Dota’s Opaque and Unfair Regional Distribution

Over the past ten years, Valve streamlined the process of qualifying for the International, making it incrementally more transparent. Yet, the process is still wracked with inexplicable decisions. How does Valve decide the composition of group stages? Or how does it decide the number of regional invites per Major? This last process is easy to criticize. It seems simple to devise a preferable system for how many teams from each region attend the Majors.

Eighteen teams attended the group stage for the last three Majors. How does Valve determine which regions earn those prized spots? It seems they use a historical model, awarding regional spots based on past success. I’m not talking about the recent past, but the results of the distant past. China has achieved limited success since TI 2021. The region missed the second Major of the 2021-2022 DLC season due to the coronavirus (the first major was replaced by regional finals). Even the third Major experienced Chinese troubles, when Xtreme gaming had to withdraw. China bounced back with a 2nd place finish at the Arlington Major and a 4th and 5th place conclusion at the 2022 International. The region’s greatest success resides in the past. Dota players used to believe China would win the Aegis every other year (they won in 2012, 2014) but China hasn’t triumphed at the International since 2016.

Does China deserve the four regional spots Valve allots? On a similar note, does Eastern Europe deserve three spots? Below I lay out a design which creates fairness, competition, and transparency Of the eighteen spots, Valve grants each region two, regardless of performance. Let’s maintain this practice. That leaves six spots. How does Valve award these slots? The public doesn’t know. Instead, Valve merely states that Western Europe and China receive two bonus spots, while Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia receive one additional slot. This is the same as the previous year.

This appropriation seems thoughtless. My proposal: the six spots for the next major are awarded to the regions that earned the top six spots at the previous major. Here is a quick look at how it would work. At The 2022 International, Western Europe had three teams in the top six. China had two. South America had one. This would have generated the following regional spots at the first major of the 2022-2023 season (Lima Major):

Western Europe: 5 Eastern Europe: 2 China: 4 Southeast Asia: 2 North America: 2 South America: 3

Instead, the spots were awarded as follows: Western Europe: 4 Eastern Europe: 3 China: 4 Southeast Asia: 3 North America: 2 South America: 2

Western Europe and South America were deprived of spots, which were inexplicably given to Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia. I can’t find any reason for this decision. I looked at the ranking points earned during the 2021-2022 spots, and those don’t explain the regional differences either.

I understand if Valve wants to limit a region to a maximum of four spots. In this event the slot should go to the 7th place team. Accordingly, the slot should have been awarded to South America, because of beastcoast’s performance.

The Lima Major concluded with three W. Europe teams, one Southeast Asia team, one S. America team and one N. America team in the top six. But Valve retained the same format for the next Major. Even though China had zero teams in the top six at Lima, four Chinese teams attended the next Major (Berlin). E. Europe also got to move on with three. Both North America and South America were unfairly deprived of a competitive spot. Berlin had the same spots as Lima. Again, W. Europe dominated, this time taking four of the top six. SA and E. Europe took the other two.

That means, according to any reasonable attempt at rewarding performance: Western Europe: 6 Eastern Europe: 3 China: 2 Southeast Asia: 2 North America: 2 South America: 3

If we want to limit a region to four spots, and I don’t see anything wrong with that, W. Europe should lose two, one of which goes to China and another to Southeast Asia. Instead, Liquipedia’s information for the third and final Major (Bali), the regional spots remained unchanged, rewarding China, and punishing Southeast Asia and South America.

At Bali W. Europe swept the top four spots. But if you give them only four spots, and keep going down the list, the result, based on my analysis is the following:

Western Europe: 4 Eastern Europe: 3 China: 4 Southeast Asia: 2 North America: 2 South America: 3

Redditors and panelists have been saying for years how South America deserved another spot. I used to disagree, because they hadn’t earned it. Now they’ve earned it, and no one is saying anything. Why is Valve acting like this? It could be organizational inertia. They’ve become too stagnated to change their system, even as changes in the Dota scene lead to different results. Even as China has faded, it still commands four slots. Valve doesn’t want to put in the work to develop a dynamic system. Or it could be viewers. Most Dota viewers live in W. Europe and E. Europe. The third most popular region is Southeast Asia. Maybe Southeast Asia and E. Europe earn extra spots because they bring in viewers. And Westerners enjoy seeing themselves in a Dota conflict with China, even if China isn’t as dominant as they used to be. Whatever the reason, the results are these. Valve’s system fails to foster competition. Teams that perform well at the major don’t benefit their region. This fails to foster fairness. Performing well at the majors earns Dota Pro Circuit (DPC) points. The twelve teams with the most DPC are invited to The International. If China receives four unearned slots to every Major, and South America never gets more than two (even when it deserves them), there will always be less South American teams at the International. Valve’s system fails to reward winners. Teams that perform well should have an easier path to the next Major. When a team earns a top six finish that team doesn’t earn a spot to the next major, but by earning another slot for their region, it would make it easier for them to return to the next major. The system fails to develop regions. Everyone can see that W. Europe is dominating. The more often players attend LANS the better they perform. Players learn from their experience. They bring that knowledge home, strengthening their home region. Denying South America their extra slot, which they repeatedly earned in 2023, unfairly hinders their development. Finally, Valve announced there will be no Last Chance Qualifier. But last year they increased the number of teams from 18 in 2021 to 20 in 2022. They still want twenty teams at The International. Normally each region gets one slot from the regional qualifiers. Instead, Valve, using some unknown system, decided that South America and Western Europe both receive two. This gives Valve its twenty teams. And while I spent the previous part of this article arguing that South America deserves another spot this isn’t the way to award it. This year’s International invites are set in stone. One might assume Valve will remain opaque and stuck in the past. But older players may remember that the process of invites to The International used to be a tightly guarded secret. Over time Valve opened their process to the public. The International is better for this transparency. Hopefully Valve will someday explain how it awards regional spots to its premier events.