Yo, Champ In Making! A Commentary on the New Championship Points System
By now we’ve all read the news about championship points. For those who haven’t, the top 12 CP totals in North America will receive invites to compete in the World Championships, though the National Champion and top 4 in the nation are no longer guaranteed a spot. Chris Brown, Video Game Tournament Planner at The Pokémon Company International, had this to say:
“The Pokémon Video Game Championship Series is a series of tournaments that ultimately crowns a World Champion. Some of these tournaments have different Championship Points weighting based on our expected level of competition. Players are rewarded accordingly for their success at more challenging tournaments. The purpose with this change in invitations is to encourage Pokémon players to participate throughout the year, including in Wi-Fi tournaments, so that the World Invitations are given to top performing players in the VG Championship Series of tournaments.”
Most of the recent complaints from fans revolve around a subtle but very influential change TPCi made: it is now a Video Game Championship Series. As in, the new VGC year will be a cumulative effort.
Concerns
While I commend him on succeeding in his goal for the most part, I have few concerns that will arise from the system — not necessarily flaws, but concerns nonetheless.
Concern 1: National Champions and runner ups are not guaranteed invitations to Worlds.
Anyone who has taken the time to do the math, or looked at someone else doing the math, will want a disclaimer about how the odds of this happening are astronomically low. But the sheer fact that this is mathematically possible raises two concerns: that the winner of Nationals and the poster child of the year is not guaranteed a spot in the World Championships and that one of the greatest incentives to even go to Nationals as a spectator has been marginally diminished.
In previous years of the Video Game Championships, back when you had to qualify for Nationals through a Regional, the VGC season was fascinating for one reason: upsets. Players who had a rough start to the season could sneak by in the Nationals LCQ and still do just as well — in 2010 (and I’d wager 2011 though I’m not sure), we had an instance of a player barely squeaking by in the Nats LCQ and then qualifying for Worlds via the top cut. We saw Cinderella stories of people we’d never expect qualifying going all the way, and it was really a sight to see.
Realistically speaking, I don’t believe the National Champion of 2013 won’t qualify for Worlds. Under this new system, whoever goes to Worlds will have to be reliably good, and all of the National Champions thus far have more than proven themselves in this arena. But what this does, however, is take away spots from those potential rising stars, or those that have just had a rough go at the beginning. Now, someone who sat out this season or choked the first Regional but magically came back and placed 4th or so in Nationals would still not be guaranteed a spot, despite showing a strong improvement and overall performance at the highest level tournament the United States has to offer. Sure, the National Champion probably will get in, but what about those that just barely lost?
Not to say this is actually a problem as much as it is a perspective issue, but I think some fans were initially distressed because we were somehow imprinted with the notion that CP would be an alternative way to qualify for Worlds other than Nationals, rather than Nationals just being one more way to get CP to qualify for Worlds. This probably upset a handful of people largely because in comparison to previous years Nationals feels less like the premiere event of the country and more like just another tournament, albeit with bigger stakes.
Of course, Cinderella stories can still come in the form of someone barely getting enough points in Regionals and then Winning Nationals, or something to that effect, even if the idea of a random no-name showing us all who he or she is becomes no more. But that brings me to my next point.
Concern 2: The Worlds invites will statistically favor young, rich people who have been hardcore from the start.
It sounds harsh to say, but the cold-blooded truth of this structure is that if two people of equal skill wanted to win invitations to the World Championships, the one with more time and money on his or her hands would probably have a greater chance.
Under this system, you have to consistently do well in tournaments and play for the majority of the season to qualify for Worlds — and that’s great for making our Worlds representatives a skilled bunch, but it requires you to also consistently go to tournaments. Yes, this was the plan all along with the whole VGC Series thing, but creating a system that necessitates players going to every event or nearly every event will inevitably make those that can only afford to go to one or two events this year even more discouraged. Remember previous years where dear friends of ours could only afford to go to the next level of competition if they placed well in the previous one, and how heartwarming it was to see them take a top spot in Nats?
But not everyone can be so lucky. Someone, and I’m thinking largely of the players in the Junior and Senior divisions here who do not have the disposable income of the more independent old farts, will inevitably fail to qualify simply because they couldn’t afford to keep going to tournaments. More specifically, anyone who is relying on an income that must support a family rather than just him or herself will be be at a significant disadvantage by opportunity alone. Let’s face it: the economy is hitting us all pretty hard, and this isn’t helping.
Solutions
None of the following suggestions are perfect, but in the interest of better serving the community around us I thought I’d start discussion on a few potential ideas to improve the Championship Point system.
Solution 1: Make a top cut from Nationals qualify in addition to CP total top cuts.
This way, we get the best of both worlds. Cinderella stories are welcomed, and people who are consistently doing well will be rewarded. Not only that, but this will give more opportunity and incentive for players, because the top 4/8/16 in Nationals will take different spots in Worlds than the CP top cuts, meaning people who are consistently above average and those who want one more chance will both feel the same incentive to keep trying.
This will also encourage people to continue to pick up the game mid-season; under the new rules, anyone who misses the first few tournaments will be too far behind in the standings to potentially accomplish anything, and this would prevent that.
If nothing else, I think one of the biggest frustrations with the new system is that Nationals is being portrayed as less influential than in previous years. Making it weigh heavier in any way, including top cuts getting invites, would ease the minds of fans.
Solution 2: Make CP a long term currency that players must spend to qualify for Worlds.
TPCi has one thing that I agree with: loyal, hardworking players who are consistently good need to be rewarded. But if you really want to guarantee long term attendance, why not make CP something players can save up over time?
One of the biggest problems with the competitive aspect of anything is that players with low self esteem will consistently think, “I’ll never be as good as these guys. What’s the point of trying?” But if they had a goal — some large amount of CP and the promise that if they played for a few years and truly devoted themselves, they could eventually qualify for the World Championships – I can almost guarantee better long term commitment to showing up. The National Champions and runner ups and those generally good people would still get enough points each year to consistently qualify, so that wouldn’t be a problem, but then we’d also have players who are dedicated to the company for years also seeing a reward for their efforts and incentive to keep trying.
I admit schematics would require more thought than my initial suggestion if this were to ever happen; an RSVP system (possibly first come first serve to limit the number of people attending in a given year) would have to be considered for crowd control reasons. But right now, if we want to reward players that are consistently good but don’t want to discourage players who can’t afford to go to every tournament, this system would still encourage larger turnouts than what we have, while still accomplishing the same goals.
Solution 3: Announce new systems before the season starts next time.
This has nothing to do with anything I’ve said so far, but I think it’s fair to say TPCi screwed over a significant portion of the community by not telling us these rules sooner. As much as I love having a bye at regionals, one of the biggest consequences of announcing them mid season will be forcing those who start this next Regional (or, Arceus forbid, the Spring Regional) will have a significant disadvantage compared to everyone else, both in that Regional and in the snowballing effects of the season. If I hadn’t gone to the previous Regionals or did tremendously poorly, I’d feel a little discouraged going into these next few, and I can certainly imagine a few other players across the country just sitting out due to sheer hopelessness.
Final thoughts
Don’t get me wrong: this new system has some cool features, and it will most likely accomplish its main goal if the only purpose is to increase turnout and bring high level players to Worlds. But like all previous VGC rulesets, it’s a work in progress, and I sincerely hope that TPCi will consider modifications for upcoming years. We can’t forget about the little guy in all this, whether the little guy is the new star just reaching full potential mid season or just someone who simply can’t afford to dump time and money on this game for an entire year just for a chance at Worlds. The Video Game Championship Series has the final world emphasized now, yes, but at the end of the day they’re still designed for the people.
About the Author
Chalkey is a Part-Time Editor for Nugget Bridge. Outside of Pokemon, Chalkey makes his living through running a small homeless shelter in Boston, focusing largely on helping clients search for jobs, apartments, and other charities for various resources. As a writer, he also works for Retroware.
Related Posts
New Mechanics Introduced in VGC 2016 →
VGC ’16 Pokémon Speed Tiers →
Hyper Offense Analysis – BadIntent’s Evil Thoughts →
