neilzinho said on stream that one of the main reasons they arent considering an academy team is because they can't play in ascension, and academy teams would basically just screw the players they pick up over.
I think its fine if they play in ascension, but if they win they would have to be sold to an org which could get promoted. This has the flaw of 'selling slots' but we're already destined to have another 'the guard' situation if an unfavourable org qualifies anyway
nihso [#2]This makes sense actually wtf.
Astronomically insanely rare W Aayan take
Hell you mean, first?
Nachtel [#5]Riot already said they will be able to next year, they just won't be able to ascend to vct if they win
makes 0 sense, then they just take the slots of other orgs
NRGSUPERFAN [#6]if the spot can be given to a recognized org then i thinkits fine. i dont think selling the spot should be allowed tho cuz thats prob an easy 1 mil
But if they can't sell the spot then what's the point of even buying an academy team?
NRGSUPERFAN [#6]if the spot can be given to a recognized org then i thinkits fine. i dont think selling the spot should be allowed tho cuz thats prob an easy 1 mil
How is making 1 mil a bad thing? Esports needs more money not less
Nef0r0 [#7]it really depends on how many buyers there are
I think there should be demand, at least from the outside it seems val is one of the games (if not the only game) which can be sustainable long term for orgs
Nachtel [#5]Riot already said they will be able to next year, they just won't be able to ascend to vct if they win
really where? I was under the impression they can't qualify for ascension at all.
Aayan [#12]I think there should be demand, at least from the outside it seems val is one of the games (if not the only game) which can be sustainable long term for orgs
it does, but it is not the permanent slot, that's a problem. If the slot is worth a million you are GUARANTEED to keep it for 1 year only. That's where it becomes a little bit unsustainable. Franchising is sustainable for orgs like MIBR, yes they will probably get kicked in 2027, but throughout those 4 years they will remain there. IF you buy a slot there is a risk that A) your org goes into the ascension tournament (where it comes down to just one grand final, it is not a league) B) your org gets dropped completely into the regional leagues.
That was the system on LoL.
Riot doesn't want team sell slot, maybe the debat should focus on that, do you think that would be a problem ?
Also, wouldn't allowing aca to play ascension disincentivise other org to invest in T2 ?
Technically an aca team can play ascension and qual to T1 as long as they have 3GC player (In that situation, a structure would have 2 team in the T1)
To me it's important to buld an aca team for the future, and structure that will not do it, will miss a huge opportunity and be less competitive in 3 years
Nef0r0 [#16]it does, but it is not the permanent slot, that's a problem. If the slot is worth a million you are GUARANTEED to keep it for 1 year only. That's where it becomes a little bit unsustainable. Franchising is sustainable for orgs like MIBR, yes they will probably get kicked in 2027, but throughout those 4 years they will remain there. IF you buy a slot there is a risk that A) your org goes into the ascension tournament (where it comes down to just one grand final, it is not a league) B) your org gets dropped completely into the regional leagues.
thats a good point, they kind of screwed them selves with two different visions. In theory the academy teams and the relegation system are good individually, but if you have them both it can cause issues
nihso [#9]But if they can't sell the spot then what's the point of even buying an academy team?
i should've reworded it a bit better
a recognized org can buy it but a random ass buyer shouldnt be able to buy it.
Aayan [#19]thats a good point, they kind of screwed them selves with two different visions. In theory the academy teams and the relegation system are good individually, but if you have them both it can cause issues
that's why I doubt any buyers will come, you loan this slot from riot for like a million or so, yes you get that franchising buff but it doesn't mean shit if your team gets relegated. This is not sustainable, something like CS, where you just link salaries to the team placement and if the team is good you just get your big share from the major stickers or prize pools, no such thing in riot, sadly
Anguibok [#17]That was the system on LoL.
Riot doesn't want team sell slot, maybe the debat should focus on that, do you think that would be a problem ?
Also, wouldn't allowing aca to play ascension disincentivise other org to invest in T2 ?
Technically an aca team can play ascension and qual to T1 as long as they have 3GC player (In that situation, a structure would have 2 team in the T1)
To me it's important to buld an aca team for the future, and structure that will not do it, will miss a huge opportunity and be less competitive in 3 years
Yeah I think it is a fundamental issue that riot wants to stay away from 'selling slots', while I can see why its advantageous I think the downsides are too great. The main issue in LoL is that the orgs hold too much power over riot, but in valorant 10/12 teams are dependant on riot, so I think if it's only 2 slots per region it's actually possible to give some leverage, as it means the t2 scene becomes more competitive
If we can have tier 1 orgs sustain academy teams, it might actually be better for the scene for there to be less orgs in t2 (many reasons like stability, guaranteed investment, less org owners waking up randomly and deciding that they dont want to do esports anymore). This would mean the entry point for some orgs becomes after ascension, instead of at the start of the season which mitigates the risk of not qualifying, meaning that perhaps orgs which wouldn't field a tier 2 team would actually end up investing in valorant.
I think we're pretty far from seeing GC players in tier 1, tier 2 I can see soon but until we see GC players in ascension I think it's not a conversation to have yet
NRGSUPERFAN [#20]i should've reworded it a bit better
a recognized org can buy it but a random ass buyer shouldnt be able to buy it.
Makes sense
Laundry [#10]How is making 1 mil a bad thing? Esports needs more money not less
but that mil is going to org's pocket and riot don't want that
Aayan [#22]Yeah I think it is a fundamental issue that riot wants to stay away from 'selling slots', while I can see why its advantageous I think the downsides are too great. The main issue in LoL is that the orgs hold too much power over riot, but in valorant 10/12 teams are dependant on riot, so I think if it's only 2 slots per region it's actually possible to give some leverage, as it means the t2 scene becomes more competitive
If we can have tier 1 orgs sustain academy teams, it might actually be better for the scene for there to be less orgs in t2 (many reasons like stability, guaranteed investment, less org owners waking up randomly and deciding that they dont want to do esports anymore). This would mean the entry point for some orgs becomes after ascension, instead of at the start of the season which mitigates the risk of not qualifying, meaning that perhaps orgs which wouldn't field a tier 2 team would actually end up investing in valorant.
I think we're pretty far from seeing GC players in tier 1, tier 2 I can see soon but until we see GC players in ascension I think it's not a conversation to have yet
I'm not talking about a full GC team, 2 of them are already qualified for BR next split, we are talking about 3 GC player and 2 males, if you find 2 crack, one or 2 really good GC player (Flor ?), you might have a team able to compete ascention (Especially in region where ascention are really bad, like in Amer where the level is kinda low)
Also, I think aca team are sustainable, they no cost a lot and will reduce the price of the people you gonna buy when player will be ready, it's a worth investment if you are goo enough to detect young people
Nef0r0 [#21]that's why I doubt any buyers will come, you loan this slot from riot for like a million or so, yes you get that franchising buff but it doesn't mean shit if your team gets relegated. This is not sustainable, something like CS, where you just link salaries to the team placement and if the team is good you just get your big share from the major stickers or prize pools, no such thing in riot, sadly
You make valid points, but I think perhaps the academy system can actually be good for org investment. Think of an org like optic, who have no interest in investing in a tier 2 roster. Now imagine an academy team comes along and wins ascension, now optic have an entry point into tier 1, I think many other orgs would be happy to invest into that kind of team as it mitigates all the financial risk from tier 2
Anguibok [#25]I'm not talking about a full GC team, 2 of them are already qualified for BR next split, we are talking about 3 GC player and 2 males, if you find 2 crack, one or 2 really good GC player (Flor ?), you might have a team able to compete ascention (Especially in region where ascention are really bad, like in Amer where the level is kinda low)
Also, I think aca team are sustainable, they no cost a lot and will reduce the price of the people you gonna buy when player will be ready, it's a worth investment if you are goo enough to detect young people
Yeah I'm aware you don't mean a full team, but even then I think it'll be some time before we see them in ascension, I discussed something similar in a thread yesterday but I think before we fix GC we should be fixing the t2 system. If we have a good t2 system GC players and maybe even teams will naturally follow, maybe even without having to artificially promote marginalised groups through GC (this is very optimistic yes, but I think its possible within the next 4-5 years if they manage t2 correctly)
Aayan [#27]Yeah I'm aware you don't mean a full team, but even then I think it'll be some time before we see them in ascension, I discussed something similar in a thread yesterday but I think before we fix GC we should be fixing the t2 system. If we have a good t2 system GC players and maybe even teams will naturally follow, maybe even without having to artificially promote marginalised groups through GC (this is very optimistic yes, but I think its possible within the next 4-5 years if they manage t2 correctly)
How would you do that ?
To me a good way to hype T2, to give more visibility and attire investor, it's better to ensure diversity, so you can have so cross-national matchup
Aayan [#26]You make valid points, but I think perhaps the academy system can actually be good for org investment. Think of an org like optic, who have no interest in investing in a tier 2 roster. Now imagine an academy team comes along and wins ascension, now optic have an entry point into tier 1, I think many other orgs would be happy to invest into that kind of team as it mitigates all the financial risk from tier 2
It's better, but it's still paying money for a limited time slot, and also what stops the team which hosted this academy just taking the best players from it?
Anguibok [#28]How would you do that ?
To me a good way to hype T2, to give more visibility and attire investor, it's better to ensure diversity, so you can have so cross-national matchup
I would allow academy teams to play in ascension and ascend
(This would mean that the team can be sold, which can be a good thing if done correctly as I pointed above and in £26)
These academy orgs are also the ones who're most likely to try and field GC eligible players in the first place. But more importantly it means that external orgs looking for t1 only don't have to take any of the risk for investing in to tier 2. Over time this would give the ascension slot a value, then there will be 2 ways for an org to qualify, either you take the risk in tier 2 and get the slot for relatively cheap or you drop the bag and guarantee yourself into tier 1. The higher the value of the ascension slot becomes, the more the teams who take the first option will be willing to pay.
But you are right in saying there needs to be more visibility, VCL's greatest strength is being able to tap into the regional market but it simply doesn't do enough as of now.
Aayan [#30]I would allow academy teams to play in ascension and ascend
(This would mean that the team can be sold, which can be a good thing if done correctly as I pointed above and in £26)These academy orgs are also the ones who're most likely to try and field GC eligible players in the first place. But more importantly it means that external orgs looking for t1 only don't have to take any of the risk for investing in to tier 2. Over time this would give the ascension slot a value, then there will be 2 ways for an org to qualify, either you take the risk in tier 2 and get the slot for relatively cheap or you drop the bag and guarantee yourself into tier 1. The higher the value of the ascension slot becomes, the more the teams who take the first option will be willing to pay.
But you are right in saying there needs to be more visibility, VCL's greatest strength is being able to tap into the regional market but it simply doesn't do enough as of now.
Well we will have more visibility if they are more hype in T2, visibility isnt something that you can just pick, it's more : How we hype people, and I think the solution is ensuring diversity
Aayan [#30]I would allow academy teams to play in ascension and ascend
(This would mean that the team can be sold, which can be a good thing if done correctly as I pointed above and in £26)These academy orgs are also the ones who're most likely to try and field GC eligible players in the first place. But more importantly it means that external orgs looking for t1 only don't have to take any of the risk for investing in to tier 2. Over time this would give the ascension slot a value, then there will be 2 ways for an org to qualify, either you take the risk in tier 2 and get the slot for relatively cheap or you drop the bag and guarantee yourself into tier 1. The higher the value of the ascension slot becomes, the more the teams who take the first option will be willing to pay.
But you are right in saying there needs to be more visibility, VCL's greatest strength is being able to tap into the regional market but it simply doesn't do enough as of now.
And both of those ways are for a limited time slot, one bad year and you are out
Nef0r0 [#29]It's better, but it's still paying money for a limited time slot, and also what stops the team which hosted this academy just taking the best players from it?
let's look at teams like M80 APEKS and TSM, they are already paying money for pros to ascend, but they don't have any bundles or tier 1 stipends. If they were to invest into the situation above I think they would still end up making money due to bundle sales.
As for academy teams being picked apart maybe they shouldn't allow roster changes once ascension begins, or at least 3/5 of the players have to be sold or something, the point being I think that issue can be easily fixed by adding a rule
Aayan [#33]let's look at teams like M80 APEKS and TSM, they are already paying money for pros to ascend, but they don't have any bundles or tier 1 stipends. If they were to invest into the situation above I think they would still end up making money due to bundle sales.
As for academy teams being picked apart maybe they shouldn't allow roster changes once ascension begins, or at least 3/5 of the players have to be sold or something, the point being I think that issue can be easily fixed by adding a rule
The problem I see with team bundles is that they aren't giving enough, isn't the number still in 6 digits? Like 600k per team or something? You pay for salaries, rent an HQ in Berlin/LA, pay transfer fees, it still maybe a lot more than what the team gets
Anguibok [#31]Well we will have more visibility if they are more hype in T2, visibility isnt something that you can just pick, it's more : How we hype people, and I think the solution is ensuring diversity
There should be diversity yes, but it shouldn't be artificial (my opinion). If you promote it this way you will attract investors who don't actually care about the game and only care about their own appearances to the public.
The best way to achieve this is as you say more visibility, the way to do this is to advertise and promote challengers more, make it so new VCT fans aren't exclusively in to tier 1 only
Aayan [#35]There should be diversity yes, but it shouldn't be artificial (my opinion). If you promote it this way you will attract investors who don't actually care about the game and only care about their own appearances to the public.
The best way to achieve this is as you say more visibility, the way to do this is to advertise and promote challengers more, make it so new VCT fans aren't exclusively in to tier 1 only
If they are no artificial diversity, they will be no diversity, biggest subregion will just ruin the smaller subregion, it will just have a snowball effect, that litterrally what happenned to Taiwan and SEA in LoL
Nef0r0 [#34]The problem I see with team bundles is that they aren't giving enough, isn't the number still in 6 digits? Like 600k per team or something? You pay for salaries, rent an HQ in Berlin/LA, pay transfer fees, it still maybe a lot more than what the team gets
I think thats a separate issue with regards to bundle revenue, since orgs like MIBR or KOI are also suffering from it.
But compare it to now, what are TSM making? They are probably making a massive loss, with NA salaries they are easily losing 1M a year, say they go on to get sponsors and 600k from bundles they might even break even, or even go on to make a profit even if they had just invested that 1M into buying a slot
Aayan [#35]There should be diversity yes, but it shouldn't be artificial (my opinion). If you promote it this way you will attract investors who don't actually care about the game and only care about their own appearances to the public.
The best way to achieve this is as you say more visibility, the way to do this is to advertise and promote challengers more, make it so new VCT fans aren't exclusively in to tier 1 only
No artificial diversity = "region based domination" = 16 team champs has 6 american teams, 4 EMEA teams, 3 Chinese, 3 pacfiic (pure example) = region domination= CS2.0
Aayan [#37]I think thats a separate issue with regards to bundle revenue, since orgs like MIBR or KOI are also suffering from it.
But compare it to now, what are TSM making? They are probably making a massive loss, with NA salaries they are easily losing 1M a year, say they go on to get sponsors and 600k from bundles they might even break even, or even go on to make a profit even if they had just invested that 1M into buying a slot
rare vlr conversation that isn't immature
Aayan [#37]I think thats a separate issue with regards to bundle revenue, since orgs like MIBR or KOI are also suffering from it.
But compare it to now, what are TSM making? They are probably making a massive loss, with NA salaries they are easily losing 1M a year, say they go on to get sponsors and 600k from bundles they might even break even, or even go on to make a profit even if they had just invested that 1M into buying a slot
Sadly most esports orgs are working in a minus, reason why sentinels and faze going public with their shares went into an utter fucking collapse. Still, sponsors and bundles are related to how well the team does/how long the team stays in franchising. It is kinda similar to how the Big 6 formed in English Premier League, big dogs have no threat of relegation, while bottomfeeders are at a constant risk of getting relegated into worse financial situations. "Just breaking even" isn't what sponsors want to hear. This whole thing still turns into secure Vs insecure. Franchised teams can offer long term plans, most ascended teams cannot afford this, they need immediate results. And given that academies can be ascended, wouldn't it make sense for the academy to host people who are still in schools, so less than 18, so ineligible?
Discord