First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post Reply
Farmer Bob
DS Region: Coruscant
DS Region: Coruscant
Posts: 4100
Joined: December 2nd, 2002, 9:49 am
Contact:

First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by Farmer Bob »

First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players:

PM from Tyson:
i forgot about the decklist thing and ive got lots of school work tonight and no decks really up to date in HT.

i know this does not take a long time..but id rather be on the safe side and consider me "out"

thanks for offering a cool tournament. i shouldve paid attention to the deadlines but ive been quite busy.

good luck!
The problem here is - what do you - the players - want to do about payment? This will raise the cost of the tournament to 2.98$ per person.
Problem is; some players have already submitted payment.

Listening to all suggestions.



User avatar
Cloudburst
Member
Posts: 1234
Joined: October 25th, 2008, 4:33 pm
Location: Superjail

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by Cloudburst »

At the time I'm writing this, less than half the field has paid. We're out about $2.40 / 8 and that's an extra 30 cents for everyone that hasn't paid yet. It just seems easiest to me to have the remaining players rework the cost.

If anyone feels cheated, they can certainly speak out. It's just an idea.
Andrew Clark
former Mod, current Rocker

User avatar
3MW0J8
Member
Posts: 4260
Joined: January 29th, 2003, 8:54 pm
Location: I said I have the most 2nd places

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by 3MW0J8 »

or just stop being ridiculous and let brad and me in
Brad Eier wrote:build better decks, play better cards, etc.
Advocate wrote:I would reply, but the site is down.
didn't choose the thug life..
Spoiler
Show
the thug life chose me

ImageImage

Farmer Bob
DS Region: Coruscant
DS Region: Coruscant
Posts: 4100
Joined: December 2nd, 2002, 9:49 am
Contact:

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by Farmer Bob »

Since your past registration end date and since you've trolled and berated and tried to destroy the tournament and continue to do so and to troll in this forum........... why should I?

User avatar
3MW0J8
Member
Posts: 4260
Joined: January 29th, 2003, 8:54 pm
Location: I said I have the most 2nd places

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by 3MW0J8 »

i've not done any of the above

and it would solve this potential problem w/entry fees


just sayin'
Brad Eier wrote:build better decks, play better cards, etc.
Advocate wrote:I would reply, but the site is down.
didn't choose the thug life..
Spoiler
Show
the thug life chose me

ImageImage

User avatar
spideyguy0
Member
Posts: 7496
Joined: January 1st, 2003, 1:57 pm
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by spideyguy0 »

I'll pay the 2.50 for Tyson if it'll make things simpler...
Casey A. - New York, NY
Image Image

User avatar
mr007agent
Member
Posts: 6876
Joined: October 30th, 2002, 1:43 pm
Location: South Houston, TX
Contact:

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by mr007agent »

3MW0J8 wrote:or just stop being ridiculous and let brad and me in
This please.
Michael Richards
Rogue 84
PC Volunteer
Shadow 43 - Dantooine Flight Leader
http://omega.uta.edu/~mhr7680/dantooineswccg.html
-007-
ImageImage

Farmer Bob
DS Region: Coruscant
DS Region: Coruscant
Posts: 4100
Joined: December 2nd, 2002, 9:49 am
Contact:

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by Farmer Bob »

You get enough of the players to vote, go for it. They can play. I'm just the TD; you people are the ones playing. You want them in; let them in. Just make your decision by the end of tonight.

User avatar
spideyguy0
Member
Posts: 7496
Joined: January 1st, 2003, 1:57 pm
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by spideyguy0 »

I'd say we're at 16 players right now which is a good number, let's just go with what we have. Reid and Brad did have their chance if they were serious. I'm sure Brad was just trying to be anoying. It's possible Reid actually does want to play, but he did have the chance before when everyone else was signing up and we know he knew about the event.
Casey A. - New York, NY
Image Image

Harpster
Booster Box
Booster Box
Posts: 1166
Joined: January 27th, 2007, 7:37 pm
Holotable username: Harpster
GEMP Username: Sharpy
Contact:

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by Harpster »

This is retarded, how are you going to not let someone play a game when we are begging for participation?

User avatar
spideyguy0
Member
Posts: 7496
Joined: January 1st, 2003, 1:57 pm
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by spideyguy0 »

Tyson wrote:
casey, that is an honorable offer, but i can not expect you to pay my debt.
too late, we can square it at one of the state events coming up if u want
Casey A. - New York, NY
Image Image

User avatar
Darren Pilbeam
Member
Posts: 2077
Joined: September 27th, 2006, 6:11 pm
Location: Hinckley, Leicestershire, UK.

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by Darren Pilbeam »

Harpster wrote:This is retarded, how are you going to not let someone play a game when we are begging for participation?
Because with all the talk about whether or not online tournaments are "legitimate", letting people sign up after the deadline (prior to which there was a month to declare interest in playing) and swapping players after pairings have been made, decklists submitted and games played doesn't exactly do anything to support the arguement that the tournaments are valid.
Three time UK Champion - 2009, 2010, and 2013

Online League Chairman (emeritus) / UK Flight Leader

Recipient of the Lifetime Acheivement Award (sic) for service to the SWCCG Online Community

Meto
Reflections Gold
Reflections Gold
Posts: 4728
Joined: August 21st, 2003, 2:57 am
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by Meto »

To be fair, neither does turning away willing players. It's really a lose-lose situation. Right now, the biggest problem for the legitimacy of online tournaments is attendance, and lack of "elite" players. I think turning away players under all but the most extreme circumstances is bad.
"I was blackout drunk and shot Hunter."

The Franchise
Member
Posts: 12655
Joined: January 26th, 2005, 9:20 pm
Location: Akron

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by The Franchise »

spideyguy0 wrote:I'd say we're at 16 players right now which is a good number, let's just go with what we have. Reid and Brad did have their chance if they were serious. I'm sure Brad was just trying to be anoying. It's possible Reid actually does want to play, but he did have the chance before when everyone else was signing up and we know he knew about the event.
it is YOU who are mistaken. about a great many things

anyway like i said i got no hard feelings, good luck to everyone playing in the event, and props to ben kline for organizing this, it certainly isn;t easy to setup and run an online event

User avatar
Darren Pilbeam
Member
Posts: 2077
Joined: September 27th, 2006, 6:11 pm
Location: Hinckley, Leicestershire, UK.

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by Darren Pilbeam »

Meto wrote:To be fair, neither does turning away willing players. It's really a lose-lose situation. Right now, the biggest problem for the legitimacy of online tournaments is attendance, and lack of "elite" players. I think turning away players under all but the most extreme circumstances is bad.
I think we're disagreeing on the meaning of "legitimate".

First and foremost an event has to be run properly - regardless of the number and identity of the players involved. We can keep delaying the start date as much as possible and delaying deadlines to accomodate as many people as possible but at the end of the day all that does is frustrate the people who make the effort to stick to the deadlines and it undermines the TD's position and ability to run the event.

If events are run properly and go smoothly then the number of participants in subsequent events will hopefully rise. If tournaments are a disaster because of repeated delays, players not bothering to check which side they should be playing and changes after rounds have started then I can't see how that can have a positive effect - even if the tournament does involve the "elite" players you mentioned.

It's unfortunate that there aren't as many players involved in this as there could have been, but if there are players that can't sign up within the near month-long period as well as others who decide to not pay the (very small) entry fee I don't think it's fair to repeatedly have a go at the guy organising it for trying to stick to a schedule that the participating players signed up to (particularly at a time of year when a lot of people will be going away and be unable to play games if there are delays).
Three time UK Champion - 2009, 2010, and 2013

Online League Chairman (emeritus) / UK Flight Leader

Recipient of the Lifetime Acheivement Award (sic) for service to the SWCCG Online Community

User avatar
DDM
Member
Posts: 4588
Joined: April 3rd, 2003, 6:00 am
Location: Milano (Italy)
Contact:

Re: First Drop: Tournament At 16 Players

Post by DDM »

Again, I agree with Darren.
I would have loved myself to play Reid (or even Brad, if I didn't think he made his post in a joke manner), but the slope is slippery, like Darren said.
I think the fact we lost 4-5 people was, imho, due also to the delays.
Get a structure first running, with no "ifs" and "delays", and people will know they can count on the format. So more will come.
SirYoda wrote:I suggest we ban all creatures.
Or better yet, just ban DDM from playing creatures.

Post Reply

Return to “July Online Event”