Automated 1v1 and 2v2 Tournament System?

[Warty]

This has probably been discussed before, but would there be any interest in an automated 1v1 and 2v2 system? Something that would run for say 2 weeks or a month, with winners declared at the end. To qualify for a winner, you would have to participate in at least n fights (50? 100?). It would be auto-matching up to the final rounds. So, you go to the tourney arena, get in line, and get matched with somebody. You fight. You can do another round if you want (have to get back in line, and will get different enemy). Maybe in this phase, you can lose up to 50% of the max required victories, and keep going?

Once you have hit the magical # to qualify for the final round, you stop the random matches and wait for the final round to start. In the final round, the contestants show up in the arena, and the host computer matches them up according to a regular playoff tree. you lose, you're out.

I don't know how exactly that would all work, but the idea is to have a way to have a playoff that doesn't require admins to set up every fight. For everyone to show up at exactly the right time, etc. etc.

Personally, I'd rather be able to say my wingman and I came in #47 in the 2v2s than say I came in first in "points" in the MA.

[Debrody]

If you want fights, contact Ink, he is running an 1v1 dueling ladder. So much fun, i can tell you.
No need for any more complexity.

[Warty]

As long as one person has to manually do it, it will have REAL limits on how many people participate, and how often you can run them.

Think of it as a speed dating service: a computer can help you "date" 100 ladies a month, every month. And 5,000 ladies participate in the pool, so you don't get a lot of repeat month to month. Now compare that to a service before computers, where someone matched you up individually. Maybe 100 total available ladies, and you only get to date 10 a month.

And, thankfully, since this isn't dating, the extra 90 dates a month don't cost you any more, PLUS you get to shoot them if you don't like them.

I wish I hadn't used that dating analogy. Now I can't say that I prefer 2v2 to 1v1.

[Noir]

would be cool, you're flying in the MA, and a pop up comes up:

Here comes a new challenger!!! Press START

And here you go fighting the 1/16th final of the 32nd semi biannual tournament

[Bruv119]

warty you seem to be under the incorrect assumption that the majority of players would actually enjoy or want a fair fight.   Even before making some sort of dreaded competition out of it.   

[Dead Man Flying]

I was always under the impression that HTC prefers a people-based approach.  The people who run these things become committed to the game (and remain long term customers), and their relationships with the players who participate probably increase their subscription longevity too.  An automated system, while effective, is impersonal and does nothing to keep players "hooked."  The personal relations are the thing.

In other words, I suspect that a people-based scenario and tournament system is more a function of business model than it is a lack of technology or design.

[pervert]

warty you seem to be under the incorrect assumption that the majority of players would actually enjoy or want a fair fight.   Even before making some sort of dreaded competition out of it.   

Hit the nail on the head there Bruv 

[Warty]

It's possible you're right about that fair fight thing, but we do make A LOT of noise about picking and side balancing, etc. 1v1s and 2v2s are pretty humbling... you have to try a lot harder to make excuses for the fact you're dead. "you came in a 10.1k, and it was a 10k merge setup!, waaah!" etc.

As for personal/impersonal, that might be right too, but I would argue it's MORE personal, since you KNOW who you are fighting, and it's only the 2 (or 4) of you. Plus everyone can see the results in the tourney tree.

I've started flying the MA the last week, after really just flying DA for the past year. I'm struck by how impersonal it is. I don't have a lot of hops in there yet, so I could be wrong about this. From what I saw, I didn't get into any 1v1s, it was all furball, all the time. (which is fun, don't get me wrong). I was always in the middle of an area where 15 cons could (and did) appear at any given moment. The furball lake in the DA results in A LOT more 1v1 type fights, even though it is also a dedicated furball area. Probably just a question of the total numbers in each arena.

[The Fugitive]

If you want strait up 1 vs 1 or 2 vs 2 then your best bet is to set them up in the DA. There are many 1 vs 1 and 2 vs 2 fights that happen in the MAs, but you do have to work for them a bit more, and fact that you have no idea who is flying against you makes it all that more challenging to me. You get the same working with a wingman. Some guys you fly with often and get to know there moves, it takes all the surprise out of the fight. Some wingman will work with you to get the kill, it doesn't matter "who" gets the kill as long as the bad guy goes down. Other wingman "need" that kill which means you have to fly different in that fight. Others hate to die so will leave you at the drop of the hat to "save" their lives. Again if you don't fly with these people all the time you won't know which flies which way.

Same same is boring, diversity is the spice of life, and fun!

[LCADolby]

warty you seem to be under the incorrect assumption that the majority of players would actually enjoy or want a fair fight.   Even before making some sort of dreaded competition out of it.   

Trying to get FTDEEP to fight a good fight ie a fair one, is like trying to pull teeth with tweezers.

[prono]

There are automated ladder systems : Example