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.
The Clash/Bash Top 8 Payout structure should be slightly reworked IMO
-
-
Definitely agreed here too!
-
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
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
I'll second this, and even just making it a platinum payout works for 5-8th. It just feels bad to top 8 and lose first round. Its like here you got, 15 packs. Better luck next time.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
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.
-
Love how you brought math into it like i was factually stating something not sharing a opinion based on feeling.
Regardless I already said I agreed with havoc so I don't get the dogpiling. -
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.
HEX forums resident liker. -
ReluxTheRelux wrote:
maybe even award 5 primal packs to the top 5-8 instead of 15 regular packs?
-
Share
- Facebook 0
- Twitter 0
- Google Plus 0
- Reddit 0