Top 8 of the CCS Should be Constructed

    • AnomalyCobra wrote:

      i don't understand how you feel limited isn't high quality
      Read my first post. This isn't about feelings.

      This is about the objective data from other TCGs that have supported coverage of both limited and constructed events. The limited events consistently have worse numbers - including the limited portions of dual format limited / constructed events.

      Yes there are people who prefer limited and prefer watching it, but a bulk of the skill in limited formats is during drafting / deck construction portion of it - not during the game play.
    • JeffHoogland wrote:

      I'd love to be able to tell people who show interest in Hex "Hey - go to twitch.tv/hextcg every Saturday and Sunday for high quality Hex coverage" but I can't do that currently. Not only do we not have coverage every week of the events we already have, but when we do have coverage it is being done on a volunteer basis that really limits what people are able to invest into their productions.

      tl/dr: Hex doesn't need more events. It needs to optimize the ones it has and start having official supported coverage.
      i read every post Jeff... but you are insinuating that limited doesn't create high quality content. I 100% agree coverage needs to be revamped but that has nothing to do with the notion of changing to 8 to constructed
    • coverage needs work more than anything else, yes.

      maybe steal LSV from dire wolf (hahahahaahahahhahahahahahahhahahaahahahhahha but seriously do that)

      but pretending objective data from other TCGs should be used here to affect the structure of tournaments while we still don't have loved casual formats is maybe the worst ccg design/development take of all time

      all signs indicate that hex does not operate on external objective data

      use feels not reals to make your points
    • If its for coverage purposes (which I agree: it should be improved by Hex, even by hiring the current casters and giving them the proper tools to work with), then 2 CCSs should be the norm, one day for limited and one day for constructed. Mixing both formats will always create "unfair" situations, and while I do agree that deciding the CCS champion on limited is anything but exciting, I dont find a good solution with what he have.

      Now, another question (totally off topic) is that if improving coverage have any means with only 150 viewers at average.
      Twitter: @Plotynus
    • AnomalyCobra wrote:

      but you are insinuating that limited doesn't create high quality content.
      I am not "insinuating" anything. I say what I mean.

      Nowhere have I said anything about the quality of limited content. What I have commented on is the popularity of limited content when it comes to streams of competitive events. Again it comes down to the biggest part of limited not involving game play - it involves deck building. Seeing good players draft is really interesting. Seeing good players slam their draft decks into each other is less interesting. This is subjective, but other games have shown this to be the popular subjective opinion - which was the reason I created this thread with the suggestion.


      schild wrote:

      coverage needs work more than anything else, yes.

      maybe steal LSV from dire wolf (hahahahaahahahhahahahahahahhahahaahahahhahha but seriously do that)

      but pretending objective data from other TCGs should be used here to affect the structure of tournaments while we still don't have loved casual formats is maybe the worst ccg design/development take of all time

      all signs indicate that hex does not operate on external objective data

      use feels not reals to make your points
      I've tried to make a point not to poke into other threads on these forums any more, but apparently every shit poster here is now coming running when I start my own thread so I guess I should stop posting all together.

      We get it dude. You want fucking EDH in Hex and you know what? I think that sounds awesome. I think playing with mercenaries and using PVE cards against my buddies sounds like a great way to play some Hex when I bored of standard.

      This thread isn't about that though - so please go somewhere else to keep saying the same shit you've said 1000 times already everywhere else.
    • Plotynus wrote:

      Mixing both formats will always create "unfair" situations,
      How is it "unfair" to expect players at your largest event to practice both limited and constructed? If you want a limited only or constructed only event that pays cause those already happen literally every weekend.

      Plotynus wrote:

      Now, another question (totally off topic) is that if improving coverage have any means with only 150 viewers at average.
      I don't seem to be able to access the video stats on the Hex Twitch page with my permissions, but we had more than this for the last stream Mat, Androod, and I did. That audience would also grow if people knew there was something worth watching consistently every week. I agree that is a different topic than this thread though.
    • JeffHoogland wrote:

      schild wrote:

      coverage needs work more than anything else, yes.

      maybe steal LSV from dire wolf (hahahahaahahahhahahahahahahhahahaahahahhahha but seriously do that)

      but pretending objective data from other TCGs should be used here to affect the structure of tournaments while we still don't have loved casual formats is maybe the worst ccg design/development take of all time

      all signs indicate that hex does not operate on external objective data

      use feels not reals to make your points
      I've tried to make a point not to poke into other threads on these forums any more, but apparently every shit poster here is now coming running when I start my own thread so I guess I should stop posting all together.
      We get it dude. You want fucking EDH in Hex and you know what? I think that sounds awesome. I think playing with mercenaries and using PVE cards against my buddies sounds like a great way to play some Hex when I bored of standard.

      This thread isn't about that though - so please go somewhere else to keep saying the same shit you've said 1000 times already everywhere else.

      Hey, guy. I can't even challenge someone with rules enforcement on Rock. If this were only about EDH I'd have called it out.

      Im in support of better coverage as well as adjusting things got more viewership (though in this case, given the nature of entry, I think you're 100% wrong). But overall, your feels on this subject are fair and accurate.

      My point was that external objective data isn't used for other decisions so even if you make a solid argument, you're pissing in the wind a bit.

      But thanks for missing the point entirely and reminding me why you're exalted.

      To wit, if you think I'm a shit poster, you need to get out more. Also, maybe possibly put on your big boy pants before getting on the internet every day.
    • AnomalyCobra wrote:

      A great comparison to this would be a Biathlon.. Bicycling + Running... you don't see the cyclist saying "well this is unfair, im not that great of a runner " biathlons require skill in 2 areas to win.

      You could look at the CCS as a Biathlon of sorts. The Clash and Bash are the individual competitions and the CCS combines them with is perfectly fine
      I don't think that's a good comparison. In biathlon, you complete BOTH Bicycling and Running. You can be the slowest in the bicycling portion but you can chase back your opponents on the running part. On CCS, if you cannot top 8 the first day, you don't play the draft portion. Thus, if we have to compare it to biathlon, then only the top 8 in bicycling segment can do the running part, others are all out, which I don't think is true to those contests. Thus, it's not a fair comparison.
    • If a Biathlon cut everyone except the top 8 after the cycling part the point remains that the sprinters that managed to get top 8 would still have a chance in that participants area of skill. If the whole race was cycling then the Sprinter would be at a disadvantage the whole time.
    • In a biathlon event where both parts are completed by everyone, you have to do well in both things to win, or be superior in one part and leverage your advantage on that part to win. But it doesn't matter which part you are good at. You can be behind on the cycling part and then outrun every freaking one of the people. It doesn't matter if you are (a)decent in running and cycling, (b)good at running bad at cycling or (c)good at cycling bad at running, you all have a decent chance to win, maybe even equal chance of winning the event. This is the same reason why heptathlon use point system and have athlete participate in every of the 7 events to decide who is the best heptathlon athlete. They don't just cut out some of them out after the first event because they suck at that part.

      In a biathlon event where the running is only for the top 8, you must be good in cycling, you absolutely must be, because you ain't making to the top 8 running portion in a biathlon event without being decently good at cycling, especially when these events . You cannot be behind on the cycling part because you will not get the chance to outrun everyone later on being behind. That means in this kind of setup, you must be good at running, no exception. Among the three archetypes above, the (b) type of athlete would have distinct advantage over (a) and (c) and (c) is especially punished by this ruleset.

      Edit: And of course, a CCS of one format is incredibly stupid. I absolutely agree with you on that part.
    • JeffHoogland wrote:

      I really don't understand people with the thought process of:

      "If limited isn't good for coverage, the solution isn't removing limited from the top 8 and moving it to the swiss, it is creating an entirely new event that is all limited"

      Why create an entirely new event with formats that are less popular for coverage? I don't think Hex needs more cash events right now. I think Hex needs official, supported coverage of the existing events it has. Events at their baseline should be advertising, while simply having them exist is something, promoting them and letting people follow them pushes them even further and get's Hex's name out there more.

      I'd love to be able to tell people who show interest in Hex "Hey - go to twitch.tv/hextcg every Saturday and Sunday for high quality Hex coverage" but I can't do that currently. Not only do we not have coverage every week of the events we already have, but when we do have coverage it is being done on a volunteer basis that really limits what people are able to invest into their productions.

      tl/dr: Hex doesn't need more events. It needs to optimize the ones it has and start having official supported coverage.
      Because it’s not just about constructed players. I play pretty much just limited and could not care less about constructed. There is a reason why people qualify on the limited section.

      Also just as a number of players playing limited has always had been more popular ( as in number of players playing not watching )

      So why punish them ?

      And I understand your point of view as for viewers and popularity in those watching but the game won’t become an all star game because we remove the limited play out of the ccs but will only punish thise that like limited as a high playing field
    • id prefer to change the tournament from season to season.

      for example:
      CCS season 1 = main phase constructed - top8 draft
      CCS season 2 = main phase sealed (like clash) - top8 constructed
      and so on

      since you can qualify through limited and constructed, this might be the most fair system (imo)

      or even better - make it 2 events
      1 CCS for limited with sealed and top8 draft
      1 CCS for constructed with pure constructed

      :p
      Austrian Kickstarter & Slacker Backer
      -=] Dont mess with the bull, you gonna get the horn [=-
    • Portensio wrote:

      Because it’s not just about constructed players. I play pretty much just limited and could not care less about constructed. There is a reason why people qualify on the limited section.

      Also just as a number of players playing limited has always had been more popular ( as in number of players playing not watching )

      So why punish them ?

      And I understand your point of view as for viewers and popularity in those watching but the game won’t become an all star game because we remove the limited play out of the ccs but will only punish thise that like limited as a high playing field
      This is my last post in this thread because interacting with people who haven't read what I've posted is both a waste of time and incredibly frustrating.

      My first post in this thread literally suggests adding more limited to the CCS than we have now. It just suggests we put it in a place that isn't the top 8.

      I don't understand why this is difficult to comprehend, but you aren't the only person to respond to this thread like you only read the title and came to the conclusion I wanted the CCS to be all constructed.

      So for the last time with some feeling:

      The CCS as a split format event is amazing. It should include both limited and constructed. In fact - I think it should include both limited and constructed in the swiss so EVERYONE has to play both.

      Where it shouldn't include limited is the top 8. That is all.
    • JeffHoogland wrote:

      Portensio wrote:

      Because it’s not just about constructed players. I play pretty much just limited and could not care less about constructed. There is a reason why people qualify on the limited section.

      Also just as a number of players playing limited has always had been more popular ( as in number of players playing not watching )

      So why punish them ?

      And I understand your point of view as for viewers and popularity in those watching but the game won’t become an all star game because we remove the limited play out of the ccs but will only punish thise that like limited as a high playing field
      This is my last post in this thread because interacting with people who haven't read what I've posted is both a waste of time and incredibly frustrating.
      My first post in this thread literally suggests adding more limited to the CCS than we have now. It just suggests we put it in a place that isn't the top 8.

      I don't understand why this is difficult to comprehend, but you aren't the only person to respond to this thread like you only read the title and came to the conclusion I wanted the CCS to be all constructed.

      So for the last time with some feeling:

      The CCS as a split format event is amazing. It should include both limited and constructed. In fact - I think it should include both limited and constructed in the swiss so EVERYONE has to play both.

      Where it shouldn't include limited is the top 8. That is all.
      I agree that the answer might give the impression that you said that there should be no limited in the CCS, and its true that you did mention that it can be made somewhere else in the event (like the first rounds) , where its actually logical, but by your own words, it would require more Dev time, which at this time would not be a priority.

      This by itself leaves, on the short term would mean either:

      - Leave CCS as is to include both
      - Seperate in 2 events, which would require less Dev time then including it somewhere else so that Constructed gets more viewers.


      Sometimes discussions depens and expand into other ideas, that does not mean that because we don't answer directly at the original post that we are not reading, just we are mostly answering what the latest conversation is heading. People suggested different formats (as a short term idea )

      Life is short :) no need be frustrated :)
    • JeffHoogland wrote:

      I think Hex needs official, supported coverage of the existing events it has. Events at their baseline should be advertising, while simply having them exist is something, promoting them and letting people follow them pushes them even further and get's Hex's name out there more.

      I'd love to be able to tell people who show interest in Hex "Hey - go to twitch.tv/hextcg every Saturday and Sunday for high quality Hex coverage" but I can't do that currently. Not only do we not have coverage every week of the events we already have, but when we do have coverage it is being done on a volunteer basis that really limits what people are able to invest into their productions.
      The number of viewers is nowhere near large enough to justify investing money in coverage, or changing the format for the sake of viewers. This doesn't mean your suggestion is necessarily a bad idea, but it needs to be justified by showing it's better for the players rather than the small number of people who are watching the event.

      I'd actually like to see them go the opposite direction with coverage. I think they should get rid of the main-channel coverage in order to help Hex streamers get more of a following on their individual channels. As it is, the main channel is soaking up most of the oxygen in the room during the big events, and as a result it's hard for streamers to get even double-digit viewer counts.
    • I just want to say that I really like the earlier suggestion of having the same Sealed pool for everyone. It would be fascinating to see what deckbuilding decisions were made. I cannot see everyone building the exact same deck, or even choosing the same thresholds, so I don't see that as boring, but I could be wrong. It would be doubly fascinating if the pool happened to be crappy. This would also be fair, as you could never blame things like the seat in your draft pod or a poor matchup (in Constructed). Everyone would be on equal footing, and only by skilfully reading what others might play and preparing for that would get you ahead. The mind games would be entertaining to witness. Can we try that even once in some tournament? Even draft is a bit too luck-based, because someone always gets more lucky with open colors or opened bombs.