TPvP #4 Suggestions/Feedback Thread

[Higurashi]

I don't think so. I agree with you that it's unbalanced, hence the "nope", but it comes with a few easily exploitable weaknesses. If you're predictable with any strategy, you'll lose, and since this is no different I don't have a problem with it. It's clear new players have huge problems with the combination of EQ+Discord, which has turned some wins into free passes, but this pretty much goes for any dominant meta deck (Devtal being one other example, Candlelight another).

I should clarify there are very few elemental combinations you can pick that don't have an answer to Discord. Picking elements is a big part of having a winning chance too, so I don't think it's harsh that it has an impact.

[deuce22]

I don't know if I have a very good suggestion for this, but the bracket setup seems kind of unbalanced for this event. Teams that get a bye round 1 have a HUGE advantage, and teams that lose round 1 have a HUGE disadvantage. All 4 quarterfinal teams had a round 1 bye this event. And the fact that team 187 has a chance to make it to the finals with only 3 wins compared to 9 wins in the bottom bracket is a little extreme.

I am all for using Challonge as it is super easy to use, but since this is one of the bigger events, we may want to find a more balanced system.

A simple suggestion would be to have a requirement of 16 or 32 teams and still use challonge. But I don't like having a fixed limit on an event like this.

Another suggestion would be to run the event like the world cup. Form 4 groups, have each team play each other once, and have the top 2 teams of each group advance to an 8-team tourney. This would allow every team to have at least 3 rounds of matches, allow any # of teams to sign up, and no advantage is given to any team.

[Higurashi]

Indeed. As I said in chat, a normal team from winner's bracket in the semis will have played 5 games. A team in loser's bracket, for instance mine, has to go through 9 games for semis. They play the event almost twice as much, which is just weird. It seems like almost any other bracket type would be superior for fairness.

[Sevs]

Isn't that how double elimination works? If we did single elimination, every team that has to do so many matches would be out. This system at least gives an slight chance for teams that lose to still make it. I guess there could just be a "Group" stage like the champions league.?

[mrpaper]

double elimination doesn't (at least always) work that way,
rd 1 is random,
rd 2, every winner faces a loser
rd 3, those who lost twice are out, the others are playing a random match (in case of uneven number of teams remainings, an unbeaten gets a bye but you can't get a bye twice unless all remainings had a bye)
rd 4.. see rd 3
repeat till all teams but 1 are out.

The great advantage is fairness in numbers of games played.
The problem is, you need new brackets each round.

[RootRanger]

Keep in mind that the players in the loser's bracket are playing, on average, easier opponents. With 16/32 teams it's mostly a fair system. Although I like the idea of World Cup style.

[TStar]

Or just don't lose.  That's the easiest solution.

The only likely change would be to move to a single elimination format, which I'd prefer not to do.  World Cup type pools is an idea that's been considered in other events but rejected for various reasons.

[The_Mormegil]

It did feel bad that the difference between winning and losing our last match was, like, four more games needed to win...

[Higurashi]

Not losing has nothing to do with the fairness of a bracket, especially when you have random variables like battle elements and in-game luck. In a game of all skill, an unfair punishment for losing would be less unfair because you'd only have yourself to blame, but the unfairness would still be unnecessary.

If anything but a specific amount of Teams cause unfairness, there's no real reason not to switch to a more fair bracket type.

[mrpaper]

double elimination would be an easy solution (yet more demanding to organisers) but I like world cup format a lot, it would bring some more thrill to the event!

[deuce22]

Or just don't lose.  That's the easiest solution.

The only likely change would be to move to a single elimination format, which I'd prefer not to do.  World Cup type pools is an idea that's been considered in other events but rejected for various reasons.

What is the main reason (or 2) that world cup type pools have been rejected? I feel like if there were an event to use that type of setup, it would be team pvp.

[mrpaper]

By the way, changing format would prolly reduce the length of the event and mostly, it will avoid the annoying waiting game that the winners will have because they're  bracket is almost over while the losers one sure ain't!