i liked the 2v2 0% SR (and winning all games we played) shittons better then 1v1 WR on promotion relegation league (where for example i lost against verzeher for expanding safely while he took risks and got lucky in them)

Edited 10/14/2015 10:37:20

If he had played the 3v3 tournament, he could have received up to 20 total points, meaning Sephiroth is still in first place.

i would reckon beating sephiroth directly on the 3v3 might give me more then that. i don't find the team grouping system very fair. some players play regularly with each other and auto-team together, while the lone wolfs get thrown together. that's why i didn't play in the 3v3. got somehow lucky in the 2v2 with pushover, we actually worked well together.

maybe teams should be drawn randomly for the teamgames, to prevent that behaviour

this would prevent a lot of players joining, as they don't want to play with X players.

lol that would be stupid if you would reject a tourney like 20 because of that not? players who play often teamgames together will have a huge advantage over other teams so i think it is more then fair if team would be randomly drawned

I'd play anyways cause there are no bad teammates. It matters less who you play with

i think you are very wrong Ctrl alt delete, i remember some times ago there was a thread for a teammate season in seasonal ladder, and when we spoked about be random teammates, a good amount of players point out few problems like:
A) you can get a teammate you BL
B) you play with someone you really wouldn't play with
C) luck factor, i am pretty sure everyone would hope to get the as teamamte the best players possibles.
D) you don't want play with someone you think he can get gooted. That's the main point, what if you get a teammate you would neveer teamup with because you know his tendence to get booted?

There are many factor that make random teammates a big factor for don't join a competition.

players who play often teamgames together will have a huge advantage over other

I kinda disagree this is any advantage: in 20 tourney you usually teamup with some you know and teams ended up being kinda balanced. Opposite in the rando mteammates, what if you get your GG partner you usually play with and i get a random player, just promoted from B i never heard and never played a single games with? this would be kinda unfair.
WIth the actual rules, all teammate join other if they at least know a little ;)

I'd play anyways cause there are no bad teammates. It matters less who you play with

Despite i can or not agree in that, it wasn't one of the point i was thinking about.

Edited 10/14/2015 11:44:35

A) you can get a teammate you BL
B) you play with someone you really wouldn't play with

i think this is part of the team game effort. if you can't communicate with your teammates disregarding your differences you will be at a disadvantage.

C) luck factor, i am pretty sure everyone would hope to get the as teamamte the best players possibles.

luck is same for everyone.

D) you don't want play with someone you think he can get gooted. That's the main point, what if you get a teammate you would neveer teamup with because you know his tendence to get booted?

there are no high boots on 20, unless someone is retiring, and in that case he should not accept new season to begin with.

the real issue here (for people not wanting random team mates) is that they believe they have better outcome with trusted teammates. well, no shit sherlock. but it's not really fair for the other participants in this case.

Edited 10/14/2015 11:55:41

I don't know how it was in 20A or 20C, but boots were definitely an issue in 20B team games. At least 3 people (Miyagi, HHH, and Qi's alt) were booted in about 90% of their games. I had a teammate get booted twice. In the 3v3 tournament my team actually only had two games that were not decided by boot.

boot are a big issue. A lot of people get booted. I can't understand how PS can't get it.

if you can't trust active people to be active, you just can't trust them.

question is why are they still playing in 20 if they don't have time to take their turns without getting booted?

I agree. 20 is supposed to be about good players battling it out. You should not be booted in a competitive league

I also think it would be nice to do random teammates or some other system. Personally, I'd like to see random teammates but for a single game. It would take more work from an admin standpoint (could be set up via CLOT in future), but would produce better results.

So if you have a division with Players 1-12, you might have games like this for 3v3:

1/2/3 vs 4/5/6, 7/8/9 vs 10/11/12
1/5/9 vs 2/7/12, 3/6/10 vs 4/8/11

Or whatever the matchup is there is probably an easy formula to use that would result in not getting repeat matchups. The point is that you would not get handcuffed by someone who gets booted (I agree that they should not be, but it does happen).

Do the same thing in 2v2 as well. The league should measure your ability to adapt to any teammate and not be dominated by some 2v2 combination that has a playing history.

I agree that no one should have the same teammate for multiple tournaments. Ideally, I would like to randomly assign players teammates, but I have heard many complaints about it in the past, so I chose not to do that. The issue of teammates potentially being booted is a key problem, along with getting an untalkative teammate. I am really interested to ask some more 20A players what they think on getting randomly assigned teammates and if it is a well-liked idea, we can use that this season; I'll just use random.org to randomize teams. If we do random teammates, I will be more picky about the players allowed in, and the rules will be more stingy on players getting booted in team games (they may be prevented from playing future seasons because of it). Getting booted in 1v1 is not so big of deal since it affects only you, but getting booted in team games hurts your teammates as well.

Team games require more skill than 1v1, as Gnuffone says.

I think the fairest way to choose a template is for them to be voted on. However, I also do not like a lot of the templates we end up with when allowing all 20A members to vote. This season, I am considering using less common templates that most players have never played or played rarely before on 1v1 and 2v2. However, I must make sure the templates still require a lot of skill, and won't be decided on luck. 3v3 will likely stay Europe as I have yet to see a 3v3 template that remotely touches it in terms of complexity and skill required to perform at a top level at it.

I like the idea of boot times Gnuffone proposed. Most serious warlight players are on everyday, and while a few people may not wish to play because of this, it will greatly speed up the games, and will make the games more interesting as people are more likely to be focused.

2v2 with alts is a new idea and while I am in favor, I think many players do not wish to use an alt for 2v2. This is something to discuss for sure though.

Keep giving opinions guys; 20 this season was not as good as past seasons I think, and I'd really like to make it strong again.

I really like my idea of random teammates for only a single game. The idea would be that you never play with OR against the same player twice, since you could not do ALL combinations of for/against unless you only had a very small division and you need to go to 12 people to be able to have 2v2 and 3v3 teams work out.

My suggestion is 12 player divisions (also helps with how long it takes). Rotating matchups like I mentioned. No player plays with/against the same player within the same format.

Here is a sheet for the 2v2 matchups (I did not have time to fill it all in, but anyone can edit it if they want to try making the matchups). Then assign each player a 'slot' with a random number generator. 1v1 would just be a RR as normal...

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/186wWXClFv2jwCpdpeIU_Eio338j1eJwDY1ROEt3EvwQ/edit#gid=0

This would measure your ability to effect matchups.

I do like this idea to change matchups every time. I think many players would be in favor of it. But who can consistently make the games required for this, and won't get bored of it. I know personally I would start it with good intentions but would get tired of it after a few games. If this can be set up in CLOT, it is an excellent idea I think.

12 player divisions is a good idea; this is an excellent idea. You can play with each player once on 2v2, then against them twice on 2v2. This would be a total of 11 games, which sounds reasonable for 2v2 to me. We can also vary settings a bit possibly. In 3v3, you could play with each player twice, and against them three times. This would be a total of 11 games also. 1v1 would also be 11 games. 33 games total with this idea would be a lot but would also be against players closer to your skill, and so more players may be interested.

Edited 10/14/2015 16:04:59

I added a 4 game sample to the doc for the 2v2 match-ups underneath the original. After 12 games, everyone would play everyone once and have everyone as a partner once, I am currently working on the 3v3 match-ups which will take slightly longer.

Edit: If someone does start the CLOT, I can help them with the match-up algorithm

Edited 10/14/2015 16:02:18

Nice job Ree

@JSA - I am sure it can be done via CLOT if you have the matchups algorithm set. It would be a bit tedious to do manually as you say. I need to download MotD's CLOT and see if I can get that to work.

If it can be done in CLOT, then I really like this idea. I will talk to some of the 20A members from this and previous seasons, and see if more players would be interested in this style of competition.

I really like the idea of different teammates for each game!

When i joined the 20C, i had never played with any of the other players before - knowing new good people was nice.
Getting to team up with everyone would be just awesome!