10-19 The Official Twink Cup 2016 Thread

[Conq]

I get what you're saying but your argument is completely destroyed by the fact that you didn't invite anyone from SR to have any say in the discussion whatsoever. Does adding Pizza (and a rep from STARTER) to a group suddenly turn it into a circle-jerk? Are you telling me that not a single person in SR is qualified to talk about the bracket that a lot of the people in the guild play every single day?

Come on man....

And just for the record, I'm not talking about the organizational aspect of the tournament, strictly rules. You seem to be mashing the tournament organization and rules into one group, which should not be the case. You can do whatever you want with how the tournament is run behind the scenes, but every major team should have a say in the rules for WSG itself.

I'm not sure what you thought the reaction would be when everyone in the entire community expected certain standards to be upheld, and you just swooped in and decided to change things without informing anyone outside of your special snowflake committee

Every team doesn't need a say, that's entirely unnecessary, people weren't picked/not picked for their guild tags, this isn't about making people feel special by involving them, any feedback we need and more will come from this thread more than it would by adding a couple people to a committee.

 

[lindenkron]

I get what you're saying but your argument is completely destroyed by the fact that you didn't invite anyone from SR to have any say in the discussion whatsoever. Does adding Pizza (and a rep from STARTER) to a group suddenly turn it into a circle-jerk? Are you telling me that not a single person in SR is qualified to talk about the bracket that a lot of the people in the guild play every single day?

Come on man....

And just for the record, I'm not talking about the organizational aspect of the tournament, strictly rules. You seem to be mashing the tournament organization and rules into one group, which should not be the case. You can do whatever you want with how the tournament is run behind the scenes, but every major team should have a say in the rules for WSG itself.

I'm not sure what you thought the reaction would be when everyone in the entire community expected certain standards to be upheld, and you just swooped in and decided to change things without informing anyone outside of your special snowflake committee

It seems as if you don't understand the issues the previous "committee" had. How did that turn out again? I believe I've repeated myself about a thousand times now. You've been there, you've tried it. It didn't work. Now we're doing something that works.

Is this a concern for Pizza, or are you just shouting "Include me include" because you feel left out? Is there anything in the process so far that seems like it's been specifically orchestrated or designed to try and belittle or destroy Skill Ratio?

I can tell you there isn't, because I wouldn't let it. I've various times among the 3 of us had to voice my opinion so loud as to almost quit on the project, to keep certain things in certain order for the sake of fairness for everyone.

That was supposed to be my role in this, the non bias. I don't know any teams here personally, and I'm a perfectionist so all I care about is how the tournament is presented and perceived from a viewer on the stream's point of view.

The reason the rules are the way they are now, is to ensure that the fairness of both parties (oldschool twinks, newer members) is as balanced as possible. It feels to me as if non of the guys playing today have any clue what twinking used to be all about. Disallowing people to use the gear that they spend the last 10 years getting would be completely against the spirit of "Twinking". Regardless of whats "Fair or not fair", you have to let TWINKS BE TWINKS. It's as if everyone forgot what a twink is. That being said, certain things need to be taken into consideration as they can be abused. It's not necessarily because of how strong they are (that's part of it) but also because of combination of how they are obtained (Heirlooms being account traded and sold to buff your TC team - like the issues last year). Which is specifically why the most broken things in that aspect have been banned out this year.

It's not because everyone can't get it. It's to avoid anabolic steroids in community. Not to stop people who have been working out for years, to flex their muscles.

 

[anatomyx]

Every team doesn't need a say

Then this is where you and nearly the entire 19 community disagree with each other.

 

[Conq]

Then this is where you and nearly the entire 19 community disagree with each other.

Is that what nearly the entire 19 community told you?

Nearly the entire 19 community has no idea how to run a tournament.

 

[Yndigo]

On the +13 sp bracer issue

The reason why people are mentioning this is because as blackout admitted that it was forgotten about, which is fine, shit happens and whatnot. Since you say that you want to run a "professional" tournament that also implys that you have a certain amount of consistancy in the ruleset that you put out. Now i'm not gonna give out my personal opinion on what should or should not be banned unless for some reason you decide that you acctually care about my opinion on the matter. The reason it is an issue is that it makes no sense to not ban it with the current ruleset that you have put out. It's clearly way more powerful than a lot of the things that are infact banned. Consistancy boys, but again you're gonna "review" it and you'll come to the right conclusion and thats good.


Dischord

Alright so i see why you want to do this, and in theory its a great idea.
In practice however it's a slightly different story, it works in professional esports because they are professionals. Everyone who will be participating in TC, wether on the broadcast team or participating in the acctual tournament are not. We're for the most part a bunch of idiots playing games online for shits and giggles and attempting to pull a listen in scenario brings certain risk factors for both the team playing and the broadcast itself and you can even argue that it could fuck with the integrity of the tournament as a whole if shit goes completely haywire.

My main concerns for it would be

• Accidental/intentional strat leaks

I suppose you could call me paranoid here but having someone sit there and listen to everything being said on coms thats not a part of the team is something that makes me concerned. This is a small community, and this is a tournament run by said community and people tend to have agendas. Or it could just be completely accidental during one of the listen ins, yes i know there will be a delay and all that but strats that could compromise the entire series could be talked about.

• People tend to say things in the heat of the moment that shouldnt be broadcasted.

This is just a reality when you stick 10 nerds from all over the world and have them play other nerds from all over the world, it's just a part of gaming I guess. Now i'm not so much concerned about the potencial backlash on players who say stupid shit, its more the stream itself. If you do a listen in and all of a sudden there's a bunch of slurs and various forms of cursing, thats going to reflect badly on you, the broadcasting team. You could bring in the argument on people doing it in esports all the time, but we're not professionals. We're a bunch of idiots.


Committee; who should and who should not have a say.

Personally, I don't care who's doing what, aslong as things get done and the rules are fair and done properly.
People are saying every team should have a representative in the committee, and i agree with that to a certain extent.
You should ask said representative for input on potential ruleset, to avoid mishaps like the 3 druid 3 monk thing which was pretty dumb, granted it was a mistake and shit happens, and then try to find a middleground based on input from all the teams.

In a perfect world the organizers should be more or less inpartial, aka they're not playing. But we're a small community and the people who gets shit done just so happens to be people who are involved with teams in one way or another, thats just the way it is.
But you as the three induviduals who have come up with these rules also need to understand when you've fucked up, and be ok with that. From the looks of it you have, which is great. Good job.




On a final note, I would like to thank you for the time you've put into this, it's nice to see something finally happening.
And to ask you to think about what you're posting in this thread in reply to other peoples less than tactful ways of approaching things. Telling people who calls out mistakes in the ruleset "If you don't like it, don't participate" is not exactly the message you want to be sending.


If you should need another point of view on anything, feel free to message me and i'll be happy to assist in anyway I can.

 

[Revoman]

Why would you not want to have each team in agreement with each other?

What my friend zeiren is preaching is the truth. The teams competing in this tournament are the ones who ultimately are affected by the rules set in place. It would only make sense to have all of the "Invited" Twink guilds come to agreement on the rules so that each twink participating can be fully confident there is an even playing field. I am also fairly confident that leaders from most of these "Invited" twink guilds would show up for such an important matter. If not, then the fault lies on them for not making a presence when rules were being discussed.
On another note, I think the rules are solid. I think, so far, the members of the committee have done a great job setting this bad boy up. I am truly grateful for all of the work put in so far. It means a lot, especially from people who don't even play twinks that much, that they would put so much time and effort in to making our dreams a reality. To the 3 key members who have put in all this work, Thank You.
Lastly, I think people are upset for an understandable reason. This isn't to take away from the brilliance that has been created thus far. We're all twinks here, and we are all very passionate about this thing. We all want what's best. In my opinion, the leaders from each guild and the members of the committee should come together to discuss the rules, much of which is probably already agree'd upon. If we can make this happen, then I believe we will have great Twink Cup.

 

[Mvq]

Yeah, I don't understand it either. I would want the leaders to be able to vote, I don't see why not. They should have a say.
And the arguement "Not everyone needs a say" and "Look how the meetings turned out before" are so retarded. Everyone don't need a say. You are correct @Conq - However, every team needs a say. They deserve a say. Votes from the Team leaders are cleaner, honest and better than people like you Conq, as they have much more experience in the field.

Now, regarding "Look how the meetings turned out before" @lindenkron - The meetings had 30 people in them, most of them didn't care and just wanted to be there to be one of the cool kids. Similar to how some kids go to parties to be there, not because they actually care about having fun or anything, because it's "cool" to be at this party.

Adding 2 more members who are 100% viable to be in the commitee would do nothing but good.
The community wouldn't feel like you're ignoring their opinion. Because atm it seems like you are.

 

[Superstylin]

Hold on...what is the deal with the "discord" thing? Why would people watching the stream need or want to hear the people in the games? I don't care if there is a delay or not, each team's voice chat should NOT be streamed (even if it is for short clips).

Maybe for a certain highlight wheel (after the match is done and audio is looked over), like a clutch last minute return and you phase in and hear everyone on the team screaming, to help build the excitement. I do not see the need to have voice linked with the stream for random parts of the game though.

Not only is there a lot of profanity in the calls, but as others have said people get heated in the calls and say stuff they would only want their teammates to hear. If I say X healer is awful because he is in a bad position and we should swap, would I want everyone watching the stream to (maybe) hear that? No. What if we are discussing a certain strat? There are too many risks and not enough of a reward to include the voice.

If you need voice inclusion, have it only available after the games on an edited VOD where the team talking approves the audio.

 

[saxxon]

lindenkron takin the helm and dissecting his opponents like its 09

the rules are set and the twink cup is on the horizon, sharpen ur fangs load up ur dwarven hand cannons nd lets get ready for action

let the boys be boys

 

[saxxon]

though honestly the discord thing seems kinda silly but other than that i agree with 100% everything else maybe minus GFd enchants, but thats what this discussion is all about, im sure the committee and the people working on the twink cup are more than happy to compromise and be rational, they are reasonable men.

 

[lindenkron]

On the +13 sp bracer issue

The reason why people are mentioning this is because as blackout admitted that it was forgotten about, which is fine, shit happens and whatnot. Since you say that you want to run a "professional" tournament that also implys that you have a certain amount of consistancy in the ruleset that you put out. Now i'm not gonna give out my personal opinion on what should or should not be banned unless for some reason you decide that you acctually care about my opinion on the matter. The reason it is an issue is that it makes no sense to not ban it with the current ruleset that you have put out. It's clearly way more powerful than a lot of the things that are infact banned. Consistancy boys, but again you're gonna "review" it and you'll come to the right conclusion and thats good.

It wasn't actually forgotten. It was voted on among the 7 people, and Conq was the only one to mention the 13 bracers as a concern. I believe it ended with a 6/7 in favor of keeping(don't quote me on that). Blackout got really stressed out with the flood of things hitting this thread, and it slipped his mind. It's never nice when it feels like your friend is being bullied into things they don't agree with or believe in. I've only stated that we were trying to do things as professionally as possible. Granted we have no fund to work with, no payment, no professional grade gear and no staff. And yet people ask a ton of us. Welp...

Alright so i see why you want to do this, and in theory its a great idea.
In practice however it's a slightly different story, it works in professional esports because they are professionals. Everyone who will be participating in TC, wether on the broadcast team or participating in the acctual tournament are not. We're for the most part a bunch of idiots playing games online for shits and giggles and attempting to pull a listen in scenario brings certain risk factors for both the team playing and the broadcast itself and you can even argue that it could duck with the integrity of the tournament as a whole if shit goes completely haywire.

My main concerns for it would be

• Accidental/intentional strat leaks

I suppose you could call me paranoid here but having someone sit there and listen to everything being said on coms thats not a part of the team is something that makes me concerned. This is a small community, and this is a tournament run by said community and people tend to have agendas. Or it could just be completely accidental during one of the listen ins, yes i know there will be a delay and all that but strats that could compromise the entire series could be talked about.

• People tend to say things in the heat of the moment that shouldnt be broadcasted.

This is just a reality when you stick 10 nerds from all over the world and have them play other nerds from all over the world, it's just a part of gaming I guess. Now i'm not so much concerned about the potencial backlash on players who say stupid shit, its more the stream itself. If you do a listen in and all of a sudden there's a bunch of slurs and various forms of cursing, thats going to reflect badly on you, the broadcasting team. You could bring in the argument on people doing it in esports all the time, but we're not professionals. We're a bunch of idiots.

Using the fact that something works in a professional esports scene because they're professional is invalid. That literally makes no sense, it's like saying the sun shines because it's the sun. So I don't know what to say to that. It wouldn't be hard to use Discord as a battle station for all communication, it's literally a link given out to the Team Leader, and then it's his job to get the crew in and joining. 8 people, taking care of 10 people each. If he can't do that, he has no point in being in the Twink Cup because then he's not capable of winning it. The listening scenario I've seen a lot of outcries about - non that have actual legitimate grounds as to why it would be bad other than "we don't like it". There'll be a delay on the stream - as already mentioned in various posts, and playing the game while having a stream open constantly to listen JUST IN CASE someone goes into a chat for 10~ second, to try and decipher if the enemy team said something 3 minutes ago was of any use to their current situation, seems like an improbable scenario. That being said, it's no use to us or the stream, if so many people dislike it that when you join the channel there'll be silence just because people don't like it (they may feel the way they do), so its up for debate if we'll allow commentators to listen in for the sake of the stream, or if quality/production value will take a hit.

Maybe people need to learn to behave? no I get what you're saying, and the stream won't be hurt in that regard. The people judging streams (admins and staff) recognizes the difference between a stream based around Text to speech filled with racism for a year straight - where your entire stream is based around racism (real life example, GoodIdeaGaming) which will gets you banned - and a couple of commentators joining a call in a tournament, where a team lets out things that isn't the opinion of the stream nor the main focus of the stream. Non issue.

Committee; who should and who should not have a say.

Personally, I don't care who's doing what, aslong as things get done and the rules are fair and done properly.
People are saying every team should have a representative in the committee, and i agree with that to a certain extent.
You should ask said representative for input on potential ruleset, to avoid mishaps like the 3 druid 3 monk thing which was pretty dumb, granted it was a mistake and shit happens, and then try to find a middleground based on input from all the teams.

In a perfect world the organizers should be more or less inpartial, aka they're not playing. But we're a small community and the people who gets shit done just so happens to be people who are involved with teams in one way or another, thats just the way it is. But you as the three induviduals who have come up with these rules also need to understand when you've fucked up, and be ok with that. From the looks of it you have, which is great. Good job.

No one is saying "oh let everyone be heard so no one is pissed off" is a bad thing. Reality is though, it's been done and when there's too many chefs in the kitchen trying to bake their bread, then no bread will ever be done. Too much debate discussion and arguing - and little to no action. I don't need to back this up, you guys proved it yourself (hence why I'm even here, as I've mentioned in various previous posts).

The 3 druid/monk thing wasn't even a mishap, it was literally things the teams have already done. From what I was told, 3 monks in a team have already appeared without the entire community that is twinking going up in flames and crying. It seems, from an objective stand point, as if people just want drama for drama - and something to complain about until the next big thing comes around (Internet mentality?).

I realize it's a small community, and I've tried my best to make sure decisions and things made are as unbiased as possible but I can't control everything - and the reality is in a lot of technical cases I'm not the best person to decide certain aspects of a game that I mechanically don't play anymore - or have proper insight to.

On a final note, I would like to thank you for the time you've put into this, it's nice to see something finally happening.
And to ask you to think about what you're posting in this thread in reply to other peoples less than tactful ways of approaching things. Telling people who calls out mistakes in the ruleset "If you don't like it, don't participate" is not exactly the message you want to be sending.

If you should need another point of view on anything, feel free to message me and i'll be happy to assist in anyway I can.

I do appreciate constructive posts like your own - but you also have to realize that when you're in my chair devoting ungodly amount of hours to a group of people you don't know or care for (hard when you don't know them) and all you get in return is unending shit - then that's a mood killer beyond compare. I believe I was told other people have quit this twinking scene do to similar reasons recently, no?

@Superstylin Most of my response to you would've already been said in other posts. Please read if you want replies.

We're not equipped to record all team audios to then do post-production of everything "in case we want to create some hype". A possible compromise could be only allowing commentators into team rooms when there's less than 15 seconds of the map left. I'm not 100% sure how I feel about that yet, but for the sake of hype and the stream, taking only an immediately look at it, it seems like a note worthy compromise. Thanks for that.

Now, regarding "Look how the meetings turned out before" @lindenkron - The meetings had 30 people in them, most of them didn't care and just wanted to be there to be one of the cool kids. Similar to how some kids go to parties to be there, not because they actually care about having fun or anything, because it's "cool" to be at this party.

Adding 2 more members who are 100% viable to be in the commitee would do nothing but good.
The community wouldn't feel like you're ignoring their opinion. Because atm it seems like you are.

Thanks for your thorough reply this time.
Our main concern - before all the rules and all the manual labor concerns etc - was to create a committee/panel/board (what ever you want to call it) that was actually able to arrive at decisions. That meant a concentrated amount of people, and an uneven number. 4/3, 3/2 - etc. I realize the reason for the distress doing the previous meetings, and saying it's invalid because there was a lot of people, while telling us to use a lot of people is also a little backwards.

Would your main concern be to add (is it the last 2 team leaders?) 2 more people to the decision table? I'm telling you as it is, we had enough issues getting 7 people on at the same time due to schedules. It always ends up with being the Europeans sitting up till 6 am in the morning. Not enjoyable.

That being said, if that's what it takes to make everyone happy, I'd personally (can't speak for the other 2 owners of NWL) be all for it as long as they meet one requirement: Be available.

I'm simply not going to be part of something that doesn't get anywhere because people are unreachable.

Edit: Added replies to this post to avoid spam posting.

 

[Pitter]

Don't force Discord for all games imo, only 1 game per series at the most should full teams be required to use Discord. If they wish to use it for all of them, then that is fine.

 

[Yndigo]

It wasn't actually forgotten. It was voted on among the 7 people, and Conq was the only one to mention the 13 bracers as a concern. I believe it ended with a 6/7 in favor of keeping(don't quote me on that).

But then the question becomes why was it not banned for the same reason head enchants and so on was banned? I mean you literally gain 8-10 sp/int for no tradeoff, and you can't obtain it anymore. It really should fall under same catagory as head enchants etc. You need to be consistant with your rules.

Using the fact that something works in a professional esports scene because they're professional is invalid.

It's really not, because because they have responsibilities towards their brand, sponsors etc they have a way different aproach to things. And you're probably not going to get banned, but it's going to make the broadcast look bad/immature as a whole if you tune in and random slurs and insults directed at the other team are being tossed around.

The listening scenario I've seen a lot of outcries about - non that have actual legitimate grounds as to why it would be bad other than "we don't like it".

Which is a legitimate arguement. You should encourage it if you strongly believe it's going to be cool, but it should not be a requirement for anything not directly related to stream such as post game interview etc.

Maybe people need to learn to behave?

If only.

Reality is though, it's been done and when there's too many chefs in the kitchen trying to bake their bread, then no bread will ever be done.

Just because it's been done badly in the past doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. It's late and i'm not really good at explaining things in general but i'll try to rephrase.

From the 6 invited teams to TC, each team should have a representative as more of an advisor than anything else. Not everyone should have a final say, but the teams should still be able to air their thoughts in a more suited enviorment than on these forums.

When important, gamechanging gameplay related issues are being brought up, said representative should be able to chime in and whoever has the final say takes everything into consideration before something is decided. You'd probably save yourself a headache or two if you did.

From what I was told, 3 monks in a team have already appeared without the entire community that is tinking going up in flames and crying

When? Where? In some random plebs or something? I've never seen anyone playing 3 monks or druids without it being a non-important/just for fun game and people just want to play and thats the only thing they had available.

I do appreciate constructive posts like your own - but you also have to realize that when you're in my chair devoting ungodly amount of hours to a group of people you don't know or care for (hard when you don't know them) and all you get in return is unending shit - then that's a mood killer beyond compare. I believe I was told other people have quit this tinking scene do to similar reasons recently, no?

I feel you man. I've organized my fair share of tournaments over the years, and I don't miss it.
It's still a community tournament and that means community has a say in things, in one way or another. You all knew what you were getting yourselves into and if not...welp here we are.


Either way, there are some inconsistencies that needs to be sorted out but overall it looks good and I have faith that we'll have a TC this year that isn't a complete and utter trainwreck.

 

[Mvq]

It wasn't actually forgotten. It was voted on among the 7 people, and Conq was the only one to mention the 13 bracers as a concern. I believe it ended with a 6/7 in favor of keeping(don't quote me on that). Blackout got really stressed out with the flood of things hitting this thread, and it slipped his mind. It's never nice when it feels like your friend is being bullied into things they don't agree with or believe in. I've only stated that we were trying to do things as professionally as possible. Granted we have no fund to work with, no payment, no professional grade gear and no staff. And yet people ask a ton of us. Welp...



Using the fact that something works in a professional esports scene because they're professional is invalid. That literally makes no sense, it's like saying the sun shines because it's the sun. So I don't know what to say to that. It wouldn't be hard to use Discord as a battle station for all communication, it's literally a link given out to the Team Leader, and then it's his job to get the crew in and joining. 8 people, taking care of 10 people each. If he can't do that, he has no point in being in the TC because then he's not capable of winning it. The listening scenario I've seen a lot of outcries about - non that have actual legitimate grounds as to why it would be bad other than "we don't like it". There'll be a delay on the stream - as already mentioned in various posts, and playing the game while having a stream open constantly to listen JUST IN CASE someone goes into a chat for 10~ second, to try and decipher if the enemy team said something 3 minutes ago was of any use to their current situation, seems like an improbable scenario. That being said, it's no use to us or the stream, if so many people dislike it that when you join the channel there'll be silence just because people don't like it (they may feel the way they do), so its up for debate if we'll allow commentators to listen in for the sake of the stream, or if quality/production value will take a hit.

Maybe people need to learn to behave? no I get what you're saying, and the stream won't be hurt in that regard. The people judging streams (admins and staff) recognizes the difference between a stream based around Text to speech filled with racism for a year straight - where your entire stream is based around racism (real life example, GoodIdeaGaming) which will gets you banned - and a couple of commentators joining a call in a tournament, where a team lets out things that isn't the opinion of the stream nor the main focus of the stream. Non issue.





No one is saying "oh let everyone be heard so no one is pissed off" is a bad thing. Reality is though, it's been done and when there's too many chefs in the kitchen trying to bake their bread, then no bread will ever be done. Too much debate discussion and arguing - and little to no action. I don't need to back this up, you guys proved it yourself (hence why I'm even here, as I've mentioned in various previous posts).

The 3 druid/monk thing wasn't even a mishap, it was literally things the teams have already done. From what I was told, 3 monks in a team have already appeared without the entire community that is tinking going up in flames and crying. It seems, from an objective stand point, as if people just want drama for drama - and something to complain about until the next big thing comes around (Internet mentality?).

I realize it's a small community, and I've tried my best to make sure decisions and things made are as unbiased as possible but I can't control everything - and the reality is in a lot of technical cases I'm not the best person to decide certain aspects of a game that I mechanically don't play anymore - or have proper insight to.




I do appreciate constructive posts like your own - but you also have to realize that when you're in my chair devoting ungodly amount of hours to a group of people you don't know or care for (hard when you don't know them) and all you get in return is unending shit - then that's a mood killer beyond compare. I believe I was told other people have quit this tinking scene do to similar reasons recently, no?

@Superstylin Most of my response to you would've already been said in other posts. Please read if you want replies.

We're not equipped to record all team audios to then do post-production of everything "in case we want to create some hype". A possible compromise could be only allowing commentators into team rooms when there's less than 15 seconds of the map left. I'm not 100% sure how I feel about that yet, but for the sake of hype and the stream, taking only an immediately look at it, it seems like a note worthy compromise. Thanks for that.



Thanks for your thorough reply this time.
Our main concern - before all the rules and all the manual labor concerns etc - was to create a committee/panel/board (what ever you want to call it) that was actually able to arrive at decisions. That meant a concentrated amount of people, and an uneven number. 4/3, 3/2 - etc. I realize the reason for the distress doing the previous meetings, and saying it's invalid because there was a lot of people, while telling us to use a lot of people is also a little backwards.

Would your main concern be to add (is it the last 2 team leaders?) 2 more people to the decision table? I'm telling you as it is, we had enough issues getting 7 people on at the same time due to schedules. It always ends up with being the Europeans sitting up till 6 am in the morning. Not enjoyable.

That being said, if that's what it takes to make everyone happy, I'd personally (can't speak for the other 2 owners of NWL) be all for it as long as they meet one requirement: Be available.

I'm simply not going to be part of something that doesn't get anywhere because people are unreachable.

Edit: Added replies to this post to avoid spam posting.

So the issue is scheduling the meetings. That shouldn't be too hard to solve.
Have everyone agree to when the meeting should be held, simple.

If the Teams in YOUR TOURNAMENT can get 20 people to agree on a date for premades and succeed to play them most of the time, then I highly doubt 9 dedicated people can't do the same.

You're bringing in TEAM LEADERS to your commitee. If there's anyone in the entire world whos gonna be dedicated enough to show up to the meetings then it's gonna be the Team Leaders.

 

[lindenkron]

But then the question becomes why was it not banned for the same reason head enchants and so on was banned? I mean you literally gain 8-10 sp/int for no tradeoff, and you can't obtain it anymore. It really should fall under same catagory as head enchants etc. You need to be consistant with your rules.

This have already been answered by me in at least 2 posts. Go back and read (Sorry don't wish to repeat myself to every single person who says the same thing)

It's really not, because because they have responsibilities towards their brand, sponsors etc they have a way different aproach to things. And you're probably not going to get banned, but it's going to make the broadcast look bad/immature as a whole if you tune in and random slurs and insults directed at the other team are being tossed around.

That's a more valid response than your previous one. And what makes the stream look bad or what not is a decision that's up for us to make, not the team playing. You're right that people have no responsibility towards anything, other than their team mates and the community. That's not enough to behave? Maybe not for some - maybe it should be?

Just because it's been done badly in the past doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. It's late and i'm not really good at explaining things in general but i'll try to rephrase.

From the 6 invited teams to TC, each team should have a representative as more of an advisor than anything else. Not everyone should have a final say, but the teams should still be able to air their thoughts in a more suited enviorment than on these forums.

When important, gamechanging gameplay related issues are being brought up, said representative should be able to chime in and whoever has the final say takes everything into consideration before something is decided. You'd probably save yourself a headache or two if you did.

What you expressed here, is exactly what we did with the current group of people, just with people that was deemed good at articulating their opinions, speaking up and voicing their opinion without dragging things out unnecessarily. It was originally talked about having the team leaders be this group of people - but then we weren't sure who it was going to be, who was still a team leader and such (you have to remember, a lot of these things took place before invited teams were a thing). So potentially anyone could call themselves a team leader, and get an invite (I believe that was the issue with the massive groups of twink committee before?).
It was also a concern for some people that there might be certain individuals that would do whatever it takes to cross and stall things - just for the sake of it not being Myrm hosting it this year. I believe in the state we're in now, we're past that hurdle and not a concern. I believe we're all aiming for a common goal (I'd assume?), a good Twink Cup 2k16.
I wouldn't mind 6 reliable people, that would often be available to get the opinions of regarding specific game mechanics/impacts - as to have an as full scale representation of the community as possible. Issue often is, as I mentioned in a previous post, people aren't available - and things end up not happening. If that's not an issue, for my personally - by all means.

When? Where? In some random plebs or something? I've never seen anyone playing 3 monks or druids without it being a non-important/just for fun game and people just want to play and thats the only thing they had available.

In the Twink Cup last year. From what I believe I was informed, BM WW and MW was run in same comp

Either way, there are some inconsistencies that needs to be sorted out but overall it looks good and I have faith that we'll have a TC this year that isn't a complete and utter trainwreck.

That was actually our initial aim. "TC this year that isn't a complete and utter trainwreck.". Very well put.

So the issue is scheduling the meetings. That shouldn't be too hard to solve.
Have everyone agree to when the meeting should be held, simple.

If the Teams in YOUR TOURNAMENT can get 20 people to agree on a date for premades and succeed to play them most of the time, then I highly doubt 9 dedicated people can't do the same.

You're bringing in TEAM LEADERS to your commitee. If there's anyone in the entire world whos gonna be dedicated enough to show up to the meetings then it's gonna be the Team Leaders.

Oh it must be nice to live in your world where everything is pink roses and bliss. You clearly have no idea how almost impossible it is to get anyone to show dedication or be available. Not to mention a timezone difference of up to 9 hours.

I can't tell you how hard/impossible it is to find a time that EVERYONE is available on. It's next to impossible even with 3 people being available almost 24/7, having just 4 showing up at the same time is.. well..

You have to understand a lot of people have real lives and obligations. I don't know if you have that, but a lot of people do.

 

[Mvq]

This have already been answered by me in at least 2 posts. Go back and read (Sorry don't wish to repeat myself to every single person who says the same thing)


That's a more valid response than your previous one. And what makes the stream look bad or what not is a decision that's up for us to make, not the team playing. You're right that people have no responsibility towards anything, other than their team mates and the community. That's not enough to behave? Maybe not for some - maybe it should be?


What you expressed here, is exactly what we did with the current group of people, just with people that was deemed good at articulating their opinions, speaking up and voicing their opinion without dragging things out unnecessarily. It was originally talked about having the team leaders be this group of people - but then we weren't sure who it was going to be, who was still a team leader and such (you have to remember, a lot of these things took place before invited teams were a thing). So potentially anyone could call themselves a team leader, and get an invite (I believe that was the issue with the massive groups of tink committee before?).
It was also a concern for some people that there might be certain individuals that would do whatever it takes to cross and stall things - just for the sake of it not being Myrm hosting it this year. I believe in the state we're in now, we're past that hurdle and not a concern. I believe we're all aiming for a common goal (I'd assume?), a good TC 2k16.
I wouldn't mind 6 reliable people, that would often be available to get the opinions of regarding specific game mechanics/impacts - as to have an as full scale representation of the community as possible. Issue often is, as I mentioned in a previous post, people aren't available - and things end up not happening. If that's not an issue, for my personally - by all means.



In the TC last year. From what I believe I was informed, BM WW and MW was run in same comp


That was actually our initial aim. "TC this year that isn't a complete and utter trainwreck.". Very well put.


Oh it must be nice to live in your world where everything is pink roses and bliss. You clearly have no idea how almost impossible it is to get anyone to show dedication or be available. Not to mention a timezone difference of up to 9 hours.

I can't tell you how hard/impossible it is to find a time that EVERYONE is available on. It's next to impossible even with 3 people being available almost 24/7, having just 4 showing up at the same time is.. well..

You have to understand a lot of people have real lives and obligations. I don't know if you have that, but a lot of people do.

Plenty of teams in the tournament are a mix of EU, OCE and US. And they still manage. So you should be able to manage aswell. Why wouldn't you?

 

[lindenkron]

Plenty of teams in the tournament are a mix of EU, OCE and US. And they still manage. So you should be able to manage aswell. Why wouldn't you?

Damn, if there's a new committee gathered I'll let you manage the meeting schedule - is that okay? Apparently it's super easy for you, so obviously you won't mind - correct?

Only seems fair as well to distribute the tasks among the community.

 

[Conq]

Damn, if there's a new committee gathered I'll let you manage the meeting schedule - is that okay? Apparently it's super easy for you, so obviously you won't mind - correct?

Only seems fair as well to distribute the tasks among the community.

 

[Mvq]

Damn, if there's a new committee gathered I'll let you manage the meeting schedule - is that okay? Apparently it's super easy for you, so obviously you won't mind - correct?

Only seems fair as well to distribute the tasks among the community.

Again, why wouldn't you? Why are you dodging the question?

 

[lindenkron]

Again, why wouldn't you? Why are you dodging the question?

How am I dodging the question? I literally answered it - followed by you "claiming" it's super easy - then followed by me then saying if it's so easy, you're more than welcome to do it.

If you're not up for the task, then please stfu and don't tell me how easy it is.

If you have no more constructive points, or posts with actual content in them - don't post or it'll just get deleted anyway. Stop wasting both of our time.