Fixing Tournament Fatigue: How Jurassic World Alive Can Bring Back Competitive Fun

Fixing Tournament Fatigue in Jurassic World Alive

Tournaments have long been a core focus for many players and alliances in Jurassic World Alive. Over the years, they’ve stood the test of time, evolving and adapting to fit the needs of an ever-changing game. However, with each new tournament announced, the disdain for these current formats has grown unbearable. Players are spending less time participating, feeling that tournaments have become a waste of time, relying too heavily on luck of the draw and sheer playtime rather than skill or strategy.

Recently, the team at Ludia shifted their approach by tying tournaments more closely to weekly in-game events. This represents a better step compared to the previous model, where players' decks were limited by strict rarity caps. Yet even this new direction struggles to recapture the magic of the original tournament system, when specific rarities, not event tie-ins or deck restrictions, were the true focal point of each format.

I understand why the team felt it was time for a change. Tournaments had grown stale, with each week starting to feel like déjà vu. While this consistency bred comfort and predictability for players, it also led to complacency. Which, while good for players in the short term, isn’t something a company wants for the long-term health of their game.

Touching on the problem we face now: these themed events are anything but fun. When the game is balanced properly, creatures are generally capped in power based on their rarity. Of course, some punch far above their weight class, but overall, rarity serves as a fairly consistent guideline, and it’s also how players typically judge a creature’s value.

Themed tournament formats completely throw that balance out the window. Suddenly, creature value doesn’t matter anymore. Instead, tournaments often boil down to one or two creatures that outclass everything else, and it becomes a simple case of "draw it and win." While similar issues have occurred during traditional rarity-restricted tournaments, players at least had room to adjust and develop counter strategies. That’s much harder to do when a single creature sits leagues above the rest of the eligible field. I will however say that a few tournaments this month have not been completely bad. I think that's because the team at Ludia decided to exclude some of the creatures that would have otherwise broken the formats.

In this article, we’ll explore some potential fixes for the current tournament issues. Along with a breakdown of the pros and cons for each idea. We'll consider both the developer’s perspective and the player’s experience, aiming for solutions that could benefit the long-term health of the game without sacrificing the fun and competitiveness that tournaments should bring.

Potential Solutions to Improve Tournaments

1. Bring Back Rarity-Based Tournaments as the Primary Format

One of the simplest ways to restore balance would be to shift tournaments back to what originally made them successful: rarity-based restrictions. Instead of focusing on weekly themes or tying tournaments to specific events, formats would once again center around Common, Rare, Epic, Legendary, Omega, or Unique creatures. This would restore clear expectations for balance and allow players to build diverse teams knowing what strengths and weaknesses to prepare for.

Pros:

• Predictable structure for players to plan and build toward.

• Easier for developers to balance creature power levels within rarity tiers.

• Reduces "meta-breaking" creatures dominating the entire field.

  
  

Cons:

• Risks becoming repetitive again without additional tweaks to keep it fresh.

• Might not tie in as well with promotional events or new creature releases.

  
  

Developer Standpoint:

• Easier to balance, but potentially harder to market "special" events around.

  
  

Player Standpoint:

• Strongly positive for competitive players.

• Could feel "stale" to players if formats aren’t refreshed creatively.

This seems like the easiest and most obvious solution. However, it does come with its own risks. While returning to rarity-based formats would help reintroduce structure and balance, it also exposes a current problem: lower-rarity creatures haven’t been receiving regular rebalance updates. As a result, the diversity and competitiveness within those tiers could feel stale or even frustrating if certain creatures remain overpowered or underpowered without adjustment.

Rebalancing of Lower Rarity Creatures:

One way to support the return of rarity-based tournaments would be to introduce regular large-scale rebalancing. Every update, or at least every other update, Ludia could focus on rebalancing a large batch of creatures, ideally around 20–30 at a time.

These rebalanced creatures would then become the new focal points for tournaments (and potentially Brawl Mode) over the next two to three months. By shifting the meta focus regularly, the game stays fresh, and different creatures get a chance to shine, rather than letting the same few dominate indefinitely.

Importantly, rebalancing doesn’t just mean buffs to underused ones, it should also include careful nerfs to strong creatures, encouraging more team diversity and creative strategies.

Pros:

• Keeps the tournament and Brawl metas fresh every few months.

• Gives underused creatures a chance to enter the spotlight.

• Encourages players to invest in a wider variety of creatures over time.

• Makes tournaments feel more strategic and less luck-based.

  
  

Cons:

• Requires more development time and testing to avoid introducing new balance problems.

• Could frustrate players who invest heavily into a creature that later gets nerfed.

• Risk of "whiplash" if balance changes are too extreme or unpredictable.

• Affects arena meta in lower arenas

  
  

Developer Standpoint:

• Offers strong long-term health for the game but demands a more consistent commitment to balance patches.

• Provides a natural way to tie marketing and events around freshly buffed creatures.

  
  

Player Standpoint:

• More excitement and team-building opportunities.

• Some may worry about their investments losing value if not communicated well.

2. Implement an Internal Power Scoring System for Themed Tournaments

Our second solution focuses on keeping the current themed tournament formats but making them significantly more balanced. To achieve this, the development team would need to introduce an internal scoring or rating system for every creature, essentially a "power score."

This system would assign each creature a score based on a controlled set of criteria, such as overall damage output, survivability, speed, synergy potential, and other relevant stats. By using this internal ranking system, the team could more easily identify which creatures are too dominant for a particular format and remove them when necessary. Likewise, they could more easily fill out tournaments by adding creatures with comparable scores, keeping the overall field more balanced and diverse.

Rather than relying solely on rarity or player feedback after the fact, this would give the team a proactive tool for curating fairer and more competitive tournaments moving forward.

Pros:

• Creates a more objective method for balancing tournaments.

• Reduces the chances of one creature completely dominating a format.

• Allows for more flexibility when designing themed tournaments without sacrificing fairness.

• Helps players feel that tournaments are based more on strategy and preparation, rather than luck or overpowered creatures.

  
  

Cons:

• Requires a significant upfront time investment from the development team to create and maintain the scoring system.

• If the scoring system isn't transparent, players might still feel confused or frustrated about creature eligibility.

• Balance is subjective to some degree; stats alone may not capture certain situational strengths.

  
  

Developer Standpoint:

• More structured, proactive control over tournament balance.

• May require additional resources to review and update power scores regularly.

  
  

Player Standpoint:

• Would likely be seen as a major positive, offering more fair and competitive tournaments.

• Could cause confusion if players aren’t given at least some insight into how creatures are scored.

3. Create a Player Ambassador Program to Help Shape Tournaments

Another solution, one that could be implemented more quickly, would be for Ludia to lean on one of their greatest untapped resources: the player base itself. Jurassic World Alive has hundreds, if not thousands, of passionate players willing to help improve the game they love.

Ludia could establish an official Player Ambassador Program, carefully selecting a diverse group of players from all stages of progression, from early-game players to top leaderboard competitors. These ambassadors could provide feedback on balance, help stress-test themed formats, and even propose new tournament ideas before they are finalized.

This would serve as both a short-term fix, offering immediate help in refining upcoming tournaments, and a long-term asset, giving the development team a trusted group to bounce ideas off for future plans. It would also strengthen community engagement by making players feel more invested in the game's direction.

Pros:

• Provides immediate, hands-on feedback from the players most impacted by changes.

• Bridges the gap between developers and the community, creating goodwill.

• Helps catch potential balance issues before tournaments go live.

• Builds a sense of ownership and pride among dedicated players.

  
  

Cons:

• Requires careful selection to avoid bias or favoritism.

• Potential risk of leaks if clear communication rules aren’t established.

• Players might have differing visions, which could complicate decision-making.

  
  

Developer Standpoint:

• Gains direct insights without needing constant internal testing for every small tweak.

• Builds a healthier and more collaborative community atmosphere.

  
  

Player Standpoint:

• Strong positive, players would feel heard and valued.

• Some players might be frustrated if they feel excluded from the ambassador program.

Each of these solutions, whether it's reviving rarity-based formats, using internal power scores, or partnering with the player base, offers a practical path toward improving tournaments in both the short and long term. However, if we look even further ahead, there's room to dream about bigger changes that could truly transform the tournament experience into something even more exciting.

Bonus Idea: Introducing a "Tournament Draft Mode"

If Ludia wanted to take tournaments to the next level, they could introduce a Draft Mode. A brand-new way for players to compete that adds strategy, creativity, and fairness all at once.

In Draft Mode, players wouldn't bring their own creatures. Instead, before each match, both players would be given a randomized pool of creatures to draft from, picking their team turn-by-turn from the same shared pool. Once the draft is complete, the battle begins with the teams they built on the spot.

Draft Mode could be introduced as a special tournament format once a month to break up the regular tournament cycle and give players something truly unique to look forward to. Over time, Draft Mode could even become the deciding factor for top 10 finishes each week, offering a thrilling and truly skill-based showdown at the highest levels of play.

Even more exciting, this opens the door for a potential Spectator Mode, allowing players to watch live as the top competitors battle it out for the final few tournament placements. Spectator Mode would add an entirely new layer of community engagement, giving players a reason to tune in and cheer for their favorite battlers.

Pros:

• Adds tons of variety and unpredictability without relying on RNG.

• Tests true player skill in adapting to different creatures and strategies.

• Creates a level playing field for players across all progression stages.

• Opens the door to highly marketable features like Spectator Mode.

  
  

Cons:

• Requires major development resources to build a draft and spectator system.

• Might confuse newer players without strong tutorials or onboarding.

• Balancing draft pools would require consistent testing and refinement.

  
  

Developer Standpoint:

• Huge opportunity for marketing ("Draft Mode is here!" "Watch the Finals Live!").

• Reinforces the game’s competitive scene and community interaction.

  
  

Player Standpoint:

• Highly exciting for both casual and competitive players.

• Gives mid-tier players more chances to shine based on skill, not just roster strength.

Quick Draft Mode Example:

• Both players receive a draft pool of 12 creatures.

• Players take turns picking 1 creature at a time until they each have 4.

• They battle with the drafted teams.

  
  

Conclusion: Building a Better Future for Tournaments

Tournaments have always been one of the pillars of Jurassic World Alive, and they deserve to be a source of excitement, creativity, and true competitive spirit. Whether it’s by returning to rarity-based formats, building a smarter internal balance system, involving players directly through an ambassador program, or even dreaming big with new modes like Draft and Spectator features, there are clear, actionable paths forward.

Change doesn't have to happen all at once, but by taking small steps now and keeping player experience at the center of tournament design, Ludia can reinvigorate one of the game’s most important features for years to come. The players are ready, and with the right moves, tournaments could once again become the highlight of every week in Jurassic World Alive.

Of course, solving tournament frustration is only part of the broader competitive puzzle. One major issue still looming over both tournaments, brawl, and arena battles alike is the problem of speed ties. A mechanic that often rewards faster internet connections rather than better strategy. While today’s focus was on tournament formats, there’s no doubt that addressing speed ties in the future will be equally critical to restoring fairness and fun across all aspects of competitive play.