there is really no winning here.

hold is during the season, teams wouldn't play because of ESEA schedule and I highly doubt teams would dedicate some practice to new maps while juggling esea, 7s and HL (although its possible)

holding it in the offseason is the most reasonable time for people to actually play the new maps because they dont have to dedicate all their time playing their esea maps. along with the fact the off season is usually a good testing period for the new maps and if they can be added to leagues.

We will revisit this another time soon hopefully

jerking himself off by stating actual facts? id love to hear you prove him wrong here as nothing he said in this thread is untrue.

I feel like dedicating an entire month to testing new maps with two matches a week would be offputting to a lot of players. I certainly wouldn't sign up for it even though I love the idea of new maps becoming mainstream. Why not smaller, casual one week[end] tournaments where a couple of maps are tested? I think people would be more inclined to submit feedback afterwards too.

It's pretty annoying how sigafoo tries to shoehorn rgl's amazing success into every single post he makes when everyone knows the only reason it gained traction is because of having a prize pool. Why not have a small prize pool for this new map tournament? It would do a lot more to help competitive tf2 and even be less of a meme than other rgl tournaments.

call it whatever you want, when it comes to the comments in this thread hes made about RGL he hasn't misstated anything. there wasn't a prize pool made for this tournament because there wasnt a great way to have the maps played a fair amount while also having a format that could determine a winner in the time period we had to run this before ESEA happened. it was obviously something we would have ideally wanted to do but not always possible.

The format youre suggesting is essentially what ive been running doing new map pugs for months but its even hard to get people to play in those, let alone full teams that want to scrim or play new maps.

I was giving context. Prolander was historically a smaller league, up until this season where it's closer to the size of ESEA/UGC sixes. Showing that just because registration is in the middle of another season didn't stop it from having success. If I left out the size, you might just go "oh well that doesn't count because it's so small/fringe." Same with the sixes league we run. Pointing out that it's larger than ESEA, and again.. had the same constraints that this person was saying was a reason why people weren't signing up. And it didn't have any issues.

The context is to show that despite being on the same constraints as the person was complaining about. These leagues all did well.

Except that's not true. I've never denied that our prize pools in Invite did draw in teams who otherwise might not have played. But the majority in of our divisions have no to very small prize pools. Historically we haven't had a prize pool in Prolander outside of Div-1/Invite, yet we see the most growth in the divisions without the prizes.

So no, the majority of players who are getting involved in our leagues have little to no incentive other than to try it out / they enjoy the format they're playing.

Because that shouldn't be required. For Highlander we're hosting our second experimental map cup. Our first experimental cup in Winter of 2018, which had no prize pool whatsoever, was very successful. The exp map cup that is starting up this weekend will have about half of the HL of the league playing it.

These cups shouldn't be about money, it's about doing something good for your comp community. About wanting to support your community map makers and also possibly bring change to your league and/or feedback to the map makers about what they can improve so it could potentially be adopted.