I think a $500 - 1K prize to the next highest 16 on the ladder would be good. It would act as thank you to the players that put in all the time but didn't quite qualify. It would also generate a lot more activity on the ladder I think. 14. 30.
I would absolutely agree on that! Whether it's 12, 16 or 25 players who would get a share of it I don't know but it would make such a difference for the ladder activity and also the effort put in. I mean imagine a a top100 player with a lot of time - I would definitely try to see whether I could sneak into those money ranks too.
You're right about the big picture and the scene, if tournaments stay about the same 20 guys this game is gonna stagnate again. There has to be incentive for the mid range players to keep the scene alive. That's why things like Titans League are so good for the community. There has to be stakes for the rest of the players outside the Select Few.
I remember when AoE 4 came out and all the tournament qualifications were done via ladder ranking. For months u saw the people at the Top doing nothing else then mongol tower rush or Rus Cav archers because they could not justify playing "random" (a feature that wasnt there at the start) since they run into danger not qualifying. Many players and viewers myself included got bored and quittet, this should be lesson for AoE2 that a ladder qualifier like this should be avoided and big adjustments need to be done to even consider it
Bro chill, since i watch aoe2 (2016), it is the first time they used the ladder to qualify. It happens to justify some seeding, but not top 4 in ranks to qualify
well the difference here is that it was an artificial ladder for a game mode that people dont usually like to play (empire wars). It was not connected to the real RM ladder.
@@renatobarreira6505 SC2 is not only a complete different game its also pretty much only popular in Korea, in western countries the interest/viewership is not really big
One positive in my opinion was that one or two bad days didn't ruin you. If you had a bad day for whatever reason, you were sick etc. you could just stop and come back next day. In normal qualifier, you were most likely out in that case.
Imo Redbull failed to implement a proper..procedure for qualifiers. The fact that they gave players no incentive to keep trying when top 4 spots were out of reach really was the biggest downfall. Instead of giving the top 4 qualifying players 9k for getting in, could lower the reward pool and spread it amongst more ranks, giving players down the ladder the incentive to keep trying, I've watched streams from various pro players give their take on the matter and everyone seems fall on that there's no incentive for anyone outside the top 4 or some who aren't near the top 4 to keep trying which ended up being a few players matching between each other(mainly Mr.Yo and Vinch) everyone's trying but when you're out of time and know that you can't possibly reach top 4 and you get absolutely nothing means more players will just give up trying
Where I have trouble feeling like it was unfair for those who finished just a bit below MbL is the fact that MbL ultimately played far more games than they did. Many players didn't grind as hard until the last few days, but MbL began his climb early and stayed there. So what if he barely played in the last few days? He had to put in the work to get to the top of the boards. Congrats to him.
Thank you. Agree 100% with all your criticisms here. I hope they don't do this to the players again. They should still put the tournament maps and the logo in the ranked queue though. It's also hard to imagine that Jordan (and other retired players) isn't looking at this and thinking I made the right choice to walk away. The reward should be getting better and stress should be going down for players not the other way around.
I think the simplest three fixes would be: 1. Give a bit of money to the ones who missed 2. Randomly ban x civilizations each game (same bans for both players, "better" civs have a higher ban rate) 3. Lessen the elo difference (I still think it should be something, but maybe the range be 10 min to 15 max so it's not a 2:1)
MBL was a complete mess by the end of it and he got through, I can't imagine what it was like for Yo & MBL with their insanely long last few days that resulted in nothing.
Thanks T90 for your perspective! As a viewer I enjoyed the hype around the qualifier. To me one of the top downsides was the amount of stress the players experienced. From what I could tell it seemed pretty awful like you mentioned. Hopefully if there are more of this format going forward some of the changes you mentioned can be implemented. Edit - for those saying pros would be playing anyway - I disagree. Format is quite different and not being able to effectively stream their gameplay is a downside for those who stream I’d imagine.
I think something that is getting overlooked is the attention that the ladder qualification has brought to both Red Bull and the Tournament over the last few months. It's basically free advertising to casuals in game, if that brings more viewership and increases the likelihood of future sponsorship and events then I'm all for it. I think as well as prize money for those that just miss out, increasing the number of spots available would make the huge grind feel more worth it. 8 players at the main event feels underwhelming considering the massive grind from so many players. I'd consider an ELO decay of current ELO, maybe just in the last 2 weeks or so, doesn't impact highest rating, but makes it harder to recover from camping if you do lose your spot. And lastly I'd make it shorter and slot it in a period where it doesnt clash with multiple other tournaments
I agree with you. Although I think it was interesting idea for Ladder Qualifier. It just needs some changes and improvements. I just wish more players could qualify.
I think the content that came out of it was amazing. In the future I believe making last only a week with the date given well in advance would be better. Also some kind of elo burning system where you need to play a minimum amount of games per day or youll lose elo.
You touched on it, but I believe the biggest issue with the ladder qualifier is how different the format is from the main tournament. For example, Mr. Yo is twice as good a "tournament" player as MBL is because of how he utilizes strategy. This is not meant to be a knock on MBL, who is a fantastic tournament player in his own right. However, the ladder qualifier selected people entirely on mechanical skills instead of the skills that made people like Mr. Yo win Red Bull in the past. This might be acceptable to fans if the main event had at least 16 players, but selecting 4 out of a measly 8 spots based on mechanical skills just leaves a sour taste in the mouth of fans who want the biggest spectacle in AOE to have a qualifier that selects the people based on the skills that make them likely to do better in the main event. It was a worthwhile experiment and we can't complain about what Red Bull does with its money, but I assume that ideas like this go through some vetting. I really doubt that Red Bull was somehow fixated on a ladder qualifier. Someone screwed up and gave bad advice. I am not saying Red Bull has to do things exactly the way we want it. However, despite being a promotional vehicle, Red Bull does also present itself as an S-tier competition in not just prize pool but also in settings. Having said all that, a friend of mine proposed a theory that, if true, redeems the organizers a bit. What if the organizers were hoping to mainstream the Empire Wars format via the ladder qualifier? That is, if all of the 1v1 community, not just the top players, threw itself into the spirit of Red Bull and played Empire Wars during that period to "be a part of it", it would have truly changed the AOE2 landscape. In that case, even if the organizers whiffed, they were at least swinging for the fences and thinking big.
At the end of the of the day its Red Bulls money and we have to be grateful that they are deciding to spend it on another tournament for aoe2. They need to justify it aswell. Yes it would be nice to give others some money, but you can't really do that on the people that didn't qualify on the ladder and also give them money in the qualifiers. I also wish it was more than 8 players. But lets just be grateful that there is another awesome land tournament.
Personally I loved it. Sure it could be tweaked. Maybe make it 2 slots instead of 4. Or add 2-6 more slots in the last chance qualifier whike maintaining 4 here. Make wins/loses equal value for games between the top 10 players instead of weighted distribution like we normally see. Somehow make an incentive for top players to play more at the end. Force random or something in top games. It's a fun idea, in ways more exciting than a generic qualifier bracket where 9/10 series go exactly how anyone can predict. I hope people don't get too salty about this format because it is really promising
they simply just need to ban mirror for this tournament ladder and that's it, the decision to use ingame ladder instead of qualifier is creative, but it is clearly not well-thought/thoroughly considered.
There's a big division on how much people got rewarded for their efforts, depending on the timing they put that effort in. ELO systems are great for long periods, but a brand new one takes too long to shake out the skill standings. Everybody starts at the same ELO and the best time to get a run going is right at the start, when you can take a good amount away from lower skilled players. The early starters pull ahead AND kick out the ladder behind them by removing ELO from the easiest players to take it from, so any late starters have a much much harder time getting their initial points up. Add in strategy of sitting on said points, and equal skill players won't catch up anytime in the short term. If you didn't jump into a ladder early and the top end are playing the system, it's going to take thousands of games for the ELO system to level out.
Some tweaks that could be made: 1. Give something to 4-16 ranked players. 2. Even if top 4 qualifies, make it so the prize is decreasing until 16th gets say 100€ so they even compete even when they reach top 16, granting action till the last moment. That way maybe say Sebastian or Hera would have played to get top position (Liereyy was absent), along with 20 more other players that didn't play last hours. 3. Make it a 5 day ladder. That way they don't spend so much time just not to qualify. 4. Ban the "Mirror" option. If they choose same civ, so be it, but mirrors were boring AF.
Liquipedia does detail that those finishing 3-8th in the Last-Chance Qualifier get a prize (3-4 $3k and 5-8 $1.5k). So 14 players in total will win prize money if this is correct.
I like usage of ladder, but this cutthrout isnt the way imo. Sonething like top128 qualifies for main qualifier with your being your seed might be good compromise
@T90 - With other tournaments, viewers often get a chance to donate to the prize pool. Do you think it is worth setting up a way for the community to donate to enhance the prize pool of the last chance qualifier? I feel like that would be impactful and increase engagement and i agree more prize pool would be good for the qualifier. This would be a good way to send that message? p.s. i dont think the main tournament reallllly needs our dono's this time round :P ty Redbull
I feel ladder would work with more qualifying. If let's say 21 would qualify you get less top heavy points and more people are threatened by just a few points and thus more likely to play. Make No1 directly to the main event and 20 to close qualifier
everyone benefits when the prize pool has a long tail. That said, I think the sponsor has a right to KISS - - I am so thankful that they are involved and if this is how they want it, hey man, it really really was a blast to watch. There is no TTL atm so-- well-- it's not like there's nothing we can be doing to counter this lack of deeper rewards, right Micorosft?
Really Really bad for the scene if it's like this again seems like an overstatement. If they did it exactly the same I think we would see less people try at the ladder which would makes it go less well but not going to kill the scene. There are improvements to be made 100% and I think if they use the ladder again they will make improvements/changes
If you look at the 4 qualified players, it is no less “predictable” than a direct elimination system. The strongest players on the circuit are still at the top. Not to mention that it is more in line with the strategic essence of the game to include draft systems for civilizations and maps.
Mate, these are the top performing players that went through. This type of qualifier is way more predictable. The matches are also pretty damn similar.
Impossible to follow in any meaningful way, unduly stressful for the players, lack of overarching strategic play, repetitive strats... Really hard to see how this was better than a qualifying tournament in any way.
I think the format is okay, but the details are wrong. Obviously the numbers 5 trough ~20 needed a money reward, also mirror matches should be disabled somehow and maps should not be banned. That way it’s more random and hopefully more fun to play and watch. I do hope this format will return in the future, but not as the main way to qualify. Just once or twice per year, it did light up some activity (and drama) within the community and that is a good thing in the long run.
"Go ahead and sign up if you want your ass beat by a pro" - dude, I would love to play a pro, I tell every pro I meet to 1v1 me if they want, the only reason I'm not forcing it is I value their time. That goes for you, too, Tristan, I'll 1v1 you any day of the week, I'm just a Mid Elo Madman, but I can at least ask some questions of you!
If you go real big brain, when you hit your best you go on a new alt account and siphon points from the bottom into your alt. Your alt isn't going to make it in anyway and your capability is likely higher than your lower ranking players. Your alt gets more points, the top below you get less opponents, and get fed less points, plus you get a chance at taking away points from your lower competitors.
Not a fan of the ladder qualifiers because the top three essentially reached a point where they were guaranteed a spot at RB, and it was only three players who were fighting it out. Honestly, they should just stick to a group stage qualification like the Euros where the two best players in their group qualify and the best third place players qualify. Or do a World Cup type of qualification where they go by region and have the winners of the groups qualify. Either option will create an incentive for the players to play their best and qualify rather than resting on their laurels because they made it.
will you be posting posting the event on youtube or will it be edited gameplay only videos? time differences make it extremely hard to watch live content which is why i'm on youtube but at the same time we only get the edited gameplay experience and dont get to experience the event proper. wanted to watch hidden cup and warlords but only got edited gameplay and that was a little disappointing.
the format could have been made more interesting if they implemented a samll draft for civilizations - like they have in league of legends before every game a championdraft - we would still see a lot of same civ but maybe a little more variance also they could have implemented some sort of rule of feature that you have to play X amount of games per day - seems bit harsh but would have prevented the camping --> especially if you dont take top rating and rather take current rating just some ideas obviously easy to say after the hole thing has concluded - also not sure if any of them would be realistic to actually implement them
The qulifying elo needs Inflation. Example: 1 point added per player per pame. So If Yo and Vinch Play 50 games with 50% wins bith rise 50 Points. They creep up on MBL, who now has to win a game to push them back
either the ladder system is competitive/grindy to select ONLY the best players for the tournament or regular qualifiers are open enough to allow underdogs to sneak through with some luck or bad/good days. You are arguing on both sides.
For a game that is so unbalanced , mirror match ups bring a sense of fairness to qualifiers. Skill vs skill and no random arse luck or gotcha situations.
What if in the ladder system is added a feature that Degenerates ELO Rating if you are not playing for X amount of hours? you lose 1 ELO for every X hours when you don't play...a condition can be added to check if the player has played in the last 24h and the this Degenerative feature activates only after 24-36 hours of inactivity. This will "force" the players to play in order not to lose the ELO... of course, it can happen that some players are not available for a longer period because of personal stuff, but it should be taken into consideration that a ladder qualification is announced with pretty much time ahead. It can be an idea.... just saying :)
Coming from online yugioh (Duel Links), the only "competitive tournament" the game has is a ladder-like 72h event where players compete for the most points, every 2-3 months. Format is absolutely brutal, especially because most of the time only the top 1 player gets anything worth his while, like an invitation to the world cup. People duel nonstop until the last minute. I feel like any ladder style qualifier is bound to be brutal and quite unfair, I can't see a way to make it not have these problems, other than not using the ladder format altogether.
I get that places 5 and on don't have an obvious reward, but seeding for the last chance qualifier is huge. They didn't leave completely empty handed if that's how seeding works.
Yo & Vinch will likely be happy not to have to compete against each other but the seeding gets weird once you account for the players who weren't suited for this kind of qualifier like ACCM and Daut.
Only half true, seeding for the last chance qualifier isn't set until like the 9th Aug, so there is still time for it all the positions to shift around
Something not really discussed was such that the "Top 4" qualification had hard time/date cut off. Meaning anyone in that time zone was able to really grind 'til the deadline, and anyone outside of that time were at a severe disadvantage. Go to bed as #1 and waking up as #6 is a kick in the teeth. There was so much blatant dodging going on as well, and I feel bad for Yo and Vinchester because they were mid-game when the deadline hit (fairly certain the winner would've taken the spot off MBL).
Ehh IDK I prefer this over a tournament setup where a Player is just Automatically out of the competition whenever they vs Hera. We get it Hera is gonna win 90% of the time and in a 4-0 /4-1 and this has made Major Tournament so boring and stale. Hidden Cup an example
I think the format is great but 4 spots is not enough. If it was a normal 16-person tournament it would be soo fun. I imagine top 8 from ladder getting in and 9-24 having a decider game. Also, ban system is needed to avoid mirrors
I would say that this tournament feels a bit off so far because we're used to the systems and structures in aoe2 being broadly positive for the community. Without trying to sound too cynical, it's hard to see redbull particularly caring about the growth of the game or some sort of positive "vibe", ultimately (and in fairness to them, they're not a charity) they want to make money and see this as a means to do so. The issue then is that they use the structures in place within the community to achieve a profit, while simultaneously investing into the community as little as possible. More so than any of the other redbull tournaments that came before, this one has the feel of cost cutting and nostalgia baiting. This isn't meant as a cry to boycott the event or even to demand better from them, just a recognition that they have a reason for hosting this tournament and it's naive for us to believe they love the game and want to see it flourish. I enjoy redbull wololo occasionally as something to mix things up, but won't be clamouring for them to hang around too much.
@ivang.vegar.7039 lol assign? It's a comp with rules. Money is earned ... if they wanted to do a winner take all, peeps would still sign up knowing that ...
I think a $500 - 1K prize to the next highest 16 on the ladder would be good. It would act as thank you to the players that put in all the time but didn't quite qualify. It would also generate a lot more activity on the ladder I think. 14. 30.
I would absolutely agree on that! Whether it's 12, 16 or 25 players who would get a share of it I don't know but it would make such a difference for the ladder activity and also the effort put in. I mean imagine a a top100 player with a lot of time - I would definitely try to see whether I could sneak into those money ranks too.
You're right about the big picture and the scene, if tournaments stay about the same 20 guys this game is gonna stagnate again. There has to be incentive for the mid range players to keep the scene alive. That's why things like Titans League are so good for the community. There has to be stakes for the rest of the players outside the Select Few.
"go ahead and sign up if you want to get your ass beat by a pro" 😂
I remember when AoE 4 came out and all the tournament qualifications were done via ladder ranking. For months u saw the people at the Top doing nothing else then mongol tower rush or Rus Cav archers because they could not justify playing "random" (a feature that wasnt there at the start) since they run into danger not qualifying. Many players and viewers myself included got bored and quittet, this should be lesson for AoE2 that a ladder qualifier like this should be avoided and big adjustments need to be done to even consider it
Bro chill, since i watch aoe2 (2016), it is the first time they used the ladder to qualify.
It happens to justify some seeding, but not top 4 in ranks to qualify
well the difference here is that it was an artificial ladder for a game mode that people dont usually like to play (empire wars). It was not connected to the real RM ladder.
I dunno, SC2 has 3 "civs" and rules e-sport rts scenario. I dont think civ variety is a issue.
@@renatobarreira6505 SC2 is not only a complete different game its also pretty much only popular in Korea, in western countries the interest/viewership is not really big
@@gebhard128Starcraft is still more popular than AoE2 outside of Korea but I see what you mean
One positive in my opinion was that one or two bad days didn't ruin you. If you had a bad day for whatever reason, you were sick etc. you could just stop and come back next day. In normal qualifier, you were most likely out in that case.
Imo Redbull failed to implement a proper..procedure for qualifiers. The fact that they gave players no incentive to keep trying when top 4 spots were out of reach really was the biggest downfall. Instead of giving the top 4 qualifying players 9k for getting in, could lower the reward pool and spread it amongst more ranks, giving players down the ladder the incentive to keep trying, I've watched streams from various pro players give their take on the matter and everyone seems fall on that there's no incentive for anyone outside the top 4 or some who aren't near the top 4 to keep trying which ended up being a few players matching between each other(mainly Mr.Yo and Vinch) everyone's trying but when you're out of time and know that you can't possibly reach top 4 and you get absolutely nothing means more players will just give up trying
Players 5-12 get a last chance qualifier where at minimum they get paid 1500 right?
Where I have trouble feeling like it was unfair for those who finished just a bit below MbL is the fact that MbL ultimately played far more games than they did. Many players didn't grind as hard until the last few days, but MbL began his climb early and stayed there. So what if he barely played in the last few days? He had to put in the work to get to the top of the boards. Congrats to him.
Don’t diss the costume! It was awesome!!
Thank you. Agree 100% with all your criticisms here. I hope they don't do this to the players again. They should still put the tournament maps and the logo in the ranked queue though.
It's also hard to imagine that Jordan (and other retired players) isn't looking at this and thinking I made the right choice to walk away. The reward should be getting better and stress should be going down for players not the other way around.
I think the simplest three fixes would be:
1. Give a bit of money to the ones who missed
2. Randomly ban x civilizations each game (same bans for both players, "better" civs have a higher ban rate)
3. Lessen the elo difference (I still think it should be something, but maybe the range be 10 min to 15 max so it's not a 2:1)
I saw some of the players' tweets about how stressful it was but I did not realize how bad it really was
MBL was a complete mess by the end of it and he got through, I can't imagine what it was like for Yo & MBL with their insanely long last few days that resulted in nothing.
Imagine the stress put in into a BO3..BO5 in a qualy set... put that into 400 games in the lapse of 2..3 weeks playing them EVERY day...
Man, that's sounds brutal@@Matias-nl1oq
Thanks T90 for your perspective! As a viewer I enjoyed the hype around the qualifier. To me one of the top downsides was the amount of stress the players experienced. From what I could tell it seemed pretty awful like you mentioned. Hopefully if there are more of this format going forward some of the changes you mentioned can be implemented.
Edit - for those saying pros would be playing anyway - I disagree. Format is quite different and not being able to effectively stream their gameplay is a downside for those who stream I’d imagine.
T90, that's so sick that you qualified to be a caster for this.
I have never been less excited for a qualifier than this ladder. Tried tuning into the streams and left after 2 or 3 games every time
I think something that is getting overlooked is the attention that the ladder qualification has brought to both Red Bull and the Tournament over the last few months. It's basically free advertising to casuals in game, if that brings more viewership and increases the likelihood of future sponsorship and events then I'm all for it.
I think as well as prize money for those that just miss out, increasing the number of spots available would make the huge grind feel more worth it. 8 players at the main event feels underwhelming considering the massive grind from so many players.
I'd consider an ELO decay of current ELO, maybe just in the last 2 weeks or so, doesn't impact highest rating, but makes it harder to recover from camping if you do lose your spot.
And lastly I'd make it shorter and slot it in a period where it doesnt clash with multiple other tournaments
I agree with you. Although I think it was interesting idea for Ladder Qualifier. It just needs some changes and improvements. I just wish more players could qualify.
One fix could be adding an extra single point of ELO extra for each win. The final day would be incredibly manic and important though
I think the content that came out of it was amazing. In the future I believe making last only a week with the date given well in advance would be better. Also some kind of elo burning system where you need to play a minimum amount of games per day or youll lose elo.
You touched on it, but I believe the biggest issue with the ladder qualifier is how different the format is from the main tournament. For example, Mr. Yo is twice as good a "tournament" player as MBL is because of how he utilizes strategy. This is not meant to be a knock on MBL, who is a fantastic tournament player in his own right. However, the ladder qualifier selected people entirely on mechanical skills instead of the skills that made people like Mr. Yo win Red Bull in the past. This might be acceptable to fans if the main event had at least 16 players, but selecting 4 out of a measly 8 spots based on mechanical skills just leaves a sour taste in the mouth of fans who want the biggest spectacle in AOE to have a qualifier that selects the people based on the skills that make them likely to do better in the main event.
It was a worthwhile experiment and we can't complain about what Red Bull does with its money, but I assume that ideas like this go through some vetting. I really doubt that Red Bull was somehow fixated on a ladder qualifier. Someone screwed up and gave bad advice. I am not saying Red Bull has to do things exactly the way we want it. However, despite being a promotional vehicle, Red Bull does also present itself as an S-tier competition in not just prize pool but also in settings.
Having said all that, a friend of mine proposed a theory that, if true, redeems the organizers a bit. What if the organizers were hoping to mainstream the Empire Wars format via the ladder qualifier? That is, if all of the 1v1 community, not just the top players, threw itself into the spirit of Red Bull and played Empire Wars during that period to "be a part of it", it would have truly changed the AOE2 landscape. In that case, even if the organizers whiffed, they were at least swinging for the fences and thinking big.
At the end of the of the day its Red Bulls money and we have to be grateful that they are deciding to spend it on another tournament for aoe2. They need to justify it aswell. Yes it would be nice to give others some money, but you can't really do that on the people that didn't qualify on the ladder and also give them money in the qualifiers. I also wish it was more than 8 players. But lets just be grateful that there is another awesome land tournament.
Another red bull Lets Go! 11
I loved the ladder qualifier! Just have to figure out a way for civ diversification and more incentive for top 16 players.
they could put some ELO boost for less used Civs and maps
Personally I loved it. Sure it could be tweaked. Maybe make it 2 slots instead of 4. Or add 2-6 more slots in the last chance qualifier whike maintaining 4 here. Make wins/loses equal value for games between the top 10 players instead of weighted distribution like we normally see. Somehow make an incentive for top players to play more at the end. Force random or something in top games. It's a fun idea, in ways more exciting than a generic qualifier bracket where 9/10 series go exactly how anyone can predict. I hope people don't get too salty about this format because it is really promising
they simply just need to ban mirror for this tournament ladder and that's it, the decision to use ingame ladder instead of qualifier is creative, but it is clearly not well-thought/thoroughly considered.
There's a big division on how much people got rewarded for their efforts, depending on the timing they put that effort in.
ELO systems are great for long periods, but a brand new one takes too long to shake out the skill standings. Everybody starts at the same ELO and the best time to get a run going is right at the start, when you can take a good amount away from lower skilled players. The early starters pull ahead AND kick out the ladder behind them by removing ELO from the easiest players to take it from, so any late starters have a much much harder time getting their initial points up. Add in strategy of sitting on said points, and equal skill players won't catch up anytime in the short term.
If you didn't jump into a ladder early and the top end are playing the system, it's going to take thousands of games for the ELO system to level out.
Costumes were great! But you know what would be silly?
Builing three archery ranges on a neutral island...
Some tweaks that could be made:
1. Give something to 4-16 ranked players.
2. Even if top 4 qualifies, make it so the prize is decreasing until 16th gets say 100€ so they even compete even when they reach top 16, granting action till the last moment. That way maybe say Sebastian or Hera would have played to get top position (Liereyy was absent), along with 20 more other players that didn't play last hours.
3. Make it a 5 day ladder. That way they don't spend so much time just not to qualify.
4. Ban the "Mirror" option. If they choose same civ, so be it, but mirrors were boring AF.
Liquipedia does detail that those finishing 3-8th in the Last-Chance Qualifier get a prize (3-4 $3k and 5-8 $1.5k). So 14 players in total will win prize money if this is correct.
I like usage of ladder, but this cutthrout isnt the way imo. Sonething like top128 qualifies for main qualifier with your being your seed might be good compromise
@T90 - With other tournaments, viewers often get a chance to donate to the prize pool. Do you think it is worth setting up a way for the community to donate to enhance the prize pool of the last chance qualifier? I feel like that would be impactful and increase engagement and i agree more prize pool would be good for the qualifier. This would be a good way to send that message? p.s. i dont think the main tournament reallllly needs our dono's this time round :P ty Redbull
I feel ladder would work with more qualifying. If let's say 21 would qualify you get less top heavy points and more people are threatened by just a few points and thus more likely to play. Make No1 directly to the main event and 20 to close qualifier
Yoooo red bull sponsor is sick
So you can be aoe2 tourney sponsor ?😅
love your videos tDaddy
Vamos Seba!!🎉
Well said T90!
Why did I get a Facebook advertisement before this video played
everyone benefits when the prize pool has a long tail. That said, I think the sponsor has a right to KISS - - I am so thankful that they are involved and if this is how they want it, hey man, it really really was a blast to watch. There is no TTL atm so-- well-- it's not like there's nothing we can be doing to counter this lack of deeper rewards, right Micorosft?
Ms should’ve made an auto match systems with bans, civ picks and whatnot for this
How would you sign up for the "Last Chance" Qualifier?
Really Really bad for the scene if it's like this again seems like an overstatement. If they did it exactly the same I think we would see less people try at the ladder which would makes it go less well but not going to kill the scene. There are improvements to be made 100% and I think if they use the ladder again they will make improvements/changes
For me the ladder was WAY more exciting than regular qualifiers where most sets are kind of predictable.
If you look at the 4 qualified players, it is no less “predictable” than a direct elimination system. The strongest players on the circuit are still at the top. Not to mention that it is more in line with the strategic essence of the game to include draft systems for civilizations and maps.
well i believe many people predictet most of the top 5 in the ladder qualifier
Mate, these are the top performing players that went through. This type of qualifier is way more predictable. The matches are also pretty damn similar.
Impossible to follow in any meaningful way, unduly stressful for the players, lack of overarching strategic play, repetitive strats... Really hard to see how this was better than a qualifying tournament in any way.
@@SeaBomb Totally agree
I think the format is okay, but the details are wrong. Obviously the numbers 5 trough ~20 needed a money reward, also mirror matches should be disabled somehow and maps should not be banned. That way it’s more random and hopefully more fun to play and watch.
I do hope this format will return in the future, but not as the main way to qualify. Just once or twice per year, it did light up some activity (and drama) within the community and that is a good thing in the long run.
"Go ahead and sign up if you want your ass beat by a pro" - dude, I would love to play a pro, I tell every pro I meet to 1v1 me if they want, the only reason I'm not forcing it is I value their time. That goes for you, too, Tristan, I'll 1v1 you any day of the week, I'm just a Mid Elo Madman, but I can at least ask some questions of you!
Top 8 of the qualifier will get $1500+. Not a huge win but it does make the long grind somewhat ok. Like pros would be playing the game anyway.
How in the world can I buy that civ tapestry??? I want eet!
If you go real big brain, when you hit your best you go on a new alt account and siphon points from the bottom into your alt. Your alt isn't going to make it in anyway and your capability is likely higher than your lower ranking players. Your alt gets more points, the top below you get less opponents, and get fed less points, plus you get a chance at taking away points from your lower competitors.
i dont think its allowed to smurf or use alts
Not a fan of the ladder qualifiers because the top three essentially reached a point where they were guaranteed a spot at RB, and it was only three players who were fighting it out. Honestly, they should just stick to a group stage qualification like the Euros where the two best players in their group qualify and the best third place players qualify. Or do a World Cup type of qualification where they go by region and have the winners of the groups qualify. Either option will create an incentive for the players to play their best and qualify rather than resting on their laurels because they made it.
3:44 you underestimate how many people would like to get their ass handed to them by a pro, people pay for that shi!
tl;dr: Microsoft and Redbull should've hired T90 as a consultant ahead of the qualifiers to plan stuff.
will you be posting posting the event on youtube or will it be edited gameplay only videos? time differences make it extremely hard to watch live content which is why i'm on youtube but at the same time we only get the edited gameplay experience and dont get to experience the event proper. wanted to watch hidden cup and warlords but only got edited gameplay and that was a little disappointing.
ofc it will be on youtube
the format could have been made more interesting if they implemented a samll draft for civilizations - like they have in league of legends before every game a championdraft - we would still see a lot of same civ but maybe a little more variance
also they could have implemented some sort of rule of feature that you have to play X amount of games per day - seems bit harsh but would have prevented the camping --> especially if you dont take top rating and rather take current rating
just some ideas obviously easy to say after the hole thing has concluded - also not sure if any of them would be realistic to actually implement them
i cant wait for RB el ronaldo!
The qulifying elo needs Inflation.
Example:
1 point added per player per pame.
So If Yo and Vinch Play 50 games with 50% wins bith rise 50 Points.
They creep up on MBL, who now has to win a game to push them back
where is the viper ?
Stupid question - how do I watch these? Dave doesn't do them. CastofEmpires doesn't have them.
either the ladder system is competitive/grindy to select ONLY the best players for the tournament or regular qualifiers are open enough to allow underdogs to sneak through with some luck or bad/good days.
You are arguing on both sides.
Is there a way we can donate to the prize pool? I’d love to donate my TH-cam vids’ revenue
For a game that is so unbalanced , mirror match ups bring a sense of fairness to qualifiers. Skill vs skill and no random arse luck or gotcha situations.
What if in the ladder system is added a feature that Degenerates ELO Rating if you are not playing for X amount of hours?
you lose 1 ELO for every X hours when you don't play...a condition can be added to check if the player has played in the last 24h and the this Degenerative feature activates only after 24-36 hours of inactivity.
This will "force" the players to play in order not to lose the ELO...
of course, it can happen that some players are not available for a longer period because of personal stuff, but it should be taken into consideration that a ladder qualification is announced with pretty much time ahead.
It can be an idea.... just saying :)
If if and buts were candy and nuts
what about the mustache
didn't people farm some new accounts and steal their elo?
Like this comment if you want to see T90 in an even more ridiculous costume! Something Spanish perhaps?
Coming from online yugioh (Duel Links), the only "competitive tournament" the game has is a ladder-like 72h event where players compete for the most points, every 2-3 months. Format is absolutely brutal, especially because most of the time only the top 1 player gets anything worth his while, like an invitation to the world cup. People duel nonstop until the last minute. I feel like any ladder style qualifier is bound to be brutal and quite unfair, I can't see a way to make it not have these problems, other than not using the ladder format altogether.
I get that places 5 and on don't have an obvious reward, but seeding for the last chance qualifier is huge. They didn't leave completely empty handed if that's how seeding works.
Yo & Vinch will likely be happy not to have to compete against each other but the seeding gets weird once you account for the players who weren't suited for this kind of qualifier like ACCM and Daut.
Only half true, seeding for the last chance qualifier isn't set until like the 9th Aug, so there is still time for it all the positions to shift around
Something not really discussed was such that the "Top 4" qualification had hard time/date cut off. Meaning anyone in that time zone was able to really grind 'til the deadline, and anyone outside of that time were at a severe disadvantage. Go to bed as #1 and waking up as #6 is a kick in the teeth.
There was so much blatant dodging going on as well, and I feel bad for Yo and Vinchester because they were mid-game when the deadline hit (fairly certain the winner would've taken the spot off MBL).
Ladder qualification is dumb, since some pro cares grinding while others are more experimental on ladder
"mirror matchups with 3 civs are really bad"
*10 years of high-level Hun wars entered the chat
I'm sure contemporary streaming and players don't enjoy/benefit from that, even then (its only for rising and adept players at a particular civ)
Why are you wearing headphones? Who are you listening to? Is T90 being TOLD WHAT TO SAY!? 😮😮😮
1111 jk we love you Mr 90
Those are his emotional support headphones, he's had them FOREVER 11
Ehh IDK I prefer this over a tournament setup where a Player is just Automatically out of the competition whenever they vs Hera. We get it Hera is gonna win 90% of the time and in a 4-0 /4-1 and this has made Major Tournament so boring and stale. Hidden Cup an example
More casters than players :(
I think the format is great but 4 spots is not enough. If it was a normal 16-person tournament it would be soo fun. I imagine top 8 from ladder getting in and 9-24 having a decider game. Also, ban system is needed to avoid mirrors
Red bull didn't give aoe2 lots of costs on qrq0
I would say that this tournament feels a bit off so far because we're used to the systems and structures in aoe2 being broadly positive for the community. Without trying to sound too cynical, it's hard to see redbull particularly caring about the growth of the game or some sort of positive "vibe", ultimately (and in fairness to them, they're not a charity) they want to make money and see this as a means to do so. The issue then is that they use the structures in place within the community to achieve a profit, while simultaneously investing into the community as little as possible. More so than any of the other redbull tournaments that came before, this one has the feel of cost cutting and nostalgia baiting. This isn't meant as a cry to boycott the event or even to demand better from them, just a recognition that they have a reason for hosting this tournament and it's naive for us to believe they love the game and want to see it flourish. I enjoy redbull wololo occasionally as something to mix things up, but won't be clamouring for them to hang around too much.
Yo these are adults T90. This a competition. Trying to be too fair ruins the soul of a great game and event. #bigboypants
For that exact reason, its mandatory for RB/Microsoft to assign revenue for hard-working players
@ivang.vegar.7039 lol assign? It's a comp with rules. Money is earned ... if they wanted to do a winner take all, peeps would still sign up knowing that ...
MBL was the lamest player ever, a shame that guy classified over an obviously better player like Mr Yo