[Pox]

Originally Posted by mGGSouth

So my feedback is this: online rounds should only give points for a single ACL. (If this had been implemented for Sydney, MK, Frustration and Iaguz would have all gotten groups, and players like me and Runamok wouldn't have had better seeding than players like Blysk and Pidgeon.

My other piece of feedback is to really try to maximize interactions between the different games at ACL. I thought it was awesome the way the FIFA finals really drew a crowd, because it was right at the centre of the event. But with the Starcraft, LoL and Smash all being off in separate rooms I felt there was a bit of a disconnect. I for one would have loved to watch some LoL and Smash if it was made really clear to everybody at the event that a big game was happening.

Agreed on both points, would have been cool to watch some smash but I completely forgot it was going on.

Originally Posted by TtSYF.tRoy

FluX, i see what you mean with both Fighto and Blysk getting knocked out early but;
4 players from open bracket placed top 2 in pro pools.
Pigeon, Frustration, RivaL and iaguz.
Two of these players came from Bracket A and two from Bracket B.
Pigeon and Frustration, from arguably the 'easier' bracket placed 3rd and 5/6th respectively. Obviously they were capable of taking the pro bracket placings they won considering they beat a bunch of 'pros'

Look at the next two players from each bracket. MK and I managed ~50% winrates in groups, and only barely eliminated Blysk and Fighto - they were both knocked out 1-2 1-2 by some combination of david, iaguz and I. Runamok and South qualified dropping only two maps between them and went 0-5 in groups. Not trying to be mean here, just trying to establish that I really don't think you can seriously refute that the brackets were stacked - the argument should be about whether or not ACL points are a fair way to seed.

[Baldie]

Originally Posted by ToRPox

at first glance it makes sense to seed ACL events based on ACL points and it's clearly unbiased. That said (and as my previous post made clear), it's not fair.

Originally Posted by ToRPox

clearly unbiased.

Originally Posted by ToRPox

it's not fair.

wut


In an ideal world I would have a single double elimination bracket. However the reality of the situation is we don't have sufficient computers to effectively manage that process. The whole reason we split brackets into two is so that I can sit down an entire bracket and allocate them a computer. That and double elim brackets get exponentially larger the more people in them so in theory having two smaller brackets reduces the total series required to be played. One of the largest waste of time at LANs is people setting up. People have to plug in their peripherals, sometimes download drivers and set the settings they want. So I try to avoid computer swapping where possible and that means delaying the other bracket until computers become available. Also please nobody counter-argue ACL should just buy more computers. It's not financially feasible for us to do this and in many places the space available wouldn't allow for more computers.

In regards to how seeding was done I seriously don't understand how anybody can argue seeding an ACL event using ACL points is not fair or not unbiased. In my opinion no admin should ever alter a bracket 'because it looks stacked' or 'because some really good guy gets a bad run', especially if the premise of seeding is based off previous qualifiers. What's the point of doing the qualifiers then? "Oh see this semi decent guy played in all the qualifiers and he's in the easier bracket but this guy here who is like top 2 protoss SEA is in the harder bracket hmm despite only playing in 1 qualifier let's swap them because it wont be as stacked then and it will make it more likely for this guy to advance because he really should." Makes me sick thinking about it. I definitely can see the merit in using 2013's model of seasons instead of yearly but that's all I can take from this entire discussion on it. There will always be people who get an easier bracket than others - welcome to a tournament.

Quick Comments

Asrathiel:

Definitely agree about admins altering brackets. Big can of worms once you start doing it

[Frustration]

Originally Posted by Baldie

wut


In an ideal world I would have a single double elimination bracket. However the reality of the situation is we don't have sufficient computers to effectively manage that process. The whole reason we split brackets into two is so that I can sit down an entire bracket and allocate them a computer. That and double elim brackets get exponentially larger the more people in them so in theory having two smaller brackets reduces the total series required to be played. One of the largest waste of time at LANs is people setting up. People have to plug in their peripherals, sometimes download drivers and set the settings they want. So I try to avoid computer swapping where possible and that means delaying the other bracket until computers become available. Also please nobody counter-argue ACL should just buy more computers. It's not financially feasible for us to do this and in many places the space available wouldn't allow for more computers.

In regards to how seeding was done I seriously don't understand how anybody can argue seeding an ACL event using ACL points is not fair or not unbiased. In my opinion no admin should ever alter a bracket 'because it looks stacked' or 'because some really good guy gets a bad run', especially if the premise of seeding is based off previous qualifiers. What's the point of doing the qualifiers then? "Oh see this semi decent guy played in all the qualifiers and he's in the easier bracket but this guy here who is like top 2 protoss SEA is in the harder bracket hmm despite only playing in 1 qualifier let's swap them because it wont be as stacked then and it will make it more likely for this guy to advance because he really should." Makes me sick thinking about it. I definitely can see the merit in using 2013's model of seasons instead of yearly but that's all I can take from this entire discussion on it. There will always be people who get an easier bracket than others - welcome to a tournament.

i 100% agree to this but i also want to add if you are a really good player or a top 2 protoss in sea you should be able to compete on a high level and should also be able to make it to groups, all players who "should" make it to groups or open bracket should also be able to get there and by players just missing out because of seeding is most likely because they didnt play better then the other good players on the day.

If Mk or Rival or who ever else just made it through missed out would you all be complaining as much, tbh i dont think so, so maybe we all just need to chill out and just take it for what it is

[Snx`Azz]

Originally Posted by Baldie

In regards to how seeding was done I seriously don't understand how anybody can argue seeding an ACL event using ACL points is not fair or not unbiased. In my opinion no admin should ever alter a bracket 'because it looks stacked' or 'because some really good guy gets a bad run', especially if the premise of seeding is based off previous qualifiers. What's the point of doing the qualifiers then? "Oh see this semi decent guy played in all the qualifiers and he's in the easier bracket but this guy here who is like top 2 protoss SEA is in the harder bracket hmm despite only playing in 1 qualifier let's swap them because it wont be as stacked then and it will make it more likely for this guy to advance because he really should." Makes me sick thinking about it. I definitely can see the merit in using 2013's model of seasons instead of yearly but that's all I can take from this entire discussion on it. There will always be people who get an easier bracket than others - welcome to a tournament.

The current system is fair for seeding as its a privilege to be seeded and you should do the work required to be assigned a higher seed. If you have to verse tougher opponents in the open bracket who are non-seeded it is your own fault for not placing higher and making it into groups.

If you are not strong enough to progress through the bracket it is your own lacking. This system is fine because you only pay for entry of the current round. Bracket luck is always present in all games.

Originally Posted by Baldie

In an ideal world I would have a single double elimination bracket. However the reality of the situation is we don't have sufficient computers to effectively manage that process. The whole reason we split brackets into two is so that I can sit down an entire bracket and allocate them a computer. That and double elim brackets get exponentially larger the more people in them so in theory having two smaller brackets reduces the total series required to be played. One of the largest waste of time at LANs is people setting up. People have to plug in their peripherals, sometimes download drivers and set the settings they want. So I try to avoid computer swapping where possible and that means delaying the other bracket until computers become available. Also please nobody counter-argue ACL should just buy more computers. It's not financially feasible for us to do this and in many places the space available wouldn't allow for more computers.

You can pursue the bracket setup in this manner however there are some issues:
1) There should be no bias in the first bracket to play in the selection. Bracket A should always start first.
2) This should be publicized in the game format so people can understand and plan for the eventuality of this setup as ACL offers more opportunities to participate in other events.
3) Have a strict schedule for this bracket type of when it should finish and when the other begins.

Having people wait around for 1 bracket to finish and slowly all computers 1 by 1 replaced by bracket A players is incredibly messy.

[|Erasmus|]

Originally Posted by Baldie

In regards to how seeding was done I seriously don't understand how anybody can argue seeding an ACL event using ACL points is not fair or not unbiased. In my opinion no admin should ever alter a bracket 'because it looks stacked' or 'because some really good guy gets a bad run', especially if the premise of seeding is based off previous qualifiers. What's the point of doing the qualifiers then? "Oh see this semi decent guy played in all the qualifiers and he's in the easier bracket but this guy here who is like top 2 protoss SEA is in the harder bracket hmm despite only playing in 1 qualifier let's swap them because it wont be as stacked then and it will make it more likely for this guy to advance because he really should." Makes me sick thinking about it. I definitely can see the merit in using 2013's model of seasons instead of yearly but that's all I can take from this entire discussion on it. There will always be people who get an easier bracket than others - welcome to a tournament.

Why would blysk have played in the qualifiers? Some of them were held long before it was known that this ACL was giving out a WCS seed or blizzard helped him with the cost of getting out here to compete for it.

The process is not entirely unfair as long as it's all known before the season starts. Changing it halfway through and then punishing players who didn't compete from the start of the year in events that at the time were completely pointless to them is indeed unfair.

Plenty of good things about this ACL though! For the first time it was actually a good experience as a spectator with the theatre and a really well run stage and interviews etc.

Quick Comments

ACL VaNzR:

OMG erasmus had something positive to say!! Thanks man :). Noted of course with the non ANZ players.

[Pox]

Originally Posted by Baldie

wut

By unbiased I mean that the current system can't be influenced to give any particular player an advantage - if you get screwed over, it's because someone didn't play enough online rounds, not because someone in the back room has it in for you. I think "impartial" is a better word.

Originally Posted by Baldie

In regards to how seeding was done I seriously don't understand how anybody can argue seeding an ACL event using ACL points is not fair or not unbiased. In my opinion no admin should ever alter a bracket 'because it looks stacked' or 'because some really good guy gets a bad run', especially if the premise of seeding is based off previous qualifiers. What's the point of doing the qualifiers then?

I guess we just have differing opinions on what the purposes of seeding is - I see it as a way to get an elimination-style tournament to have results as close as possible to what a full round-robin tournament would have - i.e. so that players with similar skill are eliminated in similar rounds. I don't think a good player should be punished for not playing in the qualifiers, and I certainly don't think a good player who did play the qualifiers should be punished at random by being matched up in the first round against a good player who didn't.

I agree that it's somewhat dodgy for an admin to alter the bracket after the fact - there should be a seeding procedure and it should be stuck to. I just think that procedure should change. The qualifiers would clearly still serve the purpose of determining who gets to start in groups.

If Mk or Rival or who ever else just made it through missed out would you all be complaining as much, tbh i dont think so, so maybe we all just need to chill out and just take it for what it is

I would be.

Quick Comments

ACL VaNzR:

I maintain, and so do my admins, that to earn a seed in an ACL tournament, you PLAY In previous ACL tournaments.

[Baldie]

Originally Posted by x5.Revenant

To improve on the situation, it would be nice to strategically calculate out how long the open brackets would run, and then only ask the Group stage players to report say 30minutes(in case Open Brackets end early) before their group stage starts.

I spent multiple hours on a spreadsheet calculating how long each stage of ACL would take, scheduling matches and the like but at the end of the day planning only goes so far. It's always hard to schedule for a tournament when there are so many variables to it (will there be any computer or network issues, how many people will show on the day, will we have a ****ing 2 hour match in the first round of open bracket etc.) I always feel guilty when people have to wait all day to play trust me but all I can do is apologise for the wait and thank them for understanding.

Originally Posted by |Erasmus|

Changing it halfway through and then punishing players who didn't compete from the start of the year in events that at the time were completely pointless to them is indeed unfair.

It would be unfair if we did that. But when I put the ACL Online Rounds Overview up in April I clearly stated that ACL Sydney would be seeded by Online Round 1 through 4 and ACL Brisbane. At no point outside of changing Online Round 3 to a WCS qualifier (which only impacted the tournament structure) did anything change after the first ACL online event. We also announced ACL Sydney was to be July 19th-20th in January so people were aware of these dates well in advance. While I do agree having season based points makes it easier for people to make decisions to attend a LAN event without feeling like they missed out on seeding opportunities I just want to make it abundantly clear there is no excuse for people saying they weren't informed well in advance of how the year would run and the importance of participating in all online rounds if they wanted to be seeded high for ACL Sydney.

Also to make it clear I love these kind of discussions despite sometimes coming across as defensive. I just sometimes need to give context to situations. Unfortunately I don't own a magic wand which makes things happen the way I want them to.

[x5_dot]

Wish I was there

Regarding seeding, I completely agree with Baldie. The general rule is that the more points you have the easier you make it for yourself. This is normally the case e.g. many players played in the online rounds to ensure they were seeded in groups. I think the players who don't bother to accrue points are normally the ones that skew bracket talent to one side just because they have to be slotted in with no set seed.

[syfChadMann]

Perhaps ACL could award seeding for open bracket based on ACL points and some consideration to OCS points? No one competitive has an excuse to not OCS points, you can earn them multiple times a day. At the end of the day, seeding is about getting a skill spread across the tournament. Of course you want accuracy and transparency? Perhaps run a few ACL Points Only ODC's or something? Add ACL points to Masters Cup results or something?.. All it does is make the seeding more accurate. Doesn't matter if its a different league, getting a better result is key.

Anyone that suggests using 'common sense' in seeding is asking for trouble, it NEEDS to be attributed to a points system.

[Pox]

Originally Posted by fray`ChadMann

Anyone that suggests using 'common sense' in seeding is asking for trouble, it NEEDS to be attributed to a points system.

Yeah, I agree 100% - the league needs a well-documented, impartial system for seeding to be taken seriously. It's definitely worth pointing out that this particular incident was a huge coincidence: if you look at the points, almost everyone had at least a modest amount of ACL points - it just happened that the rankings almost perfectly alternated between "common sense favourites" and frequently participating players. As someone who wants to see the best possible games I feel like the point system favours participation too much (as opposed to something like an Elo system) but I understand not everyone shares that viewpoint.

[SLCNPezz]

I actually really disagree with people saying seeding shouldn't be done based on Yearly points (south, pox).

This is an ACL event, it makes sense to reward people with a strong seed if they've attended previous events. All these strong players in OB, it's their fault for not playing qualifiers and attending earlier ACLs.

I've personally put a lot of effort into scheduling work and uni AROUND these qualifiers, so that I can get as many points as possible. If seeding wasn't done in this way, it would be a real slap in the face.

<only read page 2 so my bad most of this has been said already in page 3

[Frustration]

#pezzmyhero

[SLCN.Wally]

But a lot of people didn't know if they'd be able to make it to ACL till after the qualifiers, there is no incentive for them to play in the qualifiers if they aren't going to play in acl since there is no cash prize and acl points aren't used in any other tournaments.

Quick Comments

SLCNPezz:

That just seems like excuses, if you think that there's a possibility you play, period.

[syfChadMann]

Baldie, have you considered having something like DreamHack?.. with Multiple Group stages? Might make things run a bit faster? Seed top pro's into final groups and spread things out like that before moving onto a single or double elim bracket?

Not sure if that system runs much faster, but It should do? since you play three series rather than a full group of 5 series?? but there are more people?

Might be worth doing some research into? I like that format.

Quick Comments

FLuX:

I like your format you sexy man

[Baldie]

Originally Posted by fray`ChadMann

Baldie, have you considered having something like DreamHack?.. with Multiple Group stages? Might make things run a bit faster? Seed top pro's into final groups and spread things out like that before moving onto a single or double elim bracket?

Not sure if that system runs much faster, but It should do? since you play three series rather than a full group of 5 series?? but there are more people?

Might be worth doing some research into? I like that format.

I've toyed with the idea and other ideas but the ACL team decided ACL Sydney was too important of an event to try a new format we haven't trialed before. Perhaps in a future ACL we can look at other possibilities.

[syfChadMann]

Originally Posted by Baldie

I've toyed with the idea and other ideas but the ACL team decided ACL Sydney was too important of an event to try a new format we haven't trialed before. Perhaps in a future ACL we can look at other possibilities.

Maybe at ACL Melbourne 2014?

[ToRDjvillian]

Originally Posted by fray`ChadMann

Maybe at ACL Melbourne 2014?

Maybe at ACL Adelaide 2014?

Quick Comments

Maynarde:

KEEN

[Asrathiel]

Agree 100% about admins not dicking around with brackets because it looks lopsided... as soon as any person uses *their* judgement about who deserves to be where it just opens a huge can of worms. The seeding system was known beforehand, either you make the effort to participate and maximize your chances, or you don't.

Anyways! We dropped in for a few hours on the Saturday, thought the setup looked great, the big screen area was awesome, just the stage lighting issue between games took away from it a little.

Watching the stream on Sat evening and Sunday the lighting issue was more obvious, and as previously mentioned, sound balancing issues, downtime, lack of crowd mic, too much overlay and not enough crowd cam detracted from it somewhat.

Great to see the few people we got to say hi to

Quick Comments

	Maynarde:	Great to see you n goose too! gl with the bubs etc :)
	iM tgun:	Was good to see you two and the kids :)

[x5.RunaMoK]

overall i think the event went well and i was very happy to be apart of it


my only feedback and ive been gunning for this luxury is BOOOOOTHS D:

Quick Comments

	syfChadMann:	+1 for BOOOOOOOTHS!!!
	syfPhoenix:	BOOOOOOOOFS

[rezyn8]

In terms of the open bracket seeding, this is an ACL event. Previous ACL events were advertised that participation would earn points for seeding into groups and open bracket of ACL Finals events. There is no mystery here.

ACL is a tournament in its own right. It is not part of the OSC or any other tournament. If you want to give yourself the best possible seed you have to participate in that tournaments events. As such, correct me if I am wrong, there were six online qualifiers and a LAN that all earned points for the yearly Finals.

As is, OSC doesn't take into consideration ACL standings. It would be like the AFL looking at the VFL/SANFL/WAFL/etc league standings of the feeder clubs to seed the premier clubs in the finals.

While it was unfortunate to see the handsome Blysk get knocked out in the OB, he knew what he was in for when he entered. As did iaguz and the other 'top' players. Tournaments are supposed to have upsets, it would be pretty damn boring if the same 'expected' people played the Ro8 over and over again at every tournament.

I'll compose my feedback as an attendee of the event a little later.