The Clash/Bash Top 8 Payout structure should be slightly reworked IMO

    • NeroJinous wrote:

      Paying money doesn't remove the fun. You can buy a console game for $60 or download a free one from console app stores. Does that make the $60 game not fun?
      Normally card games have entry fees even at local levels, but everyone who enters normally gets close to their entry fee back in prizes(Like everyone who comes gets at least 1 booster pack) Sneak peeks are around $30-$50, but you get most of your money back in new product and promos. I don't think many would call locals or sneak peeks unfun.
      apples to oranges comparison. People don't buy breath of the wild to compete for money. When you are advertising a cash reward for a cash entry tournament the level of seriousness oppose to fun changes. Yeah if you want to play your boglam deck for $7 sure no one is stopping you. I personally don't have fun losing, especially at something I've paid money to compete in. Even though I do it alot.

    • Lowering the winnings for the top finishers discourages the best players from participating. Time + Effort + Money v Potential Gains. Lower potential gains, and it won't be worth the time effort and money of competing.

      Also giving all Top 8 players money is unfair to people with the same records that didn't qualify due to tiebreakers. Wanna be fair? Add a monetary reward for everyone that had similar record (I guess that's 5W 2L ?) as the top 8 qualifiers.

      Or change the whole system, somehow.

    • Vroengard wrote:

      Lowering the winnings for the top finishers discourages the best players from participating. Time + Effort + Money v Potential Gains. Lower potential gains, and it won't be worth the time effort and money of competing.

      Also giving all Top 8 players money is unfair to people with the same records that didn't qualify due to tiebreakers. Wanna be fair? Add a monetary reward for everyone that had similar record (I guess that's 5W 2L ?) as the top 8 qualifiers
      7-2 is different than 7-2... if you lost to someone at 7-0 and 7-1 you still outperformed someone who lost to someone at 0-0 and 0-1 when those opponents could have possibly went 2-2 or worse and dropped

    • It always struck me as odd that you could top 8 and still not get cash - so yeah, I'm totally in favor of this or something like it. I'd also be fine with a platinum reward for 5-8 if they don't want to mess with the cash prizes or have more cash prizes to give out each week. I also like the idea of giving a small platinum prize to people who already have both the sleeves and board (even just 1000p would be nice), though that's a separate issue and that's not nearly as big a deal as the cash prizes for all top 8s is.
      --ossuary

      "Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none."
      - Shakespeare, All's Well That Ends Well

    • Vroengard wrote:

      Lowering the winnings for the top finishers discourages the best players from participating. Time + Effort + Money v Potential Gains. Lower potential gains, and it won't be worth the time effort and money of competing.
      Disagree, especially when there are no bigger weekly tournament in Hex and there are nowhere for the best players to go if they don't participate in this. B/C is still ultimately the biggest weekly event no matter how they adjust the top 8 prize pool so the best players who want to play for cash still have to play in them. Also, even the best player can't consistently get top 4 when they reach top 8 so the average EV from reaching top 8 post-adjustment is positive to me.

    • Vroengard wrote:

      Lowering the winnings for the top finishers discourages the best players from participating. Time + Effort + Money v Potential Gains. Lower potential gains, and it won't be worth the time effort and money of competing.

      Also giving all Top 8 players money is unfair to people with the same records that didn't qualify due to tiebreakers. Wanna be fair? Add a monetary reward for everyone that had similar record (I guess that's 5W 2L ?) as the top 8 qualifiers.

      Or change the whole system, somehow.
      if the points system used in this game is similar to mtg the math involved is insane. When it comes to people with same record it varies drastically. If you are 7-1 and lost in round 1 you will continuously play someone that has lost 1 game. If your loss comes in the 8th round you've played undefeated decks for all 8 rounds. The guy that went undefeated will have a better score going into tiebreakers. This is just one factor. Tiebreakers are extremely confusing. I'm just grateful you cant have a tie in this game.

    • Dino could check me on this, but my guess is part of the reason why the tournaments are structured this way, is so they don't have to track down and cut payments to 16x people per week, vs. 8x. It may seem like a novel difference, but it's not considering how much time the process takes most companies.

      Regardless, prize structure should be reviewed.

    • Personally I feel that someone who walks away from a tournament thinking "Rough breaks in the end, but it's pretty awesome I walked away with $100 and I'm going to get the big prize next time!" has had a much more positive experience and is more likely to return than "Rough breaks in the end, can't believe I don't get a damn thing for sitting and playing for hours and hours and doing so well."

      I don't see it as a huge loss if someone thinks themselves above the tournament and doesn't play because first prize isn't as big as they would like, that just gives more players a chance to get into the cash and feel even more excited about the game.

    • Mitthrawnuruodo wrote:

      Personally I feel that someone who walks away from a tournament thinking "Rough breaks in the end, but it's pretty awesome I walked away with $100 and I'm going to get the big prize next time!" has had a much more positive experience and is more likely to return than "Rough breaks in the end, can't believe I don't get a damn thing for sitting and playing for hours and hours and doing so well."

      I don't see it as a huge loss if someone thinks themselves above the tournament and doesn't play because first prize isn't as big as they would like, that just gives more players a chance to get into the cash and feel even more excited about the game.
      True and the people who don't need the money ain't joining it for the money anyway, so lessening it isn't going to change anything for them. People who are doing it for the money should prefer this as luck is always a factor, be it your seated position in the draft, an opponent getting crazy transform rng, or just not drawing shards, it doesn't take much to get shafted.

    • I feel like it would be nice if it paid out to top 8 but i also wouldn't mind if it was literally winner takes all. Middle ground solutions like this just don't cut it winning the whole thing should either be amazing or top 8ing should feel good one or the other. This is the compromise that leaves half the top 8 feeling bad and the other half feeling fairly meh.

    • Wolzarg wrote:

      I feel like it would be nice if it paid out to top 8 but i also wouldn't mind if it was literally winner takes all. Middle ground solutions like this just don't cut it winning the whole thing should either be amazing or top 8ing should feel good one or the other. This is the compromise that leaves half the top 8 feeling bad and the other half feeling fairly meh.
      If it was winner takes all I wouldn't even bother (I'd bet lots of people wouldn't), if HEX was all about skill then I would, but obviously it isn't.

    • HAVOC wrote:

      Wolzarg wrote:

      I feel like it would be nice if it paid out to top 8 but i also wouldn't mind if it was literally winner takes all. Middle ground solutions like this just don't cut it winning the whole thing should either be amazing or top 8ing should feel good one or the other. This is the compromise that leaves half the top 8 feeling bad and the other half feeling fairly meh.
      If it was winner takes all I wouldn't even bother (I'd bet lots of people wouldn't), if HEX was all about skill then I would, but obviously it isn't.
      splitting the prize between 4 people or giving it all to 1 is pretty close to the same thing honestly.

    • Wolzarg wrote:

      HAVOC wrote:

      Wolzarg wrote:

      I feel like it would be nice if it paid out to top 8 but i also wouldn't mind if it was literally winner takes all. Middle ground solutions like this just don't cut it winning the whole thing should either be amazing or top 8ing should feel good one or the other. This is the compromise that leaves half the top 8 feeling bad and the other half feeling fairly meh.
      If it was winner takes all I wouldn't even bother (I'd bet lots of people wouldn't), if HEX was all about skill then I would, but obviously it isn't.
      splitting the prize between 4 people or giving it all to 1 is pretty close to the same thing honestly.
      I fail to see how it is even remotely close? Even just $50 is a lot to some people and as the saying goes "something is better than nothing". Or just look at it from this perspective... Is it better to make lots of people happy or just 1 person very happy?

      The post was edited 1 time, last by HAVOC ().

    • Wolzarg wrote:

      HAVOC wrote:

      Wolzarg wrote:

      I feel like it would be nice if it paid out to top 8 but i also wouldn't mind if it was literally winner takes all. Middle ground solutions like this just don't cut it winning the whole thing should either be amazing or top 8ing should feel good one or the other. This is the compromise that leaves half the top 8 feeling bad and the other half feeling fairly meh.
      If it was winner takes all I wouldn't even bother (I'd bet lots of people wouldn't), if HEX was all about skill then I would, but obviously it isn't.
      splitting the prize between 4 people or giving it all to 1 is pretty close to the same thing honestly.
      4 is 400% of 1(no shit), I don't see them being close at all.

    • Hex already seems to have issues paying out players in a timely manner. I'm still waiting on a check from the 11/12/2017 Clash and I confirmed with support that it is still "in progress". I worry that adding even more people to the payouts would delay this process even further. I would go the platinum route for 5th-8th place instead of packs to avoid increasing their admin/accounting costs.

    • [PSN]MallwayTweep wrote:

      The solution to this ,since we are comparing this to other cards games, is to raise the entry fee to $10. People will complain about this though. They are charging $7 currently and giving away $1,000 with an around of 86 players which equates to $602 they are losing $398 every bash. If we are to compare this to let's say a pptq. The entry fee can be anywhere from $25 to $35 you are also only winning store credit. If we compare this to a grand prix or an SCG event your looking at more in the are of $40 to $50. The entry fee or attendence has to increase to cover steeper rewards from under 8th place. As for the prize structure I can see lowering the 1st and 2nd place rewards to give 5th through 8th something.
      maybe even award 5 primal packs to the top 5-8 instead of 15 regular packs?
      HEX forums resident liker.