Christian Dura · @Cabom91
7th Sep 2015 from TwitLonger
SPL Stuff: A Chronicle
DISCLAIMER: THIS IS A HUGE TWITLONGER. LIKE, REALLY BIG. YOU CAN USE CTRL+F TO NAVIGATE TO "THISISTHEIMPORTANTSPOT" TO READ THINGS EXCLUSIVELY PERTAINING TO UPCOMING/FUTURE LAN STUFF. I JUST DROVE FOR LIKE 20 HOURS AND MY THOUGHTS ARE SUPER SCATTERED BUT I WANTED TO GET IT OUT BEFORE I FORGOT STUFF. I STILL DID. FK. GL.
Over the past three weeks there have been issues concerning DC's in SPL matches. These have been the result of DDOS/Poor internet connection/etc. These issues will forever plague online tournaments, but the reality of Smite's current situation is that making a LAN setting for each game is impossible. I think this is a good opportunity for the community to come together and talk about what needs to be done going forward in order to ensure the highest quality experience for the players and viewers.
DC's are potentially impacting who goes to worlds. Why? The idea of worlds should be to have the best teams of each region represented for an incredibly competitive event that will bring in new players/viewership for Smite. While the occupation of a professional smite player dictates that one should have reliable internet, we all know that ISP's are unreliable and unpredictable. I paid over 150$ a month for my internet connection, and I've had issues for the entire year. Sometimes I would disconnect every couple of minutes, as demonstrated during COG's set with AFK, and other times it would be in between 20 minutes to 2 hours. The time in which I would be disconnected would be random. No matter how many techs came out, or how many times I called, the problem would always pop back up in a couple of weeks. Without a different ISP available in my area I was stuck.
Unfortunately, even if you have a reliable connection people might still find your IP and DDOS you, costing you precious wins towards Regionals, and consequently Worlds. Worse yet, even if all 10 players have good internet you cannot be sure that you will have a stable server to play on. Barra and I talked at length during their dc's about how our auto's were actually DISAPPEARING. In some cases, the animation would occur but no auto attack would appear for 3 consecutive animations. I don't claim to be an expert on how servers work, but it seems odd that between the number of remakes for ping, time spent practicing for these games, and being expected to play through these issues regardless seems a bit harsh. Rubberbanding has actually impacted team fights in the SPL.
Going forward, a few things probably need to be changed to ensure that the quality of the matches is as high as it can be: Pro players need to be educated on how to protect themselves from DDOS. The responsibility for this falls on both the players and Hi-Rez as a company. A meeting between players/Hi-Rez employees concerning how to protect themselves from being exposed, as well as how to deal with an attack once its started would be incredibly beneficial for both parties. No one wins when a player disconnects. The viewers experience is ruined, and they blame the players/servers/company.
Furthermore, it falls on Hi-Rez to ensure that servers be ready and stable before the games are played. The reality is that someone's ping will be better/worse based on where each player is in relation to the server, however, as long as the ping remains stable then the expectation of professional play is reasonable. You can adjust to ping mid game as long as it remains constant, but if it fluctuates it becomes infinitely harder to land skillshots/autos.
Some people have presented the idea of having something similar to LCS, but chances are that won't be in the cards anytime in the near future. Personally, I don't think it's something that should be considered at all. The expectation is that every player will move to wherever Hi-Rez chooses to host it and play. People will say things like "Well it's your job, welcome to the real world!" but that argument is not applicable. Many professional players are in high school and going to college. Expecting them to put off their futures to compete in a video game is incredibly short-sighted. The likelihood that any MOBA will continue to be successful enough to generate a career in the long-run is pretty unlikely. Similarly, professional players have begun to settle down in new homes. Unless the general public expects Hi-Rez to compensate each player/move them to god knows where, this probably won't ever fly.
_________________________________________________________________________
***BEGIN SOLUTION TO CURRENT ISSUE/HOW TO UTILIZE IT IN FUTURE*** THISISTHEIMPORTANTSPOT
So, we find ourselves in a position where something like the LCS seems unlikely and online plays a heavy role in deciding who is good enough to compete at LAN. The solution that makes the most sense to me is changing the way in which LAN's are organized in Smite.
In Smite's current state, the only split that actually matters is the one leading up to Worlds. You could play like literal dogshit for most of the year. As long as you don't get relegated and show up in one split, you can go to Worlds. Isn't that kind of weird? A lot of the outrage concerning these dc's in particular is based on the fact that this split is absurdly important.
I think the best solution moving forward is to adopt a point system. By this I mean to use LAN's and SPL performances to accumulate points. These collective points over the course of the year would be put towards placing overall to determine who goes to Worlds.
Placing in each split would award points between 10-100, with LAN's acting as supplements (something between 5-50). The numbers could be adjusted as Hi-Rez sees fit. Ideally, the # of LAN's would increase as well. In my mind it makes sense to have a mid-split LAN, as well as one at the end of the split. This means, of course, that each team goes to each LAN. There are definitely reasons why this is good, and obvious reasons why it would suck.
+'s:
- Each team gets LAN experience - it doesn't matter how good you are online if you crack under pressure.
- Players develop closer relationship with Hi-Rez/Can positively influence public image
- Viewership skyrockets during LAN. Under this assumption, it has a higher potential to bring in more players. More players = more crowd funding = higher prize pools = more competition.
- Meta's shift at LAN. Meta shift's keep the game from getting stale.
- Each LAN is important, because it would impact seeding towards World's. No one will hold back.
- Some teams simply DO better at LAN. A great example of this is previously SK, now Fanatic. They were actually placed in the Wildcard in the Regional LAN leading up to Worlds due to a lackluster performance in the SPL. Imagine if they hadn't made it? What if there are other "LANimals" that we don't know about..?
- More consistent pay for professional players
-'s:
- teams will have to travel more frequently, interrupting IRL events (school/work/etc.)
- The issue of organizing the events would be difficult. Do you cram everything into the same time-span as you would in the original LAN set-up that Hi-Rez has been using?
- Cost vs. Reward: taking care of 40 players per region is... daunting. Is it worth it to spend that much money? Hi-Rez is a business, afterall.
- This set-up inherently damages the amateur (Challenger) scene. Since points are accumulated over the year, having relegations wouldn't make sense. If team A replaces team B do they take team A's points? Do they complain that if they had been in the SPL the previous split they would be more likely to make it to Worlds?
- Prizing would be altered again, leaving less for higher placing
I'm of the opinion that if Hi-Rez is capable of hosting more LAN's, then this is the best route to take. For the upcoming LAN, each team should be invited to play. Now based on the fact that we don't have points to work with this year, I'm not sure if we could do something like a group stage to impact seeding. The benefit of this is that each team gets to play some games in a lan setting. The bad part is that it would definitely eat up some time. There is an opportunity to mitigate this issue in NA though (and maybe other regions?). Battle & Brew could feasibly be used to host the group stage if Hi-Rez can't host it at their studio. I don't think that the schedule can really be followed without having 2 sets of games being played at once, think something similar to the launch event.
This would ensure that the most qualified teams at this current time are not hurt by dc's in an incredibly important SPL split, and ensure a higher-quality Smite World Championship. Again, the idea is that higher-quality = more viewers = so-on, so-forth.
_________________________________________________________________________
**Things worth considering in the future**
How games are scheduled: Given that we need the SPL for a constant stream of content for viewers interested in competitive Smite, more measures should be taken to ensure the games are played. I think it probably makes sense to allow for a team to have options. On Sunday after the SPL games are done players will send an email indicating a day in which the two teams can play their game. If technical issues (these being RESTRICTED to server issues) then the team will play at the time indicated by the seasonal ticket instead. If no other time is offered, then the games will happen day-of regardless of issues. The SPL will still be important, but losing a game to a DC isn't the end of the world. Still, this solution allows more opportunities for teams to ensure a game is played. There would probably have to be some kind of rule to ensure that people can't abuse dcing to drop a game they're losing, although I'm way too tired to consider it.
Relegations: This probably has to only happen once a year if this system is implemented. Following Worlds, the teams which competed will be automatically enlisted in the SPL. Then a tournament format similar to what happened prior to S2 will take place. Going forward the Challenger cup will run along side the SPL, and the points accumulated will go towards a round robin tournament between top 4 challenger vs bottom 4 spl (or something). Would probably need prizing to incentivize playing in the challenger cup for a year.
Team swaps: I think there probably needs to be a 3/5ths rule. In order to be considered an official member of the team, or part of the 3/5, you have to play for a full split. Having teams come in and take points/placing would be problematic. Could probably use deductions for breaking rule/competitive bans to mitigate it. IDK.
Casting: People are pretty critical of casting, but generally speaking they do a good job. I'm of the opinion that the cast tries to cover too much. A potential solution might be to have more streams during lan events? Something like DOTA where there can be a stream for avid viewers vs. new players - different content discussed.
Ok I'm going to sleep.