Add an actual Tournament to Tournament DMs

[Jwimmer 2,835]

The Tournament DM update has, in my opinion, been a strange success. What does this mean? It seems like alot of people like playing the tourney games. However, I think that they are lacking a huge aspect: an actual tournament. As you all know, the battles consist of signing up for the battle, waiting for the start time, and then playing the quick, 15 minute battle. After this, it is over. While you are playing in your little tournament DM battle, there are also (if there's enough players) other battles with the same rank and same format playing. The only thing special that sets it apart from a normal DM battle is the fund- but unfortunately, with the time spent waiting for people to sign up, the higher reward ends up being about the same as if you just played a normal DM battle.

 

So, what I am suggesting is adding another round. You sign up and play the first round like normal. Then, the top 3-6 players (depends on how many are in the subsequent battles) move on to the "finals" round. This game will be the final game. It will be in the same map, with the same PRO options as the qualifying round. After the final round, the tournament will be over.

 

One of the big problems with this is the fund- you would have to increase the entry fee to allow for a higher fund in the finals round. However, my solution is to make the battle fund in the finals battle increase at either 1.5x or 2x (I haven't worked out the numbers, so this is just a suggestion). Another possibility is having the fund grow like normal, but then the top player gets 2x his share of the fund, the second player gets 1.8x his share, 3rd gets 1.6x, and so on (once again, just an idea, not exact).

 

The other main problem I can think of right now is not having enough players for a final round. There are some DM tournaments that I have played that don't even have enough registrants for 2 battles. The solution is, if there are not enough subsequent battles of the same rank, to combine ranks that are right next to each other (WO3 with WO2 and WO4) into the final round. For example, if there were 2 battles with WO4s, and 2 battles with WO5s, 4 players from each of those battles would go on to the final battle (16 person DM), so the ranks would be both WO4 and WO5 in that battle.

[Maf 32,333]

Under review

[trnm]

[SwiggityWiggity_GTi 29]

^ Finaly listen to my suggestion :D

[BlueDragon_tamki 3,204]

I really like this idea

 

However it's just the last suggestion I strongly disagree with. I mean what if there were 2 battles with WO4 and 2 battles with major general? Will you put them together? Heavens no! As it was said in this topic, it would be unfair, especially m1 vs m3. It takes m1 Railgun 3 shots to destroy a3 hornet while a m3 Railgun takes only 1 shot to destroy a m1 hornet. So my suggestion on this part is to do a rank separation as it is in normal battles (example: major to generalissimo, third lieutenant to major general) but it can also be random (example: WO4 to second lieutenant, brigadier to field marshal)

[Jwimmer 2,835]

I really like this idea

 

However it's just the last suggestion I strongly disagree with. I mean what if there were 2 battles with WO4 and 2 battles with major general? Will you put them together? Heavens no! As it was said in this topic, it would be unfair, especially m1 vs m3. It takes m1 Railgun 3 shots to destroy a3 hornet while a m3 Railgun takes only 1 shot to destroy a m1 hornet. So my suggestion on this part is to do a rank separation as it is in normal battles (example: major to generalissimo, third lieutenant to major general) but it can also be random (example: WO4 to second lieutenant, brigadier to field marshal)

Not what I meant. Combine ranks around each other (eg. WO3 could only be paired with WO4 or WO2).

 

I will go ahead and edit to clarify that.

[BlueDragon_tamki 3,204]

Not what I meant. Combine ranks around each other (eg. WO3 could only be paired with WO4 or WO2).

 

I will go ahead and edit to clarify that.

oh Nvrm