@snoog I don't think awards for the other divisions make sense. Because that would make it so that in some cases a player does not want to play or win more games in order to stay in the division he is currently nr. 1 in. Also it encourages smurf accounts or trading of accounts.
Matchmaking Seasonal Prizes
I don't have any say on the budget either, but I'd imagine it would be a bit much yeah. I think making the seasons semi-annual makes the most sense in this case.
Hello Snoog , there could be a way to make it work i think since we just threw 600$ away on the 1000 Seton Tourney Again which was hosted on January and this has way more reach for all players to grind rank over the time and more potential to spend FAF funds more reasonable i think , either way you could make small adjustments either to the seasons per year or to the prizes ( if we go any lower then my first example i dont think it will attract to much attention )
Yea those are definitely possibilities. I think diminishing rewards would help, less money for each successive lower rank. But of course people will go to wild lengths for small rewards.
I just suggested it since honestly there isn't much movement in the GM sphere and it'd probably just be the same players over and over again getting the rewards.
The most important thing is to reward both activity and skill. You can't allow the highest rated dude to play 5 games and then just stop playing and sit on their rating awaiting their reward.
Hey tagada im quite sure there is another feature in matchmaking rating system called “Score” which helps separating the ranks there , but it only goes to 10 so i dont know after that how it differs who gets what rank we’d have to look into that
Example you tagada u might get grandmaster rank right after u unlocked ur rank which u have to play like 10 games or so and then TO climbe in the grandmaster ranks youd have to play games to get score which helps u move the ranks up there bcz of this its becomes competitive who gets top 3.
Ive talked with the relevant people to see if a thing like this could be implemented. In the end there was not enough support for this.
Mainly because people don't want to make the leaderboards into an event with prizes, because it is argued this would make it more an event than a leaderboard. Also, it is argued that this proposal would not increase overall participation in the matchmakers. So yeah, looks like something like this is not feasable atm.
What had more support in that discussion was to revive the concept of the old league months where playing a lot of games was rewarded. That was received well by the players at the time and improved the matchmaker activity.
Hey Storm and everyone,
I wanted to thank the leadership team and everyone involved for taking the time to consider the idea of introducing seasonal prizes for the top Grandmasters in our matchmaking system.
I completely understand the concerns that were raised, though I do wish I could have been part of that discussion. While I know I don’t have an official role in FAF, I believe that being able to engage directly might have allowed me to better explain my perspective or even understand the concerns more clearly.
I’m still having a bit of trouble seeing where the idea of "turning the leaderboard into an event" might be bad or how it wouldn’t increase overall participation, but I respect the decision made. It would have been great to explore these points further, but I appreciate the thoughtful consideration given to the proposal.
If there’s ever an opportunity to revisit this idea , I’d love to be a part of that conversation.
I appreciate your empathy here. And admittedly I share your confusion somewhat. As for including you in the discussion, that is a valid point which I hadn't considered outside of the short discussion here on the forum. To be fair, you could have told me you wanted to be included in these discussions beforehand..
Yes maybe i could have mention it but since my post explained it well enough of how this could increase the overall participation in tmm and now someone is saying that it wont confuses me , i would have not though that this would be the main issue.
Interestingly, games like CS: GO and others have successfully implemented similar systems, using leaderboards with prize incentives to keep players engaged over longer periods. These systems haven’t detracted from the competitive nature of the leaderboards but rather have enhanced player commitment and overall activity.
Perhaps we could consider a trial run, like a 3-month season, to test the impact of introducing seasonal prizes. This would give us valuable insights into whether it increases participation and engagement without making any permanent changes right away and let the facts speak then.
I’d like to listen Again The major points of this suggestion and the potential benefits of introducing seasonal prizes :
Increased Matchmaking Activity: By offering prizes and recognition, we would encourage players to participate more actively in Matchmaking, rather than sticking to repetitive maps like Setons or GAP. This shift would lead to a more diverse and strategic gameplay experience that truly reflects what FAF is meant to be—competitive Matchmaking across different maps and team sizes (1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4) with random teammates and opponents.
Long-Term Engagement: The idea promotes a sustained activity grind, as players would need to consistently play and track their rankings to stay in a good position. This would likely lead to a surge in activity, especially in the final month of the season as players try to secure or improve their standings for a shot at the prizes.
Increased Strategic Diversity: This system could encourage players to explore different formats and strategies beyond the usual meta, as they aim to secure top spots in various categories. The possibility of one player dominating multiple categories adds an exciting competitive edge.
Fair Opportunity for All: While 1v1 might be tougher due to the established skill gap, the other categories (2v2, 3v3, 4v4) offer more accessible paths to the top for players of different skill levels, especially with enough dedication and strategic play.
This approach could significantly enrich our community by making Matchmaking the central focus, aligning with the core competitive nature of FAF.
@insidiousnoob said in Matchmaking Seasonal Prizes:
Long-Term Activity Grind: Unlike a tournament, where players are highly active for just a week, this system encourages sustained engagement and long-term participation throughout the entire season.
The benefit of tournaments is that they are likely to bring inactive players back, for a brief period of time. If the tournament is enticing enough they will practice a bit beforehand, play the tourney, and maybe play a little after before returning to inactivity. Another benefit of tournaments is that people like to watch and cast the games, which results in good content to support the community and potentially attract new players.
A ladder event is probably not enticing enough to bring inactive players back. It will just make the existing ladder players play more games. People also don't seem that interested in watching or casting random ladder games, since many of them will be low quality, so you don't get the content you would from a tourney.
It would seem that even the $600 Summer Invitational was not enticing enough to bring back inactive players though, so if FAF has extra funds they might as well be used for ladder events if there are no better ideas.
I don't really know if encouraging people to grind ladder is all that beneficial. Other games want you to grind because they want lots of daily active users to impress shareholders and sell cosmetic items to. People should play FAF for fun because they are intrinsically motivated to do so, not because someone manipulated them with a division system and possibility to win $50 after months of grinding. However, there does need to be a minimum amount of activity in the matchmakers so that people who want to play games can find them reasonably quickly. I would personally feel like an unethical psycho if I spent $600 to make people grind ladder though.
Thank you for your feedback. I want to clarify that I’m not downplaying the importance of tournaments at all. I love tournaments too—I’ve participated in several and even hosted the "High Rated 2v2 Tournament" a few months ago. My mention of tournaments was purely for comparison. In one of my previous comments, I referenced the King of Seton 2v2 Tourney from January, which was great but also highlighted how we’ve been focusing heavily on certain repetitive formats. My point was that perhaps, instead of funding yet another Seton tournament, we could explore something new, like the Matchmaking Seasonal Prizes.
Regarding the concern that a ladder event might not entice inactive players, I believe it’s important to innovate and try different approaches rather than always focusing on bringing back old, inactive players. Of course, it’s great when they return, but we also need to keep our current player base engaged and excited. You mentioned that people aren’t as interested in random ladder games, but if you look at Gyle casts, Tactical Takeover, Strategic Launch, and even BRNKoINSANITY back in the day, these casters often cover random ladder games and draw a lot of views. The appeal often lies in how the games are presented and who is casting them.
You said : I don't really know if encouraging people to grind ladder is all that beneficial.
As for the concern about encouraging people to grind ladder, I respectfully disagree. Ladder is where the true FAF experience lies, and I believe you understand this too, given that you’ve played around 6,000 ladder games compared to 2,063 custom games. It’s not about manipulating players—it’s about providing an opportunity for those who take the game seriously and play it daily to experience healthy competition and have something to strive for.
Why not offer a chance for these dedicated players to enjoy some friendly competition with a tangible reward? It’s not about turning FAF into a grind, but about recognizing and rewarding the commitment that some players already demonstrate. I don’t see it as unethical or manipulative—we’re simply exploring ways to keep our beloved game alive and engaging. The goal is not to force anyone to play but to enhance the experience for those who are already invested.
Again we are not Trying to Manipulate anyone to anything or do anything unethical psychos here you can also have a season off without the seasonal prices with how the season are now you can do a season with prices and one not. I am a player myself and i have no role in FAF so this has literally no benefit for me! This is just a Suggestion from me which i am ready to defend and convince you or get proven wrong!
