Yes one of the best players in the world is good at 1v1s.

can we just have a 6s tourney lol

Yes.

If there aren't at least a handful of mge lords out there who can whip him I'll wear my underpants for week of vigorous exercise then eat them

so basically give b4nny more free money?

also mge is only fun when it's used as a training tool anyway, do you really want to play against a counterjumping idiot? Or a scout who always presses s? I know I can't stand it even normally, let alone in a damn tournament with money on the line

You are basically answering your own example question. Djokovic qualifies for those tournaments because he maintains a world ranking that allows him to automatically qualify. He is regularly playing and winning matches. If a 1v1 tournament had a similar "regular season" or divisional standings of some sort then seeding and BYE's would be justified.

Secondly, there is a huge difference in comparing a tournament like this to say something like the FaceIT tournament this weekend. I don't have any problems with the FaceIT admins issuing seeds as they see fit based off what teams Slin and other admins feel are "strong" or "weak". The reason I have no problem with that is because nobody is paying to compete in that FaceIT tournament.

I don't care if you are talking about b4nny, some UGC Iron player, an MGE lord or an MGE shitter like myself. An entry fee for each of those players is still the exact same. If those other players are getting some bonus perks for their $5, I want the same thing if I am expected to compete for cash.

If you have trouble adapting to different play styles that are used in MGE, I would suggest not entering a competitive tournament where all bets are off as far as tactics are concerned. Winning is the goal.

Don't waste your $5. You do have a choice.

MGE servers are crammed with rankings from people who play it every day.

Would you accept a Swiss system?

B4nny would lose handily to a DM donkey, the kind of player who pushes on 9 health but spends all day on MGE servers.

It's not possible to use a Swiss system, nor would it even be worth the time if it were available. Using MGE server ELO rankings are probably a worse idea than giving a free Bye

Its really simple, if 32 players signup, you randomly seed every single player.
--You can do it by putting all players names alphabetically from 1 to 32 or
--you can do the same and match-up every 2nd name on the list alphabetically
--You can list when every player signed up and entered from 1st to 32nd
--Hell, you can use names in a hat and stream it on Twitch if you really wanted to go overboard

The point is, randomly seeding 32 players is really simple without the need for special treatment for certain players.
I'm not trying to be a dick in any way, I just believe in fairness for all players, especially in a 1v1 tournament.

It is 100% possible, available and suitable - it's what it was designed for. If you're paying you get your money's worth, you're guaranteed some competitive games against people at your level, and you get the chance to play the best. You can always drop out if you get bored. A classic win - win in my view.

Also the point of seeding is to give an advantage to the best players and put them against the weakest. The point of it is to design the tournament so that the 2 highest seeds meet in the final. You never randomly seed people, they're not seeds, they're just random matches.

The problem with MGE ELO is that people have farmed it for some unknown reason and the values are not accurate.

Yeah it's flawed data but it's probably not too bad for broad classification as long as it's not taken too seriously.

Regardless you don't need it for a Swiss system. By about half way through you're playing people at your level so with a 32 man field the most suffering would be a couple of games then it should be fairly competitive for everybody. You could run 5 rounds with 32 players to get an outright winner or use it to select a playoff field for a knockout at the end.

to start, I would only give some like kevinispwn 5$ to play in something like this, not someone with 23 posts

real mge tournament hype?

lemme demo

soldier and demoman only
no unlocks

can the coinflip just let the person decide map, and not class. It's pretty dumb to not be able to play your best class. Also that prevents matchups like scout v soldier which are always fun.

@SpaceCadet and GentlemanJon
for the sake of simplicity I'd just like to stick with a double-elimination bracket. standard is standard for a reason, in that case.

can you give me some examples?

The only class-picking options are picking a ditto (ie, both players play the same class for the duration of the round: Soldier) or allowing free-choice (players can switch at any time over the duration of the round). The one who chooses class isn't going to do something like assign Shotgun Engie to their enemy and Scout to themselves, it doesn't work like that.

In the case of a ditto being selected, the winner will obviously be the one who's better at the class, and (likely but not guaranteed) the one who selected the ditto. The loser will be allowed to choose a ditto of their own in the next round to counter, and them the last round will be a tiebreaker where both players will have to adapt as necessary to whatever the other chooses to play, since it's free-choice.

That wouldn't be very entertaining to watch. I could get the same thing out of spectating an MGE server.

The whole point of the class and map-picking system is to encourage flexibility and adaption. I don't want to see a first-to-20 Scout 1v1 on the same map every game.

Round 1 gives the advantage of class-picking to the winner of the coinflip, and the advantage of map-picking to the loser of the coinflip.

Round 2 gives the advantage of class-picking to the loser of the previous (meaning they can opt for a ditto they believe would give them a better chance or enable free-choice to counter anything the other throws out) and the advantage of map-picking to the winner of the previous (so if the other person chooses, say, Pyro, he can make sure the engagement is an open space where the other guy can't cheese him as hard).

That is what this thread is for. What maps in MGE do you feel are problematic for a tournament setting? Obviously Ammomod and BBall shouldn't be allowed, but what others come to mind? .

That's the point. I want it to be quick. Following rounds give enough opportunity for a comeback, but imo you can usually see where an MGE is going by the halfway point. Forcing a map and possibly a class change each round keeps things interesting to watch, without it falling into the dull, repetitive gameplay loop that MGE usually becomes after a few rounds.

MGE is a practice mode, not a spectator esport. Changes need to be made to add variety and intrigue to the experience for it to work in a setting like this.

I would want to reserve at least one or two over the duration of the tournament to ensure that players can play on the maps they want to play on and, if properly scheduled, there won't be any trouble with other players on the server.

Requiring demo recording is a no-brainer, but thank you for adding it.

FaceIt's tourney is a thing, my man. I don't have money for a prize-pool like that, and MGE with a twist is what I'm interested in running. You're welcome to sponsor your own tourney or donate to a prize-pool of one you agree with if an MGE tourney isn't something you're interested in.

Honestly, why did you even click this thread if you knew there wasn't anything here for you?

I mean, a tourney is a tourney regardless of who's running it.

And you're not giving me anything- at best, I'll break even for the money spent with enough signups, with all of the rest going toward casting/production/the prize pool. I have no desire to profit from this.

I prefer the current coinflip system so people can get a fighting chance. Your typical first-to-20 MGE is 5-10 minutes on the same map, on the same class, with very little variety involved. It's usually a foregone conclusion halfway through, too.

Nobody in this tourney would be granted an unfair advantage. Class-picking is mitigated by the other person map-picking, and even then class-picking isn't a guaranteed advantage.

For instance, let's say you're terrible at Soldier and Demoman but excellent with Scout and Pyro. Your opponent excels at the explosive classes, and he gets to pick class on the first coinflip.

Round 1, you lose the Soldier matchup.

Round 2, you get to pick class. You get to choose to do a Scout matchup. The other person gets to choose a map that ensures you won't cheese him too hard. You are still not guaranteed victory, because he may well have better aim and movement than you, but you are given a fighting chance. Assuming you win this round, it goes on to the tiebreaker.

Round 3, no restrictions, random map. Neither of you are at any advantage or disadvantage. At this point, it's about who can best counterplay the other: it's to see who is actually better at the game. You could pull out Pyro at this point to shut down his projectiles, for instance, or he could counter that strategy with a Scout pick. etc etc.

There are more classes in this game than just Scout and Soldier. Skill also involves counterpicking and adapting to what your opponent is doing, which I believe the rules of this tournament would encourage.

I understand your thinking more read this post. We both have very different opinions on what a 1v1 tournament should be. You say:

"Class-picking is mitigated by the other person map-picking, and even then class-picking isn't a guaranteed advantage."

Wrong. I don't see where forcing another player to play a particular class in a 1v1 can prove who is better. If you force me to play pyro vs pyro because you pick the class, the tradeoff of me picking the map doesn't mean anything because I still have to play a retarded class like pyro in a 1v1.

You seem to believe 1v1 is about "counterplay" and using the classes and maps to tailor advantages in the game. I believe that takes away from the actual skill of the players and in the end a 1v1 should be nothing but who is more skilled.

Lastly, why would ammomod MGE not be a viable choice? It is the most pure MGE map available where terrain, height and map exploits offer no advantage at all unlike almost all other maps. The only way to win is simply to be better than the other guy.

I can agree to disagree on everything, I wish you luck and hope it is successful because having more tournaments and such in the community is always a positive thing.

i strongly agree with spacecadet. the most even playing field for everyone would to let people pick their best class and compete with that.

whoever is best at MGE? like how else would you seed it?

Yeah ammomod is really just how good you are at purely hitting shots, whereas badlands middle in particular has a lot of strategy and positioning in it.

For a single round. If you're truly better at the game, you'll either:
A, overcome the challenge and beat the Pyro main at their own game
B, demolish them in Tiebreaker, since there's no class picking to speak of and you can counter whatever gimmick they try to pull off.

I don't see how my proposed system prevents the better player from winning. It only hurts you if you have a limited knowledge of counterplay in this game which, yes, is a huge part of what dictates "skill". It's not just raw aim.

Being forced to adapt is much more challenging than a straightforward Ammomod MGE testing raw aim and nothing else. It's also much more interesting to watch than that, because there's room for upsets and exciting things to happen. Would you watch a cast of pure stock MGE? I know I wouldn't. We've both already seen all that has to offer.

There's more skill involved in TF2 than just aim. Positioning, knowing the map, counterpicking, etc, are all key parts of the game. MGE as a practice mode for raw aim is fine, but for it to be worth spectating changes to stock MGE need to be made that enable other forms of skill to be presented.

Again, skill in TF2 isn't limited solely to Scout and Soldier. That's extremely narrow-minded, and if we aren't willing to experiment I don't see the scene growing in any significant way.

I want to showcase the variety and excitement that exists in 1v1s in TF2. The stock MGE ruleset leaves a lot of that out, so shortening rounds, switching maps and adding a class/map-pick system enables the other forms of skill in TF2 to shine.

MGE is nothing like the rest of this game, period. Thrashing in MGE won't mean you'll thrash in the main game, because there's classes, there's strategy, there's positioning that can counter you. Adding even just a little bit of that significantly spices up the standard MGE formula, at least in my opinion, and that's why I'm pushing this tourney so hard.

I appreciate the sentiment. Thanks for being constructive, if nothing else.

(cba to read everything before) but best of 19 is a really small sample

hell yea mge tourney, just free class mge would be pretty great too imo.
time to polish my spire pyro

I would prefer to avoid ammomod mge if at all possible. It's such a small map, whoever has the ping advantage will win (if both players have equal skill that is). If you have under 30 ping, its pretty easy to get a direct right when your opponent spawns without them getting a chance to react. I'd rather play no splash than ammomod

Nobody would argue that. What is probably apparent to most people is that generally the skills required to play medic and pyro etc to a high standard, are not the same skills that mge uses aka aiming and movement and that's about it. We actually already have some modes that allow these classes to show their skills, they're called 6s and highlander.

I don't know about you but in terms of actually watching mge (which is already a fat xD in my books anyway) I'm pretty sure 9/10 people would say that watching 2 medics throwing needles at eachother isn't necessarily that exciting, so your format expecting to show off an exciting variety when half of the classes are essentially downgrades to scout mge is extremely questionable.

not to mention that as soon as you get to the top level you'll probably just be playing with scout and soldier mains anyway, so it barely even matters. You're probably just jumping people through hoops to see the fun part of the game which is the free for all switching. TBH this would be a much better idea if you just removed the first 2 rounds, since it could at least be vaguely funny to watch a soldier mge hero lose to a pyro..

First off, big ups to you for donating your time and effort to host a tournament. No matter what rules you go with, I wish you luck.

Forced diversity isn't really diversity. It's the same reason we allow two of most classes in 6v6 game-play. Sure, you could FORCE a limit of one, FORCING teams to run snipers or heavies... but that's dumb. I'd elaborate, but there are already like 800 threads on this forum concerning that topic. Also, see sigafoo cup.

It kinda is. You don't have to be a pyro main to be a "good" pyro.

As for a pyro vs pyro 1v1, what is that really? Two pyros running around with minimal movement shotgunning eachother?

What about an engie 1v1? Same thing but smaller hitboxes.

What about a sniper 1v1? Baitscoping.

Medic? ... degroot keep?

You talk about how stale watching the 6s classes mge would get, but none of those other fights sound very interesting or skill intensive. At best you might get someone vastly superior to another player throw the second round on purpose, so he can avoid a "ditto" match in the third game, and go engie vs soldier or med vs soldier just to be a dick. That's about the most entertainment I could see out of your proposed ruleset.

Like I said, it's your tourney, and I don't even play this game, so do what you want - you have that right, and rightfully so (no pun intended) - but there's a reason basically everyone is rolling their eyes at the idea of forced classes.