World Beyblade Organization by Fighting Spirits Inc. Beyblade Discussion Beyblade General

Let's Get Rid Of Ranked And Unranked Tournaments And Replace Them With...

Apr. 14, 2022  10:59 PM
 
What do you think about getting rid of ranked and unranked tournaments and replacing them with PROFESSIONAL and AMATEUR tournaments that are both "ranked", so everyone that attends a tournament has a chance of becoming a #1 blader?

The current RANKED tournaments and rankings will be reclassified as PROFESSIONAL and still adhere to the current ranked rules.
The current UNRANKED tournaments will reclassified as AMATEUR and will have a ranking associated with it the same as the current ranked / professional.

I believe this will open up a lot of avenues for organizers to have some amazingly "unconventional" tournaments such as hypersphere only, DX stadium only, Wide Type Stadium Only, HasPro Stadium Only, etc. style tournaments that still give the competitors a chance to prove themselves with a solid Amateur Ranking.

I'd love to hear your thoughts about this.
Apr. 14, 2022  11:15 PM
 
This is dope! It eliminates the negative aspect that comes with allowing all stadiums or formats to be considered ranked. Honestly I am one of the negative people when it comes to that. I believe ranked should be structured and similar when it is played. The “professional” aspect can cater to that.

On the amateur side it leaves more room for fun and creativity. Less stress but still a drive for competition with a separate rank.

This is an issue with all competitive gaming or sports whether we admit it or not. I will say it myself, I am a try hard and I play for the competition. I enjoy the game and enjoy having fun but I play and only play for the heavy competition. Like others play just to have fun to play in general. Neither is right or wrong it’s just how we choose to play. Splitting that would be dope and we could also look at events or specific formats to cater to either class.
For instance the Pro rank could be more strict, and formats cater to competitive players.

Amateur could cater to new players, more lax on rules. Single Bey formats for intro players who may not have invested in a lot of beys etc.

I’m for this overall 💯

On the programming side though I’m unsure of the complexities. But if it’s possible this would be SWEET!
Apr. 14, 2022  11:31 PM
 
(Apr. 14, 2022  11:15 PM)StayCool Wrote: This is dope! It eliminates the negative aspect that comes with allowing all stadiums or formats to be considered ranked. Honestly I am one of the negative people when it comes to that. I believe ranked should be structured and similar when it is played. The “professional” aspect can cater to that.

On the amateur side it leaves more room for fun and creativity. Less stress but still a drive for competition with a separate rank.

This is an issue with all competitive gaming or sports whether we admit it or not. I will say it myself, I am a try hard and I play for the competition. I enjoy the game and enjoy having fun but I play and only play for the heavy competition. Like others play just to have fun to play in general. Neither is right or wrong it’s just how we choose to play. Splitting that would be dope and we could also look at events or specific formats to cater to either class.
For instance the Pro rank could be more strict, and formats cater to competitive players.

Amateur could cater to new players, more lax on rules. Single Bey formats for intro players who may not have invested in a lot of beys etc.

I’m for this overall 💯

On the programming side though I’m unsure of the complexities. But if it’s possible this would be SWEET!

I'm so glad to hear you're in favor of this, I really think it'll help everyone find fun in the game. 

For the programming, I'm not sure the complexity but I figured since ranked and kings already existed it wouldn't be too difficult to clone that and call it amateur. But of course I can't say for sure since I didn't create the code for it.
Apr. 14, 2022  11:44 PM
 
I mean, this basically adds up to "let's rank the unranked tourneys", and though I get that it also kind of just doesn't work. Rankings are used to compare skill, but does that even remotely hold up when "amateur" tourneys can do so many wild things that it's actually crazy?

The "Amateur" tournaments will be just as full of tryhards as the Professional rankings. Let's face it, I'm an organizer. I do a lot of wild and sometimes stupid things such as bringing Orbit to Burst Standard (and winning), but that doesn't make me any less of a tryhard. Even if the rules are casual, you can't strip that away from me. Others will be the same. The name is misleading, perhaps even a misnomer entirely. No, it doesn't cater to newbies any more than anyone else without kicking out the high skilled players. That's no fun for them!

Ranking the currently unranked tourneys doesn't really mean anything either. The rules will vary by an insane amount, so you can't actually compare what happened in the Hypersphere Only tourney to something that happened in a Burst Wide Type. Why then are we trying to rank something where they simply cannot be compared properly?

Like, if you want to host a more casual tournament with a weird ruleset nothing is stopping you. Adding a ranking system to that just... doesn't matter. Watching a number go up or down won't make you any more or less happy about the tournament, will it?
Like, rankings are only impactful when the rules are fairly similar. These "Amateur" tourneys wouldn't be.
Apr. 15, 2022  12:00 AM
 
I like this like idea! I honestly believe it's not outside of the box I believe it widens the box that beyblade tournament rules and formats should have never been in. (Sorry) Variation possibilities are limitless if having fun is the focal point.
Apr. 15, 2022  12:05 AM
 
Another point against: If the point is casual fun, why stress people out with rating points? Doesn't that work against a casual/fun atmosphere?
And for the record, I have it on good authority that the sites coding is old as dirt and not trivial to modify. Keep that in mind too.
Apr. 15, 2022  12:22 AM
 
(Apr. 14, 2022  11:44 PM)MagikHorse Wrote: I mean, this basically adds up to "let's rank the unranked tourneys", and though I get that it also kind of just doesn't work. Rankings are used to compare skill, but does that even remotely hold up when "amateur" tourneys can do so many wild things that it's actually crazy?

The "Amateur" tournaments will be just as full of tryhards as the Professional rankings. Let's face it, I'm an organizer. I do a lot of wild and sometimes stupid things such as bringing Orbit to Burst Standard (and winning), but that doesn't make me any less of a tryhard. Even if the rules are casual, you can't strip that away from me. Others will be the same. The name is misleading, perhaps even a misnomer entirely. No, it doesn't cater to newbies any more than anyone else without kicking out the high skilled players. That's no fun for them!

Ranking the currently unranked tourneys doesn't really mean anything either. The rules will vary by an insane amount, so you can't actually compare what happened in the Hypersphere Only tourney to something that happened in a Burst Wide Type. Why then are we trying to rank something where they simply cannot be compared properly?

Like, if you want to host a more casual tournament with a weird ruleset nothing is stopping you. Adding a ranking system to that just... doesn't matter. Watching a number go up or down won't make you any more or less happy about the tournament, will it?
Like, rankings are only impactful when the rules are fairly similar. These "Amateur" tourneys wouldn't be.

With this logic then there is no need for a ranked tournament because as you just stated "Adding a ranking system to that just... doesn't matter. Watching a number go up or down won't make you any more or less happy about the tournament, will it?"

My wife agrees the name "Amateur" could be misleading and should be called something else... not sure what though. Maybe Semi-Pro or Casual?

But from what I see here there really is no reason not to rank it; let the folks that only do crazy tournaments have their own ranking that means nothing. Who cares? It's not like the ranked rankings mean anything anyway, right?
(Apr. 15, 2022  12:00 AM)JCMakeEmBurst Wrote: I like this like idea! I honestly believe it's not outside of the box I believe it widens the box that beyblade tournament rules and formats should have never been in. (Sorry) Variation possibilities are limitless if having fun is the focal point.

I have a feeling fun isn't the focal point for a lot of folks 🤣
(Apr. 15, 2022  12:05 AM)MagikHorse Wrote: Another point against: If the point is casual fun, why stress people out with rating points? Doesn't that work against a casual/fun atmosphere?
And for the record, I have it on good authority that the sites coding is old as dirt and not trivial to modify. Keep that in mind too.

If you get stressed out about fantasy points then I don't think you're ever really having fun, points or not. The bladers that come to beyblade will come to beyblade and the results will be the same results. But I've heard people mention they don't go to unranked tournaments because there is no point in them but I've yet to hear that statement in reverse.

Guess it's time to redo the coding with a good ol' crowdfunding effort.
Apr. 15, 2022  12:50 AM
 
Not to get off topic. But imo the main problem with the rankings is that it favors people who have played longer and the people that win against them rather than the people who consistently perform well at events. I think regional rankings could help. I am in favor of unranked events counting towards someones regional br.
Apr. 15, 2022  12:51 AM
 
I'd be down for getting rid of rankings entirely. Our current rankings have never meant less than they currently do. They reflect points earned when the game was entirely different, when the rules were entirely different, and are subject to a lot of external factors like tournament availability and rules lawyering.

I'd be interested in seeing "Fun" or "Chaos" tracks where rules are variable and interesting, as well as a "Serious" track for the more diehard strategists. You could keep separate, new rankings in each if you really wanted, or forego them for one or both.

I think the labels "Amateur" and "Professional" are going to be divisive, you ought to avoid those.
Apr. 15, 2022  1:00 AM
 
(Apr. 15, 2022  12:22 AM)Mike.Nightwing Wrote:
(Apr. 14, 2022  11:44 PM)MagikHorse Wrote: I mean, this basically adds up to "let's rank the unranked tourneys", and though I get that it also kind of just doesn't work. Rankings are used to compare skill, but does that even remotely hold up when "amateur" tourneys can do so many wild things that it's actually crazy?

The "Amateur" tournaments will be just as full of tryhards as the Professional rankings. Let's face it, I'm an organizer. I do a lot of wild and sometimes stupid things such as bringing Orbit to Burst Standard (and winning), but that doesn't make me any less of a tryhard. Even if the rules are casual, you can't strip that away from me. Others will be the same. The name is misleading, perhaps even a misnomer entirely. No, it doesn't cater to newbies any more than anyone else without kicking out the high skilled players. That's no fun for them!

Ranking the currently unranked tourneys doesn't really mean anything either. The rules will vary by an insane amount, so you can't actually compare what happened in the Hypersphere Only tourney to something that happened in a Burst Wide Type. Why then are we trying to rank something where they simply cannot be compared properly?

Like, if you want to host a more casual tournament with a weird ruleset nothing is stopping you. Adding a ranking system to that just... doesn't matter. Watching a number go up or down won't make you any more or less happy about the tournament, will it?
Like, rankings are only impactful when the rules are fairly similar. These "Amateur" tourneys wouldn't be.

With this logic then there is no need for a ranked tournament because as you just stated "Adding a ranking system to that just... doesn't matter. Watching a number go up or down won't make you any more or less happy about the tournament, will it?"

My wife agrees the name "Amateur" could be misleading and should be called something else... not sure what though. Maybe Semi-Pro or Casual?

But from what I see here there really is no reason not to rank it; let the folks that only do crazy tournaments have their own ranking that means nothing. Who cares? It's not like the ranked rankings mean anything anyway, right?

You really took that one point and ran away with it far past anything I said huh? Please don't do that, it's not really honest debating.

My point is that ratings only matter when the rules are consistent. Unranked is not consistent, and is in fact as far away from consistent as possible, therefore a rating for it is not helpful or indicative the same way it is for the actual Ranked. That's not even beginning to mention that some Unranked tournaments are simply an experimental variation of Ranked, and yet they'd be clustered in with other things that are nothing at all alike. How does that make sense to rate things that are as different as night and day together in one lump?

And honestly, aside from your pointed jabs that worrying over rating points is silly (which is itself simply dismissive. What's to say nobody worries about that, and why is it okay to be so aggressive to those that do?), you still haven't given a real reason on why adding rating points to this makes it more enjoyable in the slightest. You ducked the question, I want an answer to it. If there is nothing to gain, or if that gain is minimal at best, then there is no reason to change a thing.

And though you may wish to change the entire site's code, it's not that easy. Finding anyone capable of doing dinosaur code would be hard enough. Attempting to update to something newer comes with serious downtime and risks losing a ton of data. No, it is not worth screwing with the code for such a minor change as "rank the unranked matches" in my opinion.
Apr. 15, 2022  1:03 AM
 
(Apr. 15, 2022  1:00 AM)MagikHorse Wrote:
(Apr. 15, 2022  12:22 AM)Mike.Nightwing Wrote: With this logic then there is no need for a ranked tournament because as you just stated "Adding a ranking system to that just... doesn't matter. Watching a number go up or down won't make you any more or less happy about the tournament, will it?"

My wife agrees the name "Amateur" could be misleading and should be called something else... not sure what though. Maybe Semi-Pro or Casual?

But from what I see here there really is no reason not to rank it; let the folks that only do crazy tournaments have their own ranking that means nothing. Who cares? It's not like the ranked rankings mean anything anyway, right?

You really took that one point and ran away with it far past anything I said huh? Please don't do that, it's not really honest debating.

My point is that ratings only matter when the rules are consistent. Unranked is not consistent, and is in fact as far away from consistent as possible, therefore a rating for it is not helpful or indicative the same way it is for the actual Ranked. That's not even beginning to mention that some Unranked tournaments are simply an experimental variation of Ranked, and yet they'd be clustered in with other things that are nothing at all alike. How does that make sense to rate things that are as different as night and day together in one lump?

And honestly, aside from your pointed jabs that worrying over rating points is silly (which is itself simply dismissive. What's to say nobody worries about that, and why is it okay to be so aggressive to those that do?), you still haven't given a real reason on why adding rating points to this makes it more enjoyable in the slightest. You ducked the question, I want an answer to it. If there is nothing to gain, or if that gain is minimal at best, then there is no reason to change a thing.

And though you may wish to change the entire site's code, it's not that easy. Finding anyone capable of doing dinosaur code would be hard enough. Attempting to update to something newer comes with serious downtime and risks losing a ton of data. No, it is not worth screwing with the code for such a minor change as "rank the unranked matches" in my opinion.
You got it.
(Apr. 15, 2022  12:51 AM)DeceasedCrab Wrote: I'd be down for getting rid of rankings entirely. Our current rankings have never meant less than they currently do. They reflect points earned when the game was entirely different, when the rules were entirely different, and are subject to a lot of external factors like tournament availability and rules lawyering.

I'd be interested in seeing "Fun" or "Chaos" tracks where rules are variable and interesting, as well as a "Serious" track for the more diehard strategists. You could keep separate, new rankings in each if you really wanted, or forego them for one or both.

I think the labels "Amateur" and "Professional" are going to be divisive, you ought to avoid those.
As always, I appreciate your words.
(Apr. 15, 2022  12:50 AM)Zektor Wrote: Not to get off topic. But imo the main problem with the rankings is that it favors people who have played longer and the people that win against them rather than the people who consistently perform well at events. I think regional rankings could help. I am in favor of unranked events counting towards someones regional br.
That is a solid point.
Apr. 15, 2022  1:26 AM
 
No, I definitely have not "got it", or else I wouldn't still be making counterpoints.

Such as this: Why are "having fun" and "worrying about your rank" so mutually exclusive that you keep using it as an argument?
Apr. 15, 2022  1:30 AM
 
The coding could be difficult and this is coming from someone who does some minor coding from time to time, but i do love the ideas of the "Amateur" classification and give other stadiums and Hasbro systems a chance, it adds a lot more spice and diversity to the game and i'm all about diversity to be fairly honest.

While i think this could be difficult to implement due to coding troubles and other things in general, i really do like this idea.
Apr. 15, 2022  1:55 AM
 
(Apr. 15, 2022  1:30 AM)DeltaZakuro Wrote: The coding could be difficult and this is coming from someone who does some minor coding from time to time, but i do love the ideas of the "Amateur" classification and give other stadiums and Hasbro systems a chance, it adds a lot more spice and diversity to the game and i'm all about diversity to be fairly honest.

While i think this could be difficult to implement due to coding troubles and other things in general, i really do like this idea.

Maybe you can answer me, because Nightwing isn't: What is the point of ranking the currently unranked and very dissimilar formats like this?

Like, I don't get what people like about it at all.
Apr. 15, 2022  1:56 AM
 
I haven’t read all of the post but I do agree with Zektor and DeceasedCrab . I am for just getting rid of ranked and having standard format, GT, classic etc.

Bits can still be a thing and more important big tournaments with nice prizes. I run The Circuit for that reason. It’s ranked to draw people in because that matters to a lot of players but the level of competition and prizes matters too.

I look at it this way, we have the NBA, NFL and various other sport leagues. You can go undefeated the whole season but if you don’t with the championship then what was the point? Compared to rank, you can have all the points, status or glory but if you’re not taking home the win in the big events (when or if they come) then what’s the point? Just gaining points?

The idea of pro vs amateur didn’t matter as much but I like the idea of serious competition vs casual play for fun. If there’s 1000’s of dollars riding on a poker game you won’t just “try your luck” you’re gonna play hard and that’s what I was looking for. Regardless I think it’ll work out
Apr. 15, 2022  2:11 AM
 
Seems this could just be accomplished by resetting the current ranks every so often so everyone is on an even playing field. Making Unranked ranked as Amateur, immediately takes away the no pressure fun of Unranked imo. Amateur does bring the idea of tournaments geared to a specefic range of Bey Ranks to mind though.
Apr. 15, 2022  2:18 AM
 
(Apr. 15, 2022  2:11 AM)froztz Wrote: Seems this could just be accomplished by resetting the current ranks every so often so everyone is on an even playing field. Making Unranked ranked as Amateur, immediately takes away the no pressure fun of Unranked imo. Amateur does bring the idea of tournaments geared to a specefic range of Bey Ranks to mind though.

I agree with this and can see the pressure of ranked leaking into unranked with the title. Amateur or unranked events would become stressful. A seasonal reset would be legit. I know Zektor mentioned the regionals but if we had a yearly reset I think that would promote overall growth. If every region had equal opportunity to get those top rank spots that would drive a lot of tournaments and expand the community. You wouldn’t just be playing against your locals in rank but you’d be free to compete against others
Apr. 15, 2022  2:33 AM
 
(Apr. 15, 2022  2:18 AM)StayCool Wrote:
(Apr. 15, 2022  2:11 AM)froztz Wrote: Seems this could just be accomplished by resetting the current ranks every so often so everyone is on an even playing field. Making Unranked ranked as Amateur, immediately takes away the no pressure fun of Unranked imo. Amateur does bring the idea of tournaments geared to a specefic range of Bey Ranks to mind though.

I agree with this and can see the pressure of ranked leaking into unranked with the title. Amateur or unranked events would become stressful. A seasonal reset would be legit. I know Zektor mentioned the regionals but if we had a yearly reset I think that would promote overall growth. If every region had equal opportunity to get those top rank spots that would drive a lot of tournaments and expand the community. You wouldn’t just be playing against your locals in rank but you’d be free to compete against others

This is already looking like a far better solution than the op.
Apr. 15, 2022  2:38 AM
 
Ugh….. I wasn’t going to make a post in this tonight as I am super tired. But I guess I’m gonna do it anyways. Forgive me if I misspell something or don’t go all out with my punctuation. So please bear with me….

So I have made and read threads about organizers and why they are hardly hosting tournaments (ranked and unranked) if at all. The WBO is the go to website for competitive organize play for all of North America. Hasbro has hosted like what 2-3 tournaments since Burst came out? I wasn’t around for MFB but if the WBO was around then I’m sure hasbro didn’t do it back then either.

Now I will start off by saying that I do not think we need to make Unranked tournaments have a ranking system. However, I think I know what Mike.Nightwing was trying to go for. A lot of players on the WBO that have the rank of “Organizer” have said plenty of times in plenty of threads that the reason they do not host events is because they lack the “proper” equipment, mostly referring to the B-09 standard beystadium, to host a ranked event. The minimum age requirement to become an organizer right now is 13. The B-09 stadium at minimum is around $50 from eBay. I don’t know many 13 year olds that have or could spend that kind of money on a B-09 or even 3 of them to make sure the event could run smoothly. I get the idea that they could host an unranked event without the B-09, but let’s face it, just like in the show they want to become the number 1 ranked Blader. Now how can they do that if they can’t host ranked?

Mike is trying to make a suggestion to get this part of the community to become more active and help the community grow. I’ll be it might not be the best answer it was definitely just a suggestion. One that I think has clearly gone over a lot of peoples heads. I see a lot of debates about making this stadium or that stadium legal for ranked, when the problem is all of the suggested stadiums are still a minimum of $50. If you wan the pro series to be legal, the sets with it in them are a minimum of $50. You want the DB stadium that to a minimum of $50. Almost no young organizer will ever be able to host to play. Some areas like MD, NC, Toronto, Florida all have thriving communities where 6-7 people all probably have 1-2 B-09s ready to bring to the tournament. But I ask you, what about the community in Arkansas? How often do you see them host? Do they even have a community? What if the reason they don’t is because it’s a small group of 13-16 year olds that want to play but none of them can afford the B-09? How could they have a tournament that makes them feel like they are working towards something? What incentive do they have playing unranked tournaments all the time? That’s easy, none. They can’t get points to try and get to that number 1 ranked spot they all strive to get.

Now I understand the point of view that you should just want to play for fun. Trust me I do. But the minute you started a ranking system, playing for fun went completely out the window. Now little Timmy might not care about the ranking system. But what if the other 13 players in his little slice of the community do? If he hosts an unranked tournament he might not get any participants to show up. And that’s a real downer if you ask me.

Anyway, sorry for the novel. But, I’m pretty sure this is what Mike was trying to get at. I’m starting to feel like most players are only thinking about themselves and how things work in their little section of the community rather than the community as a whole, and that’s not what we need. We all need to work together and try to grow the WBO as a whole.
Apr. 15, 2022  2:52 AM
 
CrisisCrusher07 as soon as I posted my last post I immediately considered what you just wrote. This is more of an incentive to have or host unranked events. This is the what I’ve seen. Organizers who are organizing now are competitive. That’s facts, we want to play and compete and of course we will host events and formats that we enjoy the most. And typically that’s not unranked, but there are a lot of kids and adults who play but shy away from the “ranked” life for whatever reason.

The WBO has a stigma for hardcore Bladers and yes it does attract serious Bladers but can also detour casual players. Finding that balance is tough. Maybe we need to discuss serious alternatives for the hardcore Bladers with competition and legitimate rewards or incentives for unranked events
Apr. 15, 2022  3:42 AM
 
Personally speaking, I don't dislike this idea. I do see more casual or creative tournaments as a kind of gateway for engagement in ranked play, so they can be an asset and I support that (again, personally). I have said previously I like the idea of a separate ranking system that also includes casual/experimental formats (though I would like experimental just rolled into ranked tbh, it's not like we don't vet these first and we get better data by people taking it seriously!) I like the amateur/pro name scheme too.
Apr. 15, 2022  4:09 AM
 
(Apr. 15, 2022  2:38 AM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote: Ugh….. I wasn’t going to make a post in this tonight as I am super tired. But I guess I’m gonna do it anyways. Forgive me if I misspell something or don’t go all out with my punctuation. So please bear with me….

So I have made and read threads about organizers and why they are hardly hosting tournaments (ranked and unranked) if at all. The WBO is the go to website for competitive organize play for all of North America. Hasbro has hosted like what 2-3 tournaments since Burst came out? I wasn’t around for MFB but if the WBO was around then I’m sure hasbro didn’t do it back then either.

Now I will start off by saying that I do not think we need to make Unranked tournaments have a ranking system. However, I think I know what Mike.Nightwing was trying to go for. A lot of players on the WBO that have the rank of “Organizer” have said plenty of times in plenty of threads that the reason they do not host events is because they lack the “proper” equipment, mostly referring to the B-09 standard beystadium, to host a ranked event. The minimum age requirement to become an organizer right now is 13. The B-09 stadium at minimum is around $50 from eBay. I don’t know many 13 year olds that have or could spend that kind of money on a B-09 or even 3 of them to make sure the event could run smoothly. I get the idea that they could host an unranked event without the B-09, but let’s face it, just like in the show they want to become the number 1 ranked Blader. Now how can they do that if they can’t host ranked?

Mike is trying to make a suggestion to get this part of the community to become more active and help the community grow. I’ll be it might not be the best answer it was definitely just a suggestion. One that I think has clearly gone over a lot of peoples heads. I see a lot of debates about making this stadium or that stadium legal for ranked, when the problem is all of the suggested stadiums are still a minimum of $50. If you wan the pro series to be legal, the sets with it in them are a minimum of $50. You want the DB stadium that to a minimum of $50. Almost no young organizer will ever be able to host to play. Some areas like MD, NC, Toronto, Florida all have thriving communities where 6-7 people all probably have 1-2 B-09s ready to bring to the tournament. But I ask you, what about the community in Arkansas? How often do you see them host? Do they even have a community? What if the reason they don’t is because it’s a small group of 13-16 year olds that want to play but none of them can afford the B-09? How could they have a tournament that makes them feel like they are working towards something? What incentive do they have playing unranked tournaments all the time? That’s easy, none. They can’t get points to try and get to that number 1 ranked spot they all strive to get.

Now I understand the point of view that you should just want to play for fun. Trust me I do. But the minute you started a ranking system, playing for fun went completely out the window. Now little Timmy might not care about the ranking system. But what if the other 13 players in his little slice of the community do? If he hosts an unranked tournament he might not get any participants to show up. And that’s a real downer if you ask me.

Anyway, sorry for the novel. But, I’m pretty sure this is what Mike was trying to get at. I’m starting to feel like most players are only thinking about themselves and how things work in their little section of the community rather than the community as a whole, and that’s not what we need. We all need to work together and try to grow the WBO as a whole.

I understand your scenario, and I can see where you'd find it from what he was saying, but some of what he was putting forth there was really getting in the way of this. Putting it in a proposal like this already gets in the way, as it draws focus to the proposed solution instead of raising it as a problem and then presenting a solution afterwards. If this really is the plan, really coulda done better (and without passive-aggressively attacking competitive bladers at that).

If the issue is that a ranking system exists, then there's not much that can be done honestly. Truth is, Beyblade is a game built on competition just as much as it is on fun, and those people that want competition over just fun probably aren't going to change their tune (and are exactly the same people that are hosting and attending ranked tournaments currently, if they're in a region which can do so). The only way to make the fun-seekers happy is to screw over the competitive side of things a lot more than I'm comfortable with, so in the end I don't think that a "semi-competitive" ladder is a good idea at all. This isn't the right sort of happy medium.

I also disagree that all playing for fun goes out the window just because a competitive scene exists either. Not everyone will care about their ranking, many are just happy to get to play against others (myself included in this number, I've driven 3 hours for a miniature unofficial tournament before despite being a "competitive blader"). Heck, the wannabe organizer in your example is exactly this kind of person too.

Either way this idea doesn't seem like the answer to speak of, and the only ways I see to fix the problem is to convince those bladers that don't currently want to attend unranked events into giving them a shot just for the fun of it. Alternatively finding a way to get legal stadiums into the hands of wannabe competitive organizers, but with the WBO Paypal still down I don't see this happening anytime soon since the money for such a task would have to come from somewhere.
Apr. 15, 2022  5:11 PM
 
(Apr. 15, 2022  4:09 AM)MagikHorse Wrote: I understand your scenario, and I can see where you'd find it from what he was saying, but some of what he was putting forth there was really getting in the way of this. Putting it in a proposal like this already gets in the way, as it draws focus to the proposed solution instead of raising it as a problem and then presenting a solution afterwards. If this really is the plan, really coulda done better (and without passive-aggressively attacking competitive bladers at that).
I can agree that the wording was not ideal.


Quote:If the issue is that a ranking system exists, then there's not much that can be done honestly. Truth is, Beyblade is a game built on competition just as much as it is on fun, and those people that want competition over just fun probably aren't going to change their tune (and are exactly the same people that are hosting and attending ranked tournaments currently, if they're in a region which can do so). The only way to make the fun-seekers happy is to screw over the competitive side of things a lot more than I'm comfortable with, so in the end I don't think that a "semi-competitive" ladder is a good idea at all. This isn't the right sort of happy medium.
As I said, I do not think this is the answer to the problem. It was simply just a suggestion that could have been worded differently. 


Quote:I also disagree that all playing for fun goes out the window just because a competitive scene exists either. Not everyone will care about their ranking, many are just happy to get to play against others (myself included in this number, I've driven 3 hours for a miniature unofficial tournament before despite being a "competitive blader"). Heck, the wannabe organizer in your example is exactly this kind of person too.

Correct the Organizer in my example is this kind of person. However, the example is there to emphasize the other players within his community, not himself. The fun aspect will always be there for some players. But, once you give something a ranking system that competitive aspect will inevitably become the dominating force to drive players to come to tournaments, so they can try to become known as "The Best". Some people such as I look for that balance. I will do a lot of traveling to play in tournaments just because I mostly enjoy the road trips with my friends. Those are normally more fun for me than the tournaments themselves. But we are all competitive players and so we have the drive to want to beat each other and get higher than each other in the rankings.


Quote:Either way this idea doesn't seem like the answer to speak of, and the only ways I see to fix the problem is to convince those bladers that don't currently want to attend unranked events into giving them a shot just for the fun of it. Alternatively finding a way to get legal stadiums into the hands of wannabe competitive organizers, but with the WBO Paypal still down I don't see this happening anytime soon since the money for such a task would have to come from somewhere.
Correct this probably is not the correct answer to the problem. I don't know what the exact answer is, but I hope that whatever it is we do eventually find it.