The problem is, where do you draw the line for tournaments with "insane" settings? Personally, I would like to get rid of all Lottery Tournaments. But I won't "vote to delete" an entire tournament based on my dislike of settings. Just decline the invitation/ ignore the tournament. Many people have voiced there being an auto-delete time for tournaments based on their size (as I advocated in my original post), and I feel that's a better way than having people manually delete tournaments. Another matter: how are you going to mediate this "Vote to Delete?" People who are on good terms on this game don't necessarily have to be in clans. Alts can still bypass this and vote multiple times, unless some sort of IP checker is implemented. In my opinion, it's too hard to actually police the power of deleting tournaments upon popular demand. Unless a very good system is implemented, it will be too hard to restrict, and even then, the benefits are slim.

On the Open Tournaments tab, I also saw many tournaments that are just the same settings, except with different numbers of players/teams/etc. Can we limit this as well? I think players should make only one open tournament with the settings they desire, and will be obstructed from creating any more tournaments of the same type until the original open one is either filled or deleted. This could get rid of some of the similar settings by one player. But more popular tournament settings like Strategic 1v1/2v2 and Europe (to name a few old favorites) can be created by anyone. Just limit the amount of tournaments lower levels could make and slowly add on every few levels. Maybe even give membership more of a value by allowing the use of a maximum 5-6 open tournaments freely, while others must earn them, or can achieve less than the maximum account to control the flow of open tournaments better.

(I didn't read all the posts fully, as I will when I have the time to, but this deserves to be at the forefront of the forum page, and with 10 threads about the same topic, it's being pushed back to a place where it shouldn't be.)

Edited 2/12/2015 05:25:50

If there is going to be voting, I prefer to allow users to create small-medium tournaments (but not large, open ones), and have people vote a tournament up if they like the settings. Tournaments with a lot of positive votes could be featured and recreated with more players by an administrator (if the administrator likes it). We have a featured map, we could have featured tournaments.

Edited 2/12/2015 05:40:45

wow, its already a long discussion, and honestly, i did not read everything.
but maybe you want to push my uservoice suggestion a little bit ;)
https://warlight.uservoice.com/forums/77051-warlight-features/suggestions/4502038-search-filter-criteria-for-open-tournaments

It's great that this issue has been raised, at last. There are numerous good ideas voiced here and it seems we need to discuss them. But for the time being, the most urgent thing appears to let smartphone-only players take part in the tournaments.

My suggestion is thus: Let only level 30+ players create new tournaments. Work on making the smartphone app more inclusive and user-friendly.

Categorization of tournaments (as suggested by many users here in the forum) can also help keeping things tidier.

Let's see how it goes this way. I don't see a compelling reason to be radical at the moment (that is, to attempt to solve many problems rapidly).

Ah - but in case you want to change the tournaments section to something where money is involved (it's not difficult to see where this leads - I don't have a problem with it, though), well, then you may want to hurry. I wouldn't suggest that, to repeat - but I would understand.

Edited 2/13/2015 15:05:37

I haven`t read this entire thread so I don`t know if these things have already been suggested (they probably have)

I would say:

-Creating Tournaments like you can now is only available for members
-The max amount of tourneys a non-member can start is 3 (1 after lever 10, 2 after 30, 3 after 50)
-Non-members can not create big tournaments until level 50
-If a tourney hasn`t started after X days it will be deleted.

On the last one, I have seen the agrument that you don`t want a new player to be disappointed when the tourney he joined got deleted. But I would say make the amount of days something like 100. Thats still about 1/3 of a year. If a new player is still on after this time he`ll probably know what`s going on. Also, joining a tourney and then have it not start due to not enough players is more logical to me than joining a tourney and having it start after a year so that lots of players get booted (and in the case of two inactive players you can have games that last 200! days. This is without autoboot ofcourse)


EDIT: Just realised this is about open tournaments... Also this came by

I'm thinking about completely disabling invites for open tournaments. Why does someone need to be invited when the tournament is open? It's open to everyone -- just join. Inviting is just over-complicating things.

Maybe you should change the way the invite list works. If you could make it so that everybody who declines doesn`t count an invite anymore, so you can invite new people in their place. (ofcourse make it so that people who have declined can not be invited again)
^if this is already the case, then at least a auto-decline
But a invite system still helps, even for open tournaments.

Edited 2/13/2015 16:42:43

What if there was something like a tournament point system... sort of like coins but different. Once a player reaches a certain level, they would be allotted 100 tournament points, specifically for creating tournaments. When a person a goes to create a tournament, each bracket or slot they include would cost them one tournament point. For example, a 16 player/team tournament would cost sixteen tournament points, a 32 player/team tournament would cost thirty-two tournament points, and so on. Players would get an additional 100 + (multiplier*lvl) tournament points at the beginning of each month, and could earn more by being a member (higher monthly multiplier), earning tournament points by winning them (maybe 3/4s of the investment into the tournament?), by exchanging their coins for them, or by simply purchasing them. In addition, tournament points could also be achieved by tournament achievements, like "participate in a tournament, win a tournament, create a tournament, etc." This would limit the amount of tournaments created, their size, and also increase the amount of consideration that goes into creating the tournament.

What do you think?

Min - If you limit only the number of OPEN ones, I am cool with that. nobody needs more than a couple open ones anyway (that have not started).

yeah, only open ones in this case

I have not read the entire thread, but the reason I never visit the open tournaments page is that I don't want to spend an hour to dig through all tournamens to see if they have interesting settings.

There should be an filter system where I can select which tournaments I would like to play. Here I should be able to select all available options, cards, boottime, etc in detail. A few examples:

- Boot time: slider to select min and max accepted values
- Multiattach: don't care, yes, no
- Cards: don't care, yes, no
- Gift card: don't care, yes, no (this might be collapsed under the general "cards")
- team size: slider
- tournament size
- map (select from map's? text search?)
- elemination type
- AI after boot
- Luck level
- Honor vacations
- etc.

Basically the entire settings screen.

This way I can quickly find the right tournament for me, and this will probably also reduce the number of duplicated tournaments.

P.s. slighly related: In my tournaments list, I mis the filter option "Tournaments that I am still playing in", i.e. remove from the list as soon as I am defeted.

LET'S TALK ABOUT OPEN TOURNEYS
https://www.warlight.net/MultiPlayer?TournamentID=3013

there should be an override for the no auto boot flaw. this tourney is one of the first ones i ever joined. my next opponent hasn't been seen in over 800 days. there are match ups that are going to be happening that inevitably have 2 inactive players. i'm thinking it will be at least another couple years till it's done.

it started in September 2012

Edited 2/16/2015 15:30:28

@Slammy, there is. It is currently at 100 days. (so no auto-boot= 100 day auto-boot)

Additionally I find it silly that there are 1v1 games with lower VTB than Direct boot, effectively hiding the actual limit. That's a completely different issue though :p

Edited 2/16/2015 16:08:52

so what has been said, what has been understood, what will be done?

someone may have said this but I refuse to read this whole thing, my solution is simple

a 10 day auto boot is required for all tournaments (Or less if wanted)

i very rarely visit the tournaments page, i believe most players equally only end up participating in tournaments by invites.

i don't think creating tournaments should be limited to members only, but they could atleast raise the level required to create them a little higher.

or cancel tournaments that are open for too long or have way above average number of declined invites (might be good indicator that folks made a bad template or are troll spamming it to people who don't care about such settings).

i think the trolls and bad template makers will still keep creating crappy tournaments regardless of any of these changes though.

so i would suggest better visibility to the open tournaments instead of stricter rules to cancel them.

a widget on the multiplayer dashboard listing the number of open tournaments. something similar to the real time ladder widget. i think that would do the trick.

The multiplayer dashboard is so cluttered already :(

A significant issue with tournaments is that people join then months go by, the tourney finally starts, but in the interim, people have left WarLight and so their teammates get screwed.

I would suggest the following:
- Invitations expire one week after being sent
- Invitations cannot be sent to inactive players
(no active games in the past week && > 1w inactivity)
- After accepting an invite, if a player goes inactive,
he's removed from the tourney attendees
- Every month a player needs to confirm their desire to
attend the tourney - failure to do so (within a week)
is an auto-decline
- If a tourney has declined (or failed to improve) in
accepted members over a month, the tourney owner is
asked whether he wishes to cancel the tourney
- If a tourney owner is asked three consecutive months
and attendance has not gone up, the tourney is
cancelled.

Most of this was already stated and would fix a lot of problems. Not saying I agree with all of it (mainly the time limits) but this can be adjusted to be more reasonable

Right now the open tournament page only shows the name of the tournament, what type of tournament it is and what the status of it is. For someone to even see what map it is he must to go into the setting and try to find it.

My solution to the problem would be to make it easier to find the game you want to play

---

mlb cubs

Edited 3/7/2015 23:44:02

I personally rarely join tournaments that are so large for fear of them getting stuck forever. If I get invited to a tournament that was made over 3 months ago, even if it only has 3 people left to join, I will decline. I have no incentive to join large tournaments like this

[I wrote the following but then checked some of the previous posts and saw that Fizzer had already considered the essential idea I put forward - well actually some other people thought in similar lines, unbeknownst to me earlier. See Fizzer's comments posted @ 2/10/2015 18:37:03

But I'll keep the following anyway. I still think the essential idea is good!]

- (to Fizzer) Just clear all of the tournaments which either (1) are at least one year old and haven't started yet, or (2) have no preset auto-boot time and stuck at one point for the last 3 months, for example [the points already earned are kept as is]


In the new system:

- Invited players should respond in 10 days max. If they don't, the invitation should expire.


- As has been said in a previous post (2/24/2015 03:31:12) there must be a preset auto-boot time. It could be 5 days by default. A tournament host should be able to extend (max. 10 days) or shorten it.


- A newly created tournament should be forced to start in -say- max. 2 months:

(a) If it can't start in a month, the host should be allowed to start it with the maximum number of players that can be accommodated within the elimination framework chosen.

..... e.g. You have an individual tournament (no teams, 1v1) which isn't round-robin, requires -say- 128 players, but only 110 players have joined by the end of a month. Then the host should be given the choice to start it with 64 players. If she approves, then the tournament starts with the 64 players who joined first. If she doesn't approve, the tournament is given an extra time for forced start (= 1 month extra, according to my suggestion above - see (b) below).

..... e.g. You have a team tournament (say, 2v2), which isn't round-robin, requires -say- 128 players (= 64 teams), but only 80 players have joined by the end of a month. 60 of them have their teams (30 teams are ready), 20 of them are waiting for teammates. Then the host should be given the choice to start it with the 16 teams which were formed the fastest. Again, if she approves, then the tournament starts with the 32 players who formed these teams. If she doesn't approve, the tournament is given an extra time for forced start (= 1 month extra, according to my suggestion above - see (b) below).

(b) If it doesn't start in a month, it is given an extra month. If it still can't start by the end of the 2nd month, it is forced to start with the maximum number of players that can be accommodated within the elimination framework chosen. This time he host is given the options to either force-start the tournament or completely cancel it.

(c) If the tournament is forced to start somehow, an identical tournament is created automatically with the players who are not able to play in the original one. If there are teams already formed, they are maintained and carried to the identical tournament as is. For the second tournament the host is the same initially (she probably won't be an actual player in that one), but she can leave the post to someone else.

Edited 3/19/2015 21:14:43