Inferno/General Thoughts

Liquidswords

Doctor DooM wrote: »

As far as I am concerned, Dublin needs a regular monthly tournament.

Fair enough, it doesn't have to be the same thing every single month of the year though. It loses meaning, a single ranking battle season would probably be better even, with a couple months break to allow for other tourney formats and a general change of pace before going at it again for another season. It's like if the Premier League just ran all year long each year people wouldn't really care and there'd be no hype, nobody wins anything more than a single event, nothing carries over, there's no champion to gun for, not even anything to build upon because the slate's wiped clean after each meet up.

Things need a conclusion and a break between to become refreshed.

It's not about being special or super deluxe anything it's just about making things a bit more interesting and competitive, giving people something to look forward to and level up for. Instead of having them think 'sure I'll not bother there's another one next month' and then saying the same thing the month after. There needs to be a bit more incentive to make the effort is all.

GorySnake

I think breaks and irregular tournaments would just hurt the scene, we wont get any better from not playing.

Placebo

it would also be hard to get venue bookings at odd dates,
AND if one person is busy on the inferno date, then that means they dont get to play for 4 months?

Sagat06

I think you're all losing perspective of what people with my point of view are saying. Not that meet ups should only be every two/three months. Not that casuals and other tournaments cant or shouldnt happen in between big tournaments.

What I'm saying is having our 'flagship' event every month is too often.

I think Liquidswords summed it up better than I can :rolleyes::)

The Hound

Maybe we can have an Inferno league which runs similar to the way it does now and then a bigger tourny every 2 months or more. Idk, I like the idea of it being once a month. It does take a break from december to february just like football leagues take a 2 month break. We seem to be getting the numbers once a month which is good, its not like ppl dont want to show, we always have an average of over 20 I'd say which is good

Ry

Right **** the long post

Make inferno Bi-monthly and call it something cooler cuz infernos a **** name no offence inferno.

K.O.Kiki

I think you're all mad.

Sisko

I can't really add anything to this since I've not attended one in a while.

Good points from both sides though.

Yreval

I know it's been four months since I've been to an Inferno - in fact, I've only been to three in total - but after thinking about this issue for a while, I think ranking battles, like the ones we used to have here in the North, are the best solution.

You'd still have monthly tournaments, but they wouldn't be the stand-alone affairs that don't really mean anything that they are now - they'd count towards rankings over the course of a season.

I imagine things panning out like this: by this coming summer, SSF4 AE, BBCS2, MvC3 and KOF13 should all be out on consoles. Let's say that the season starts in July. On the first Saturday of the month you'd have SSF4 AE as the main game with MvC3 as a side game (taking place during the group stage of the main tournament), and on the second Saturday you'd have BBCS2 as the main game and KOF13 as the side game.

This would go on every month until the following April, so you'd have ten sessions for each game. In May you'd have the big annual bash like the thing Misty was talking about (Evo qualifiers too, maybe?). Another possibility would be to have this big tournament double as the final session for each game. June would be an off month in the South, but you'd have Q-Con here in Belfast to look forward to.

(Come to think of it, maybe I should try to revive the Dragonslayers RBs in the autumn. I'd have plenty of practice from running Project Fi.G.H.T.S., that's for sure.)

What do people think about this?

Sisko

Didnt kneecaps suggest and try to run something like this a few months ago?

Kirby

I'm happy with the monthly event. As I tend to miss every 2nd one ...if it was held bi-monthly I would be screwed.

On a purely selfish note, I'd like to bring up the decaying rankings.

I agree with them as it stops somebody showing up once, winning a tourney and disappearing into the night and screwing up the regulars not being able to get seeded. I get that. So no arguement there.

But I'm not convinced of the formula used for it tbh. I admit that I miss tourneys.....I only got to go to around half of them last year. But I've lost my seeding recently.

I'm not tooting my horn. I recognise I'm not good enough to win an Inferno as there are plenty of people much better than me. But I consider myself just about a top 8 tourney player tbh. I've beaten everybody except chris in a tourney at some stage. Results would tend to back that up. 5th...3rd...4th...5th...7th....3rd...5th....3rd....7th.. etc etc. When Im available to go, I do okay.

So as I said, it would be disappointing to turn up to the next one and find myself in a group of death. Thats all I wanted to say regarding the decaying seedings. I think they might decay a bit too much.

chopperbyrne

Marvel 3 is going to be out by the time of the March Inferno.

How would everyone feel about running SSFIV and MVC3 on the same day and have them both be double elimination from the start?

We could probably keep the same pricing structure and just have the pot split between both games.

Would mean smaller prize money for the winner of each, but I think it's the best solution as otherwise people who can only make it once a month will have to choose a game and numbers for both tournaments would suffer.

Voa

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Marvel 3 is going to be out by the time of the March Inferno.

How would everyone feel about running SSFIV and MVC3 on the same day and have them both be double elimination from the start?

We could probably keep the same pricing structure and just have the pot split between both games.

Would mean smaller prize money for the winner of each, but I think it's the best solution as otherwise people who can only make it once a month will have to choose a game and numbers for both tournaments would suffer.

If you guys want to test out and see how it would turn out, I'd be happy to reschedule a WoH to coincide with an Inferno before MvC3 comes out. Then again, I'm sure a lot of the SSF4 heads would probably be more on board with MvC3 than with BB so it might not be such a hot idea:p

Speed Boat

Keep inferno monthly. I can understand peoples view point(s) that it's not as big a deal and so on. But I enjoy knowing that it's never too far till the next tourney.

It's becoming our equivalent of something like guard crush or the break which i think is a good thing. And they happen every week.

If people want a bigger event then have something every 3 or 4 months. But that then begs the question what is bigger? More people, Larger pot, more games or side tourneys?

It will require some work.

Ian McTetly

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Marvel 3 is going to be out by the time of the March Inferno.

How would everyone feel about running SSFIV and MVC3 on the same day and have them both be double elimination from the start?

We could probably keep the same pricing structure and just have the pot split between both games.

Would mean smaller prize money for the winner of each, but I think it's the best solution as otherwise people who can only make it once a month will have to choose a game and numbers for both tournaments would suffer.

Is MvC3 gonna bring in as much comp though? If there was a Super tourney I'd be buying into and practicing for that alone, I'd imagine others would have a similar mentality. I'd play in a side tourney for the craic for sure, but when **** gets srs I'm gonna be focusing on one game. Holding them both with the same pricing on the same day would be cool for Marvel only players, but with the lack of MvC2 interest (to my knowledge) I can't see there being too many people dropping Super for Marvel 3.
Obviously I could be wrong about all this but there's my two cents.

Dreddybajs

I'm gonna be focusing on MVC3 when it comes out, holding a tournament on the same day is grand but I definitely don't think splitting the prize pot between the two games is a good idea.

I was just gonna suggest a fiver entry to MVC3 (for the first while anyway, or longer if people like it that way), to encourage people to try it out etc.

bush

I dont like the idea of splitting the pot either, like tetly said its not fair on the people who have no interest in the game. Could we run mvc on a different day with a lesser played game like tekken or bb? Try and boost numbers for those games. Maybe even mk when it comes out.

I agree with kirby too about the seeding. Maybe if someone doesnt show up they could get some points, like there average from the last 6 tourneys or something.

Doctor DooM

Alot of good points since I last posted.

@liquidswords- Speed Boat clearly stated what I was getting at with my post, I guess I should have been clearer.

It's ok to say "Oh we'll have inferno once a month for the Dublin Guys but a bigger MEGA INFERNO once a quarter for travellers".

How do we differenciate it? I am not a big fan of taking anything away from the monthly infernos, I think they are very very important for our scene (more so since the DSRB stopped). As Roogle said it's as much about keeping ties with the scene as playing games.

Furthermore, I think we're at a tipping point, video output wise. We're getting alot more interest from outside Ireland than we ever had before. It'd be a real shame to reduce the amount of stuff putting us out there now.

So how do we ensure more people make an effort for the bigger tournaments?

Secondly, I am no fan of running a second game on Inferno day. I am there for SSF4. I found the side tournaments just broke my concentration (pretty funny how hound won one side tournament, I won the other, and we ended up in the final of SSF4 though )

Let Marvel grow organically. I'm pretty sure it's going to.

Thirdly, I think the decaying seeds should run for 6 months not 3. This means people who put an impressive placing but can't attend every month will stand more chance of having a good seeding.

As an adjunct to this, I have long been a proponent for a vouch system for seeding at Inferno. While the lads strict adherance to a completely fair seed list is admirable, it ends up with situations like the last XGC inferno where Chueytoo had me, azza, and ken b in his group. That's got to be crap for a new player, and if it was someone less into the scene overall than Chuey may have cost us a new guy.

If someone like me or azza or Bush or Hound who consistently places top 8 goes "this guy here, put him in an empty seed slot, he's going to kick all kinds of ass" it should be listened to. This is a lesson Inferno could learn from the DS lads.

Fourth, I like the name Inferno and I love the fact that everyone (except the North, bad north) keeps to the captain planet naming scheme.

Dreddybajs

Yeah I have no problems with keeping MVC3 separate from Inferno days either (honestly with the current venue it's probably a good idea, if Marvel attracts a fair few new players we may overfill the space).

I don't think vouching for seeds is a great idea, it's too subjective, and maybe that great player from online won't end up playing well in a tournament environment anyway. I think it'd be sensible to make an exception if foreign players who have tournament victories come over for events, but that's about it.

Sairus

Doctor DooM wrote: »

It's ok to say "Oh we'll have inferno once a month for the Dublin Guys but a bigger MEGA INFERNO once a quarter for travellers".

How do we differenciate it? I am not a big fan of taking anything away from the monthly infernos, I think they are very very important for our scene (more so since the DSRB stopped). As Roogle said it's as much about keeping ties with the scene as playing games.

I've been trying to think on this too and I'm coming up pretty blank All I could really think of are the following
I mean for these to only apply to the super infernos and I dont necessarily agree with all of these ideas, just tossing em out there

1) Simply encourage everyone who is only occasionally able to go to Inferno's to go a to a specifically outlined date instead of everyone showing up higgeldy piggeldy throughout the year.

2) Increase buy in cost and maybe extend prizes below top 3. Larger prize and more people get a taste to reflect the larger numbers.

3) Get sponsorship from Gamestop or GAME or HMV or something. Have actual prizes in addition to money.

4) Have a trophy. For added kicks get one with a large face so that the latest winner can be engraved. At the end of the year a playoff between everyone on the trophy could be held to see who gets to keep it. A new trophy could then be bought, rinse repeat.

bush

How about doing the seeding off the last 3 tournaments attended?

Kirby

I love the trophy idea. Doesn't have to be big or fancy....and tbh they aren't that expensive. We could get them engraved with the tags of the winner like you said and have a big playoff at the last inferno of the year.

And bush agrees with me about the seeding....so obviously hes a genius

Having MVC3 and SSF4 on at the same day would be too chaotic. Bad idea. I'm sure MVC will draw a crowd. I plan to play it. I'm going to be useless at it but I still plan to attend all the events....unless I hate the game ofcourse....which I doubt.

Liquidswords

bush wrote: »

How about doing the seeding off the last 3 tournaments attended?

Someone who knows the scene and the players well should just pick the 8 best players in attendance at any given event, no need to get too complicated.

Everybody has horror stories about getting thrown into a group of death but IMO that's better craic to play in and usually doesn't fu*k with the balance of the force as much as having one dude in the group who's completely free.

Decaying seeds seem pretty useless and reward attendance more than gameplay, you end up with dumb sh*t like having someone who has won 5 of the last 8 tournaments tied for 3rd. Shout-outs to Spammy White .

It'd probably be easiest to just do 6 month ranking battle seasons, crown a winner and reset. It would take care of seeds and all the other horse****e.

chopperbyrne

Liquidswords wrote: »

Someone who knows the scene and the players well should just pick the 8 best players in attendance at any given event, no need to get too complicated.

Everybody has horror stories about getting thrown into a group of death but IMO that's better craic to play in.

I'm all for random draw as it does be better craic, but if we are to seed people it should be done properly.

Increasing the amount of events before decaying starts is probably the easiest solution.

pdbhp

I've been avoiding wading into this discussion but feel that Inferno is absolutly fine in the format in which it's running, as for side tourneys thats exactly what they are and should be treated as so with smaller prize pots and buy ins.
On the topic of a Super Inferno that would be a good idea once a year to have a Grand Finale with larger buy in and a greater prize pot.
As for seedings they are ok the way they are and there is no real group of death because of the level of play at Inferno means each group is difficult.

Azza

Makes little difference to me if Inferno is monthly or bi-monthly, I'll try to attend them all work and weather permitting.

As for a larger event, it seems like the next logical step for the community.
Needs to have something above regualr Inferno's. Qualifier for tournaments abroad. Or perhaps offering something large enough to attract players over from the UK.

I think the seeding system is fine as is.

GorySnake

Liquidswords wrote: »

Decaying seeds seem pretty useless and reward attendance more than gameplay, you end up with dumb sh*t like having someone who has won 5 of the last 8 tournaments tied for 3rd. Shout-outs to Spammy White .

Thats the whole point of decaying seeds, its a representation of what the scene is currently like. Cobelcog won 5 out of the last 8 tournaments, but out of the last 3 he came 4th, 1st, and didnt enter. Tied for 3rd, 1st place, whatever, either way he's Top 8 and seeded.

If you went by the last 3 tournaments attended, if some random player wins 3 in a row and then never shows up again, s/he'll be at the top of the seedings but it would not be an accurate representation of the scene since s/he would not even be playing anymore, hypothetical situation.

Doctor DooM

Lets put the cards on the table here and talk about what people are not saying.


The seed list is great for HYPE.

New guy comes along and watches Bush beasting someone and gets told he's number 3 in the country. That makes him a target (in a good way) and someone to learn from.

It's great being able to simply say "this is number 5 and number 12 fighting, it'd be geat for 12 to win".

Also, I know getting into the top was a goal for me when I started out. I don't mind so much now when I drop out, but it gave me something to aim for when I was new.

The seed list should represent the best currently most active players.

I think it'd be a VERY bad idea to remove this by resetting it etc every now and then.

Think about the outside looking in. We want to attract new people right? Seed list shows a story in itself. We don't really need it internally as welall know who's the best and whats what. But it codifies things, gives us all targets, and jokes, and something to fight for other than "Man I finally beat Chris LOLS."

Wth reference to vouching all I am saying is common sense should apply when someone who will clearly make Inferno a crap experience for a new player is randomly thrown into the mix. It's not something that should be used lightly.

I appreciate other people mightn't feel that way, but there you go.

Kirby

I don't think anybody was suggesting dumping seeds altogether. That would be silly. They work well and are necessary. The question is about tweaking. Atleast my comment was anyway.

I don't like the idea of going to six tourney's in a row (like I did) than missing 3 tourneys out of the next 6 and losing your seeding. Happened to me. Thats still like 9 out of 12 overall. That doesn't warrant losing your seeding...atleast in my eyes. Especially if you consistently do well. The suggestion was to take a larger sample of tourneys....not just 3.

Don't want to make an issue out of it. Fact is If you are good enough it wont matter much. I've been lucky enough to make it out of groups for every inferno over the past 2 years....seeded or not. Its not a big deal. It was just an observation after orim posted the list a few pages back. Thats all. No biggie.

Speed Boat

Do we just use the top 8 as seeds? Or the top 16?

Or is it dependent on how many groups on the day?