Hello, this is a suggestion made with the effort of several players for the devs/GMs of LoN.
As you know, sprints have been ruled to giving a choose a loot card to the player with the highest overall score each month, and players are limited to 4 sprints per week that count. Nothing wrong with that. However, in the case of a tie, the reward is granted to the player who joined the most sprint tournaments. This rule made little or no sense to most players participating in these, as well as discouraging some from even making an attempt at winning each month.
The reason for this is that rule has basicly changed rules of the sprints from who can do the best in the tournaments to who has the most free time and most alts to make an attempt at getting tons of points each week, and joining tons of tournaments.
There are several suggestions I am bringing here in an attempt to make the play field for sprints more fair to the average player, and not so tilted towards one person, JezMaster. From looking at the sprints page on the LoN official site, you can see aside from the very first 2, every single sprint has gone to the various JezMaster alts, clearly showing how his ability to join virtually every sprint with 3+ alts every time allows him an easy victory.
Suggestion #1- In the case of a tie, change the decider of the winner to who has joined the LEAST sprints as opposed to the most. The reasoning behind this is simple. Giving the reward to whoever joined the most means giving it to who had the most free time. However, giving the reward to whoever joined the least means it goes to the player who had more skill that month, simply because they joined less and got the same amount of points. That alone shows they did better on average in the ones they joined, which should translate to an overall better score.
Suggestion #2- Remove/edit the 4 sprints per week limit rule, and replace it with a new one. Create a new rule limiting the amount of sprints you can join all together each week. This should make it easier for players who can only join 1 per day to have a chance at winning. For example make it so players can just join 5 sprints per week and they all count. Or alternatively, keep the top 4 counting and limit them to 6 per week. This would give players with less time a better chance to win, while still keeping the amount needed to join in to win relatively high.
Suggestion #3- Make a second possibility for a second choose a loot card each month. Create a new challenge to win this one, such as counting only the first 3-4 sprintsgiving it to the highest score attained by the sum of those sprints. This would allow people with less time and the higher skill to win, as well as allowing the people with tons of spare time to keep winning.
Suggestion #4- Implement the rules of CQ tournies to sprints, only 1 account per person-AKA no alts-. Being as these are free tournies, people, like JezMaster, can run mass amounts of alts and use the onles that get the luckiest match ups and highest scores early on as their main account. Yes I realized many players rune alts to get extra promos, but I can see a way around this. 1 account per person shall be chosen ahead of time as that person "main" account for sprints, meaning that is the only one that is competetive for the choose a loot card. This would further the fair playing field to giving more players a chance to win, while at the same time rewarded the same amount of promos.
Thank you for reading this, and please consider what I have presented. It would undoubtedly add to the player base joining sprint tournaments, as well as giving it more of a competetive edge.
I agree with the fact that the current system needs revising.
I agree as well.
Agreed. I have attempted to match master many times but have only come close once and that was when I was when I played in every sprint there was. even playing in them when I had already gotten 48 points in the week for incase of a tie. Since then I have stopped trying cause I don't have that kind of free time anymore.
i completely agree, jezmaster has an advantage of playing in all 8 tournys a week. if you look at sprints this is how it has been
August 2008, Jezmaster won by over 50 points
September 2008, Jezmaster won by 40 points
October 2008, Jezmaster won by 38 points
November 2008,Jezmaster won by 6 with cole close at 2nd, but jezmaster also had 3rd and 4rd
December 2008,Jezmaster tied first first, with himself, and won by 10 points
January 2009,Jezmaster won by 16 points
February 2009,Jezmaster won by 26 points( this is where cole stopped trying)
March 2009,Jezmaster won by 46 points
April 2009,Jezmaster won by 33 points
May 2009,Jezmaster won by 38 points.
Considering jezmaster does not win every single CQ and choose a loot, the system is unfair to other players, yes every1 can still get the promos but jezmaster is basicly getting 1 free choose a loot every month, at the VERY LEAST, the followup places should atleast recieve a reward too, like a box of boosters.
wickedsteel wrote:
i completely agree, jezmaster has an advantage of playing in all 8 tournys a week. if you look at sprints this is how it has beenConsidering jezmaster does not win every single CQ and choose a loot, the system is unfair to other players, yes every1 can still get the promos but jezmaster is basicly getting 1 free choose a loot every month, at the VERY LEAST, the followup places should atleast recieve a reward too, like a box of boosters.
The problem with that is just as you said. He would end up getting all of the prizes still.
November 2008,Jezmaster won by 6 with cole close at 2nd, but jezmaster also had 3rd and 4rdDecember 2008,Jezmaster tied first first, with himself, and won by 10 points
The current system is indeed flawed. I got "close" one month but it just wasn't worth my time to continue trying to compete for prize.
As is, whoever can participate in the most sprints has the advantage. Having 10+ accounts makes it a blow out. Did Jez violate any rules? Of course not. But the devs/mod should know by now that this sprint structure sucks...much worse than it did before.
You want to reward the best player don't you? If so then you should factor in the number of games played. Like Daarcher said, either award the win to someone who got the points with the fewest games, and/or normalize the results so that you can't just join and drop a tournament after maxing out and retain the lead.
How about you can only play in X sprints a week and that's it. That way you are rewarding the player who puts up good and consistent results. I understand that this will make it tough for players who just want the promos so the point cutoffs may need to be adjusted.
How about a tournament for the top X players ranked in sprints where 1st is choose a loot and then boosters for the rest?
I think most people don't realize they are not all solely my alts and I am only playing 1/3 of the time.
Winning 10 Sprints isn't much when you spread that among 3 people. Most of my Choose any Loot cards comes from weekend tournaments .
Sprint is not a very competitive tournament format and it's meant to reward the player(s) for time invested.
Both Uway and I (alone) have won about 15 times each on the weekend Choose Any Loot tournament. How come there aren't any complaints directed at that format yet?
Anyhow, I actually like the idea of making Sprint more competitive like only being able to compete in 5 tournaments and making every game counts. That way, Daarcher can use his elite skills to dominate it and then we can all complain how that system is tilted in favor of him =p.
Jez
I'm not even sure if its just one guy entering all those tournaments, a team of people can alternate sprints and get credit towards the tie breaker rule.
I like Cole's idea of holding a 16 man tourney at the end of the month for the card. I would even ask for a no alts rule for this tourney.
Jez wrote:
Thats because in choose a loot every1 has a chance, its 1 tourny and if u win u win, if u lose u lose. in the sprints in your case, if u win u win, but if u lose u have 9 more chances to win, and its unfair to the people who cant make all 10 sprints in 1 week. This may even favor you, but an idea i had is seperate morning sprints and evening sprints into 2 different categories, and gives a choose a loot to the winner of both. that way people would atleast have a chance. and you said 1/3 of the time your not the one playing....... it is against the EULA of every SoE game to share accounts, so GMs, u have proof of him saying that, which is another unfair advantage jezmaster is recieving, which should be stopped too.
OK here goes.
Suggestion #5- Make it against the rules for more than one person to join sprints on a single account. That just seems like pure cheating the system to me, its like making 3 people fight 1 person, just not fair. I don't think these were made with the intention of multiple people playing one account just to win more stuff each month.
*EDIT*
Read cole's ideas and he pretty much hit the point I was initially making.
agree (bump)
All I said was that I play 1/3 of the time and not all the accounts are mine. Didn't say anything about sharing.
I mentioned that because people tend to associate me to like 15 accounts.
I hate sprints. I have time for like 1 a month. All these new cards I have to trade for each month are a pain.
BTW, I like Daarcher's first suggestion a lot.
All I said was that I play 1/3 of the time and not all the accounts are mine. Didn't say anything about sharing. I mentioned that because people tend to associate me to like 15 accounts.Jez
besides jagan(who is also a jez bot or some1 related to him) and poly_p, every sprint has been won by a master0#, if u really want be to believe that master01, 03, and 04 and 3 different people, ur gonna have to try a lot harder than that, especialy since i know you have played on all 3 of those accounts.
Also, i think to make sprints the most skill based instead of time based, combine the second suggestion and the fourth suggestion that daarcher posted into 1, players can only join a limited amount per week instead of only being scored on their 4 best, AND limit it to no bots in sprints
