EPTI hope they can come up with a better solution for giving regional winners some kind of advantage (choose your groups, maybe?) than the quarterfinal seed.
[Patch 3.11] General Discussion - Page 246
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
thenexusp
United States3721 Posts
I hope they can come up with a better solution for giving regional winners some kind of advantage (choose your groups, maybe?) than the quarterfinal seed. | ||
|
upperbound
United States2300 Posts
I'd rather have a format where the region winners get to draft their groups in the group stage, or even just straight world cup format where 16 or 32 teams go directly into groups and all battle it out. Sure, it's sometimes unfair when you get a group of like Italy, Netherlands, U.S., some African team where 3/4 teams probably deserve to move out of groups but only two will, but people rarely seem to have problems with "groups of death" in world cup formats, which are only every 4 years after all. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On September 25 2013 04:18 upperbound wrote: I mean if it's really double elim, though, the Winner's bracket finalist should have to get eliminated twice, no? It really does make some sense to give the WB finalist SOME advantage. Pick/ban advantage is significant enough (giving them blue side in LoL). | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
On September 25 2013 04:36 TheYango wrote: Pick/ban advantage is significant enough (giving them blue side in LoL). Except they didn't get that. Fnatic got blue vs. C9 Current format seems pretty weird. | ||
|
ketchup
14521 Posts
On September 25 2013 04:04 Dark_Chill wrote: How soon do you guys get boots on a support? That's another thing about oracles, clearing wards while moving like a sloth is not really the most efficient thing. I personally would get boots as soon as I can. I see no reason to delay them, and generally it helps me in lane. This may just be my old habits coming into play though since I have not played support consistently in a while. | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On September 25 2013 04:07 TheYango wrote: My conspiracy theory is that everyone who's ever complained that double elim grand finals should give an advantage to the WB finalist is just secretly butthurt that their favorite team lost a finals 3-2 when with a 1 game advantage they would have won. It used to be so simple back in the day. 2 simple possible Bo3s were played and no one complained. Only since SC2 came out has there been such issues with the simple double elim format. Don't know if SC2 is to blame or Dota. I mean CS, SC, War3, Q3 all survived fine with finals that could be 2 Bo3. Maybe it was streaming or going "mainstream". God I hate how "going mainstream" ruined so much fun. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On September 25 2013 04:36 TheYango wrote: Pick/ban advantage is significant enough (giving them blue side in LoL). I think having double elim for finals feels so anticlimatic. It's such a big advantage to have 2 lives in a final, for WB. | ||
|
UniversalSnip
9871 Posts
On September 25 2013 04:03 Ketara wrote: You can get into all this statistical math about how likely a format is to ensure that the most skilled player/team wins the event. Double Elimination might not be as exciting, but it makes it much more likely to ensure this. The most likely ways statistically are Round Robin and Swiss Pairing, but those are even less exciting, since they don't have "final" matches at all. Edit: Personally, I'd prefer double elim to the current Worlds format. I am pretty upset with yesterdays games, as are I think a lot of people. Swiss has so many disadvantages from a broadcasting perspective. I think it's rarely used in publicity oriented tournaments (I can think of many smaller, almost unwatched tourneys where its common, but the only major one is mtg where you have a trillion competitors. Even then, all swiss tourneys except the absolute least notable cut to a single Elim top 8 or 4). | ||
|
Numy
South Africa35471 Posts
On September 25 2013 04:40 wei2coolman wrote: I think having double elim for finals feels so anticlimatic. It's such a big advantage to have 2 lives in a final, for WB. Well double elim isn't meant to prioritize entertainment. It's very simple formula where if you lose 2 sets you get eliminated. It's just two conflicting ideas. The format is there to try get the best team to win where as the viewers only want hype so it stands to reason you choose one or the other. I absolutely HATE formats that use double elim than at the finals they suddenly change the rules. It completely defeats the reason for double elim and is only there because it's trying to appease both sides. Don't appease both sides. Choose one and do that to the best of your ability. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
It's very statistically accurate though. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
On September 25 2013 04:43 Numy wrote: Well double elim isn't meant to prioritize entertainment. It's very simple formula where if you lose 2 sets you get eliminated. It's just two conflicting ideas. The format is there to try get the best team to win where as the viewers only want hype so it stands to reason you choose one or the other. To be honest, it's just anti climatic as just having a round robin season, and just having Rank 1 be the winner, without having playoffs. | ||
|
Tula
Austria1544 Posts
The flipside of that is that it makes complete elimination of entire regions before the quarterfinals possible, but frankly if the #1 seed of a region is so weak that he can't make it out of a group, he deserves to be eliminated anyway, but it is a moot point. Riot chose a format, everything we dislike about it should be put into a feedback mail or tweet, not into endless circles of discussion on boards. Lets focus on the games we do have instead  | ||
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21245 Posts
#gamania2013 #bearlieve | ||
|
Shiznick
United States2200 Posts
i also don't get how it's anti-hype when fighting game tournaments are almost all double-elim and are hella hype. | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
I wish we could see more tournament format variation so we could get a good idea of what works best for league, spectator-wise. Single-elim bo3 bracket? Just bo5 finals, semis, or none at all? Double-elim bo1 bracket? OSL-style group stages, or swiss with smaller groups? Start bracket at ro16, or go straight to quarter- or semi-finals after groups? There are a lot of options, and it's a shame some of the weirder ones (e.g. double-elim bo1) seem to be written off so quickly. | ||
|
RagequitBM
Canada2270 Posts
On September 25 2013 04:51 Shiznick wrote: i actually don't think the one set advantage in finals seems more advantageous than it actually is, since you have to factor in players' mental state after they lose the first set when in winner side. i also don't get how it's anti-hype when fighting game tournaments are almost all double-elim and are hella hype. In fighting game tournaments they start with the same score, the loser just has to win two series in a row, that's fair, and makes sense. Everyone gets two lives. You can't do that in League because the games just take much too long. | ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
On September 25 2013 05:01 Eiii wrote: Double elim is absolutely anti-hype when each bo3 can (realistically) take anywhere from an hour to two and a half hours. I feel like fighting game tournaments don't suffer the same issue because their rounds are generally so short. It's one thing if the underdog just has to outplay their (supposedly more skilled) opponents for twenty minutes to take the championship-- it feels like something else entirely when you extend that time out to two hours. Assuming a team gets a one set advantage in league and each game goes roughly 40 minutes a grand finals can take 5-6 hours in league when you add in the breaks inbetween games, pick/ban phase, etc. I don't like double elim for anything, including fighting games, but yes it is especially bad in league since the games take so much longer than a fighting game or a Starcraft match. | ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
| ||
|
Doctorbeat
Netherlands13241 Posts
On September 25 2013 05:08 Requizen wrote: You speak as if longer viewing time is a bad thing. Also, there can just be double streams, like TI3, to reduce screen time. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
On September 25 2013 05:08 Requizen wrote: You speak as if longer viewing time is a bad thing. It is a bad thing. 2 bo3 series yesterday took nearly 7 hours to do. | ||
| ||
