EPTYou have a player who's biggest strength is defensive reactive play who happens to play Zerg and he absolutely dominates his opponents.
How long are we gonna keep this phat elephant in the room without addressing it
User was warned for this post
Double Elimination Grand Finals Advantage - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Drahkn
186 Posts
You have a player who's biggest strength is defensive reactive play who happens to play Zerg and he absolutely dominates his opponents. How long are we gonna keep this phat elephant in the room without addressing it User was warned for this post | ||
|
FCHK
202 Posts
 HomeStory Cup/20Secondly, I can see why they give 1 map advantage to player from winner bracket 1) they want to make Grand Final Bo7 2) another series on top of that would be too long Lastly, I think double elimination should only be used in which the whole tournament is one big knock-out bracket If there are multiple stages, the knock-out part should just be single elimination ESL Pro Tour/2023/24/Masters/Spring | ||
|
Balnazza
Germany1098 Posts
On July 03 2024 13:30 Drahkn wrote: I would worry less about tournament formats and more about Zerg creep and Queen defenders advantage in this game. You have a player who's biggest strength is defensive reactive play who happens to play Zerg and he absolutely dominates his opponents. How long are we gonna keep this phat elephant in the room without addressing it Yes, I know, you are convinced that Serral is the best player of all time and feel that Terran should be nerfed, but please don't insert that in this discussion, has nothing to do with it. Lastly, I think double elimination should only be used in which the whole tournament is one big knock-out bracket If there are multiple stages, the knock-out part should just be single elimination https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/ESL_Pro_Tour/2023/24/Masters/Spring The original use of DE was, atleast as much as I can tell, to help with the costs of travel etc. Often tournaments didn't have big enough venues to play out Group Stages (especially for games like Counterstrike, where even 16 teams already bring 80 players into the venue, who all need a setup to play etc.), but if your tournament was SE, that would have been quiet the costly fun. Imagine in todays world there is a 16-Player SC2 tournament SE...and your first opponent is Serral. Great journey. Especially considering "back in the day" everything was Bo3, not Bo5/7. Same was for all the events that had four players or teams attending after long Seasons (NGL, WC3L, the german EPS). You can't really stretch out your 4-participant tournament over three days without DE. Today DE is mostly used either as the entire tournament as you mentioned, or in case of DotA2s TI to reward teams who played better in the massive Group Stages. LoL of course also uses DE by now, but if I recall correctly the reason for that was mostly to push for more Cross-Region Matches, since in the old system, it usually boiled down to Korea vs. China or Korea vs. Korea real fast. Dunno if the goal is really accomplished with DE though... | ||
|
tigera6
3219 Posts
On July 03 2024 21:34 FCHK wrote: Firstly, I'm for double elimination in which player from winner bracket get a 2nd chance if he/she loses in Grand Final HomeStory Cup/20Secondly, I can see why they give 1 map advantage to player from winner bracket 1) they want to make Grand Final Bo7 2) another series on top of that would be too long Lastly, I think double elimination should only be used in which the whole tournament is one big knock-out bracket If there are multiple stages, the knock-out part should just be single elimination https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/ESL_Pro_Tour/2023/24/Masters/Spring The one issue with the 1 map advantage in Bo7, is that the Upper Bracket player get to choose which map he has the "free" win, and get to choose which map to play first as well. That could lead to an early 2-0 in the Bo7 which might be too much advantage. | ||
|
Argonauta
Spain4902 Posts
For me, the ideal system will be 2 groups of round robin with all players (to ensure the players in better form qualify). 4 top spots in the round robin qualify to a single elimination playoffs bracket starting with 8 players with 4,2,1 matches. This format can also be escalated to a 16 player playoff bracket if needed to be. I think this is the best format we can have. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland24270 Posts
On July 03 2024 21:34 FCHK wrote: Firstly, I'm for double elimination in which player from winner bracket get a 2nd chance if he/she loses in Grand Final HomeStory Cup/20Secondly, I can see why they give 1 map advantage to player from winner bracket 1) they want to make Grand Final Bo7 2) another series on top of that would be too long Lastly, I think double elimination should only be used in which the whole tournament is one big knock-out bracket If there are multiple stages, the knock-out part should just be single elimination https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/ESL_Pro_Tour/2023/24/Masters/Spring Yeah, GSL being a good example of that. | ||
|
ZeroByte13
747 Posts
And they don't have 1 map advantage in the finals - I guess because finals are Bo5 so starting with 1-0 is huge. But in Dota drafting is very important - there are situations when a team starts a tournament in a dominant way but later other teams start banning their best heroes/combos and that team is not as strong anymore. And of course the low bracket finalist plays more games thus showing more strats/heroes, so I guess this is considered to be enough? Probably not really applicable to RTS though. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3340 Posts
| ||
|
kajtarp
Hungary464 Posts
On July 03 2024 21:34 FCHK wrote: Firstly, I'm for double elimination in which player from winner bracket get a 2nd chance if he/she loses in Grand Final HomeStory Cup/20This homestory cup link is just a nice proof what i wrote about DE on page 1. Innovation beats Serral 3:1 but then Reynor beats Innovation 3:0. Cup should have been Reynors. But instead Serral sweeps trough LB all the way to Grand finals with his 2nd life. Imagine Serral has a 2nd life when soO won IEM and took down Serral brilliantly trough his way to win. Or Serral/Maru having a 2nd life when Oliveira has won. This is just 2 examples, but i'm quite sure we could find much much more. DE would just remove most if not all upsets/surprises out from tournaments which are already very stale because the very same few persons are in the top4/8 almost all the time. | ||
|
bela.mervado
Hungary373 Posts
On July 04 2024 05:44 kajtarp wrote: This homestory cup link is just a nice proof what i wrote about DE on page 1. .. SE vs DE: it's a choice. you have to answer the question: who do you want to win, the one that can win a boN where N is large enough, or a one-two-three trick pony that can take down a 'better' player in a bo3. both can be good. through a pink glass i'd like the bo69 winner to win. but in war you just want to win. lies, deception, does not matter, a win is a win. and of course we can have both or some safety so to speak, to some extent, by having a swiss or group stage feed into SE. if you choose DE (which this thread is about) you probably want to be consistent and grant the WB finalists the extra life everyone else has used at this point. how you do it, is not trivial. i think the veto idea is very interesting one, but it's far from the fair extra life. on a side note a shitty map pool should be fixed, ideally. the Bo7 grand final loss into Bo3 extra match is a bit weird. i'd like to see the <Bo7 loss extended into a Bo-something-bigger with score kept> method in sc2, could be fun. i think the +1 map advantage is a good solution. | ||
|
ZeroByte13
747 Posts
Bo5 + Bo3 might end fast with 3-0 from the winner. | ||
|
Turbovolver
Australia2384 Posts
My take on this has always been that playing another match makes the most sense in terms of competitive integrity, but in terms of hype/viewer experience for esports I think a single match is best. So the "offer some advantage" method is best. Extending the finals with a one-game bye is pretty good if logistically doable. Number of matches really depends on the game, Bo7+Bo1 is good for SC2 I think. | ||
|
FCHK
202 Posts
On July 04 2024 00:45 tigera6 wrote: The one issue with the 1 map advantage in Bo7, is that the Upper Bracket player get to choose which map he has the "free" win, and get to choose which map to play first as well. That could lead to an early 2-0 in the Bo7 which might be too much advantage. What about letting the player from loser bracket veto 1 more map or have the first pick? | ||
|
Fango
United Kingdom8987 Posts
There are situations in tournaments otherwise when the best players meet in the ro64 or lose due to some high variance build, double elim helps in that case. But in a game like sc2, playing fewer maps in a tournament before the finals is already an advantage, especially for protoss players. I would put money on most protoss bo7 winners in LotV would have lost a rematch if they played one right away, for example. Giving someone a free map win in sc2 is too much, especially when they get to choose the map and we often have a map pool favouring one race. It does nothing but make the finals worse for viewers. | ||
| ||
