Wolves' Den PvP Tournament - The Great Aether Cup

[Ayerro]

So one totally related post is spamming... really?

Who are the others who think what I did was rude? They aren't speaking up. Or are they ones just silently clicking "like" on your posts?

There were three huge posts before you condensed it.

The point in calling out more people?

I'm dipping out of this because we digressed to the point of calling out people who don't want to speak up. At this point, there really is no relevance to the topic.

[Logos]

There were three huge posts before you condensed it.

The point in calling out more people?

I'm dipping out of this because we digressed to the point of calling out people who don't want to speak up. At this point, there really is no relevance to the topic.

I explained why it was three posts. I did not remove any words when I condensed them into one post.

You said there were others who thought what I did was rude, so I was wondering if that is the truth, or just something you made up.

5) My first post was a suggestion to take matters privately, but you took it as a passive-aggressive post. Mirrors don't do that.

I just assumed you would be more open to see how voicing an opinion after an event has started could be rude.

Your first post:

You guys should discuss this somewhere else. `-` This looks like a completed event thread; It's a little rude to bombard it after people worked hard to even set this up in the first place. I understand that the concern could be genuine, but this discussion can really be better thought out elsewhere.

It did not specifically suggest to take matters privately, and passive-aggressively used "a little rude to bombard" to politely try to hide the emotions you let out later in the thread. Also, the event has not started, in fact it does not start for about a month. No other teams except for the original poster's team have even registered. I just had to correct you on those points.

I agree that this is getting off topic. Let's get this back on topic.

You continue to say the event was already created. Does that mean the rules are set in stone and not up for public discussion?

[Ayerro]

I explained why it was three posts. I did not remove any words when I condensed them into one post.

You said there were others who thought what I did was rude, so I was wondering if that is the truth, or just something you made up.

I agree. Let's get this back on topic.

You continue to say the event was already created. Does that mean the rules are set in stone and not up for public discussion?

Those who are secretly liking my posts are likely the ones who also share my opinion, as well as those liking yours.

I'll clarify:
Discussion would be spam in context, and a discussion like the rule change would involve many people as seen presently. I suggested taking it privately because what comes with a discussion is the incorporation of anyone who has anything to say about the topic. Especially for a rule change such as the one you brought up, I wouldn't be surprised if it went on for pages and if it did, it would look unprofessional and badly thought-up especially on the creators' side. This wasn't created by one person but by many who've contributed their thoughts, though one person is representing it's creation.

That is not my decision and I'm participating solely as a player in this tournament. The person representing this event seems more than willing to hear what you and others have to say, but the option for the Aether Skype group might be more sensible. You would be able to be a spokesperson for those who don't want to speak up in a setting with others who want to have a sincere discussion that doesn't turn into a heated debate on what's better.

[Ayerro]

It did not specifically suggest to take matters privately, and passive-aggressively used "a little rude to bombard" to politely try to hide the emotions you let out later in the thread. Also, the event has not started, in fact it does not start for about a month. No other teams except for the original poster's team have even registered. I just had to correct you on those points.

"You guys should discuss this somewhere else." This is probably by far the most direct suggestion. It's formatted as a suggestion would be: "You should..." I can't imagine it being any more specific than that.

I would think someone's reaction would be even worse if I didn't "politely cover up my emotions." If I were to be confrontational as opposed to what you call passive-aggressive, this would've been even more heated. "You are being rude" would receive even more flame.

The event started on May 19th as stated in the original post hence why this thread even exists. Registration is a stage of an ongoing event.

Anyway, back to PVP:
I prefer 4man teams. I would prefer playing with people I'm comfortable with instead of a substitution for a different-job-main that would "counter" the other team's job/comp.

[Logos]

"You guys should discuss this somewhere else." This is probably by far the most direct suggestion. It's formatted as a suggestion would be: "You should..." I can't imagine it being any more specific than that.

I would think someone's reaction would be even worse if I didn't "politely cover up my emotions." If I were to be confrontational as opposed to what you call passive-aggressive, this would've been even more heated. "You are being rude" would receive even more flame.

Anyway, back to PVP:
I prefer 4man teams. I would prefer playing with people I'm comfortable with instead of a substitution for a different-job-main that would "counter" the other team's job/comp.

That post did not say where the discussion should take place, it just said "somewhere else". It did not use the word "private", nor did it mention the Skype group.

You can politely cover the emotions up; it is the polite thing to do. It just doesn't fool me.

Yes, back to PvP... So we agree about preferring 4 player teams. Groovy. I look forward to discussing this more with the creators of the tournament in private, and here in this thread with anyone else who wants to share their thoughts.

[Astrapls]

Every single team IS eligible to have 6 players, but how many teams are there reading this thread who actually are able to take advantage of this rule? I only know of one team, the team who wrote the rules for the tournament and put it together, who is able to and will take full advantage of that rule and find other competitive players to fill a team of 6. Other teams, correct me if I am wrong about that.

That's hard to say, and we can't possibly know. There may or may not be teams who can field 6 players. However, you suggested that the extra players be paired with others to make another team. If it's going to be so hard for teams of 4 to find extra players, how are the few teams that can field 6 going to find two more players to make two teams? The option to allow teams of 6 lets those two players participate in the tournament. It's simply an option which makes the tournament more inclusive for the sparse Wolves Den community. I can understand your concern about some players only being skilled at a single job, but that's not really anyone else's problem. Most skilled players are talented at multiple jobs, and it's not an uncommon thing. I know plenty of players who are very effective on multiple jobs both in PvE and PvP. Any team with only 4 players who are each limited to a single job are most likely going be stuck with a one party composition. However, this is their own failing and should not be used as a reason to limit other teams' potential. Additionally, there is nearly a month until the tournament, so any such teams should take this time to learn other jobs in PvP or find more members so they that have more job flexibility.

...but people very typically have a main job they focus on the most...
...Now if one player is a beast at two jobs, that should be rewarded...
...so why not level the playing field...

How is that leveling the playing field, though? A team of 4 with players who are "beast" at multiple jobs would have similar or greater advantages than the team of 6 with their one main job if they're truly skilled.

The other team has 6 players, and the two in reserve are a bard main and a dragoon main, so they swap in those dps to counter-comp the other team. That seems unfair to me. If the summoner main in team two switched to bard, and the ninja main to dragoon (instead of swapping other players out), they most likely would not be as good/intricate on those secondary jobs as those other players who main those jobs, so counter-comp would be much more of a challenge.

It seems like you're afraid of being "countered" and that your team is unable to adapt to different situations. Regardless, you're completely missing the point. The 6 man team thing is not about having counter compositions but being more inclusive, allowing more people to participate. It could be possible that a few people don't have enough for a team of 4 and would like to play with their friends who do have a team. You cannot rule out this possibility, and by doing so, you're alienating target players. Ultimately, the 6 man team setup is beneficial in the inclusion of more players when being unable to make two full teams.

[Logos]

(snipped)

I can't say I disagree with what you said in this post. It was all quite rational and well thought out. I acknowledge the points you made.

Where we seem to have different perspectives is as to whether the tournament is more competitive, or if it is more geared toward community and inclusion.

If it is equally both, well then it should be equally competitive and equally inclusive. The way the rules are written now definitely lean more toward inclusive than competitive, for the reasons I have previously illustrated.

Here's how I look at a competitive Wolves Den tournament, such as the one we are talking about:

Wolves Den is 4 v 4, not 6 v 6. So let's see who the best 4 player team is ~ the 4 most skilled PvPers!

Simple as that.

The inclusive balance would be the middle ground suggestion I made in my previous post. What do you think of that suggestion?

[Logos]

I'll clarify: Discussion would be spam in context, and a discussion like the rule change would involve many people as seen presently. I suggested taking it privately because what comes with a discussion is the incorporation of anyone who has anything to say about the topic. Especially for a rule change such as the one you brought up, I wouldn't be surprised if it went on for pages and if it did, it would look unprofessional and badly thought-up especially on the creators' side. This wasn't created by one person but by many who've contributed their thoughts, though one person is representing it's creation.

That is not my decision and I'm participating solely as a player in this tournament. The person representing this event seems more than willing to hear what you and others have to say, but the option for the Aether Skype group might be more sensible. You would be able to be a spokesperson for those who don't want to speak up in a setting with others who want to have a sincere discussion that doesn't turn into a heated debate on what's better.

It seems like others are interested in discussing this here too, though. Just because there is discussion and debate doesn't mean that the event is unprofessional and badly thought-up. Discussion is healthy and helps people express their thoughts, and is certainly not spam in this context. People want a tournament to be fair for every team, right? Achieving that may require lots of discussion, public and private.

I am not at all opposed to joining the Aether Skype group. I'll set up Skype now. Please PM me the details for how to join the group.