Those same requirements for joining could actually be the cause of why the tournament is not meeting the minimum requirements. Plus, we look for unfair structures to the tournament such as unequal paths to win (one player can't play 3 rounds while most other players have to play 6 rounds).
P4Ssoa wrote:Night Strike wrote:P4Ssoa wrote:I agree, that's something to think about. But could requirements for joining not partially solve this problem?
Those same requirements for joining could actually be the cause of why the tournament is not meeting the minimum requirements. Plus, we look for unfair structures to the tournament such as unequal paths to win (one player can't play 3 rounds while most other players have to play 6 rounds).
I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by this. Can you please explain? What do you mean by "the tournament is not meeting the minimum requirements"? And what do you mean by: you look for unfair structures to the tournament?
You want to say tournaments like that are not allowed?
I'm not sure if I don't understand it, because I know too little about tournaments, or maybe my english isn't good enough.
P4Ssoa wrote:I am organizing a tournament at this moment. This is why I started this topic in the first plays. I see a system that could be so much better.
All the things you mentioned could easily be solved. You just need to do some effort and brainstorm with me.
Instead of:
Bad suggestion because we cannot check the tournaments if they meet the website rules.
You could've said:
Something to think about: The tournaments should always be checked if they meet the CC rules before people are allowed to join. So before they go on the "join tournament" page, were players can see them, they should go to the tounrament staff for review. Only when the staff verifies them, they should turn up on the join tournament page.
You can look for flaws to put this idea to the ground, but you can also help to get rid of these flaws and make a brilliant system.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users