|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/14/2008
Posts: 1,410
Location: Chokio, MN
|
Looks like a majority of people are ok with going with 2 games being played at 350ots. I'll update the first post accordingly.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 2/17/2009
Posts: 1,447
|
Are the BC rulings now in effect?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/14/2008
Posts: 1,410
Location: Chokio, MN
|
Thanks for bringing this up Laura! I'm deciding that the BC rulings won't be in effect this tournament since people might have built their escalation squads prior to the tournament starting without the knowledge that their characters would change. I don't want to punish people for choices on how they wanted to plan out their squads since they might have had those characters previous designs in mind for their squad synergy. Future Escalation tournaments will have the BC rulings in effect however since people will have had the opportunity to see it and plan accordingly.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 2/17/2009
Posts: 1,447
|
Makes sense. Thanks!
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/14/2008
Posts: 1,410
Location: Chokio, MN
|
talking with DarthMaim today, I thought maybe to encourage people who haven't gone undefeated to have a shot at getting into the finals, we could have the top 2 players of each division face off against each other in the playoffs to determine the division winner, then the winner of each division then would face off against the other division winner for the finale. My thought process behind this was that in a regular 10 person tournament with swiss, we'd cut to the the top 4 to go into playoffs to ultimately determine a overall winner. This has 2 divisions of 5 people but it is essentially 10 total people, so a top 4 makes sense i feel. Would everyone else be ok if we had the top 2 people of both divisions after 5 rounds face off against each other to determine who goes to the final match?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/16/2009
Posts: 1,488
|
I was thinking Core Worlds #1 plays Outer Rims #2
and Outer Rims #1 plays Core Worlds #2.
Or just go full March Madness lol
Top 3 from each division get a bye.
Game A
CW #4 plays OR #5
Game B
OR #4 plays CW #5
Game C
CW #1 plays winner Game A
Game D
OR #1 plays winner Game B
Game E
OR #2 plays CW #3
Game F
CW#2 plays OR #3
Game G
Winner Game C plays Winner Game F
Game H
Winner Game D plays Winner Game E
Game I
Winner Game G plays Winner Game H
Or just rank everyone 1-10
R1 7 plays 10 8 plays 9
R2 1 plays 8/9 2 plays 7/10 3 plays 6 4 plays 5
R3 1/8/9 plays 4/5 2/7/10 plays 3/6
R4 1/4/5/8/9 plays 2/3/6/7/10 for the title
Yes I know that's a lot but I was bored at work lol.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 1,193
Location: Los Angeles, California
|
Mando wrote:talking with DarthMaim today, I thought maybe to encourage people who haven't gone undefeated to have a shot at getting into the finals, we could have the top 2 players of each division face off against each other in the playoffs to determine the division winner, then the winner of each division then would face off against the other division winner for the finale. My thought process behind this was that in a regular 10 person tournament with swiss, we'd cut to the the top 4 to go into playoffs to ultimately determine a overall winner. This has 2 divisions of 5 people but it is essentially 10 total people, so a top 4 makes sense i feel. Would everyone else be ok if we had the top 2 people of both divisions after 5 rounds face off against each other to determine who goes to the final match? +1. I would ask that we slightly alter this a little? Instead of 2 games at 350, play just 1, then the top 2 in each division play @ 350, then, the top ones from each division play the championship @ 350. Then the 2nd place players in each division will play each other @ 350, for 3rd place. An Imperial credit for everyone's thoughts.....................................
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 1,193
Location: Los Angeles, California
|
Mando wrote:talking with DarthMaim today, I thought maybe to encourage people who haven't gone undefeated to have a shot at getting into the finals, we could have the top 2 players of each division face off against each other in the playoffs to determine the division winner, then the winner of each division then would face off against the other division winner for the finale. My thought process behind this was that in a regular 10 person tournament with swiss, we'd cut to the the top 4 to go into playoffs to ultimately determine a overall winner. This has 2 divisions of 5 people but it is essentially 10 total people, so a top 4 makes sense i feel. Would everyone else be ok if we had the top 2 people of both divisions after 5 rounds face off against each other to determine who goes to the final match? What does everyone think of Mando's idea of the top 2 in each division facing off to start the playoffs?
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 2/17/2009
Posts: 1,447
|
It sounds fine to me.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/29/2008
Posts: 1,786
Location: Canada
|
I prefer the Top 4 idea much more than the Top 2 idea. A larger playoff pool is always better than a smaller one, IMO.
How about this: The top player of the Core Worlds division plays against the 2nd-place player from the Outer Rim division, and vice versa (the 2nd-place from Core plays the top from Outer Rim). This will prevent a rematch and instead provide more variety in the playoffs.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 1,193
Location: Los Angeles, California
|
thereisnotry wrote:I prefer the Top 4 idea much more than the Top 2 idea. A larger playoff pool is always better than a smaller one, IMO.
How about this: The top player of the Core Worlds division plays against the 2nd-place player from the Outer Rim division, and vice versa (the 2nd-place from Core plays the top from Outer Rim). This will prevent a rematch and instead provide more variety in the playoffs.
+1.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/2/2018
Posts: 186
Location: Wisconsin
|
thereisnotry wrote:I prefer the Top 4 idea much more than the Top 2 idea. A larger playoff pool is always better than a smaller one, IMO.
How about this: The top player of the Core Worlds division plays against the 2nd-place player from the Outer Rim division, and vice versa (the 2nd-place from Core plays the top from Outer Rim). This will prevent a rematch and instead provide more variety in the playoffs.
Top 4 sounds good to me
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 1,193
Location: Los Angeles, California
|
thereisnotry wrote:I prefer the Top 4 idea much more than the Top 2 idea. A larger playoff pool is always better than a smaller one, IMO.
How about this: The top player of the Core Worlds division plays against the 2nd-place player from the Outer Rim division, and vice versa (the 2nd-place from Core plays the top from Outer Rim). This will prevent a rematch and instead provide more variety in the playoffs.
What do you guys think about a 3rd place match between the 2 that lose in the first rnd of the playoffs?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/16/2009
Posts: 1,488
|
DarthMaim wrote:thereisnotry wrote:I prefer the Top 4 idea much more than the Top 2 idea. A larger playoff pool is always better than a smaller one, IMO.
How about this: The top player of the Core Worlds division plays against the 2nd-place player from the Outer Rim division, and vice versa (the 2nd-place from Core plays the top from Outer Rim). This will prevent a rematch and instead provide more variety in the playoffs.
What do you guys think about a 3rd place match between the 2 that lose in the first rnd of the playoffs? That's one where I'd let them decide.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/29/2008
Posts: 1,786
Location: Canada
|
Having a match to determine 3rd and 4th sounds like a good idea, if those players are up for it.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 1,193
Location: Los Angeles, California
|
thereisnotry wrote:Having a match to determine 3rd and 4th sounds like a good idea, if those players are up for it. 
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 1,193
Location: Los Angeles, California
|
Mando wrote:talking with DarthMaim today, I thought maybe to encourage people who haven't gone undefeated to have a shot at getting into the finals, we could have the top 2 players of each division face off against each other in the playoffs to determine the division winner, then the winner of each division then would face off against the other division winner for the finale. My thought process behind this was that in a regular 10 person tournament with swiss, we'd cut to the the top 4 to go into playoffs to ultimately determine a overall winner. This has 2 divisions of 5 people but it is essentially 10 total people, so a top 4 makes sense i feel. Would everyone else be ok if we had the top 2 people of both divisions after 5 rounds face off against each other to determine who goes to the final match? Has a decision been made on this? If so, would there still be 2 games at 350, before the playoffs start?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/14/2008
Posts: 1,410
Location: Chokio, MN
|
Yes, 2 games at 350
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 1,193
Location: Los Angeles, California
|
Mando wrote:Yes, 2 games at 350 How about the decision of the top 4 playing in the playoffs? If so, would it be as Tint had suggested, with 1 vs 2 from opposite divisions squaring off?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/14/2008
Posts: 1,410
Location: Chokio, MN
|
DarthMaim wrote:Mando wrote:Yes, 2 games at 350 How about the decision of the top 4 playing in the playoffs? If so, would it be as Tint had suggested, with 1 vs 2 from opposite divisions squaring off? Yeah, I liked tints idea of top from each division going against the 2nd place team from the other division.
|
|
|
Guest |