Guild Wars 2

Hey guys, just as the title says, would you pay a $20 entry fee for a 1v1 tournament with these prizes?

EDIT: The prize list wasn’t complete but has now been updated to have all the info.
1st: $500, R8M4 , Gems
2nd: $250, gems
3rd: $125, gems
4th: $100, gems
5-8th: $75, gems

http://strawpoll.me/1738111

Your opinion is quite valued here.
EDIT:
About the Tournament; -

The main tournament is called the The Ultimate Profession Tournament.
Initial matches will be inter-class so Warriors v Warriors, Mesmer v Mesmers and so on. All these matches happen under an Umbrella bracket. So for instance Warriors v Warriors and Guardians v Guardians happen under the “Battle of the Sturdy” and whoever wins the tournament of the Warriors will meet the Guardians and this is the same for all the other classes. They all have their own brackets. We expect that this will reducee the chance of everyone playing a specific class because they think they would win with that.
If they do that, they will have to beat other members of that class at that spec.

BANNED LIST:
No bunker amulets; Soldier, Settler’s, Cleric, Magi
- No exploits.
- No Strenght Runes.
We haven’t banned any particular class skills or speccs because of how we’ve set-up the tournament.

Not for a 1 v 1 tournament. Some builds are just too broken for that. 3 v 3 and up to 5 v 5 would work.

Pyriall.1683:

Not for a 1 v 1 tournament. Some builds are just too broken for that. 3 v 3 and up to 5 v 5 would work.

We have an idea for how to set-up a 1v1 tourney in a way that would make it quite fair (we’ve got rules for almost everything and bans for most of the unfair stuff) but we just need to know if you guys would be willing to contribute to the prize pool.

What do you class as “unfair stuff”? Because that could be quite subjecive.

- No bunker amulets; Soldier, Settler’s, Cleric, Magi
- No exploits.
- No Strenght Runes.

We haven’t banned any particular class skills or speccs because of how we’ve set-up the tournament.
The main tournament is called the The Ultimate Profession Tournament.
Initial matches will be inter-class so Warriors v Warriors, Mesmer v Mesmers and so on. All these matches happen under an Umbrella bracket. So for instance Warriors v Warriors and Guardians v Guardians happen under the “Battle of the Sturdy” and whoever wins the tournament of the Warriors will meet the Guardians and this is the same for all the other classes. They all have their own brackets. We expect that this will reducee the chance of everyone playing a specific class because they think they would win with that.

If they do that, they will have to beat other members of that class at that spec.

Only if it was hosted by ANet. But it’s not… so no way.

No I wouldn’t pay , I ain’t got no money.

Dirame.8521:

Pyriall.1683:

Not for a 1 v 1 tournament. Some builds are just too broken for that. 3 v 3 and up to 5 v 5 would work.

We have an idea for how to set-up a 1v1 tourney in a way that would make it quite fair (we’ve got rules for almost everything and bans for most of the unfair stuff) but we just need to know if you guys would be willing to contribute to the prize pool.

It’s still 1 v 1 and there are several broken builds that are going to enter. I wouldn’t pay for a 1 v 1 tournament. I would pay for a 3 v 3 up to 5 v 5

Pyriall.1683:

Dirame.8521:

Pyriall.1683:

Not for a 1 v 1 tournament. Some builds are just too broken for that. 3 v 3 and up to 5 v 5 would work.

We have an idea for how to set-up a 1v1 tourney in a way that would make it quite fair (we’ve got rules for almost everything and bans for most of the unfair stuff) but we just need to know if you guys would be willing to contribute to the prize pool.

It’s still 1 v 1 and there are several broken builds that are going to enter. I wouldn’t pay for a 1 v 1 tournament. I would pay for a 3 v 3 up to 5 v 5

I added a bit about how the tournament works to the original post. Let me know if that changes things.

Dirame.8521:

Pyriall.1683:

Dirame.8521:

Pyriall.1683:

Not for a 1 v 1 tournament. Some builds are just too broken for that. 3 v 3 and up to 5 v 5 would work.

We have an idea for how to set-up a 1v1 tourney in a way that would make it quite fair (we’ve got rules for almost everything and bans for most of the unfair stuff) but we just need to know if you guys would be willing to contribute to the prize pool.

It’s still 1 v 1 and there are several broken builds that are going to enter. I wouldn’t pay for a 1 v 1 tournament. I would pay for a 3 v 3 up to 5 v 5

I added a bit about how the tournament works to the original post. Let me know if that changes things.

It doesn’t, sorry.

I think the rules should be: only Fox, no items, Final Destination.

More seriously, I dislike tournaments where things are arbitrarily banned by the organizers. Ban things that have proven to be far too polarizing (since it makes things stale), but just an arbitrary “no bunkers” (even though you didn’t actually ban all the amulets bunkers use anyway) isn’t going to make things any more interesting. I’m all for the no exploits, although you need to strictly define what you will be considering an exploit.

Btw, you might as well ban Lich form and Supply Drop if you’re going to start banning bunkers.

Well. I went to the straw poll fully expecting to click yes, but the contribution was in cash. No, I wouldn’t put in cash, but I would put in gold.

We tried hosting a doubles tourney where te team entry was 50g each, and the tourneys were 100% crowdsourced, so 100% of the pot would be split amongst 1st 2nd and 3rd.

It sputtered in the end even though we had 8 teams committ. We’re still trying to get it off the ground.

Rezz.8019:

Only if it was hosted by ANet. But it’s not… so no way.

It’s being organizedby Bloodytech (We do the 6v6 GvG tournaments) in partnership with Digital Professional Sports (the guys who helped Anet with the ToL tournament.)

Dirame.8521:

- No bunker amulets; Soldier, Settler’s, Cleric, Magi
- No exploits.
- No Strenght Runes.

So what about the zerker hambow builds? What about any of the other specs that could be defined as ridiculous that don’t utilise any of those amulets?

I think it’s pretty silly to have a tournament that you want to call “ultimate profession” and then arbitrarily ban amulets and one set of runes. I’m also not a fan of blanket bans like this, not because I play using any of the those amulets, but because I just don’t see the reason for it.

No exploits would obviously be a good thing.

Would I pay money for this? No, not with your current set of rules.

Static.9841:

Dirame.8521:

- No bunker amulets; Soldier, Settler’s, Cleric, Magi
- No exploits.
- No Strenght Runes.

So what about the zerker hambow builds? What about any of the other specs that could be defined as ridiculous that don’t utilise any of those amulets?

I think it’s pretty silly to have a tournament that you want to call “ultimate profession” and then arbitrarily ban amulets and one set of runes. I’m also not a fan of blanket bans like this, not because I play using any of the those amulets, but because I just don’t see the reason for it.

No exploits would obviously be a good thing.

Would I pay money for this? No, not with your current set of rules.

The idea behind the rules is to not have lenghty matches where bunkers and other classes with amazing healing, win by simple attrition. Zerker Hambow builds are not ridiculous, they are just perceived to be. These decisions were made based on play experience and what players have located counters for.

Every build so far has a counter and our rules are still changing to include things like Diamond Skin. Our goal is to have matches that are fast paced and fun to watch. We don’t want to sit there for 10 minutes wondering whose winning.

Dirame.8521:

Zerker Hambow builds are not ridiculous, they are just perceived to be. These decisions were made based on play experience and what players have located counters for.

So what you really want to say is “our rules were determined by our bias of what we perceive to be OP and don’t want to see played.” Don’t get me wrong, its fine if that is how you decide to do the tournament, but just blanket banning amulets doesn’t get rid of tanky builds. Stats alone don’t make you tanky.

Bhawb.7408:

Dirame.8521:

Zerker Hambow builds are not ridiculous, they are just perceived to be. These decisions were made based on play experience and what players have located counters for.

So what you really want to say is “our rules were determined by our bias of what we perceive to be OP and don’t want to see played.” Don’t get me wrong, its fine if that is how you decide to do the tournament, but just blanket banning amulets doesn’t get rid of tanky builds. Stats alone don’t make you tanky.

That’s true but the amulets do play a significantly large part. We don’t want boring matches. That’s just what we’re trying to avoid.

Dirame.8521:

Bhawb.7408:

Dirame.8521:

Zerker Hambow builds are not ridiculous, they are just perceived to be. These decisions were made based on play experience and what players have located counters for.

So what you really want to say is “our rules were determined by our bias of what we perceive to be OP and don’t want to see played.” Don’t get me wrong, its fine if that is how you decide to do the tournament, but just blanket banning amulets doesn’t get rid of tanky builds. Stats alone don’t make you tanky.

That’s true but the amulets do play a significantly large part. We don’t want boring matches. That’s just what we’re trying to avoid.

Then do away with a 1 v 1 tournament. Nothing like a 2 second match to get the juices flowing right?..

Pyriall.1683:

Dirame.8521:

Bhawb.7408:

Dirame.8521:

Zerker Hambow builds are not ridiculous, they are just perceived to be. These decisions were made based on play experience and what players have located counters for.

So what you really want to say is “our rules were determined by our bias of what we perceive to be OP and don’t want to see played.” Don’t get me wrong, its fine if that is how you decide to do the tournament, but just blanket banning amulets doesn’t get rid of tanky builds. Stats alone don’t make you tanky.

That’s true but the amulets do play a significantly large part. We don’t want boring matches. That’s just what we’re trying to avoid.

Then do away with a 1 v 1 tournament. Nothing like a 2 second match to get the juices flowing right?..

We’re more likely to encounter a long match in this day and age than a 2-second match.

guardian v guardian is one of the stupidest matches ever so Im definitely not joining this

Dirame.8521:

We’re more likely to encounter a long match in this day and age than a 2-second match.

That doesn’t really apply when you ban most (you forgot rabid) of the relevant amulets.

wheres PU mes, shadow rejunv thief in the list.

So you’ll have ’the best from each class’ to fight other classes? In 1v1?

Basically you want only the most skilful players of particularly broken 1v1 builds to get through. Yes.

I’m all for duelling servers in pvp, as they’re a great place to check out builds (of your own, or from watching others), but 1v1 combat is not *nearly* balanced enough to get me to support a venture like this. Even with gold rather than cash, I’d have little to no confidence in the fairness of this tourney.

I want paid tournaments. How about those?

cheese.4739:

So you’ll have ‘the best from each class’ to fight other classes? In 1v1?

Basically you want only the most skilful players of particularly broken 1v1 builds to get through. Yes.

I’m all for duelling servers in pvp, as they’re a great place to check out builds (of your own, or from watching others), but 1v1 combat is not nearly balanced enough to get me to support a venture like this. Even with gold rather than cash, I’d have little to no confidence in the fairness of this tourney.

You are making too many assumptions. The reality is, someone with enough brains can beat the builds you consider OP.

Would not pay, and here’s why:

- ANet has not put enough time into balancing the game
- You’re banning things you don’t like
- You’re not banning things you like
- Didn’t ban PU mes
- Didn’t ban Shadow Rejuvenation thief
- Didn’t ban AI builds
- Too easy to get cheesed for a real money buy in

Frankly you didn’t put a limit on stealth, or arena size. Mesmer and thief can just stealth unlimitedly and reset fights, even without PU or SRejuv.

Shrug. reeks of fail.

Simply, a buy in (gold or money) for a highly unbalanced and biased 1v1 tournament is an instant failure.

Realist.5812:

Would not pay, and here’s why:

- ANet has not put enough time into balancing the game
- You’re banning things you don’t like
- You’re not banning things you like
.

Oh you want me to ban things YOU don’t like? Isn’t that what it is?
Please, spare me the overdramatics. When we made the Skyhammer tournament, everyone yelled “engies, engies everywhere” and guess who won? Mesmers. When SOAC made the 1v1 tournament a year or so ago, everyone yelled “Mesmers or thieves will win” and guess who won that tourney? Engies. So please spare me the drama.

Espahhtzzzzzzzzzzz
Either ban all the cheeze or don’t ban any of it. Double standards won’t get you anywhere.

If you’re not going to put a limit on stealth, or create a designated fight area so thief and mesmer can’t disappear and reset for infinity and beyond, the tournament is a failure.

If you’re not going to ban ALL the cheese builds, instead of just SOME that YOU don’t like or run, the tournament is a failure.

If you’re not going to ban AI builds, then you’re hosting a “1 v AI” tournament, or a “AI v AI” tournament, not a 1v1 tournament. SO ENGAGE! MUCH CAPTIVATION! MANY SPECTATE, WOW!

If you’re not going to accept criticism and concerns, that is your loss. The majority of the votes say no, and for good reason. Read them.

I’d rather play in traffic.

Laters and good luck.

1v1 isn’t balanced. The cheesiest builds would win, you’d have to ban entire playstyles to make it viable. Also, paying money for something you can arrange between guilds or friends is just a bad idea.

Realist.5812:

If you’re not going to put a limit on stealth, or create a designated fight area so thief and mesmer can’t disappear and reset for infinity and beyond, the tournament is a failure.

If you’re not going to ban ALL the cheese builds, instead of just SOME that YOU don’t like or run, the tournament is a failure.

If you’re not going to ban AI builds, then you’re hosting a “1 v AI” tournament, or a “AI v AI” tournament, not a 1v1 tournament. SO ENGAGE! MUCH CAPTIVATION! MANY SPECTATE, WOW!

If you’re not going to accept criticism and concerns, that is your loss. The majority of the votes say no, and for good reason. Read them.

I’d rather play in traffic.

Laters and good luck.

I created this topic to get people’s opinion on paying for a tournament. If i didn’t care about your opinions i wouldn’t have made this topic.
The rules weren’t up for committee discussion but that doesn’t mean I’m not listening.

only if Anet balance all classes.

Dirame.8521:

but that doesn’t mean I’m not listening.

‘dw guyz we’re listening to your feedback’

Anyhow, percentage-wise, more people seem to be in favor of skyhammer than such a tournament. If that doesn’t say everything, idk what does.

Note that a stealth spam thief can prolong most matchups forever. That could be a problem depending on how you handle such situations. Do you call it a draw for example?
You might want to test your format in a more casual setting first and get some publicity that way. People are more likely to join if they know that the format is solid.

Master of Timespace.2548:

Note that a stealth spam thief can prolong most matchups forever. That could be a problem depending on how you handle such situations. Do you call it a draw for example?
You might want to test your format in a more casual setting first and get some publicity that way. People are more likely to join if they know that the format is solid.

The match only last for 10 minutes. And we have a back-up plan for when a match ends in a draw.

Dirame.8521:

Master of Timespace.2548:

Note that a stealth spam thief can prolong most matchups forever. That could be a problem depending on how you handle such situations. Do you call it a draw for example?
You might want to test your format in a more casual setting first and get some publicity that way. People are more likely to join if they know that the format is solid.

The match only last for 10 minutes. And we have a back-up plan for when a match ends in a draw.

You’re at the point where you sound just like A-Net about Skyhammer. People are telling you no, and you keep trying to force a yes. Not many people would pay for a 1 v 1 tournament. There are too many broken builds to play it competitively.

Pyriall.1683:

Dirame.8521:

Master of Timespace.2548:

Note that a stealth spam thief can prolong most matchups forever. That could be a problem depending on how you handle such situations. Do you call it a draw for example?
You might want to test your format in a more casual setting first and get some publicity that way. People are more likely to join if they know that the format is solid.

The match only last for 10 minutes. And we have a back-up plan for when a match ends in a draw.

You’re at the point where you sound just like A-Net about Skyhammer. People are telling you no, and you keep trying to force a yes. Not many people would pay for a 1 v 1 tournament. There are too many broken builds to play it competitively.

No. All I’ve been doing is explaining the tournament. Your saying no doesn’t change whether this tournament is going to happen or not. It just changes whether or not you’ll pay an entry fee for it.

Dirame.8521:

Pyriall.1683:

Dirame.8521:

Master of Timespace.2548:

Note that a stealth spam thief can prolong most matchups forever. That could be a problem depending on how you handle such situations. Do you call it a draw for example?
You might want to test your format in a more casual setting first and get some publicity that way. People are more likely to join if they know that the format is solid.

The match only last for 10 minutes. And we have a back-up plan for when a match ends in a draw.

You’re at the point where you sound just like A-Net about Skyhammer. People are telling you no, and you keep trying to force a yes. Not many people would pay for a 1 v 1 tournament. There are too many broken builds to play it competitively.

No. All I’ve been doing is explaining the tournament. Your saying no doesn’t change whether this tournament is going to happen or not. It just changes whether or not you’ll pay an entry fee for it.

Why the commitment to 1 v 1 when there are so many broken builds?

Pyriall.1683:

Dirame.8521:

Pyriall.1683:

Dirame.8521:

Master of Timespace.2548:

Note that a stealth spam thief can prolong most matchups forever. That could be a problem depending on how you handle such situations. Do you call it a draw for example?
You might want to test your format in a more casual setting first and get some publicity that way. People are more likely to join if they know that the format is solid.

The match only last for 10 minutes. And we have a back-up plan for when a match ends in a draw.

You’re at the point where you sound just like A-Net about Skyhammer. People are telling you no, and you keep trying to force a yes. Not many people would pay for a 1 v 1 tournament. There are too many broken builds to play it competitively.

No. All I’ve been doing is explaining the tournament. Your saying no doesn’t change whether this tournament is going to happen or not. It just changes whether or not you’ll pay an entry fee for it.

Why the commitment to 1 v 1 when there are so many broken builds?

Because I believe in the format we’ve set-up which isn’t entirely detailed here.

Dirame.8521:

Pyriall.1683:

Dirame.8521:

Pyriall.1683:

Dirame.8521:

Master of Timespace.2548:

Note that a stealth spam thief can prolong most matchups forever. That could be a problem depending on how you handle such situations. Do you call it a draw for example?
You might want to test your format in a more casual setting first and get some publicity that way. People are more likely to join if they know that the format is solid.

The match only last for 10 minutes. And we have a back-up plan for when a match ends in a draw.

You’re at the point where you sound just like A-Net about Skyhammer. People are telling you no, and you keep trying to force a yes. Not many people would pay for a 1 v 1 tournament. There are too many broken builds to play it competitively.

No. All I’ve been doing is explaining the tournament. Your saying no doesn’t change whether this tournament is going to happen or not. It just changes whether or not you’ll pay an entry fee for it.

Why the commitment to 1 v 1 when there are so many broken builds?

Because I believe in the format we’ve set-up which isn’t entirely detailed here.

Why isn’t it detailed?

You also mentioned you had a backup plan for a draw situation but won’t expand on that either. None of this will change my opinion on the tournament, but hiding information and making vague comments about it isn’t going to help.

Instead of adding bans, have you guys thought about removing the bans and adding a time limit on matches? That would solve your “We don’t want matches to go on forever” problem, and allow your contestants to run builds their comfortable with even if they may or may not be considered bunkers to you or others.

If the time limit is reached and both players are alive, then the one with the most health wins, or add a tie breaker in some way. Those are just some ideas.

Honestly I think the restrictions so far seem good and I would be willing to pay but $20 does seem like a bit much. Also maybe charging players a gold fee would be better option as I think more players would be willing to pay it.

I voted no because I don’t like your “ban” list. It is stupid.

No. I do not believe in micro-transactions and additional costs/fees in Buy-2-Play games. Also, including costs will result, in almost 99% cases, in cry babies of “I-payed-I-want-to-play-it-my-way” type.

The simple answer: I’m not going to pay money so that some guy can run a skill-less troll 1v1 build and get $500, if the tournament was 2v2 or 3v3, things might be different.

infantrydiv.1620:

The simple answer: I’m not going to pay money so that some guy can run a skill-less troll 1v1 build and get $500, if the tournament was 2v2 or 3v3, things might be different.

Or 5v5. I would do 5v5. And screw your idiotic ban list.

The players have spoken. It’s a terrible idea.

Scrap it.

I died laughing when you said “Because I believe in the format we’ve set up which isn’t detailed here.”

It isn’t “detailed here” for one simple reason.

You don’t have anything.

If you actually had it all worked out, you’d explain it in full detail here.

Since you have nothing, I’m starting to get the impression this is a scam. You’re trying to scam players out of money for some fake tournament.

I hope ANet looks into this scam attempt.

Good luck.

Aside from the blatant scam attempt in this thread, so much this:

The simple answer: I’m not going to pay money so that some guy can run a skill-less troll 1v1 build and get $500, if the tournament was 2v2 or 3v3, things might be different.

Realist.5812:

You’re trying to scam players out of money for some fake tournament.

I can personally vouch for Dirame not trying to scam anyone.

Realist.5812:

The players have spoken. It’s a terrible idea.

Scrap it.

I died laughing when you said “Because I believe in the format we’ve set up which isn’t detailed here.”

It isn’t “detailed here” for one simple reason.

You don’t have anything.

If you actually had it all worked out, you’d explain it in full detail here.

Since you have nothing, I’m starting to get the impression this is a scam. You’re trying to scam players out of money for some fake tournament.

I hope ANet looks into this scam attempt.

Good luck.

Aside from the blatant scam attempt in this thread, so much this:

The simple answer: I’m not going to pay money so that some guy can run a skill-less troll 1v1 build and get $500, if the tournament was 2v2 or 3v3, things might be different.

You’re right I don’t have everything detailed. Which is why I made this thread to get people’s opinions on whether they’d be okay with paying an entry fee to expand the prizes.

You’re acting like I linked a paypal page for you to pay your money right now.

Dirame.8521:

You’re right I don’t have everything detailed. Which is why I made this thread to get people’s opinions on whether they’d be okay with paying an entry fee to expand the prizes.

The problem is that the full details of the tournament are big determinants of whether I’d pay or not. I’d highly suggest that you start off with basically “for funsies” easy buy in tournaments (in game money, not huge amounts), at first with no rules. Then after a tournament where you can see what absolutely dominates, ban the key parts of that spec that limit as few others as possible. Then you continue iterating on that with subsequent tournaments until you feel that the rules and system make it competitive enough for real money.

Especially do the first few just with people in game and no prizes (just for fun). The key is being able to say definitively “I banned ____ because ____ build uses it and was too dominating”. For example you ban lich because it two shots people and has too few counters, that aren’t easily accessible in 1v1s.