Attention Please 3 for 1

[Blitzaholic]

I think it would be fair if the CC site with it's newest update rewards map makers and tournament makers as it does for tourney's now, however, lets be FAIR.


No disrespect, it is very hard work, but lets make it something like every 3 tournaments you host, you receive 1 medal.


I mean, how can one guy have like over 30 medals just on tourneys alone???????????????????????/ when if you dont make tourneys the max you can get is 27??????????


I suggest for every 3 you receive 1 medal





and yes you can move this to suggestions and bugs or whatever, but thought it would be nice here for a few days so it can get some more attention, I think most agree, this would be more fair, CORRECT?


I mean if you hosted 30 tourneys, why would you get 30 medals???? should be more like 30 tourney's hosted you would get 10 medals, this is much more fair?



what do others think?

[hwhrhett]

i concur.

[Night Strike]

Changes are being considered.

[bbqpenguin]

seems fair enough, but i don't really care about medals anyway

[Blitzaholic]

Changes are being considered.

thank you sir

[wcaclimbing]

I think it would be fair if the CC site with it's newest update rewards map makers and tournament makers as it does for tourney's now, however, lets be FAIR.

Making a map takes months of hard work, which should deserve more than just a medal, in my opinion. Helping make new maps for this place, working for a long time, eventually giving your map to CC, it at least should earn you one medal for each map.

[prismsaber]

I'd go a step further and make it possible to receive only 1 medal for making a tournament. 3 max, just like any other medal.

[Sentinel XIV]

So, do we measure the sign of our worth by how many medals we have now? I get that working on tournaments and maps is a lot of work and self-sacrifice, and I'm not trying to take anything away from anyone, but it seems like a lot of people are putting more worth on these medals than they deserve.

I suppose I see both sides of the argument. Let me put it to you this way, though:

would you stop making the maps if you received fewer medals?

I don't think you would. You're going to make maps because that's what you like to do. So, what does it matter?

Just playing Devil's Advocate.

[danodukebb]

I dont like the 3/1 rule...i like the 3 medals for tourneys...

I am doing an NFL tourney right now which is going to take at least 2-4or even maybe 5 months to finish...if not 6

why should that count as 1/3 of a medal?

[gameplayer]

It's hard to find a consistent way to reward tournament organizers due to the wide range of tournament sizes. For example, in the current system, a 16-player single elimination 1v1 tournament scores the same as a 144 all-map iron man event. I don't think it would be fair to give a third of a medal to a large tournament like that which takes a long time and a lot of effort to complete. There probably is a better way to score tournament contributions, but this isn't it.

[Night Strike]

It's hard to find a consistent way to reward tournament organizers due to the wide range of tournament sizes. For example, in the current system, a 16-player single elimination 1v1 tournament scores the same as a 144 all-map iron man event. I don't think it would be fair to give a third of a medal to a large tournament like that which takes a long time and a lot of effort to complete. There probably is a better way to score tournament contributions, but this isn't it.

And having to check the size for every single one of them is why the TDs haven't gone that route. Plus, where would the line be drawn?

Everybody, keep discussing possible solutions to the tournament medals system. The TDs have a few ideas, but more are always welcome. I might move this to Tournament General Info forum, but it's fine here for now.

[hwhrhett]

of course it is a lot of work for someone to do a tournament or make a map, but it is also alot of work to defeat 500 unique opponents at any given game style. and ill bet hour for hour, it takes alot more work to get your silver or gold medal in any of the game types than it takes for a tournament or map.

[gameplayer]

It's hard to find a consistent way to reward tournament organizers due to the wide range of tournament sizes. For example, in the current system, a 16-player single elimination 1v1 tournament scores the same as a 144 all-map iron man event. I don't think it would be fair to give a third of a medal to a large tournament like that which takes a long time and a lot of effort to complete. There probably is a better way to score tournament contributions, but this isn't it.

And having to check the size for every single one of them is why the TDs haven't gone that route. Plus, where would the line be drawn?

Everybody, keep discussing possible solutions to the tournament medals system. The TDs have a few ideas, but more are always welcome. I might move this to Tournament General Info forum, but it's fine here for now.

You could have classes based on tournament sizes, for example
Class A= 16-32 players
Class B= 32-48 players
Class C= 48-64 players
Class D= 64-72 players
Class E= 72-128 players
Class F= 128+

And TD's wouldn't even have to check for every tournament, a new requirement when sending in tournament privilege requests would be listing the class size of your tournament

[gameplayer]

of course it is a lot of work for someone to do a tournament or make a map, but it is also alot of work to defeat 500 unique opponents at any given game style. and ill bet hour for hour, it takes alot more work to get your silver or gold medal in any of the game types than it takes for a tournament or map.

Again, this depends on the size of the tournament. A large tournament takes a lot of time to create all the games, send out all the pms, update all of the standings, etc. A large tournament would probably take about the same amount of time as a silver medal, I would guess.

[Night Strike]

of course it is a lot of work for someone to do a tournament or make a map, but it is also alot of work to defeat 500 unique opponents at any given game style. and ill bet hour for hour, it takes alot more work to get your silver or gold medal in any of the game types than it takes for a tournament or map.

Sorry man, but that isn't exactly an option. There are many people who stay on this site ONLY because of playing in tournaments, so those organizers need some sort of recognition for keeping players playing. Also, there are many tournament players who were freemium but decided to buy in just so they could play in more tournaments.


Gameplayer, how would you divide up the awarding of medals based on those classes? Also, wouldn't partial medals have to be recorded somewhere until an organizer earned enough for a full medal?

[gameplayer]

of course it is a lot of work for someone to do a tournament or make a map, but it is also alot of work to defeat 500 unique opponents at any given game style. and ill bet hour for hour, it takes alot more work to get your silver or gold medal in any of the game types than it takes for a tournament or map.

Sorry man, but that isn't exactly an option. There are many people who stay on this site ONLY because of playing in tournaments, so those organizers need some sort of recognition for keeping players playing. Also, there are many tournament players who were freemium but decided to buy in just so they could play in more tournaments.


Gameplayer, how would you divide up the awarding of medals based on those classes? Also, wouldn't partial medals have to be recorded somewhere until an organizer earned enough for a full medal?

Yeah...that's the problem with medals, partial ones look weird. As far as a full medal, I'd say about 64-72 is worth one medal. I'm not sure how the rest would be divided up though, I'll think about it.

[Timminz]

Why not measure each tournament by games played, and give bronze, silver, or gold medals based on total tournament games created? I don't know what the levels should be. I would leave that up to people with more knowledge of tournaments.

Do the same thing for map makers. Maybe 1 map for bronze, 5 for silver, and 10 for gold?

This way, the only medal that didn't fit the gold/silver/bronze structure would be the special contribution medal.

[hwhrhett]

of course it is a lot of work for someone to do a tournament or make a map, but it is also alot of work to defeat 500 unique opponents at any given game style. and ill bet hour for hour, it takes alot more work to get your silver or gold medal in any of the game types than it takes for a tournament or map.

Sorry man, but that isn't exactly an option. There are many people who stay on this site ONLY because of playing in tournaments, so those organizers need some sort of recognition for keeping players playing. Also, there are many tournament players who were freemium but decided to buy in just so they could play in more tournaments.


Gameplayer, how would you divide up the awarding of medals based on those classes? Also, wouldn't partial medals have to be recorded somewhere until an organizer earned enough for a full medal?

i think i was misunderstood, im not saying that they shouldnt be recognized for their work. im just saying that its thrown around alot that they put alot of work into it. but i think they forget sometimes that there are alot of people that put alot of time into this site that are just playing games. and lets face it, the last thing we need is a bunch of unorganized and lazy folks making a bunch of shitty tournaments because they want more medals. the same could be said for maps. i would think that a scale is best, where 1 is bronze, 3 is silver, and 10 is gold. similar to the way they are for game styles. nobody that doesnt deserve a gold is gonna make 10 maps, or finish 10 tournaments.

[e_i_pi]

You could have classes based on tournament sizes, for example
Class A= 16-32 players
Class B= 32-48 players
Class C= 48-64 players
Class D= 64-72 players
Class E= 72-128 players
Class F= 128+

And TD's wouldn't even have to check for every tournament, a new requirement when sending in tournament privilege requests would be listing the class size of your tournament

Not meaning to be a pain in the neck, but I'm running a 17-player league at the moment. A 16 player simple knockout means 15 games set up. My league is going to have 136 games total. So this formula, as it stands won't work out fairly

[Night Strike]

and lets face it, the last thing we need is a bunch of unorganized and lazy folks making a bunch of shitty tournaments because they want more medals.

Which is exactly something that is being taken into consideration. (By the way, a crappy map wouldn't make it through the foundry process, so you shouldn't have to worry about that.)

The problem with having gold/silver/bronze based on tournament size is that it would take a lot more design work to have all those levels.

[danodukebb]

player number don't even matter...i have 32 players but its a 16 "week/event/game" thing...plus a playoff system...

[edbeard]

i think i was misunderstood, im not saying that they shouldnt be recognized for their work. im just saying that its thrown around alot that they put alot of work into it. but i think they forget sometimes that there are alot of people that put alot of time into this site that are just playing games. and lets face it, the last thing we need is a bunch of unorganized and lazy folks making a bunch of shitty tournaments because they want more medals. the same could be said for maps. i would think that a scale is best, where 1 is bronze, 3 is silver, and 10 is gold. similar to the way they are for game styles. nobody that doesnt deserve a gold is gonna make 10 maps, or finish 10 tournaments.

I think all your idea does is limit the number of tournaments they'll make. If a person is going to make 10, 16 player tournaments, let 'em. if they run it horribly, then people won't join any future ones from them and they'll only be able to get one or two medals. why the big deal over what other people do to get tons of medals? Just because I think medals are a bit useless doesn't mean I'm going to try and ruin the fun for the people that see them as the bees knees.


also, it's not the same for maps because of the whole process it takes to make a map. A shitty half-assed map won't make it out of the ideas forum. A shitty tournament can be run from start to finish.

[what,me worry?]

you should only receive up to 3 medals for this catagory like every other medal. create 5 maps you got bronze, 10 maps is silver and 20 maps for gold.


cant be handing out medals like candy at halloween

[Night Strike]

you should only receive up to 3 medals for this catagory like every other medal. create 5 maps you got bronze, 10 maps is silver and 20 maps for gold.


cant be handing out medals like candy at halloween

Tournament medals are currently limited to thirty. (That's how many were designed.)

[hulmey]

of course it is a lot of work for someone to do a tournament or make a map, but it is also alot of work to defeat 500 unique opponents at any given game style. and ill bet hour for hour, it takes alot more work to get your silver or gold medal in any of the game types than it takes for a tournament or map.

To be honest you have no idea how hard it is to make a tournament and stick with it! Congrats to all the people who have managed to successfully conclude a tournament and all those with lots of tournament medals!!!!

I do also feel thaht map maphmahkersh should get 2 medals for 1 map or sumfink similar