Night:

ON OFF

Spoilers:

ON HIDDEN

6

I fucking hate franchising

posted in General Discussion

Comments:

Threaded Linear

← View full thread

#35

Nef0r0

2

Frags

+

–

1.) a team ascends, has to fight tooth and nail to get to champs because then they drop into the ascension tournament. If they are eliminated due to being unlucky then they might have their players stolen because talented players don't want to waste one year in tier 2 instead of a year in tier 1, therefore making them weaker and forcing them to find weaker alternatives
2.) poor phrasing, it doesn't encourage you losing games, it doesn't punish you enough, e.g. mibr
3.) franchising does affect the length of the career cause the number of slots is limited, NA can only field 6-7 duelists MAX, anyone else is surplus, forcing anyone in the duelist slot to be in the hot seat and there is nowhere to fall back on
4.) I give this one to you
5.) it has to do with franchising because having more than 3 events + stages will force riot to increase their spending and they do not find it profitable

#37

Mortadelo

-1

Frags

+

–

1 I see, but that is quite literally what happens in Open circuits aswell, established teams get invited while upcoming teams have the disadvantage of having to of though the whole qualifier. Also again, you can have a franchising system that doesn't have that problem, before the changes tier 2 teams didn't have that pressure, they had 2 years guaranteed. So your problem is not intrinsically with franchising

2 Sure fair enough. But if MIBR doesn't improve next year or the one after they're gonna be kicked form franchising and that is punishment. Also not being punished for 1 singular bad season is part of why franchising is good and why we get stories like TH this year. But yes I agree

3 There is a place to fall back on, tier 2, the fact that tier 2 is not stable in Valorant has nothing to do with franchising. For example LOL, they have successful tier 2 and legendary 10 year careers of players. So no, length of career is not intrinsically a problem of franchising, maybe of the current format (I don't agree)

5 Gonna use the same argument, LOL has franchising and does not have a lack of events.

Let me approach this differently so you understand my point better. Imagine Riot hires you tomorrow, they tell you you cannot change franchising itself, but you can make any change you want to the format/schedule/tier2. Do you feel like you could find a way of fixing all of those issues without breaking franchising?

#41

Nef0r0

2

Frags

+

–

1.) I am still talking about franchising in the current set of rules though. The team's position in an open circuit depends on how good the team is. If an established org starts going to shit (e.g. Fnatic, NiP, astralis in cs) nothing will save them because there is no system preventing this. They can get back by getting good. The hierarchy built by strength is always better than the one built on money sportswise
2.) The fact that franchising houses and allows this mediocrity for 4 years now is concerning
3.) Tier 2 has lower salaries, and only 1 chance to improve for 1 year
5.) because lol is more profitable
if riot were to hire me, or even Jesus Christ, no one is solving that franchising problem. I will however post a counter question. why was everyone in europe so against the Super League despite all of the big teams being in debt, because it would ''kill the competition and turn football into a show'' but then everyone just said ''franchising? fair enough.'' Why? what was different about it?

#43

Mortadelo

-3

Frags

+

–

I actually love the Superliga tho lol. And now that you mention it the new format did have promotion and demotion very similarly to VCT. People hated it because they didn't bother to see the format had changed from the original one and had a bad impression

I don't know if you're not understanding my point or just don't want to. I agree with every single problem you mentioned, it's not about that. Imo you're simply blaming those problems on the wrong cause, franchising is just one more part of a system that is wrong, but the part is not necessarily wrong. Idk how else to explain it, a franchising system without all of those problems is definitely possible in my eyes. But let's just agree to disagree I suppose

#44

Nef0r0

2

Frags

+

–

so what is your fix then? promotion/demotion makes it a league, not franchising.

#46

Mortadelo

-3

Frags

+

–

It's never been franchising in the first place, teams don't really own the spots. Just a way of calling it I suppose. And let me read the original problems and try to solve them

ascended teams always at a disadvantage

They will always have more pressure but I think they should guarantee them 2 years like before and only have the second year teams do the Playoff -> Ascension Champs -> retain spot thing

system which encourages losing games

Have the contract revision be every 2/3 years instead of 4

careers which last 2-3 years max

Make tier 2 more stable to give the players a place to fall back on. I would probably heavily reduce the amount of VCL's in EMEA to 3 or 4, condense the viewers and the quality orgs. create rivalries between countries and make each other play against one another more than fucking once a year. And most importantly extend their season

shitty formats

I would make none shitty formats xD

lack of events

I would add more events xD

#47

Nef0r0

2

Frags

+

–

Based, great solutions, getting new orgs in t2 might be tough but manageable

#50

Mortadelo

-3

Frags

+

–

There's orgs interested in valorant, it's a big esport. But Riot needs to fix A LOT of things

I've heard Heroic NIP and Quadrant are joining Polaris next year for example

#51

Nef0r0

2

Frags

+

–

The main problem I see that they are in one region and only one can go fight for ascension no?

#52

Mortadelo

-2

Frags

+

–

Yes, but more orgs benefits them, more viewers etc. I think competition is good, if you can't beat those guys you can't beat everyone else

continue thread →

Sign up or log in to post a comment