Would you like this Tourney, and would you play in it?

Discussion in 'PA: TITANS: General Discussion' started by wpmarshall, July 17, 2016.

  1. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,854
    Likes Received:
    2,973
    I'm trying to get it so that it's hard to 'knock out' by ganging up on people.
    Otherwise I can just see pros complaining that they didnt get through because they got triple-teamed.
    stuart98 and cdrkf like this.
  2. Clopse

    Clopse Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,525
    Likes Received:
    2,860
    A smart pro be like, hey anyone wanna team up, we will win if you join me. Smart smelly no life scrub would be honored for this and team up. Awesome pro and no life scrub both make it through. True story.
    stuart98 and cdrkf like this.
  3. Quitch

    Quitch Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,246
    Likes Received:
    5,980
    Then don't have a FFA round.
  4. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,854
    Likes Received:
    2,973
    Then have just another run-of-the-mill 1v1 tourney.
  5. Pieman90

    Pieman90 Active Member

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    99
    Why don't you do something like this? https://exodusesports.com/tournament/cloak-danger/
    tunsel11 likes this.
  6. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,854
    Likes Received:
    2,973
    Because dynamic alliances has to have allied victory. If not I would do something like that and then have the follow up be a 2v2 round for example.
  7. Quitch

    Quitch Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,246
    Likes Received:
    5,980
    Yes. That's what you get if you "fix" the "problem" you highlighted.
  8. Pieman90

    Pieman90 Active Member

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    99
    You don't need to have dynamic alliances thou, just an example of an ffa tourney and I think people atm might be more interested in that than in another 1v1 tourney.
  9. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,854
    Likes Received:
    2,973
    One answer to it would be to have the 1v1s as double elimination with a losers bracket whereby coming in the bottom 2 of an FFA means yo only have 1 'life' in the 1v1s whereas those who win or come 2nd will have 2 lifelines as they can still come back through the losers bracket.
    Clopse and cdrkf like this.
  10. cdrkf

    cdrkf Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,719
    Likes Received:
    4,788
    I like that idea
  11. stuart98

    stuart98 Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,006
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    That means no challonge though. Maybe put the one life into the Bo3 round rather than a double elimination?
  12. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,854
    Likes Received:
    2,973
    How ever did we manage without it?
  13. reptarking

    reptarking Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    1,577
    make the players capped to 4 per ffa.
    each player in that ffa gets lives to use during the elimination tournament based on how they did in the FFA.

    1st place ffa. gets extra 3 lives.
    2nd gets +2 lives.
    3rd gets +1 lives.
    and 4th gets no extra lives.

    this makes it so if you die in the ffa first you cannot lose a single game in the elimination tournament. you win your ffa you can lose 3 games over the tournament before your out. do it with standard 1v1 single elimination style brakets. but keep track of lives left for each player. so if player A and B face off in round 1, Player A has 2 lives and B has no extra lives. Then B has to beat player A 3 times without droping a game. Player A only needs to beat B once to move on to round 2 with whatever lives he has left. if you do brackets properly there should not be to people with 3 extra lives facing one another tell quarters or semi's.

    Could also make it in FFA that
    1st gets 2 lives extra.
    2/3 get 1 extra life.
    and 4th gets 0 extra.

    also adding in that a win in the elimination rounds gives you 1 extra life. so if you get 4th in ffa and go undefeated in elimination rounds. after 4 rounds and getting to the finals you could have 4 extra lives to face an opponent who might have got 1st in an ffa but dropped 2 lives getting to the final and only has 4 lives like you. making it a best of 9. which is a bit much but would be probably near a bo3 tournament in amount to of games from start to finish.
  14. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,854
    Likes Received:
    2,973
    Seems rather overcomplicated as you'd need a way to sort different opponents for players after each loss. It would mean brackets could not be constructed in advance etc. It'll be hard enough with some people starting in the losers bracket I feel. What do others think about Gandalf's thesis? :p
  15. cdrkf

    cdrkf Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,719
    Likes Received:
    4,788
    I like the concept, however if this was the plan we'd have to limit the maximum obtainable number of lives to 2 (so no games requires more than a BO3).

    Btw Gandalfs idea doesn't require anything special for brackets- he's saying if a player has '2 lives' going into round 1, their opponent has to defeat them 3 times to get past them. If the player they are facing only has 1 life, they only have to win two games- kinda of like a tie breaker in tennis. I like the idea but may prove difficult to track as number of games each round will depend on previous performance. Also games could go on for a long time (like a tennis tie break) if one player wins, then looses next effectively resetting the score back to even again.
  16. grzegorz2121

    grzegorz2121 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    18
    I don't know why everyone don't like this idea. I think it's great idea (I doubt if i saw it somewhere...)
    This is how I understand it:
    First round is to sieve veterans and weaker players so they can play with others that are similar in skill level.
    Next we have 1v1 battles both veterans and weaker players on the end winners from both categories fight each other.

    I want to play in it too :)
  17. ljfed

    ljfed Active Member

    Messages:
    182
    Likes Received:
    132
    The reason you don't see this style of tournament is because that is generally not the outcome in the FFA bracket. Better players will not necessarily beat the worse players in an FFA. It may be more fun but it is a lot more random.

    Though I still like the idea.
  18. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,854
    Likes Received:
    2,973
    Would people like the idea / be willing to play, more or less, if the following change was made;

    The top 2 players in each FFA go into a 'Winners bracket' whereas the 3rd and 4th placed players in the FFA go into the losers bracket where if they lose 1 more game they are knocked out. The rest of the 1v1 plays as a standard double elimination (losing in the winners bracket sends you into the losers bracket) etc.
    That way the outcome of the FFA is relevant and players will need to work harder, be more diplomatic and more devious in order to progress without 'losing a life' as it were.

    I know this has already been tabled, but a wider opinion pool may be better.
  19. grzegorz2121

    grzegorz2121 Member

    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    18
    It isn't that good like first idea but still better than random single-elimination tournament.

Share This Page