Five Tribes –Les Artisans de Naqala Five Tribes –Les Artisans de Naqala

Forums

Recherche
Forums » T2R Competitive Play - English » FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions
Montrer: Messages du jour 
  
AuteurSujet
\/\/ill
Senior Member
Maître des citrouilles

Messages: 386
Enregistré(e) en :
June 2010
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Thu, 17 April 2014 09:38
An open draft wwould at least give Felix the opportunity to play tag with me which he so desperately craves!

I like idea of

1 US map
1 eu map
1 1910/big cities/US
1 AAT
1 TAG (but one game on each team's chosen map except US, with third game on US)
1 Asia+Swiss (nice 2p clash)

It would give new tag matches on maps not used before...
      
FLOP_Hecki
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 883
Enregistré(e) en :
October 2005
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Thu, 17 April 2014 22:04
An open draft, really ???!!!

Oh come on! What if someone picks me in his team - and i don't like him? I'm happy with my GANG - and it's not my mistake that so many players are only able to play 1-2 maps.

This idea should be erased immediatly. Smile
      
yaelka
Senior Member
Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2011

Pages Perso
Messages: 368
Enregistré(e) en :
July 2005
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Fri, 18 April 2014 18:37
What about

1. USA
2. EU/USA
3. to be chosen frome the lower seeded team
4. TAG

1 and 4 seem to be a "must" for me.
2 can be replaced by whatever (EU only ... )
3 to be chosen from the lower seeded team (at least in RR), out of a predefined list (AAT or Swiss/Asia or USA 1910, Big Cities and Mega or a second TAG on a different map or - if wished - even a second USA match. But then we should fix anything completely different as no. 2). That would make everything a bit more open and more tricky.

I don't like the idea of open draft. I enjoy being on BTB team in Fusion and on TuS team in NC ... and hope none of my Captains will fire me Confused ... but if one of them does Crying or Very Sad I'd prefer to look for players I like to play together with by myself and not getting drafted in any team. Up to now I've always seen Sysy and onyx helping to find teams for players who didn't find one by themselves till the end of registration.

Let's keep fusion alive or try to make it even more popular Smile

[Mis à jour le: Fri, 18 April 2014 18:43]

      
onyx puffin
Senior Member

Messages: 1151
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Fri, 18 April 2014 21:33
dandee wrote on Thu, 17 April 2014 03:09

if you want to make a real tournament Fusion the most fun and most interesting is to create teams randomly
a player signs up for one or more categories
Every year different teams
dan


There have been many of us that would like to do a Random grouping Team tournament. Probably it should be a separate event. And maybe to be effective, even single elimination so it could be completed in say 4 weeks or 7 for double elim. (16 teams) (8, 4, 2 1) (or double elimination 7 weeks, 8, 8, 6, 5, 2 or 3, 2, 1 or 2)
A 4 week tournament maybe do-able into the current Tournament schedule.

[Mis à jour le: Fri, 18 April 2014 21:37]

      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2013

Pages Perso
Messages: 2970
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2007
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Fri, 18 April 2014 23:10
How about:

5 match clash :
US
EU
TAG
Choice of Team A
Choice of Team B

Choices offered : Asia, Swiss, Swiss/Asia, AAT

4 matches clash :
US
TAG
Choice of team A
Choice of team B

Choices offered : Swiss, Asia, Europe, AAT


FUN might be an option : if there's a great desire for it and if a 6-game format can be designed.
EDIT : Or we could offer a 6-game US format including BC, 1910, USA, Mega, 8+nono and another fun map.

We don't have to worry about a home advantadge in playoffs.
A team would have to make a different choice from one clash to another.

About BTB, there's no willingness to fire anybody Very Happy. Now that we won, I would be willing to split the team in 2 to create 2 basterds team, to integrate 5/6 new players and offer a new experience to my teammates without killing the core of our team. More basterds is good for everybody !
It is only a personal thought -still to be discussed between us- and not a plan yet.

[Mis à jour le: Sat, 19 April 2014 04:56]

      
DrakeStorm
Senior Member
Champion du Monde AdR 2014

Messages: 907
Enregistré(e) en :
March 2006
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Sat, 19 April 2014 02:07
How about this idea (or some variation of it):

Reduced matches from 6 to 4 games. Add more mactches and let each player play any 2.

Possible matches could be:
US
EU
Asia
Swiss
TAG (2 games instead of 3)
FUN (4 of the 5 picked, similar to how AAT maps are picked)

With this appraoch you would still only need 1 "other" map specialist to play both Asia and Swiss. But it could allow a new player to only have to learn 1 new map (for either Asia or Swiss), not 6 or 7 (for AAT).

Also if the clash was 6 matches, putting in a newbie for Asia or Swiss wouldn't hurt as much. 1 loss out of 6 matches rather than 1 out of 4.

Sysyphus wrote on Fri, 18 April 2014 14:10

How about:

5 match clash :
US
EU
TAG
Choice of Team A
Choice of Team B

Choices offered : Asia, Swiss, Swiss/Asia, AAT

4 matches clash :
US
TAG
Choice of team A
Choice of team B

Choices offered : Swiss, Asia, Europe, AAT.

FUN might be an option : if there's a great desire for it and if a 6-game format can be designed.
We don't have to worry about a home advantadge in playoffs.
A team would have to make a different choice from one clash to another.


I like the choice of each team picking a format, but in the first scenario, you would need 2 Other Map Specialists. That means the 4 teams this year that only had 1, would have to add/train another. In the second scenario you "might" need 2 unless you allow a team to always pick the same choice and they pick Europe each time. So option 2 seems better to me.

Could take it one step farther and have each team make 2 choices, but narrow it down a bit to try to minimize the number of map specialist needed on a team.

      
Morientes ZL
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 273
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2012
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Sat, 19 April 2014 10:25
My propose is :

1)US
2)EU
3)TAG
4)AAT
5)Swiss/Asia

or without 5
      
\/\/ill
Senior Member
Maître des citrouilles

Messages: 386
Enregistré(e) en :
June 2010
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Sun, 20 April 2014 02:28
there is an asia tourney, eu tourney, us tourney, swiss tourney, AAT tourney in the year...

it would be nice to have a clash in one tourney based on 1910/Big cities... (i hate it, but by same argument, mega...)

seems odd we have none...
      
onyx puffin
Senior Member

Messages: 1151
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2005
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Sun, 27 April 2014 05:28
The FUSION CUP Evaluation summary

So here is what I learned from the notes in this thread:

1. Only need 1 US 2 player match in the FUSION set.

2. EU only or US/EU is still open for debate. But keep some form of EU.

3. TAG must remain as people have come to really enjoy that dimension of the tournament.

4. The 4th slot, currently the AAT slot needs some more thoughtful consideration. Either keep it the same OR perhaps use a way to make the slot optional with some creative way to do home/away choice for maps. (see notes 7 & 8 below)

OTHER things we learned:

5. (not much support for create teams randomly, unless it is make a separate tournament)

6. (Dea and Drake seem to really be at odds when it comes to discussing stuff)

7. (AAT, Asia, swiss, tournament all have about same level of participation. Truck noted Big Cities, Mega, & 1910 do not get much play from top players; AND Will asked why none of those three have a tournament, and asked if we ever tried a tournament with any of those 3?)

8. (A proposal of home/away matches maybe should be considered. But how would this work out in the KO-stage? Another option is that each team chooses one format for each match, either AAT, asia, Swiss Mega BC or 1910)

9. (whether FUSION would go to 5 matches may need more support and there was concern that 5 matches would mean less teams)

[Mis à jour le: Sun, 27 April 2014 05:32]

      
Knockando
Senior Member
Vainqueur Multi-Player Winter Championship AdR 2010

Messages: 1567
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2010
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 30 April 2014 12:26
It's nice to play all maps, but it's more interesting to play 3 (or more) games in a row on the same map.

So perhaps TAG + USA + 2 or 3 other matches choosen between differents maps can be intersting
      
SuperPello
Senior Member

Pages Perso
Messages: 488
Enregistré(e) en :
January 2011
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 30 April 2014 13:04
That was my propose.

SuperPello wrote on Fri, 11 April 2014 20:23

Hi all.

Why not a more simple:
US
EU
US/EU
AAT
TAG

?

(The second US player has at at least 3 US game)

      
Sysyphus - Pommard
Senior Member
Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2013

Pages Perso
Messages: 2970
Enregistré(e) en :
December 2007
Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Thu, 01 May 2014 03:22
With Pello's choice we have only US and Euro map unfortunately.

Home advantadge can be solved easily by giving each team the choice of one match in a clash.

4-match clash in Round Robin :
(to make sure we keep all the current teams).
US
TAG
Match 3
Match 4

Choice of :
(locks in my mind)
  • EURO
  • SWISS
  • ASIA
    (and why not)
  • BC/1910 combo
  • AAT
  • FUN (if interest and viable 6-game format)


    Allow teams to play a 5-match clash in KO if they agree.
    TAG as a lock.
    Each team chooses 2 of the matches among the choices above (including USA).

    1. Keeps the spirit of promoting alternative maps alive
    2. Lineups built according to team's strengths instead of putting up with an imposed format.
    3. Therefore Helps to balance the clash or at least teams would feel like it.
    4. Flexible format which would be more likely to last through the years, by offering/playing a different clash every week. And you would have the opportunity to play the same opponent on a different format in KO and adjust your strategy.
    5. 6-game Swiss-Asia-BC/1910 offer good alternatives to AAT.
    6. We could include all those matches in TELO, (better than U/E left aside).

    About the AAT hoarders :
    We just played AMC/SMC, nobody has a clear edge on those maps. Anybody who is willing to learn an alternative map, by diversifying or by just building a new strength is likely to be pretty competitive and to be a serious asset for their team in the next Fusion Cup.

    [Mis à jour le: Thu, 01 May 2014 05:08]

  •       
    \/\/ill
    Senior Member
    Maître des citrouilles

    Messages: 386
    Enregistré(e) en :
    June 2010
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Tue, 06 May 2014 18:04
    I would like to strongly suggest my idea (Sysy seems to have adopted it somewhat) of a 2p clash of US+1910+Big Cities - I think that is a nice skill set, all that a good US player needs to do is learn the new tickets - it wont take long and you can still play a combo well etc even if you dont know your opponent's ticks just yet!

    Asia really is a great 2p map, I could possibly argue it being better than US for different reasons. It would be nice to have a clash in this. I think the map deserves it certainly more than EU or Swiss. Im not suggesting it for this tournament, but I would like to try Tag-Asia! Seems like a very interesting prospect if anyone else is interested?

    Will
          
    Sysyphus - Pommard
    Senior Member
    Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2013

    Pages Perso
    Messages: 2970
    Enregistré(e) en :
    December 2007
    Fusion 2015 ? Fri, 26 September 2014 03:15
    OK guys, we have 2 months to review the fusion rules with that previous discussion as a starting point.
    Let's say that by November 30th discussion is closed. Fusion will likely start in the end of January.

    Team formation
    Team formation is not under discussion. If we let teams choose the format of their clash, teams' strengths will be more balanced.

    Questions then (not an official vote, but meant to keep the discussion around clear matters) :
    1) Should we try a 5-match clash over a 4-match and allow TAG players to play a single ?

    2) Should we let teams choose parts of the clash format ?
    If yes (according to 1) :
  • For a 4-match clash : each team picks one match with US and TAG as a base.
  • For a 5-match clash : Each team picks 2 matches. 5th is TAG.
  • For a 5-match clash : Each team picks 1 match. Base : TAG, US, Euro.

    3) What match format could be picked by a team ?

    I'd personally go a 5-match clash and have teams choose 2 matches each with TAG as a 5th match. USA map will always be a favorite no matter what. It would add some strategy in the game, it would offer exciting clashes and keep the diversity in the competition.
  • Regarding match formats available : USA, EURO, SWISS, ASIA, BC/1910/US (or BC only and 1910 only), AAT.

    Thanks for your contributions.

    PS : I am still planning on splitting BTB into 2 teams. If you are interested in joining us -we would need 6 players- contact me via pm.

    [Mis à jour le: Fri, 26 September 2014 03:29]

  •       
    Sysyphus - Pommard
    Senior Member
    Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2013

    Pages Perso
    Messages: 2970
    Enregistré(e) en :
    December 2007
    Re:Fusion 2015 ? Sat, 22 November 2014 06:49
    Hello,

    The tournament workgroup is trying to design a clash format which :
    1. would offer a bit more exposure to alternative maps.
    2. would try to narrow the gap in terms of teams strength

    It led to 5-match clash proposal, allowing TAG players to also play a single.
    A 5th match would automatically add a map to a clash, and would reduce the chances of winning a clash thanks to tie-breaker in KO.

    Any suggestion regarding the format of a clash ?

    Slot 1 = Tag
    What for slot 2, 3, 4, (and 5).

    Putting USA and Euro has locks for 2 and 3, does not really narrow the gap between teams and is likely a replica of last year's Fusion.


          
    AGT-Schachus
    Senior Member

    Pages Perso
    Messages: 116
    Enregistré(e) en :
    November 2005
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Sat, 22 November 2014 10:59
    Nobody seemed to support Drakes idea about shprter matches with the possibility of playing more than 1, but I like it. Thumbs Up
          
    Sysyphus - Pommard
    Senior Member
    Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2013

    Pages Perso
    Messages: 2970
    Enregistré(e) en :
    December 2007
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 02:11
    Hello all,

    We discussed the format with workgroup discussion in November.

    Our conclusions were:

    1) Expand the format with more matches/maps for more diversity.
    2) A TAG player could also play a single.
    3) Maps available.
    Consensus: TAG, US, EURO, Asia, Swiss.
    Strong support: AAT
    Good support: 1910 Combo 2x1910, 2xUSA, 2XBig Cities
    Suggestions only: FUN, BC

    Discussions stalled at this point.

    We need another quick complete feedback, so that we can publish the rules around Feb 1st.
    Fusion's goal was and is to promote diversity. If the format could contribute to reduce the gaps between teams, that would be ideal.



    1. Expand the format ?
    a. No, keep the 2014 4-match clash
    b. Yes

    If yes,
    b1. 5-match format.
    b2. 6-match format.

    If yes,
    c1. Allow a TAG player to play a single
    c2. Allow a player to play any 2 matches
    c3. Allow any player to play 2 matches (would make sense only if we could boost the number of teams participating and makes sense for a 6-match format. Number of players in a team would not be a constraint any more. Any team with 3/4/5/6/7 players would be flexible)

    2. Format
    D. Fixed format = same format every week to make it easier.
    E. Leave teams the choice to pick some maps. (pro:makes sense only if lower seeded teams benefit from it. Con: makes the schedule/organization messier)

    3. In a TAG match :
    F. Keep playing 3 games
    G. Play 2 games

    Please answer ASAP, so that we can clearly define the global format.

    I'll make another poll if needed to choose the final format and the maps included.

    Thanks

    [Mis à jour le: Wed, 07 January 2015 02:19]

          
    onyx puffin
    Senior Member

    Messages: 1151
    Enregistré(e) en :
    January 2005
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 04:25
    Since I would love to see more participation in FUSION, and would like us to move to a 5 section match; and since I know people love the US map far more than the others, but having two regular US matches is simply not in the spirit of the FUSION diversity:
    I would propose we add the 5th match as US map 5 tickets minimum for each player. I choose that (of the FUN match dimension) because I think adding the 5 ticket dimension makes a different feel in strategy to the game without the other gimmickry. Also there are more US players and therefore more people to have a chance to participate in the FUSION teams.

    So I would propose 5 match set:
    1)US
    2)EU
    3)TAG
    4)AAT
    5)US 5 ticket minimum

    [Mis à jour le: Wed, 07 January 2015 04:27]

          
    DrakeStorm
    Senior Member
    Champion du Monde AdR 2014

    Messages: 907
    Enregistré(e) en :
    March 2006
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 04:48
    AGT-Schachus wrote on Sat, 22 November 2014 01:59

    Nobody seemed to support Drakes idea about shprter matches with the possibility of playing more than 1, but I like it. Thumbs Up


    Someone likes my idea.. I think it is a first!!

    So to recap my proposal/vote:

    6 matches
    4 games per match (2 for TAG)
    Each player can play 2 matches per round.


    Matches are:
    US
    EU
    Asia
    Swiss
    TAG
    FUN (4 of the 5 picked, similar to how AAT maps are picked, or get rid of 5 Tix one since I think that is the most luck akin to Mega).

    Benefits:
    1) You could get away with 4 player teams, but also could have a bigger team and still get everyone to play.
    2) Someone playing a format they aren't familiar with only has to play 4 games and not 6 (and on only 1 map as compared to AAT or an Asia/Swiss split format).
    3) Someone playing a format they aren't familiar with doesn't affect the clash result as much = 1 loss out of 6 rather than 1 out of 4 like in previous years.

    Could get rid of the FUN match or change it to something else, but a decent number of people know the format and it actually has a fair amount of skill. There is still alot of room for skill improvement in the format..like when to take a penalty, what tickets are best to keep, etc.
          
    Sysyphus - Pommard
    Senior Member
    Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2013

    Pages Perso
    Messages: 2970
    Enregistré(e) en :
    December 2007
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 05:39
    Well you have a poll including everyone's proposals in this thread, including yours, Drake. You might as well use it.

    In the end 6 matches sounds good, (go thank dea for her pm). I don't think 4 or 6 games/match does matter at all since scheduling is the real pain more than the playing time.
    4 games/match and a 2-match TAG will favor a lot of ties overall, and we will end up with clashes won on a roll of dice...

    I'd agree though that TAG takes a fair amount of time unless you're playing reasonable people.

          
    onyx puffin
    Senior Member

    Messages: 1151
    Enregistré(e) en :
    January 2005
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 05:43
    DrakeStorm wrote on Tue, 06 January 2015 22:48


    So to recap my proposal/vote:

    6 matches
    4 games per match (2 for TAG)
    Each player can play 2 matches per round.

    Matches are:
    US
    EU
    Asia
    Swiss
    TAG
    FUN (4 of the 5 picked, similar to how AAT maps were picked,



    I actually like this proposal but think it should be 5 matches, and make Asia/Swiss option by the players. So would be Matches would be:
    US
    EU
    Asia/Swiss
    TAG
    FUN (4 of the 5 picked, similar to how AAT maps were picked,)
          
    DrakeStorm
    Senior Member
    Champion du Monde AdR 2014

    Messages: 907
    Enregistré(e) en :
    March 2006
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 08:28
    Personally I think the multiple choice options, not just here but when we discuss the NC, etc. do not ever give the full picture. There are always too many what ifs? For example I vote for 1b and 3g, but if 1 ends up A, then I would vote for 3f, etc. And then when there are too many what ifs, people just vote for the status quo.

    And we all know most people don't care, so I think just asking for opinions, and more importantly what people liked and did not like about the previous year and then give some options to improve the event. After that just work behind the scenes with the organizer(s), rules committee, etc. and present the event (maybe give a little time afterwards for comments and do minor tweaks if needed), then start the event.
          
    Knockando
    Senior Member
    Vainqueur Multi-Player Winter Championship AdR 2010

    Messages: 1567
    Enregistré(e) en :
    January 2010
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 10:05
    b2 c3
    or b1 c1
    Smile

    e
    Let the team choose all maps. Each team (A and B, A is the lower seeded)) give the order of maps (A1, A2 etc)
    And the maps played are A1, B1 (if not choosen before), A2 etc until 6 maps.
    Choice between US, TAG, EU, Asia, Swiss, AAT, BC, 1910Combo, Fun...

    [Mis à jour le: Wed, 07 January 2015 10:08]

          
    FLOP_dea1
    Senior Member
    Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2007

    Messages: 2110
    Enregistré(e) en :
    September 2005
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 10:57
    My view:

    1:
    a) keep the 2014 4-match clash

    b2) If we don't keep the 4-match clash go to 6-match format

    c1) Allow a TAG player to play a single (that's also allowed with the 4-match Format and should of course stay)
    c2) Allow a player to play any 2 matches (makes sense with more matches, flexibility may be needed)
    c3) ??? Isn't that the same as c2?
    In case c1+2 were meant as "only ONE player is allowed to play 2 matches" that would be a change even to the old format where both TAG players could have played a single.


    2.
    D) Fixed format = same format every week to make it easier.


    3.
    F) Keep playing 3 games in a TAG match


    My thoughts:
    I'd keep the 4-match format, because in the last years people said the main problem for most teams was finding an AAT Player. with more matches played on alternate maps you'll need to find even more of those.


    If we don't keep it I'd go to 6, not 5, because

    - even number is better, it makes all games count

    - with 6 you need no picking and I fear that picking maps will result in a mess:
    -- You need to do that before giving the lineup --> timing Problem
    -- You need to make good rules covering all what-if's (eg what if both teams pick the same map?)
    -- to keep it balanced each team should be allowed to pick the same amount of matches, which is a problem with 5 matches/clash and TAG + US fixed.

    My suggestion for 6 is:
    TAG
    US
    EU
    Asia
    Swiss
    1910/BC/Mega 2 games each


    I'm not fond of any FUN variant (and like Drake I think 5 ticks is the worst of them). FUN is fun, but not a "normal" tournament.


    I would stay with 6 games (3 for TAG) not 4.
    The issue is finding a date, not the duration.
    An evening where I have a TTR match is "lost" for any other purpose anyhow - if I spend an evening for TTR I'd like to play a reasonable amount of games a) to be less luck dependent and b) because I enjoy playing.
          
    dandee
    Senior Member

    Pages Perso
    Messages: 702
    Enregistré(e) en :
    November 2008
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 11:02
    DrakeStorm wrote on Wed, 07 January 2015 08:28

    Personally I think the multiple choice options, not just here but when we discuss the NC, etc. do not ever give the full picture. There are always too many what ifs? For example I vote for 1b and 3g, but if 1 ends up A, then I would vote for 3f, etc. And then when there are too many what ifs, people just vote for the status quo.

    And we all know most people don't care, so I think just asking for opinions, and more importantly what people liked and did not like about the previous year and then give some options to improve the event. After that just work behind the scenes with the organizer(s), rules committee, etc. and present the event (maybe give a little time afterwards for comments and do minor tweaks if needed), then start the event.


    same for me.
    Smile
          
    Lucullupus
    Senior Member

    Pages Perso
    Messages: 827
    Enregistré(e) en :
    July 2008
      Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 12:31
    Hi folks!

    I always understood the spirit of the FUSION cup as a competition, where the fun factor plays an important role. So i always had funny teams with funny players. Of course we wanted to win our matches, but if not, we had at least our fun. Therefore I will support any suggestion, which increases the fun factor and helps fun teams to be competitive against the monstermasterpointstarteams. The possibility of some surprising results could help to increase the quantity of playing teams.
    More matches is okay, the number of games is (imho) irrelevant. Yes, a player should be allowed to play two matches in a clash.
    I prefer:

    US
    EU
    TAG
    ASIA / SWISS (lower ranked team chooses)
    US 5 TIX (I like Onyx suggestion!)
    AAT (or a part of it)

    I dont like Asia AND Swiss, because there are only few specialists of these maps. 2 or 3 TAG matches? Difficult question, tags are funny for the players, boring for the spectators, so maybe two of them is enough. Also tags are not so easy in scheduling and three tags need to be played on two days sometimes.

    Smile

    [Mis à jour le: Wed, 07 January 2015 12:32]

          
    benny296
    Senior Member

    Messages: 122
    Enregistré(e) en :
    May 2013
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Wed, 07 January 2015 16:22
    I never played in the Fusion Cup, but I try to give my opinion Razz

    1. USA
    2. Europe
    3. Asia
    4. Swiss

    These four definitely have to be in it, because these are the maps and they give the best diversity.

    5. + 6. Big Cities/Mega/1910, maybe even add slot number 7.

    In my opinion it would be nice to play all variants available.
    FUN modes should only be for the fun tournament and I never tried TAG, so I will not give an opinion on that.
    I like the designated playstyles more than any community-invented ones in a tournament like this.

    Of course every player should be allowed to play two games in a clash of six or seven.
          
    Sysyphus - Pommard
    Senior Member
    Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2013

    Pages Perso
    Messages: 2970
    Enregistré(e) en :
    December 2007
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Thu, 08 January 2015 05:41
    Tournament would be more interesting if teams could play with only 3/4 players to favor a higher number of teams, easier communication for captains. It would make it easier also to build new teams.

    To avoid large clashes of 6/7 matches and possible scheduling issues, we could reintroduce the home and away feature like GFF suggested in the past.

    TAG
    USA
    and 2 maps of home team's choice among :
    EURO, ASIA, SWISS, 1910/BC/USA (rather than Mega)

    Best teams in RR get home field advantadge in playoffs.
          
    FLOP_dea1
    Senior Member
    Vainqueur Nation Cup AdR 2007

    Messages: 2110
    Enregistré(e) en :
    September 2005
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Thu, 08 January 2015 14:48
    hmmm...

    That means you need at least 2 players on your team who are able to play all maps (or one each for Euro/Swiss/Asia/US-Variants).
    If you have that anyway you can just as well produce a lineup for a 6-match clash TAG/US/EU/Asia/Swiss/US-Variants.

    Would you like to participate with this format as an EU-only player?
    Probably not, as you don't know how often you'll be allowed to play - maybe never in the KO (if your team never is "home" and the other doesn't pick EU).

    Again, I see the picking very problematic:
    - Timing issue (how many days before lineup is it done?)
    - Planning issue (captains cannot plan ahead who shall play when, as you cannot plan without knowing the picks - so players have to reserve possible playing days/times until "last minute")
    - Picking maps will frequently correlate to picking/kicking persons
          
    NG xbomanx
    Senior Member
    Vainqueur Single Player World Championship AdR 2010

    Pages Perso
    Messages: 395
    Enregistré(e) en :
    May 2008
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Thu, 08 January 2015 19:54
    Sysyphus - Pommard schrieb am Thu, 08 January 2015 05:41

    Tournament would be more interesting if teams could play with only 3/4 players to favor a higher number of teams, easier communication for captains. It would make it easier also to build new teams.

    To avoid large clashes of 6/7 matches and possible scheduling issues, we could reintroduce the home and away feature like GFF suggested in the past.

    TAG
    USA
    and 2 maps of home team's choice among :
    EURO, ASIA, SWISS, 1910/BC/USA (rather than Mega)

    Best teams in RR get home field advantadge in playoffs.



    I agree with this. I favore 4 players.
          
    Knockando
    Senior Member
    Vainqueur Multi-Player Winter Championship AdR 2010

    Messages: 1567
    Enregistré(e) en :
    January 2010
    Re:FUSION CUP 2014 evaluation & questions Sat, 10 January 2015 23:12
    After thinking more, there is no real interest to play 6 matches and allow players to play 2 each week. There are others tournaments to be played in the same time.

    So 4 matches per clash, and TAG players can play a single match if they want.

    And I like the idea to give the choice of the map to the teams.
    It won't be a mess, because you just have to ask to the captains to send their 4 favorites maps with a deadline before the end of previous round, and if they don't post TD keep the same choice as previous round.
    Lower seeded team (Team A) has 1st choice ;
    then 1st choice of second team (Team B) (if already chosen by team A then 2nd choice of team B);
    then 2nd choice of team A (if already choosen by team B, then 3rd choice of team A)
    then 2nd choice of team B (if already choosen by team A, then 3rd or 4th choice of team B)

    [Mis à jour le: Sat, 10 January 2015 23:19]

          
    Pages (2): [ «  <  1  2 ]     
    Sujet précédent:Multi Winter Championship 2014: Qualifying phase, stage 3
    Sujet suivant:2015 competitions : feedback needed
    Aller au forum: