The Dota Pro Circuit has been a great addition to the Dota 2 esports scene. It has created an year with far more events so we see the best teams compete against each other far more often. It has also created an incredible incentive for teams to try all year round and build into The International. Finally it has given life back to the third party tournament organizers. There have been plenty of positives, but there are ways to improve the DPC for the next year. Here is my list of what should change for the next year.

Patching

I think the two week patching system has failed. There isn’t enough time for teams to prepare for tournaments, even if patches didn’t get released mid tournament. It can also vary results as one of the least understood parts about patching is that a patch can affect teams in vastly different ways. We need only look at the Dota 2 Asian Championships to see how Pangolier made Mineski an even more dangerous team. The patching system in its current iteration, the cycling system feels random. There are plenty of teams that can adapt, but only if they happen to have the right player or set of players that can take advantage of whatever the patch is giving out.

This in turn has hurt teams that cannot refine strategy over a longer period of time. So I think it’s far better if we abandon this experiment and change the patching to be somewhere between 1-3 months. Not so short that teams and pros can’t delve into the depths of Dota and not so long that it gets stale. A potential drawback is casual enjoyment, but without actual statistical proof it’s just hearsay and I haven’t seen any data that proves it one way or another. Finally quality of life patches can come out whenever, I don’t see a problem with those.

Improving the Majors and Minors

Right now, Majors need to be a bit more strict. I personally enjoy the amount of times I get to see the best teams compete against each other, but it doesn’t seem fair if a Major and a Minor has the same field of teams, but a winner from one gets more points than the winner of another (Newbee comes to mind). At the same time the amount of teams, formats, and patches can vary the results and we want every team to have a fair chance to win each tournament. Some have also complained that there are too many Majors so they don’t feel as special.

So what I’d do is restrict Majors to a minimum of 16 teams. Top eight from the DPC get invited. If it is the first Major, then only invite the surviving top teams from TI8 and make the rest open qualifiers. In a normal minor the eight qualifier slots should be split like this. Six online qualifiers for the six regions, NA/SEA/CIS/CN/EU/SA. The final two qualifier spots should be open LAN qualifier slots where teams have to travel to the tournament itself and play in a mini-tournament to get the final slot into the tournament.

The reason I want this is because one of the biggest criticisms through the DPC was the allocation of regional online qualifier slots. The problem with that is no tournament organizer can accurately assess how to split the qualifier spots between popular teams, good teams, and regional teams. So this solves all of them as you get all of them to fight it out highlander style to see who survives. Another option is to keep it the same as now and leave it to the organizer, but I think my option adds a bit more hype, prestige, and differentiates the Major from the Minors even further.

As for Minors I think they should have somewhere between 8-12 teams. They also have qualifier spots, but in the case of Minors, it should be up to the tournament organizers to figure it out. As far whether or not top DPC teams should be invited or not is a complicated issue. I can see why tournament organizers need them, but it dilutes the impact of the Majors. So I think a good alternative to that is to have Minors only have 1-2 invites. The rest of the slots are all online qualifiers. Tournament organizers still get 1-2 popular teams. The rest of the system will mean that the teams will have to go through the entire qualifier process and so if a top DPC team is adamant about going, they will have to go through the same road as everyone else. This will likely create a larger differentiation between Majors and Minors, allows a tier of competition below the top, and gives better characterization between the tournaments.

Finally the format needs to be a bit more strict. For me, I think no team should be eliminated without playing a bo3 as Dota 2 as a competitive game makes the most sense as a bo3 game.

Scheduling

I think Valve did a great job last year with scheduling this year as there were no conflicts between Dota 2 tournaments. However they did a lackluster jobs with online qualifiers. I’d like for Valve to take a more hands on approach to the online qualifiers as we’ve had multiple times where teams couldn’t participate because it was logistically impossible to do so.

Points and Transfer Window

I think the points system is fairly good the way it is now. I like how it’s a bit more point heavy towards the end so that the best teams that are closer to TI are more likely to get in. The problem with emphasizing it too much though is that teams won’t try as hard earlier on in the year, so it’s hard to balance, but in general, ending the season with a Super Major seems like a smart idea.

Second, I want the points to go down to the top 8 for the Majors (16 team tournaments). I’m fine with the Minors only having the top 4 getting the points as they are less points so you can’t dilute that anymore. I haven’t figured out the math, but I’d do something like:

1500 points total for a Major:

1st – 500

2nd – 300

3rd/4th – 150 (Or 175-125 split in the case of a 3rd/4th decider)

Top 8 – 100

The final thing I want to talk about is the transfer window. It is put under this section because teams can manipulate the DPC so that they can get boosted into a high position in the DPC, like when Ilya “Lil” Ilyuk joined Na`Vi (though that’s moot now). In my view, there should be no roster lock at all until about 50% of the DPC points have been allocated. This is a compromise between the current system of roster locks and the old days.

The reason I want this is because I feel that roster locks are too hectic and don’t give enough time for roster to pick up players and experiment over a good amount of time. With this version I’ve put together teams get a lot more team to be deliberate and calculated in how they form. At the same time, teams will eventually have to decide on a final five and give the stability that Valve wants from the scene. Finally by putting it at 50% of the DPC points, you can avoid teams deliberately trying to game the system.

Final Note

The last thing I want to talk about that I know won’t happen is in-game monetization. A lot of the community have complained about the facebook stream, but as far as I can tell it’s the only way that some of these tournament organizers are making profit. The only other choice is to go pay-per-view and I doubt that will go down very well.

So I think a great alternative is to go back to the past and allow Majors/Minors to have battle passes/compendiums as it’s a great way to fund tournaments. It brings together the hardcore and more casual playerbase, and makes it more financially viable for someone like ESL to not have to do a facebook deal.

Overall these are my thoughts on how to improve the DPC model for next year. I think it’s a great system, but these adjustments could really smooth out the edges and make it an even better experience moving forward.

Related Articles: