PDA

View Full Version : [Beat the Jack:] Jack Qualifiers



Uraxor
12-23-2013, 05:02 PM
Rules of Jack Qualifiers, part of (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/819070-Beat-the-Jack-the-January-February-Tournament-announcement-thread?p=9452620&viewfull=1#post9452620)


http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/2489/rdo8.png (http://imageshack.com/a/img189/3742/v6mp.png)

Status: Started!
Jack Qualifiers dates: 3. 1. - 9. 2.



The Qualifier takes place throughout 20 consecutive Jackpots.
To qualify (a.k.a. 'to beat the Jack'), player needs to submit a screenshot of the game with opened Notifications, showing that the player has placed in Top 0.5% in 4 out of 5 consecutive Jackpots.

The Notification bar will therefore need to show results of 4 Jackpots, fulfilling the Qualifiers prerequsites.
Top 0.5%, rounded up, is upper half of Tier 1 in Jackpot. E.g. with 9851 participants, 49th position and better counts.
All the Jackpots included in the screenshot need to have taken place within the Qualifiers dates, i.e. 3.1. - 9.2.
Example:
http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/7529/ndrx.png

This screenshot informs of the player's Username and shows 2 Jackpot placements, good enough for Jack Qualifiers. The date also tells us, Uraxor hasn't placed well enough in the following Jackpot on 21. 12. Therefore to obtain a qualifying screenshot, he will need to place well enough in the two next Jackpots, on 23. 12. and 25. 12. He will also need to delete some of the Gift Notifications, to fit all 4 Jackpot results in the screenshot.

Screenshots are to be posted in a dedicated thread (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/821354-Beat-the-Jack-Screenshot-submissions!).
Everyone who submits a valid screenshot automatically proceeds into the Main Event (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/819073-Beat-the-Jack-The-Main-Event?p=9452624&viewfull=1#post9452624).
Those unable to qualify through Jack Qualifiers have chance to qualify through the Underdog Qualifiers (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/819072-Beat-the-Jack-Underdog-Qualifiers?p=9452623&viewfull=1#post9452623), which run simultaneously.

maly_drab
12-24-2013, 11:11 AM
so.... basicly you want to see such screenshots, arent you ?

http://i.imgur.com/8m7xW1O.jpg

Dipl0mate
12-24-2013, 12:08 PM
With the UI so we can see your nickname I guess.

Uraxor
12-25-2013, 12:23 AM
With the correct dates and as dipl0mate points out, the whole screen for validation purposes, yes.
(And stop scaring your opponents away. That's dirty competition. You wanna do it the right way, go, play, push them out into Underdog Qualifiers.)

maly_drab
12-25-2013, 01:27 PM
thx for info.

and to all those scarred peoplez:
I dont think i will be able to play that active by the time the TOurnament will start, so
DONT BE SCARED

My intentions were not even close to thinking the way Uraxor did.. Im not that evil and that smart :P

jkk89
01-01-2014, 06:30 PM
So the next jackpot that will start tomorrow (2.1.2013) is valid for the qulifiers?

Uraxor
01-01-2014, 07:57 PM
So the next jackpot that will start tomorrow (2.1.2013) is valid for the qulifiers?

Exactly.

trupiciel
01-03-2014, 01:20 PM
So we are not allowed to post pictures like this untill we finish as 0,5% best in 4 jackpots in a row? :cool:

http://i.imgur.com/fHY5fRq.jpg

Zazafda
01-03-2014, 05:55 PM
Hi Uraxor I have a question: why is it necessary to be top 0.5% in only 4 out of 5 consecutive jackpots?

Some players (me included, this is why I ask the question) maybe cannot just play 4 out of 5 consecutive JPs because of work/private life/whatever...

Wouldn't it be possible to change rule to: be in top 0.5% for 5 (or more) JPs for all the period of "selection"?

Sorry for my limited english but I think you understand what I mean.

Uraxor
01-03-2014, 08:59 PM
Zazafda; it's there to show the player's dedication towards the game as well as the fact that his reaching of the desired treshold was a matter of skill, rather than a matter of luck.

I am aware that this rule will make it hard for some to 'beat the Jack' - however those people can still qualify for Underdogs. Reaching top 5% can be done within 60 minutes, including one or two losses (tested myself).



And yes, trupi. 4 within the given timeframe.

Zazafda
01-04-2014, 11:34 AM
Zazafda; it's there to show the player's dedication towards the game as well as the fact that his reaching of the desired treshold was a matter of skill, rather than a matter of luck.

I am aware that this rule will make it hard for some to 'beat the Jack' - however those people can still qualify for Underdogs. Reaching top 5% can be done within 60 minutes, including one or two losses (tested myself).



And yes, trupi. 4 within the given timeframe.

I understand what you mean but sometimes I cant even play DOC. I will try my best to play 5 consecutive JP to be in!

xRoni
01-05-2014, 02:47 PM
Hi, I have simillar problem to Zazafda but im working in security so shedule is 24h(at work)/48h(free time) + school so im not able to play in 5 consecutive jackpots. In certain curcumstances I can play 2 jackpots in a row then in 3rd I just cant play and then I can play 2 more jackpots so my question is if I can just miss one? That would be still 4 of 5 jackpots in a row.

Uraxor
01-05-2014, 07:35 PM
Hi, I have simillar problem to Zazafda but im working in security so shedule is 24h(at work)/48h(free time) + school so im not able to play in 5 consecutive jackpots. In certain curcumstances I can play 2 jackpots in a row then in 3rd I just cant play and then I can play 2 more jackpots so my question is if I can just miss one? That would be still 4 of 5 jackpots in a row.

Yes, this is fine. E.g. 5 consecutive Jackpots are 9. - 11. - 13. - 15. - 17.; you can miss any one of them.

Zazafda; that's unfortunate. As I said, you can skip one in the chain of 4 (the 4 in 5 rule); that's as lenient as this tournament's rules go.

Best of luck to the both of you guys!

trupiciel
01-07-2014, 09:35 AM
So how is everyone doing? Am I the only one trying? Share some info guys, who's in? :D
This Kelthor is quite easy for reaching 0,5%
http://tools.mmdocking.com/decks/show/3209

Milky97
01-07-2014, 11:19 AM
So how is everyone doing? Am I the only one trying? Share some info guys, who's in? :D
This Kelthor is quite easy for reaching 0,5%
http://tools.mmdocking.com/decks/show/3209
Just started yesterday, so 3 more to go :).

ZergRusher
01-07-2014, 11:55 AM
@Trupi:
it's not hard to notice that there are only THREE 0.5% in the screenshot xD

@Zazafda
i agree that the rules are too "demanding"

Zazafda
01-07-2014, 01:02 PM
I am currently 3 times in top 0,5% out of 3 JPs. Unfortunately I wont be able to play next JP so we will see friday evening if I am able to join the tournament... But for this third JP I had some issues to reach 300 Telo (my goal to be assured to be top 0,5%) with some catastrophic streaks from 289 to 60 and then back to 275 5 times and missed the final game! Horrible stats with 41 win for 26 lost games... But I did it!

trupiciel
01-08-2014, 05:54 AM
I am currently 3 times in top 0,5% out of 3 JPs. Unfortunately I wont be able to play next JP so we will see friday evening if I am able to join the tournament... But for this third JP I had some issues to reach 300 Telo (my goal to be assured to be top 0,5%) with some catastrophic streaks from 289 to 60 and then back to 275 5 times and missed the final game! Horrible stats with 41 win for 26 lost games... But I did it!

Over 60 games in JP, that's some dedication :D I had to play like 30, because one particular Ishuma tilted me and I went on a losing streak after a loss against him. Funny thing is that the same player gave me my final 315telo score :D revenge is sweet :cool:

Zazafda
01-08-2014, 07:00 AM
Over 60 games in JP, that's some dedication :D
Yeah I know, but the only period when I can play at least 4 out of 5 consecutive JP is from first JP to 5th JP of the selection period so I HAD to be top 0.5% :D

trupiciel
01-09-2014, 01:20 PM
First! :P

http://i.imgur.com/6yFe56V.jpg

M0rw47h
01-13-2014, 04:26 AM
I will not take part in it, just because of rules.
Allowing players to switch between 3 decks = rock/paper/scissors. Hope this will be fixed in next edition.

Dipl0mate
01-13-2014, 09:50 AM
I will not take part in it, just because of rules.
Allowing players to switch between 3 decks = rock/paper/scissors. Hope this will be fixed in next edition.

If you dont mind, Im curious about why you think this. Assuming one deck can straight forward counter another (which is not that accurate), even with sideboard (which is even less accurate), how 3 decks make it more rock paper scissor than one deck ? In my opinion it just make the choice of the deck smarter, even more since each of these decks has a sideboard : the thinking around "best case scenario, worst case scenarios, sideboarding adjustments possibilities in all those cases" looks great for me.

I think the biggest "unknown" in the rules is the sideboard. How will this affect the current "jackpot meta" ? Which deck dies with sideboarding, and which one shines ? For instance I guess Cassandra dont profit that much from sideboarding and dont suffer this that much, maybe a little event wise. On the other hand I have this morgan deck... with sideboard... cant wait =D

M0rw47h
01-15-2014, 04:05 PM
If you dont mind, Im curious about why you think this. Assuming one deck can straight forward counter another (which is not that accurate)

I guess you're right, Sandylock vs Kelthor is 50/50% matchup... how could I forget about that...


even with sideboard (which is even less accurate)

Oh wait... you got an information enemy is playing Sandalphon vs your Kelthor, so you side in Pillages and Wastelands... but guess what... you face Wolf Captains and Combo-Wombo.


how 3 decks make it more rock paper scissor than one deck ?

Because one deck isn't about r/p/s at all imho. Now let me explain why.
When you choose a deck for such tournament you have to predict metagame for it, hard thing but doable. E.g. if in your opinion metagame will be full of Kelthors, you consider Cassandra as non viable for it, on the other hand if you predict metagame full of Sandalphons, you consider Kelthor as bad choice and Cass a good one. Thats how it works in MTG where players pick one deck with 15 card sideboard. If you fail to predict metagame, then indeed you may feel like its r/p/s.


In my opinion it just make the choice of the deck smarter, even more since each of these decks has a sideboard : the thinking around "best case scenario, worst case scenarios, sideboarding adjustments possibilities in all those cases" looks great for me.


No idea if smarter for you mean pick two Sandalphons/Dhamirias just to 'cheat' the rules and enemy...

WesleyCau
01-16-2014, 06:38 AM
I only just heard about this challenge and it sounds like a fantastic idea. Huge props to the people responsible for organizing it. Unfortunately i'm busy this time of the year so won't be able to participate.

A few suggestions:

Relying on screen shots seems unnecessarily complicated (and open to abuse). Given this tournament has the support of Ubisoft, why not just ask them to provide a list of the final rankings for each jackpot. You can collate those lists easily and provide regular updates about who is close to qualifying. I'm suprised they don't already provide an online copy of each Jackpot's results.

I'm also curious about why you choose to diverge from Ubisoft's "Tier system" in your qualification. Making people aim for an arbitrary top 0.5% seems counter-intuitive. Whats wrong with simply requiring people to achieve Tier 1 and bumping up the entry requirements as a result?

Finally, I think having consecutive jackpots as the only qualification method i unnecessary limiting. A better method would be:

EITHER
a) Achieve "Tier 1" in 4 consecutive Jackpot Tournaments
OR
b) Achieve "Tier 1" in at least 10 Jackpot Tournaments during the qualification period.

WesC

Uraxor
01-16-2014, 09:59 AM
I only just heard about this challenge and it sounds like a fantastic idea. Huge props to the people responsible for organizing it. Unfortunately i'm busy this time of the year so won't be able to participate.

Thanks & sorry to hear you cannot participate.


Relying on screen shots seems unnecessarily complicated (and open to abuse). Given this tournament has the support of Ubisoft, why not just ask them to provide a list of the final rankings for each jackpot. You can collate those lists easily and provide regular updates about who is close to qualifying. I'm suprised they don't already provide an online copy of each Jackpot's results.
Screenshot is an active signup; not everyone knows about the competition/wants to take part - we cannot just consider everyone qualified.


I'm also curious about why you choose to diverge from Ubisoft's "Tier system" in your qualification. Making people aim for an arbitrary top 0.5% seems counter-intuitive. Whats wrong with simply requiring people to achieve Tier 1 and bumping up the entry requirements as a result?
T1 is way too easy, that wouldn't be elite at all. Initially it should have been just Jackpot's front page (i.e. first 12 spots), but that was deemed too hard.


Finally, I think having consecutive jackpots as the only qualification method i unnecessary limiting. A better method would be:

EITHER
a) Achieve "Tier 1" in 4 consecutive Jackpot Tournaments
OR
b) Achieve "Tier 1" in at least 10 Jackpot Tournaments during the qualification period.

WesC
Notifications bar can only show up to 5 items at time. Also the consecutiveness shows player's dedication as well as ability to perform well constantly, not randomly.

Hope these answers help
Uraxor

Dipl0mate
01-16-2014, 10:08 AM
@M0rw47h : I agree sandylock has a very favorable matchup against kelthor but here is the point : why playing a deck which has obvious weakness ? There are tons of decks that have no straight hard counters. On the same page, playing sandal lock in this format seems like a huge gamble. Kelthor 4 cosmic balance + 4 rise of the nethermancer has not such a terrible matchup I guess. And it is the best case scenario for sandal. With a 15 cards sideboard you cant switch from one sandal to an other, the only way to do this is like you said after playing 2 sandal. But here again, it is gamble because you have to tell which deck you picked (and I guess it goes through an admin if the admin dont want to deal with things like "my opponent played it but said he was playing this") so you cant switch between the two decks once you know what deck your opponent play (this is to be confirmed indeed). Even if it is not the case, double sandal is an expected strategy I guess and people need an answer to this, and it should be fine.

About the usual way to predict metagame, it is all about personal preference but it does not look obvious at all that "metagame prediction" is more "interesting" than deck choice prediction. I find that you have way more information to use in the 2nd case and I prefer this way. Also losing to random deck unmetagamed is kinda frustrating but this is all about the deck choice, some are more solid against "random" than others. Exactly like here, we are asked to think our deck given this format.

Anyway I guess its your call, was just curious. We will see if the top 8 looks like double sandal / dhamiria. Imho a solid Ishuma with nice sideboard eats those 3 decks alive but it is just an opinion.

ZergRusher
01-16-2014, 10:53 AM
@M0rw47h & Dipl0mate

sideboarding will definitely make some matchups more even but in general i thing the game was build around hard counters (monsoons, Ward against Darkness, Fear, mass dispel being very cheap) and wasn't build to be played with sideboard. Having said that i'm very interested to see how it will turned out. IMHO sideboarding helps Ishuma the most.

WesleyCau
01-16-2014, 12:01 PM
Thanks & sorry to hear you cannot participate.


Screenshot is an active signup; not everyone knows about the competition/wants to take part - we cannot just consider everyone qualified.

T1 is way too easy, that wouldn't be elite at all. Initially it should have been just Jackpot's front page (i.e. first 12 spots), but that was deemed too hard.


Notifications bar can only show up to 5 items at time. Also the consecutiveness shows player's dedication as well as ability to perform well constantly, not randomly.

Hope these answers help
Uraxor

I think anyone who plays regularly enough (and seriously enough) to accidentally qualify for this tournament would want to play. The only reason they wouldn't play is that they didn't know about the challenge (or failed to screenshot their notifications).

re: To 0.5% vs T1.

Imagine a 10,000m running heat where the Top 8 runners qualify for the semi-final. Now imagine that you tell only part of the field that the Top 4 places win entry into a special event with a big cash prize. Rather than comfortably walking into a T8 position those runners would fight hard to come T4 while potentially better runners that don't know about the special prize would be content to finish 5th-8th. This is why top 0.5% isn't a fair qualification method.

If you really wanted to get the strongest and most consistent/dedicated players then top 8 or 16 players based on number of T1s in your season of choice would be the fairest way. To say that someone who makes T1 in every single tournament doesn't deserve to play in your tournament is silly.

Ideally, if Ubisoft wanted to get behind the idea of 'Jackpot Seasons' they could put together an excellent Grand Prix style point system and advertise it to all players.

Anyways thanks again for putting your time into running an event like this. I look forward to following the finals!

Djinn-n-Tonic
01-21-2014, 06:05 PM
Being a newish player (been playing for about 2mo lvl40) to mmdoc, but a long time MtG paper/online player I thought I would throw out my 2 cents on this tourney. First I think the fact that there are third party supported tournaments for this game is great and this one seems well organized. Secondly I feel that the qualifying requirements for this are really well laid out. Having only the top .5% qualify for the main event directly is fine given the length of time available to you to achieve the number of JP's needed to do so. I feel this way because their is a secondary qualifier for everyone else to play their way into the main event much like a GP of magic with last chance qualifiers. Because the requirements are so low to get into the LCQ its almost like there isn't any at all. My one and only gripe with this which is the Main Event having you make 3 decks with sideboards for all of them. Now being semi-new to the game I simply do not have all the required cards to build 3 T1 decks and why three? If you wanted a diverse field that could have anything in it like a JP ladder then why have decklists at all, why not just let people play any legal deck in their collection and not worry about sideboards? Having so many deck choice in a field makes it so there will be no real meta, every match is another gamble and makes your sideboard useless because your opponent can just switch decks entirely. The whole reason for a sideboard is to allow the one deck you are playing to adjust to the opponents deck choice in the meta-field.

Gripes aside I feel that your tournament is a great thing for MMDOC I saw the huge upswing in grinding on the JP ladder first hand, and I fully support any future events that may come the communities way. I hope that everyone who wants to participate in this event gets the chance too and supports it as much as they can so there will be more events in the future. The game as whole is great and I really would like to see it keep growing with player, third-party organizers, and creator support.

Uraxor
01-21-2014, 09:52 PM
Being a newish player (been playing for about 2mo lvl40) to mmdoc, but a long time MtG paper/online player I thought I would throw out my 2 cents on this tourney. First I think the fact that there are third party supported tournaments for this game is great and this one seems well organized. Secondly I feel that the qualifying requirements for this are really well laid out. Having only the top .5% qualify for the main event directly is fine given the length of time available to you to achieve the number of JP's needed to do so. I feel this way because their is a secondary qualifier for everyone else to play their way into the main event much like a GP of magic with last chance qualifiers. Because the requirements are so low to get into the LCQ its almost like there isn't any at all.
Thank you for the praise!


My one and only gripe with this which is the Main Event having you make 3 decks with sideboards for all of them. Now being semi-new to the game I simply do not have all the required cards to build 3 T1 decks and why three? If you wanted a diverse field that could have anything in it like a JP ladder then why have decklists at all, why not just let people play any legal deck in their collection and not worry about sideboards? Having so many deck choice in a field makes it so there will be no real meta, every match is another gamble and makes your sideboard useless because your opponent can just switch decks entirely. The whole reason for a sideboard is to allow the one deck you are playing to adjust to the opponents deck choice in the meta-field.
Actually, as someone who owns all the cards, this hasn't even occured to me. But then again, the top players are supposed to gather and fight - and those are expected to own large collections as well. But you are right, that asking for exactly 3 decks puts newer players, who can nonetheless beat the Jack, at disadvantage. I'll change it to up to 3 decks.
That goes with the second part of your comment. You have missed the bit in rules where it says (at least I hope so!) that games in playoff phase will be conducted live, with the Spectator mode. This allows us to implement a never-before-seen system where both players will initially select their Hero for a game. Once they both make their choice, their selection will be announced and after that they will be allowed to use their prepared sideboards - to tech out against the Hero, they know they will face. That is where tactics as well as knowledge of decks and deck building will make a huge impact. Sideboarding correctly (and having a correct sideboard) will be where skill and estimation comes in.
It is 3, because that allows to pick 2 'top' decks and one possibly 'weaker', which can be useful for its surprising power or in certain matchups. It also (hopefully) will provide diversity in play for the streams. I'd rather hope not to stream 5 consecutive Dhamiria mirrors.


Gripes aside I feel that your tournament is a great thing for MMDOC I saw the huge upswing in grinding on the JP ladder first hand, and I fully support any future events that may come the communities way. I hope that everyone who wants to participate in this event gets the chance too and supports it as much as they can so there will be more events in the future. The game as whole is great and I really would like to see it keep growing with player, third-party organizers, and creator support.
Thanks again and I hope my answers were explanatory enough.

trupiciel
01-23-2014, 01:27 AM
Anyway I guess its your call, was just curious. We will see if the top 8 looks like double sandal / dhamiria. Imho a solid Ishuma with nice sideboard eats those 3 decks alive but it is just an opinion.

Please stop trolling others into playing Ishuman Dipl0mate. Playing some mindgames already? You naughty boy :cool:

Uraxor! Can we pick one hero two times and build two different decks around him? If yes, will you provide x/x/x outline or any other method of differentiating between said decks when sideboarding live?

Uraxor
01-23-2014, 04:47 PM
Uraxor! Can we pick one hero two times and build two different decks around him? If yes, will you provide x/x/x outline or any other method of differentiating between said decks when sideboarding live?

Yes, you can pick one Hero more than once, if you feel the sideboard isn't good enough.
All decks will be posted at mmdocking, so for the live games you will be asked to specify which one do you mean to pick and the list will be forwarded to opponent.

Ludonith
01-28-2014, 10:48 AM
I have a question.

I already sent my submission for the Underdog qualifer because the qualifer stop the 30.1 but the Jack qualifer continu up to the 9.2. If I can get my 4 Jackpot in the top 0.5% between 30.1 and 9.2, do I qualify directly for the jack qualifier ? or it's too late because now I'm in the Underdog playoff ?

Uraxor
01-28-2014, 11:42 AM
I have a question.

I already sent my submission for the Underdog qualifer because the qualifer stop the 30.1 but the Jack qualifer continu up to the 9.2. If I can get my 4 Jackpot in the top 0.5% between 30.1 and 9.2, do I qualify directly for the jack qualifier ? or it's too late because now I'm in the Underdog playoff ?

I believe it's somewhere in the rules.
You have a choice - you can stay in Underdog Qualifiers (and Underdog Tournament) - but as soon as that starts (with you taking part) - you are not allowed to 'beat the Jack'.
What you are allowed to do is to withdraw your Underdog submission (before the deadline) and post 'beat the Jack' Qualifier at later date. At your own risk and consideration that if you fail to beat the Jack, you're out..

Hope that makes it clear!

sebouboubry
01-29-2014, 08:15 AM
hey ! where can I post my scrennshot ?


PS : I found sorry ! :)

Dipl0mate
02-05-2014, 11:06 AM
Please stop trolling others into playing Ishuman Dipl0mate. Playing some mindgames already? You naughty boy :cool:


Missed it ! To be honest, the more I think of it, the more I tell myself Jezziel is the way to go... Look how many sideboard option prime/light/air magic do offer !

trupiciel
02-05-2014, 05:55 PM
Missed it ! To be honest, the more I think of it, the more I tell myself Jezziel is the way to go... Look how many sideboard option prime/light/air magic do offer !

space saved for a reply; come back in 13 days from now

Dipl0mate
02-05-2014, 06:00 PM
space saved for a reply; come back in 13 days from now

I will be there, waiting...