Gotta Play Big to Win... Small? - TPCI New Prize Structure for Regionals 2016

2/04/2016 PokemonToxic 0 Comments

Isn't that the phrase? Not in Pokemon it isn't. Under Pokemon's new prize structuring found here: CLICK HERE

Under the new system Pokemon will now payout (with packs most likely from their newest set Break Point) to lower than usual finishers. Packs will now uncharacteristically be paid out to top 128. Graph A breaks down the payouts for each finishing group (specifically the masters division). Line 1 is what you will recieve if you placed in a specific tier (ex. Players finishing in T8 would recieve 54 Booster Packs). Line 2 is the total pack payout for that specific tier (ex. those finishing 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th, will split a total of 216 packs). Lines 3-4 are specifically what the payout percentage (based on the 2016 packs being given out in total to each person's placing and the placings all together). Example: Players finishing in T8 will split 10.71% of the total prize pool amoung its 4 other competitors or each will recieve 2.68% of the overall total prize pool.


According to the Pokemon.com link above (and with simple addition), 2016 booster packs will be given out to masters in total at each regionals (regardless of total attendance).


Graph A
So by my calculations (not shown, and based on prior event knowledge), an estimated 400 person regionals, a record of 5W-4L-0T  (15points) will net you a top 128 seeding. A 5-4 record, you know, slightly better than a .500 season will net you payout. I personally feel that taking winnings from the top 8 and allocating it to the bottom T64 & T128 isn't good for the competitive nature. It indirectly discouages and de-incentivizes good players from doing their best. Why put in long hours of play testing and meticulous deck construction/meta gaming when I can coast and get a decent enough payout?

The only last incentive left (after the prize restructuring and cutting t4 trophies) is championship points and round 2 byes at nationals. I argue that even with championship points being untouched, and that the day 1 invite bar is so low I could not care less between 20-30 points. If I'm not winning/finishing top 8 at multiple regionals/nationals, I only need my 300 points and then I'm done for the season. I no longer have the incentive to attend, try hard, buy more product, or push the (meta) game to the limits without being properly rewarded for my efforts. I have already won my chance to play the best. I can push the game to the limits when it actually matters ... in August. 

Another issue with the new structure is that regionals attedance can range from 150 to 500 masters division players. Example: Ontario Canada regionals versus St. Louis Regionals. Ontario Canada regionals has an expected turnout of less than 200 (based on last years attendance and current regional trends). Last year top 64 extended to records who were 4W-3L (12points). With the extension of prizes, Ontario Master players have a chance even with a negitive record to recieve payout support. Now take into consideration St. Louis regionals, last year who had an attedance of 360+ Master players (double the player base on Ontario). Top 128 there would roughly estimate a record of 5W-3L-1T (16points) [an above winning record there]. I'm not sure if I agree TPCI static (regardless of attedance) payouts now...



Now lets reflect: take a look at last years regionals payout. This was from Pokemon.com's Fall regionals information page: CLICK HERE

Graph B



By compairing the two regionals payouts, serious cuts were made to those finishing in the Top 4 and minor cuts to Top 8. The champion now (under new structure) wins the same amount as second place. What is this even? If you compare the payouts in any other tournament 2nd should never pays out to a 1:1. It would be like if you were on Jeopardy and you won $15,000 in final Jeopardy and the 2nd place opponent (regardless of his/her score) would also get $15,000 even though he/she was outplayed? But you won and you get the trophy right? You could completely 6-0 your opponent twice in the finals at Regionals this year. However, you're both going home with the same amount of prizes (minus 2nd place does not recieve a trophy). Where did your prize support go originally? It got spread to players in the lower Top 8, mostly into those with slightly above average records.

So what can Pokemon do to encourage players to play the best (like no one ever was)?
In theory you could follow in the footsteps of the largest collectable card game, Magic: The Gathering. They must be doing something right if they can draw in thousands of people for (what I feel and other players feel the Pokemon Regional equivalent) Grand Prix(s) (GP for short). 





I located the payout structure for the upcoming 2016 GP(s). I then calculated it's percentage payouts per person versus its payout pool. Example: First place recieves $10,000 of its $21,200 (min. 3000+ players) static (independent of its attendance) total cash prize pool. I then proceeded to replicate the percentage payouts to emulate that of MTG into Pokemon's booster pack payouts. A full breakdown on MTG GP payouts can be found here:
CLICK HERE


Graph C








  
From Graph C above, you can see that the payouts between each placing is exponentially higher. 1st Place would (in pokemon packs) recieve 972 packs (slightly adjusted higher to get a number divisiable by 36, which is 27 boxes!) based on the MTG percentage payout. From there, payouts get much smaller where anyone finishing outside the top 8 not even recieving a full box. The MTG structure robs alot of the lower placings players of packs and puts a much higher weight (and pressure) on finishing 1st.

A loss in the finals means your winnings are cut by nearly 55% and even futher as you place lower. Records in day 2 top cut are so close (mainly lower T8 vs upper T16 as well as lower T16 vs upper T32) that something as close as 1 point (or even tie breakers) could cut your winnings in half.  I don't necessarly agree with this drastic variance in winnings but is still to be considering when structuring.

Other competitive games have huge variances such as Super Smash Bros Melee / Super Smash 4 structure being a 60%/30%/10% payout. I did not include this since payout is based on TO entry fee, venue fees and overall attedance. Smash Bros and other competitive E-sports games have little luck to factor as skill is the main driver. Consistent players can continue to recieve these payouts over and over again. There are too many factors (when calculating payouts) to consider this scheme but I digress.

I continued to search for a more balanced payout structure... Then I came across professional poker...




I took the payout scheme from professional poker found here & implemented there structure for a 351-475 player tournament (similiar to a large Pokemon regionals attedance):
CLICK HERE
Again, I used the percentages to emulate a Pokemon payout structure. I had to restructure payouts as some of Top 8 was not divisable by 36 (as it has been in the past). I attempted to get as close to 2016 packs (total given for master division). It took a considerable amount of time to adjust percentages as Professional Poker is played on tables of 9's versus Pokemon standard tradition of 8's (So the numbers do not quite match the ones on the website).
Graph D



























I feel that there is a balance in doing well. A loss in the finals doesn't cut your winnings in half (they are cut enough to feel it but you aren't burned by it). Payouts still get a decent amount (T64 receiving 10 packs is still a good day especially a typical T64 record is 6-3; an above average winning record). Missing cut isn't devistating when you only recieve 5 less packs behind your counterparts in 17-32nd places. Its not fun but you definitely do feel like you are at least going home with something.

When I finished top 64 at Ft Wayne and I went home with 15 packs and a T-Tar regionals mat, I was satisfied that my time, effort and hours testing was for something. It was not by any means easy where I could coast on skill alone to a 6-3 record. If didn't test or put hours into testing, I know I could coast into Top 128 seed with a mindless autopilot deck and get a disappointing 6 packs for 9 hours. I know my heart wouldn't have been in it to win it because of the lower payout (montetary and other reasons stated above).

I don't agree with your "everyone should get something" attitude but TPCI is going to do what it wants regardless of the competitive scene. I will most likely be trying at a bare minimum. No longer will I stress over deck picks and metagaming for hours on end to obtain a small pool of packs. The only drive I have left is to get 300 and finish.

Andrew Wamboldt of Charizard Lounge once told me "Once you have 300 points, its really going to come down to how well you do at [US] Nationals anyways whether you get a day 2 or not [or degree level of stipend(s)]."

Until then...


OR