Try
Try to convince me EWC =/ Masters 3
posted in
Valorant Discussion
Yea I mean I have yet to meet a point greater than mine
I only see cope from the opposition
Too much work I might ChatGPT something up but I’d rather js address ppls points than pteeent mine and see brain rot interpretation
the more time goes on the more i come to believe that a majority of humanity would enter the experience machine
in general I do think a more active approach to avoiding cognitive hazards should be adopted (scale with their invasiveness) but I'm a big believer in humanity though, we're chilling
there's like 20 arguments supporting EWC and like 2 supporting Masters (I can copy paste my list and add a few more points to it if u want)
EWC > Masters
no champs points
event itself is just thrown in between events
online qualifiers
terrible production
single elim bracket
lack of prestige as admitted by past winners
- champions events also give no champs points, does that mean its mickey?
- it was fit into the vct schedule, it's just tight but the schedule was planned around it
- everyone is already in the same city, 0ms vs 20ms-30ms isn't a big deal or even sometimes noticeable
- masters has tech pauses too, vct emea literally cancelled games before due to pc issues
- champs 2021
- everyone wants to win more, of course a masters winner wants to win champs
- champs 2021
thank you for naming another mickey mouse event but i dont see how thats relevant to the conversation
- the event is not being compared to champs but rather masters, and masters events do give out champs points
- the fact that it’s tight means it’s just slammed in between events; all other masters events have spaced out qualifiers
- any ping advantage is noticeable at the highest level which is why vct qualifiers are played on LAN and not online
- comparing ewc to regionals doesn’t help your case
- the first champs event ever; perhaps if ewc was introduced then it would be better but we are 5 years deep into the esport
- benjyfishy has admitted he would rather win a masters than ewc, as did finalist keiko
champions events also give no champs points, does that mean its mickey?
Champs is the culmination of all the most consistent and best performing teams across VCT which is what makes it not a mickey mouse, EWC has none of that, they just reward money and whatever team gains momentum.
it was fit into the vct schedule, it's just tight but the schedule was planned around it
China started playing before the event was even finished and you want to tell me that it was fit into the VCT schedule
- Not sure how that makes a tournament Mickey
- Umm okay, so is masters 2 Mickey since it’s in between masters 1 and champs?
- Not that deep
- Fair complaint, although it picked up at the main event beyond groups
- Well if we call every event with a bad bracket or style every event would be Mickey in some way shape or form
- I mean your sample size is one team and those teams were 1 win away from champs and masters in a row so obviously it’s gonna be diff. Plus you can’t tell the winners it’s not as prestigious?
- it makes it not equal to a masters event which you’re arguing
- there is actual time between all vct events, unlike ewc who is packed a week before or after vct events
- i can really just stop here because you’ve already lost the argument and have decided to not argue this point but ill continue
- for a masters level tournament it should be consistent throughout
- see #13
- yes i can because a previous winner and current finalist agreed they’d rather win a masters event. also said team was nowhere near as strong internationally in 2025
- Again that doesn’t just make it not equal to it?
- I’d argue this makes it better because it makes the games actually more fast paced which is a good switch in the pace for the spaced out tournaments
- No it’s just not that deep g. It being online means nothing unless you insinuate the T1 players are cheating in which lol what. Plus this isn’t an argument, it’s supposed to be changing my opinion hence the post which no one here has able to execute
- Yea I’m not arguing against the Prod, although I think some elements clear VCT like the music and the half time replays
- Can’t rn will later
- Again you don’t have a good sample size bro
- yes it does because it is an integral part of masters events that is missing from ewc, an extra incentive to do better in masters
- why? wouldn’t longer events be more fun? more matches? more viewership?
- well it’s not equal to a masters qualifier because it takes place online, where the playing field is not level, in comparison to LAN where it is. besides you’re not expecting to change your mind so please stop lying, you just want interactions
- 👍
- 👍
- i guess neither do you?
- I agree with it gives an extra incentive but that prize pool being so much more than masters also gives a bigger incentive
- Taking longer to complete =/ More matches
- Yea I’m not expecting to but I will if I’m presented smth smart. Again online qualifiers just doesn’t mean much
- That doesn’t really address my original comment
- it really doesn’t. it’s an organization incentive more than it is a player incentive which if you count that then sure? but players play to be recognized as the best itw. they already get paid by their orgs
- i guess this is good if you want more events in the season but that doesn’t mean it has to be single elim. it’s just in general not a very good way of determining the best team and the only advantage of it is that events end faster (which isn’t bad but also not good? it depends on if you value quality or quantity)
- 👍
- don’t really know how else to address it since no pro ever really talks about ewc favorably or unfavorably except those that exclusively speak out and say they’d rather win masters
- Even then I don't see how them placing well in a tournament wouldn't make them recognized to be best itw, like after EWC alot of teams perspectives changed without a doubt. Beforehand 100t was a middle of the back team now they're at the top contenders
- Yeah I don't like the single elim either. I see arguments for it some peoople say it causes less flukes since less chances but I think its the opposite personally, so im glad it was only 2 series being single elim
- Yeah we'll have to wait and see how 100t players' opinions shift or stay over time too early to say anyting yet
well, for one, the winner of london isn’t at the event. also im not arguing 100T isn’t good (they are very good) its just that the event itself doesn’t hold that much meaning. i absolutely think 100T is good enough to win champs easy
1) so every major before 2024 was mickey
2) sure but if scheduling mattered all that much china would've fried london with 6 weeks prep while lev with 2 day prep wouldn't have won
3) So everything before 2023 and after 2026 is mickey
4) wouldn't say it was terrible+ it improved over time however even if we assume it was, the legacy of an event isn't defined solely by its production
5) many sports/other eSports events are single elimination it's just valo is not used to the format
6) past winner* (only benjyfish) also does that mean if the 100t players say it is prestigious then it becomes non-mickey?
- see #13 point 5 (also 2023 events had different incentives such as extra region slots which EWC also does not have)
- china is not a good region and i think this was established for a while now
- see #13 point 5
- i would absolutely say it’s terrible in comparison to masters events that have had proportionate amounts of technical issues and production issues + the general atmosphere of the event is nowhere near as good
- other sports do not matter, we are talking about valorant and if valorant is not used to the format wherein masters events hardly change then it is an inferior event; other games such as cs and dota treat it this way too
- fns considers soop and sen city invitational masters; it is much more telling if you win an event but say the event itself doesn’t matter as much as a masters
EWC supporters actually pulling up with the worst arguments oat to argue with you lmao
Yeah when you said "Can't rn will later" I knew we were dealing with a debate legend
Yeah and that's fine, but then you come to me and say you "mogged all the questions" lmaooo
i mean 4 words is easier to type than god knows how many i typed earlier? u may have 12 wpm but i dont bro i can get shit done fast but things that requires thought takes longer to type sorry if this is too damaging for ur brain
it is, plain and simple
lower bracket format opens the door for weak teams to build momentum in the lower bracket and go far, which leads to some poor-quality games in the middle of the tournament (kickoff 2026)
tournament is squeezed in between other tournaments because it doesn't have Riot's support and is literally boycotted by the franchise monopoly; if the circuit were open, we'd have events that are just as short and very tightly packed together
people complain about the lack of games and still complain about a event that provides more games lol
lower bracket format opens the door for weak teams to build momentum in the lower bracket and go far
i’m sorry momentum is a really overused buzzword because every team resets at the beginning of every day. if you’re a good team you’re able to shake off losses quickly and not get in your own head after being down because mentality is a part of competition. single elim doesn’t allow for any mistakes or comeback stories and is basically just a race to the finish line
if the circuit were open, we'd have events that are just as short and very tightly packed together
this however i agree with, but right now it’s just not justified with how rito handles tournaments
people complain about the lack of games and still complain about a event that provides more games lol
i don’t understand this point because ewc can exist with double elim
every eam resets at the beginning of every day
weak argument bro, momentum exists in almost every competitive game/sport (even if it's more psychological than physical, it exists), while i still agree with the rest of the argument; single elim should happen in events with more <group stage> games (major is a great exemple of this)
ewc is poorly managed bc it is a shitty event overall, im just defending the single elim thing tho; not enough effort in all fronts
ewc can exist with double elim
time; and it could, i just like single elim LMAO
Qualifier is set in between stage 1 and masters, so incentivizes teams that didn’t make masters to try harder
Event is set between masters and stage 2, meaning teams that attended masters are more likely to be burned out or end up being burned out during stage 2
Qualifiers are too short. No longer group stage and playoffs, means easier to fluke a qualification, unlike to a masters event.
- So them trying harder is a problem now not sure
- Fair point but any team can have burn out doesn’t make a tournament js bc 1-2 favored teams not going bad, otherwise Santiago is the biggest Mickey oat
- I guess sure but it’d also be an issue if the qualifiers are too long so it’s a docile edged sword
Teams that didn’t make masters literally have nothing else to focus on until stage 2. Teams that made masters had days between ewc quals and when masters started, and teams like lev were clearly testing comps and maps during quals.
The point about burn out is that a team like prx or vit who made deeper runs is more likely to be tired, or simply heavily anti stratted than 100t who didn’t even make London or Santiago and therefore has nothing to do since stage 1 but prep.
Regular length qualifier such as for masters aren’t too long imo. If we only cared about the first 3-4 games in regional play like for ewc quals, you’d have a lot of fluke qualifications (teams like kru, mibr would have made London over lev or nrg)
- No team will deliberately will play BAD just to not qualify that’s just silly. They might experiment but I don’t see how that makes that bad necesssrily
- Oh well no doubt about that trust me I agree there’s no way 100t has had any burnout compared to PRX or smth
- Fair point
i personally don’t think ewc is as valuable as a masters but believe it’s close
like i’d say ewc is worth around 80% as much as a masters win
and champs is worth 2x a masters
but this is just how i personally feel
ewc is still an insanely valuable win
Thats fair
I think its dead equal i consider it as masters 3
Even when TH won probably before that its just another tournament. It's like LOCK/IN where some peopole dont consider it btu that doesnt really change the fact that all the teams there qualified fairly and wanted to win its not like they deliberately lost / wanted to lose lol
This annoyed me so im draining some oceans
People keep pointing to arbitrary differences and acting like that automatically disqualifies EWC from being "Masters level," but that's not how prestige works.
No Champs Points? Champions itself doesn't award Champs Points either because that's not what they're for. They're qualification points, not a measurement of tournament quality.
Scheduling? Riot literally built the VCT calendar around EWC. Calling it "slammed in" is just describing where Riot chose to place it, not proving it's a lesser event.
Online qualifiers? Every qualified team still had to earn their spot. Once you're at the main event, everyone is on LAN anyway. If we're pretending 20ms is the deciding factor instead of teams simply being better, we've run out of arguments.
Single elimination? I don't even prefer single elim, but format alone doesn't suddenly erase the quality of the competition. Plenty of respected esports and traditional sports use single elimination. It's a different format, not an invalid one.
Production? Fair criticism. The group stage had issues. That doesn't magically reduce the level of teams attending or the accomplishment of winning the tournament.
"Pros said they'd rather win Masters." Cool. Benjyfishy and Keiko saying they'd rather win Masters after coming one map away from winning both doesn't suddenly establish some universal hierarchy. Players also consistently say they'd rather win Champions than Masters—does that make Masters a Mickey Mouse tournament too?
The biggest thing nobody has answered is this: every elite team qualified fairly, everyone showed up trying to win, and the event featured one of the strongest international fields Valorant has ever had. If Riot called this "Masters 3" instead of "EWC," I genuinely don't think 95% of these arguments would exist.
At that point the only real difference is branding.
Some people are treating Riot's naming convention like it's holy scripture. Riot says it isn't Masters, therefore it can't possibly be Masters-level? That's just an appeal to authority. Riot could've branded LOCK//IN as "Masters 0" or EWC as "Masters 3" and we'd be having a completely different conversation.
Personally, I'd value EWC as Masters 3—if anything, maybe even slightly higher. The prize pool is larger, every team desperately wanted to win, and the tournament still answered the same question Masters does: who's the best team in the world right now?
If ewc is a masters soop and rbhg are masters and thus g2 have won an international
Discord