i dont have any tournament invite :(((

Thanks Fizzer. I have a question...

I played a couple coin games with my alt, just to test out the system, but lost my coins. Would you mind if I played with my main in these? The rules say only 1 account, so I understand if that is a no. But it would be nice if we had a grace period on when that update was first done.

Just looked at the math on this and I don't get it AT ALL.

1) If you have an entry fee of 6 coins, why does this not reduce the cost to host the tournament? The cost is the same either way, which means those 6 coins per person just go to the rake/payout only. So why would anyone EVER make an entry fee on these at all?

2) If you increase players on a tourney with an entry fee, it should not increase the host fee. Again, this just increases the rake even more.

3) Increasing rounds should not increase host fee and payouts. It should decrease payouts and hold host fee static (or really, both should be an option).

On the surface this whole idea seems great. But basically nobody will ever have an entry fee because there is no incentive to (it should reduce the host fee and/or increase the prize). And I highly doubt many people will host one of these at all. Even if they won a simple 32 player tournament, they'd put up 153 coins and there is a 179 coin winners take. Who is going to risk 179 coins on a %3.1 chance of taking home 26 coins? Complete waste of time to host.

So the way I see it is Fizzer is going to have to sponsor a bunch of these things or they will be almost non existent. If you put a percentage of the entry fee back into the prize/host fee, then you'd get interest.

So maybe the 6 coin entry fee are like this:
1 coin to rake
1 coin to host fee
4 coins to prize

Yes, it decreases the rake on an entry fee one, but nobody will ever make an entry fee one without it reducing their cost anyway. This would benefit Fizzer a lot on all non-warlight hosted ones, and not benefit him on all warlight hosted ones (rake would be less). My guess is him hosting won't happen a ton, so overall he'd be way better off dividing the entry fee.

Edited 3/31/2015 16:19:48

Would be nice if we'd get another 100 coins, just like when the coins first showed up!

I understand that this is a big change to the open tournaments system. But really, before this update, the open tournaments system was broken.

There were nearly 300 open tournaments just sitting there, stagnating, and they were never going to start. This is a bad experience for everyone involved -- tournament creators would create a tournament and never get to play in it or see it start. People joining tournaments would come to the page, and either get overwhelmed with choices or they'd see one they wanted to join, join it, and then never get to play.

We want all open tournaments to start within a reasonable amount of time. For this to happen, the ratio of people creating to joining tournaments needs to be reasonable. For example, for each person that creates a 500 person tournament, there needs to be 500 people willing to join tournaments. (1:500 ratio). This wasn't the case before, clearly, as evidenced by having tens of thousands of unfilled tournament seats.

It's possible this update could end up swinging it too far in the other direction (i.e. tournament list is always empty). If so we'll adjust again until we find the right balance for a healthy system.

But basically nobody will ever have an entry fee because there is no incentive to

Sure there is. In tournaments with an entry fee, the tournament creator can make money. Tournaments that are free to enter are basically charity, as tournament creator is just giving away money to the winners with no hope of making anything.

I would not have joined V.I.W two years ago if it weren't for a free round robin tournament I joined.

Two years ago the open tournaments system was working pretty well. Did you try browsing tournaments in the last few months? I'm pretty sure you would have found that your story was already broken, since the vast majority of open tournaments never started. That's what we're trying to fix.

Still, if i wanna to create medium sized (32 players) tournament with 180coin entry fee i need to pay 3840+ coins only for creating.

You're right it's possible to create expensive 32 player tournaments, but the numbers are not favorable. Try dragging it up to 256 players and you'll find the deals get much better.

What about playing with X accounts(in the same team) in XvX prized tourneys?

You can never use more than one account for anything coin related.

"But basically nobody will ever have an entry fee because there is no incentive to"

Sure there is. In tournaments with an entry fee, the tournament creator can make money. Tournaments that are free to enter are basically charity, as tournament creator is just giving away money to the winners with no hope of making anything.

Can you explain this to me? When I toggled between fee/no fee...the host fee did not change at all. Are you saying that in a free one, the host cannot play in it? If so, that still doesn't change the fact that the host has a %3 chance on making a %17 profit...even in an entry fee tournament.

Again...I love this idea in principle (never would have seen this solution coming out of the open tourney issue chat). But I think it needs tweaking or the execution of it won't work.

It's possible this update could end up swinging it too far in the other direction (i.e. tournament list is always empty). If so we'll adjust again until we find the right balance for a healthy system.

I think what you will find is nobody will create any. The chance of return on investment is simply way too low, so there is no incentive. You need to decrease the host fee on entry fee tournaments or IMO it won't work.

Edited 3/31/2015 16:23:07

I gained 100 coins but I lost my first game and got 20 left what do I do

Still, if i wanna to create medium sized (32 players) tournament with 180coin entry fee i need to pay 3840+ coins only for creating.

You're right it's possible to create expensive 32 player tournaments, but the numbers are not favorable. Try dragging it up to 256 players and you'll find the deals get much better.

Nothing is changing:
256 players, 180 entry fee -> prize(1st) 36556 coins, cost 19200 coins

Well, awaiting people eager to spend 200$ just to create tournament :P

even if we set lowest possible entry fee it costs 640 coins with prize about 1200 that can be won.
Who will create such tourneys? Creation cost should be fixed (or adjustable, let's say someone want to fund prize)

Edited 3/31/2015 16:30:38

Ok, let's say that for the open tournaments it is reasonable to make fees, since being in open tournaments means some kind of exposure via warlight ad if open tournaments are always lotto/spam it's bad. However I'm still completely not convinced why that is the case in real time tournaments whether it's open or private. First, as of this update, rt tournaments will have to start at some specific time or they'll get deleted, both in private and open section, so that is not a problem anymore. Second, I was getting excited for coin tournaments, because I thought that this might revitalise wargaminglive-like events and bring back some people to competetive scene, I was intending on hosting regular rt tournaments, however the necessity was that it'd be under rational rules. By rational I mean I wouldn't be almost sure to lose coins heavily. Now, suppose I want to make a 100 coin (102 for arguments sake, since the multiplier is easier to calculate with) 16 player rt tournament. Now, I thought that I'd be able to make it for free, but the prize pool would be hovering around 80-90% of 1600 that was put forth by the players. However under current rules it'll cost me 1088 coins to create and 100 coins to enter, which is 1188 coins for the host. The prize for 1st place is 1523 coins, for 2nd place 653 coins, which basically means that in order to break even, I'd have to make finals EVERY tournament and get 1st place 50% of the time, which is completely unreasonable considering it's likely only best players would participate. Comparing it to a normal coin game where in order to break even you need to sustain 55%+ win rate, here the host would need sth closer to 80-90%, which basically means that the host gives out coins as charity. Of course some players might want that, but personally I think it's completely unreasonable and gives no incentive to the host. Of course the host CAN make money if he wins in the tournament, but there is no warlight player that could do that in the long run. I'd really like to hear why is it not possible to make at least private rt coin tournaments where everyone has the same entry fee and the prize pool is 80-90% of the sum of entry fees.

Right. As I said the cheapest option (I assume the ratios stay the same as it grows) is a %3 chance on %17 return (even if the host has no entry fee on top of hosting...not sure if that is true or you are already entered).

That %3 chance assumes all players are equal, which we know is not true. Even still, a great player has a very low chance of winning a given tournament unless the field is pretty dispersed...and you won't get that as much when people are putting up coins. Maybe an elite player has a %10 chance of winning it...that still does not make the %17 return worth that risk.

The rate of return to investment ratio to join a tournament makes it totally worth it. The issue here is simply the host fee. It needs to be reduced when entry fees are used or there is zero incentive to host.

Edited 3/31/2015 16:46:34

This game is becoming more and more money orientated. I understand Fizzer wants to make some cash out of this but taking away the free options is the best way to stop new players from staying. People like free in their faces, they don't like seeing that they NEED "Friends" to play in tournaments without cash.

Edited 3/31/2015 18:09:46

Yeah, I get the spend money to have it be open and such, but the price to do so is pretty high vs the potential benefits.

I can't host WGL coin tournaments because I would be purposely losing money. (Because the host can't participate..) I don't have income I'd like to throw away for that..

Why can't a host participate? Rather curious on that one.

A host of WGL is most likely hosting the stream/commentating. Rarely does the host actually participate.

Why don't all participants get a prize?
E.g.: if you win all games, you receive entry fee/(amount of brackets or rounds coins*1); if you win all apart from a game, entry fee/(amount of brackets or rounds*1.1); if you win all apart from two games, entry fee/(amount of brackets or rounds*1.1); ect.
This would allow players sustain the ability to join coin tournaments (assuming they have some spare coins left over), and, may be later, allow the ability to join coin games.

Edit: Ignore this question then. I posted not hoping for an answer.

Edited 4/2/2015 08:04:09

I'd understand if you could still do public tournaments for free, but not being able to is kind of unnecessary and unwanted

Because the host can't participate

Sure they can! I'm not sure why you thought that :)

First, as of this update, rt tournaments will have to start at some specific time or they'll get deleted

That was true before the update, too. It's just that before the update, the time was always "right now". With this update you can specify any time.

Now, I thought that I'd be able to make it for free

The problem is that allowing people to make open tournaments for free doesn't work. We tried it, and the ratio between people who want to make tournaments and the people who want to join tournaments is too heavily weighted towards the making side. This causes way too many tournaments to get created and the entire system breaks down. You can read more about my thoughts on this here: https://www.warlight.net/Forum/74674-s-talk-open-tournaments

Perhaps there is a way to do some sort of sliding scale, where tournaments are cheap/free when there's only a few in existence, but they get more expensive as the open tournament page grows in size. That would basically be a self-correcting system, instead of requiring us to adjust it manually.

This game is becoming more and more money orientated.

WarLight's servers cost over $1000 per month just to keep running. Every time anyone accesses the site or plays a game, it costs money. That money has to come from somewhere, or the site would cease to exist. I am trying to find a way to make WarLight profitable without making it pay-to-win like most other games are doing. If you have a better suggestion at how to accomplish this, I'd like to hear it!

I understand Fizzer wants to make some cash out of this but taking away the free options is the best way to stop new players from staying.

Tournaments are a bit of an advanced feature. New players can't even access tournaments, as it's a feature that needs to be unlocked. And even if they could, most new players would still start playing a bunch of normal games before moving on to tournaments, so I don't think your point is really accurate.

Edited 3/31/2015 19:33:23

Maybe there could be a way to limit the amount of people able to join free open tournaments. Also, maybe there could also be a limit to the number of open tournaments able to be created before a new one can be created. Just some suggestions.

Now, I thought that I'd be able to make it for free

I was referring to specific real time tournaments. Please don't take one line out of context, because I was asking something completely different. Real time tournaments regardless if they are open or not, will never clutter the system, because they are deleted shortly afterwards if they are not started. I don't even care if it is open or invite-only, my question was why can't I make a normal rt coin tournament where participants equally pitch into the pool, why the host has to function like charity?

Real time tournaments regardless if they are open or not, will never clutter the system, because they are deleted shortly afterwards if they are not started. I don't even care if it is open or invite-only, my question was why can't I make a normal rt coin tournament where participants equally pitch into the pool, why the host has to function like charity?

Sorry I mis-understood.

First, let's separate the idea of real-time/multi-day from open/closed. You say that real-time tournaments never clutter the system but that's not true anymore -- someone could make an open RT tournament scheduled for a week from now, and it would appear on the open tournaments list for a week.

The only reason the tournament creator seeds the pot right now is to limit the number of open tournaments. If there is enough interest in private coin tournaments, then yes, I think it would be okay to allow those to be created for free. It does not matter if it's RT or MD, they are treated the same.