#Gauntlet infinite grind needs to change.

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

simple oxide
#

The Main Issue: Infinite Grind
Right now, success in Gauntlet is determined more by who can play the most games rather than who is actually the best player. This also limits how many people can realistically participate.

On the first day, some players managed 22 games in 24 hours, meaning they barely slept. This isn’t sustainable. Players feel forced to grind non-stop or risk falling behind, leading to burnout rather than a true competitive experience.

Flaws in the Current Point System
The current structure heavily favors only top placements:

1st - 8 points
2nd - 4 points
3rd - 2 points
4th - 1 point
This creates an unhealthy meta where most players play for 1st place, since anything less isn’t competitive. Some players forfeit early when they think they can’t win, which lowers the overall quality of games.

Proposed Solution

  1. Extend the Tournament to a Weekly Format
    Instead of a 3-day grind, Gauntlet should be a weekly event to improve competition and sustainability.

A larger prize pool (~$1,000) would allow more paid positions, making participation more rewarding:

1st - $340
2nd - $200
3rd - $150
4th - $100
5th - $60
6th - $50
7th - $40
8th - $30
9th - $20
10th - $10
More paid positions mean more players stay engaged, keeping competition high without making it all about grinding.

  1. Switch to an Average Point System
    Instead of total points, rankings should be based on average score per game.

Players must play at least 20 games per week to qualify.
Their average points per game determines their final standing.
New point distribution:

1st - 10 points
2nd - 8 points
3rd - 7 points
4th - 6 points
5th - 4 points
6th - 3 points
7th - 2 points
8th - 1 point
This approach rewards consistency and skill instead of just non-stop grinding. Players who perform well but can’t play 10+ hours a day still have a fair chance to compete.

Final Thoughts
Right now, the system only benefits 4-5 players who can grind the most while still playing at a high level. Over time, burnout will lead to fewer participants, weakening the competitive scene.

The proposed changes—more paid positions and an average score system—would:

Make Gauntlet more competitive
Reduce excessive grinding
Make it more accessible for a wider player base

Update: After Hollow pointed out that this system could be abused by smurfs, there should also be a rule that smurfs do not count towards the rewards.

near magnet
#

The leaderboard idea is genius but i agree that the current rules only incentivize 4-5 people to grind and compete

This event was for slickz, hollow, fox and web3

The experience even for those isnt good as 1/4 (you) chose that its not worth it to play 16 hours for 1st place. Hollow and fox want to stop to play and just split the money

As someone who isnt in the 4 mentionned above, with the rules suggested i would certainly play my 20 games and feel incentivized to play more to get a better avg and shoot my shot at rewards

Im sure even the casual players would feel like playing at least 20 games to shoot their shot

rigid elbow
#

@sharp delta

clever agate
#

the crashes and bugs just make this have to be a way worse format than it needed to be

sharp delta
#

We can t fix the crashes Hollow, we hope the upcoming changes will get rid of these nasty bugs/crashes, freeze etc.

clever agate
#

that's what i mean, realistically it's gonna be fucked one way or another

sharp delta
#

At the end of the six days event we will see how many lobbies we reached, beside those 4 players (due to the fact that lobbies starts with 8 players) You will explain to me why all these "casual players" participated. Maybe coz they like to play even if they aren t top players? dunno. We will see.

simple oxide
spring citrus
#

I like all of this. Id even suggest making it top 15 or 20 and not having as much of a difference at the top end. Especially if you dont go average and keep it as is

clever agate
#

I'd just do a smurf challange and have the prizepool based on rank achieved in x period

sharp delta
#

Smurf Limited Grind will be a good name for it yeah

spring citrus
#

actually not a bad idea haha

short kiln
#

after 1st day some players stop grind, when they see can't touch first places

sharp delta
#

why not top 50 and give em 20 dollars each just to be "democratic" and reward who plays and not the best performers. ah..

short kiln
#

i agree - that give price to more that 4 people good idea. but with current prize pull it's hard to realize, so it will worth as reward/spend time to farm points
i agree that limited games also better

clever agate
#

i mean this isn't the best performance, we're averaging in the 5s, this is the most no lifers

sharp delta
#

yeah..the "Infinite Grind" was truly self explanatory concept, I agree

burnt schooner
#

The idea was never about playing for a few days, taking money from Illuvium, and leaving the game empty. The goal was to keep the servers active, reduce queue times, and allow players to enjoy the game more. Everyone knows there are crashes, so it would be great if players reported them to help the team fix them faster. And in return for your time, you’d receive some rewards.

Of course, some people play full-time—that’s what they do. But for those of us who work and don’t have much time, it’s great to come home, enjoy the game, and not have to wait 15–30 minutes just to get into a match.

#

Some people are here to build for the long term, and I truly respect the @sharp delta for ideas like this. Since our community is still small, we should come together and also consider the well-being of the game. Additionally, there will be a leaderboard with significant prizes, providing even more incentive to stay engaged.

signal widget
simple oxide
burnt schooner
signal widget
sharp delta
#

is it Sl1ckz or FF-Advantage talkin? /confused

burnt schooner
# simple oxide I'm curious, what about my suggestion do you think would be worse? My suggestion...

I find that a three-day event schedule works better for me compared to a weekly format, and I'd like to explain why.

As a full-time employee with a two-hour daily commute, my availability during the weekdays is quite limited. However, I have the opportunity to play during the weekends, specifically over a three-day period. This allows me to participate in at least one of the events and achieve a ranking of 1-4.

Given these circumstances, the three-day format aligns better with my schedule and enables me to engage more effectively.

#

And 3 days i can just enjoy the game chill 🙌

simple oxide
near magnet
# burnt schooner I find that a three-day event schedule works better for me compared to a weekly ...

In a weekly format not only you could compete for all events (all weeks) but youd also be able to truly compete and have the same odds than anyone else because anyone who plays at least 20 games would have their avg score counts

I find myself in the same situation as you and for the current event theres no reason to play for me but with the suggested rules here i would definitely find myself playing a lot

The suggestion brought by slickz here is not to undermine the current event but simply to improve it (as for more people playing, less queue time for all)

sharp delta
#

Valar Morghulis, Valar Dohaeris.

clever agate
#

problem is if i get shit scores i can just make a smurf

simple oxide
clever agate
#

i still think an actual ladder ladder is the best thing to do

simple oxide
rigid elbow
cyan osprey
#

Sorry guys, this current system was literally made to have better / quicker que times, thats literally it, nothing else, and its working. The only other thing missing is a leaderboard within Illuvium itself like in the past. This event specifically is made for constant queues, theres other events for best players.

sharp delta
#

"I find myself in the same situation as you and for the current event theres no reason to play for me but with the suggested rules here i would definitely find myself playing a lot" Actually you played for years w/out a penny as reward..but now you will not play coz the money is the deal right? /understood.

simple oxide
cyan osprey
#

youre thinking for yourself rather than the better for the game

sharp delta
#

You are missing one thing: true, you only suggest improvements but nothing original or new ideas..this is easier, I agree.

near magnet
simple oxide
simple oxide
near magnet
cyan osprey
simple oxide
cyan osprey
sharp delta
#

but then Foxspirit will kick you out..so..it s a problem lol

simple oxide
burnt schooner
cyan osprey
sharp delta
#

less queue time is beneficial

simple oxide
cyan osprey
#

the reason its like this is because the system was literally made for it to be like this

kindred gorge
#

Personally I can’t always commit to “20 games in a week” just because my schedule, so if there is a 3 day period and I may not even need 20 games but it’s likely I’ll get a queue because people are grinding for that 3 day period. For me obviously it’s not the money reward, but the fact that I actually can queue in under 20 mins, but if I was interested in the money then I would say committing to a 3 day format give me more opportunity and given that queues are shorter probably more chances and will to play if I know I get a game quicker

cyan osprey
burnt schooner
simple oxide
cyan osprey
burnt schooner
#

And stay and secure youre spot

cyan osprey
#

well when they get fatigued theyll play a lil less than they normally do which would be the same amount you do or whatever

kindred gorge
#

I think we’ve learned that if people can qualify in one day for the entire week some will just do that and stop

spring citrus
simple oxide
# kindred gorge Personally I can’t always commit to “20 games in a week” just because my schedul...

On the first day of this event, people played 20+ games. In this format, you actually need to play more if you want to have a chance, not less. As for queue times, it’s debatable whether they would be shorter or longer with my suggestion, but I personally believe that over a longer period of time, my suggestion would result in better queue times because more people would feel incentivized to compete.

kindred gorge
#

Also it’s kinda silly because you guys could literally just do both and then everyone’s issues are solved

burnt schooner
kindred gorge
clever agate
#

it's more brain damage than dedication

kindred gorge
burnt schooner
#

Nobody make you to do it Sir it youre choice

cyan osprey
spring citrus
#

Sounds like most agree increasing the amount of players receiving rewards would be better. Personally I think Min games + best average is the best way to go. Not sure about 3 day vs 1 week though

sharp delta
#

The only thing you achieved @simple oxide is having me and Hayez leaving the guild (the only two people working on events for HYPE since last spring) beside the truly good host by Caveman, so now you are free to craft innovative concept and have your events, all good.

clever agate
cyan osprey
sharp delta
#

GG by nature

simple oxide
#

@kindred gorge If we’re going to be serious about this, isn’t it important to listen to the players who are actually participating and how they feel? A lot of the people playing feel it's more of a pain than fun. What do you think would be most beneficial in the long run?

cyan osprey
#

by a lot he means a few

sharp delta
#

that s why we have 3 times the lobbies we normally had...for the fatigue

burnt schooner
#

@simple oxide what player do you mean ?

cyan osprey
#

rich said a very simple statement, make another event with your rules and have both running

kindred gorge
simple oxide
# cyan osprey by a lot he means a few

From the players at the top who have responded to this, all seem positive about my suggestion. So right now, it’s 100%, but if you want to use the term 'few,' that’s fine. 😊

kindred gorge
#

We have 3 different style events currently

#

It’s impossible to please everyone

#

Trust me

clever agate
#

there's 'madness' type events in other games, where you just have a set pool of money, a 4-6-8 hour window of time to play, and the money is distributed based on points everyone gets something, but this doesn't work without thousands of $

sharp delta
#

Just be another "Quants clone" and copy the idea..not a big deal eh.

cyan osprey
#

its crazy to me that these guys a trying to break a working system. how about just add onto it with another event you think is good and have both working at same time

sharp delta
kindred gorge
#

My way fixes everyone’s issues:

  1. shorter queue times
  2. More events for more types of players
  3. More rewards for more types of players
  4. No need to argue over 1 particular style of event
  5. Players have choice to participate in what they want
#

So whoever wants to organise another style tournament all you have to do is organise it like @sharp delta has been doing and then get with me, we have a group of tournament organisers we add you to and the bam we have another tournament/ladder? with @simple oxide rules

#

Then one day I never have to use this gif again

short kiln
#

just limit games/day - 5-10. who get better result at better position. if it will be 10 - no way you can play 1 more try with smurf

#

and it will be still fast que time. but with this rules, i have play 16 hours-day, to get my placement

cyan osprey
rigid elbow
short kiln
sharp delta
#

wait until there will be negative points for 5th to 8th..the pain will be real then.

cyan osprey
short kiln
short kiln
sharp delta
#

prolly yes coz you are a really good player.

cyan osprey
# short kiln ?

like leaving the matches, you know what im talking about dont act like you dont man.
which is why negative points def need to be in

regardless good job on amount of time played, that was the purpose of the event

cyan osprey
#

i didnt place in the top 4 and im not even salty because ive been getting constant queues after each other

short kiln
#

if i leave from games - how my result will be around 5 points per game? if leave count? just think a bit

short kiln
cyan osprey
cyan osprey
sharp delta
#

hollow wants the supercar too eh

short kiln
cyan osprey
#

this is a different event.

crisp verge
#

I'm done with this. This whole debacle happened because slicks was upset. @near magnet is his fan boy and chose slickz over @sharp delta and I. We have hosted the best most professional tournaments/events around. This is an event not a tournament. Why because this game is dead and it takes 30 min to load into ranked. What we have here is a bunch of greedy pirates that dont care for the game but cash in their pocket. Patate was scared to lose slickz to phantom guild. Phantom is usually where drama starts. I don't know another guild that makes a 1.5 hr long hate video to other guilds. With that said they do host some nice events, when they aren't giving out rewards to wrong answers on trivia or ehst under wear was jimbo wearing. I wish the best for ilv as a whole. But with internal fighting it's a cancer. Start fasting cut out the cancer. Quants event made ranked lobby wait times do able. Keep milking the cow guilds.

spring citrus
#

Btw I upvoted this because I like the suggestions not because I think it "needs to change". I think its great as is and doesnt need to change at all. Main suggestions I like is more players winning not just 4.

Sounds like a few things happening here. Not enough appreciation for the work quants has done and too many spam complaints over the last few events, often not constructive/justified at all. Maybe this has led to this thread feeling more like hating on the event rather than just feedback/suggestions

sharp delta
rigid elbow
kindred gorge
#

Maybe time to close it as they said they are going to run their own event

near magnet
#

Weve let quants run the events as its what he wanted to do and is good at organising them. We all appreciate the work, passion and good ideas he brought but some times, like for this current event, I and the players disagree with the execution and rules. Quants has shown to have a different perspective and be close to feedback like this thread shows

Its not about choosing slickz or quants/hayez, this even started before slickz was here

Hyperion stands to be the #1 competitive guild and the best at everything it does. Some events were not supporting what we stand for and i couldnt influence the outcome passively after multiple attempts so as a leader i had to step up and put my feet down for the guild

Quants on his side only wants to manage the events if he has the final say on the rules and execution so it doesnt work anymore and thats why the separation

No hard feeling, and this thread is simply slickz making a suggestion to see what the players think

In no way this thread is trying to attack the current event or organizers. The goal of the event is to get less queue time, and of course as theres now a leaderboard its better than when there was no leaderboard, but its not achieving its goal well in our opinion because this structure only incentivize 4-5 people while making it a worst experience than it needs to be for those and the rest. The suggested change are to incentivize all of those who can play the minimum 20 games in a week to play which should result in the least queue time possible while making it a more enjoyable experience for all

simple oxide
# kindred gorge Maybe time to close it as they said they are going to run their own event

Yeah, I think it's good to close the thread because it turned into more of an argument with insults rather than a discussion about improving the tournament structure and player experience, which was the goal of the post. @kindred gorge You came up with a good solution so both parties can be happy. Time to move on, and we can try to make the best of Illuvium in our separate ways 🙏