Changes to Masters for NEXT season - UK

[Oshova]

Couple of comments.

Story encounters appeal to less people, so let's stop worrying about that. They'll take place with lower numbers (planned & actual) and will be great. End of.

Masters going up to 24 has a number of issues (apart from 16 being a cosy number, and a good fit in the current venue). 24 players means the following;.

• 8 pools of 3 means 2 games in a day and 2 hours of hanging about. 1 winner from the pool. Not good in my opinion
• 6 pools of 4 gives 6 or 12 through to the next round which is also not good because neither give a clean knockout down to a final
• 4 pools of 6 means too many games (5) before elimination down to a final 2 per pool, or a result being based on not playing everyone in a pool

32 is too many for the Masters (its no longer special)

Conclusion - stick to 16

4 Pools of 6 can play 4 games sat and the 5th on Sunday with quarters, semis and final then too. Issue is time squeeze plus no one getting to play LoEH 2nd day.

8 Pools definitely doesn't work.

6 of 4 could work, you just have to determine a way 4 players can get first knock out round byes. Probably by their own TP and then VP diff.

Or use a system where the best losers go through... They're all pretty bad options when compared to 16 players though. It just works. 

[Psientologist]

Couple of comments.

Story encounters appeal to less people, so let's stop worrying about that. They'll take place with lower numbers (planned & actual) and will be great. End of.

Masters going up to 24 has a number of issues (apart from 16 being a cosy number, and a good fit in the current venue). 24 players means the following;.

• 8 pools of 3 means 2 games in a day and 2 hours of hanging about. 1 winner from the pool. Not good in my opinion
• 6 pools of 4 gives 6 or 12 through to the next round which is also not good because neither give a clean knockout down to a final
• 4 pools of 6 means too many games (5) before elimination down to a final 2 per pool, or a result being based on not playing everyone in a pool

32 is too many for the Masters (its no longer special)

Conclusion - stick to 16

4 Pools of 6 can play 4 games sat and the 5th on Sunday with quarters, semis and final then too. Issue is time squeeze plus no one getting to play LoEH 2nd day.

8 Pools definitely doesn't work.

6 of 4 could work, you just have to determine a way 4 players can get first knock out round byes. Probably by their own TP and then VP diff.

Or use a system where the best losers go through... They're all pretty bad options when compared to 16 players though. It just works. 

Arguably the best 4 of the 6 winners getting byes is a good system, rewards the players in the same way a typical event does, getting a good VP diff and not just a win, also no intentional draws.

[mythicFOX]

One thing we haven't talked about it the dates the season runs between. 

I'm not overly keen on there being effectively a two month break between the end of November and the masters.  Having a cut off at the end of November makes sense from an admin perspective, but isn't there a case for running 1/12/15 to 30/11/16, or 1/1/16 to 30/11/16?

What do people think?

[ProximoCoal]

I'd prefer things to run the way Doxey suggests as this means moar Malifaux! (though before people suggest that this is people being too obsessed with the rankings I am still going to try and attend multiple events during the break, but I am pretty sure people put on less events because of the break)

[Psientologist]

I'd prefer things to run the way Doxey suggests as this means moar Malifaux! (though before people suggest that this is people being too obsessed with the rankings I am still going to try and attend multiple events during the break, but I am pretty sure people put on less events because of the break)

There needs to be some sort of gap so that invites are able to be given out etc.

I understand the gap could possibly have an effect on amount of tournaments ran and attended but December tends to be a very busy month for people.

I also liked Nationals book ending everything, though that isn't even the case this year.

Agree this should be looked at however, two whole months is probably a little excessive. Also needs to be communicated with Stephen to be applied to rankings system properly.

[Clousseau]

December as the 'dead' month is OK as it tends to be quiet event wise anyway. But the 'season' should start again 1st Jan.

[Psientologist]

December as the 'dead' month is OK as it tends to be quiet event wise anyway. But the 'season' should start again 1st Jan.

Agreed. However it is kind of sweet having LoEH as the first ranked, it doesn't need to be.

11 month Calendar 1/1 - 30/11 seems most logical.

[mythicFOX]

Yeah I should say my personal preference is an eleven month season running 1st Jan to 30th November.

[MalifauxMartin]

Yeah I should say my personal preference is an eleven month season running 1st Jan to 30th November.

Agree 100%

[M_Ruckuss]

1st Jan-30th Nov is my preference. 

I believe masters should stay as is.

Story encounters don't work with rankings imo. As others have said, if people want to play story encounters, they will. Joels 1st Star Wars one was epic. 

I like the "champion of champion" event- great idea. However, will people drive along way for just potentially 1 game of 'Faux? Rewarding players for a tourney win is a great idea tho. In time in might even replace the masters (although I don't believe this to be the case) however, until proven that it a) is popular and b )the community as a whole favours a shift, I believe the two should be concurrent, or masters should stay as is. It's our Super Bowl.  The scene is very healthy; GT growing  year on year. Rankings have helped build that- people in this scene want to compete in a healthy way. and that crappy piece of plastic represents the pinnacle of all our yearly gaming efforts. 

Any which way, I believe consensus is paramount- we are all part of the greatest gaming community in the world. We are all passionate in our beliefs about what is best for the scene- working together is key.

[Psientologist]

Still think Champion of Champions event has merit if at an event where being knocked out doesn't mean standing about doing nothing aka Cons/Shows

[MariFaux]

As I said before, I like the idea and if we have a Champion of Champions event and Joel wants me to, then I'd run a story event parallel which is open to everyone and catches all the knock-outs. So everyone is guaranteed a full day of gaming. 

[mythicFOX]

This thread has died down a bit now and time is getting on.  Without wanting to be presumptuous it's probably worth summarising where we are and asking if there are any more contributions people want to make before we lock matters down.

To summarise it sounds to me like the consensus is to keep things as they are, in other words;

• The 2016 season will run 01/01/16 to 30/11/16.
• Sixteen players will be invited to the 2016 maters, to be held at some point after 30/11/16, probably in Janurary 2017.
• Invites to be given as follows;
  • No player may receive more than one invite.
  • One invite offered to the reigning 2015 Master, who will be decided at the event in Jaurary 2016
  • One invite offered to the winner of the UK Nationals (aka UKGT) in 2016
  • The remaining invites are to be offered to the highest ranked players who are able to attend, based on the player rankings for UK events held in the 2016 season. 
  • Invites to be offered down the rankings until Masters is quorate at sixteen players. 
• Player rankings and their administration are a separate matter to be handled elsewhere. 
• Format etc of the 2016 Masters event to be handled closer to the time. 

Does anyone have anything else to add? Are we happy with the above for the 2016 Season?

[M_Ruckuss]

This seems to summarise popular opinion as far as I can see Mr Doxey- efficient as ever- have a brew!

[Psientologist]

Regarding increasing next years masters. Greg (who still hasn't posted yet) mentioned an elegant solution.

We're were all work in 8's etc. But why not just 16 up to 20. Group stages add one more game, 4 rounds in one day is doable and nothing else needs to change.

Looking at this years rankings a lot of the 16-20th placed players are definitely worthy as were in last years (Luke and Connor for example) and the size of the scene and the amount of events has definitely increased.

Also, this wouldn't include me if it happened right now which is perfect.

Greg did also have some other things that are definitely worth listening to before making a decision.

For the most part however James' summary is pretty spot on.

[MariFaux]

I second James' summary. Also, we should make a decision soon (at least as the timings for the season are concerned - before January). 

The thread has been up a while now, and everyone can post their opinion, but we can't wait forever, it'll either die down or it will get repetitive, both not very helpful directions.

If Greg (or anyone else) has new input, THEN POST HERE instead of talking to single people.

 

Edit: I thought as well about groups of 5, but with 4 games two wins and two losses is very possible, what is way less elegant than two wins getting you further. But if people are happy 4 games and with VP diff playing a bigger role than wins, it's certainly a possibility. It makes match-ups and groups a bigger deal as well. For these reasons I'm for keeping it at 16.

Edited December 3, 2015 by MariFaux

[Psientologist]

I keep telling him...

True that 2-2 is likely but then currently 1-1-1 is too, I like that VP diff matters in group stages, much more like a typical event.

Also agree, we need to lock in some decisions.

How is it to be decided, who gets final word? Voting?

[mythicFOX]

Decisions like this tend to be made by the organiser (in this case Joel) listening to what we all have to say and then making a decision they believe to be broadly in line with the consensus of the players.

My view is whatever is decided it ought to be communicated in the next week or so. That way everyone is clear what's happening before the new year starts.

 

Edited December 3, 2015 by mythicFOX

[MalifauxMartin]

 

 

Decisions like this tend to be made by the organiser (in this case Joel) listening to what we all have to say and then making a decision they believe to be broadly in line with the consensus of the players.

My view is whatever is decided it ought to be communicated in the next week or so. That way everyone is clear what's happening before the new year starts.

 

Agreed, voting etc will get complicated. From what I've read, and conversations locally, the summary above describes the general (dare i say overwhelming?) consensus pretty much exactly. So while there is still time for others to add their thoughts, as the thread has quieted down and anyone with a strong opinion is likely to be aware of the conversation I think we should start to think about coming to a conclusion for the masters season in question.

I think this has been a very healthy exercise for the player community, and would like to applaud Joel and everyone who has posted for the spirit and tone in which the conversation has been had. I'm sure we've all seen other communities deal with less important issues in much less civil ways! 

[ProximoCoal]

 

I think this has been a very healthy exercise for the player community, and would like to applaud Joel and everyone who has posted for the spirit and tone in which the conversation has been had. I'm sure we've all seen other communities deal with less important issues in much less civil ways! 

agreed. If we stick with status quo we have still gained ideas on how to improve attendance of story events and more.

[Psientologist]

Is Joel already putting himself forwards to run the masters event in 2017 as well?

Some of this chat is 100% masters based either so that is only why I ask.

[Clousseau]

The Masters isn't really any particular T'S event, one of us just has coustardy for a while. So although voting would be impractical,  concensus is appropriate.  James has summed things up nicely, and I support it for 2016 and onwards.

On the topic of expanding to 20, then this makes for 4 potentially tense games, a long day, and an impact on the side event. Also 4 players per rund dont have a game. So I prefer to stay with 16.

[Joel]

I've been quiet on this thread for a few days now to allow discussion to run its course, but I think it now has.  I support the summary that James has put forward too, and I'm grateful to everyone who has contributed to this thread.

as for running the masters event next time, I'm happy to continue, but if anyone else wishes to run it, I'd also be happy to pass it off.

 

[jonahmaul]

With a caveat that I've not read this whole thread so apologies if I'm repeating anything (I read most of the first page and this page but if you were on the second I have no idea what you said!) but thought I'd bring a bit of outsider perspective to this in the hope it might help!

 

Firstly regarding the Malifaux rankings I really like these, my group like to check out where we are and compare ourselves against each other (was also quite cool to see that I'd only ever lost tournament game to people ranked inside the top 25, a friend top 26!).  We definitely appreciate the work that goes into these and I think it definitely brings a level of prestige in a good way.

 

As somebody who isn't near the top 16 ranking I've never seen it as an us and them mentality and have never really got the impression that it is.  Within my playgroup we've discussed those who are nearer the top and see it as a commitment more than anything.  If you want to be ranked in the top 16 then you need to not only be a decent player but you need to play a decent number of events to stay up there.  Personally I think that's something that should be rewarded because the players are supporting the community and those running events.  I don't think it's something that's achievable for me because of time/money/travelling meaning that attending regular tournaments is difficult (I'll generally attend anything in Cardiff/Bristol but anything further rarely happens though we did May Feng in Bournemouth this year and probably will again next year (we'd have done September's Curse too if it hadn't clashed with the rugby)) but it's certainly something that's good to have there if I (or anybody else) decided to try and break into that.  I like that it awards regularly doing well and not just winning tournaments too.

 

I've played several people in or near the top 16 and had good games against all of them.  I don't know if this is substantial evidence but it's pretty good evidence against rankings turning people into douchebags.  I played Luke Cocksedge on the top table in the last game of Here Be Dragons at the beginning of this year and we'd not defined a piece of terrain well before the game started and he ruled it in my favour despite the fact it meant me being able to full heal an almost dead McMourning and ultimately we drew meaning I won the tournament on VP Diff.  If this isn't a sign of not-douchebaggery (I'm a sociologist, I can make words up!) then I don't know what is.  If anything the top 16 players know that they are good and are near the top of most, if not all, events that they play and so the chance to win one tournament isn't the be all and end all.

 

Straight knock-out tournaments suck ass.  It's a terrible idea full stop in a game that always involves some element of luck.  You do well all year and attend numerous events which cost money/time/commitment then turn up for the Master and lose your first game because you just can't flip face cards - nope!!!

 

The champions of champions tournament is a good idea though.  I definitely don't think it should replace the Masters but a separate champions of champions tournament (following regular GG rules) would be a cool idea.

 

I'm an outsider when it comes to top 16 rankings but I do enjoy attending tournaments when I can so hopefully my perspective has offered something to the discussion.

Edited December 4, 2015 by jonahmaul

[PotentiallyLethal]

It's interesting. If you run with it I'd be happy to be involved, but I am concerned that it may not work out so well. At the moment I don't think there are enough events to make it functional

 

 

I am also still a bit iffy about trying to make story events more competitive

 

As an alternative how about we introduce a tournament season achievement challenge? You could incorporate it into the rankings as part of your own profile, when you click your name from the main screen, so you could get a list of the things you have done and within this you could get achievements for completing a story event, winning best painted, attending multiple story events etc.

 

 

 

ou could also keep in some of the stuff the rankings already has to some extent, like play in 15 tournaments and play all factions at an event in the year

 

That would all be doable as long as TOs were up for including all that information in the file sent to me. The achievements for story encounters could be given out as badges on the players page and in the badge section of the main page of the rankings.

Sorry for coming in late to this discussion, may make more comments as I read the thread, though it looks like the thread has finished before I got to it

Edit: and I also think that the 11 month Masters qualifying calendar would be better 1/1 to 30/11 of each year, more chances to play

Edited December 5, 2015 by PotentiallyLethal