<< Back to Ladder Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 9 of 9   
Season I ladder: 2/7/2012 15:44:54


szeweningen 
Level 60
Report
Hello,

I am aware that this problem does not concern me, but it might in the future. I just looked at the final ranking table of seasonal ladder. I honestly wouldn't want to be in PaniX's shoes winning all the games and ending 5th. What is very disappointing is that when you look at the "notable victories" window on the pages of top ten players you'll see that almost no games between top 10 players there ocurred (it led to 3 people ending the season with no losses). Possible solution? Maybe a playoff phase for top 16 (with standard double-elimination brackets that would set players according to their rank). What are your thoughts about it?
Season I ladder: 2/7/2012 15:58:50


szeweningen 
Level 60
Report
Sorry, don't even look at the post above, it did account for 11 games, not 15, sorry for mistake, but still the part about in-games between top 10 is still valid.
Season I ladder: 2/7/2012 17:01:22


Gnullbegg 
Level 49
Report
I think it's not the first time this has been put forward but I agree with szeweningen here. Adding a playoff phase to the seasonal ladders really could add something special to the whole competition. A small knockout tournament, starting with quarterfinals for example, would be great (and it could even make for an interesting watch with fog as they are right now!).
Season I ladder: 2/7/2012 17:37:24

The Duke of Ben 
Level 55
Report
The new settings for matchmaking will probably solve most if not all of the problems from season I. As I see it, nobody would go 15 (or 20) games straight winning if they fought people on their own level.
Season I ladder: 2/7/2012 17:45:48


MilitaryManiac 
Level 57
Report
Even if nobody goes undefeated, I still like the idea of a playoff system. Dont be like the BCS in college football!!!!!!
Season I ladder: 2/7/2012 20:39:37

The Duke of Ben 
Level 55
Report
It's a cool idea, until you realize that very tight matchmaking will mean that all of the highest ranked people have fought each other already. Want to know if Rubik would have beaten Yeon? Watch their game.

Sure, not everyone will fight everyone, even when close in rank. They will have fought a number of people around the same rank though, and you'll have a much better idea of who is better than who.
Season I ladder: 2/8/2012 00:47:43

Qi 
Level 55
Report
Season I ladder: 2/8/2012 01:14:05

Qi 
Level 55
Report
[8-player double-elimination tournament: season I's top 8](http://warlight.net/MultiPlayer.aspx?TournamentID=1862)
Season I ladder: 2/8/2012 02:01:45

Qi 
Level 55
Report
if any of top 8 are satisfied with the results of the ELO system for season I and decline, i'll do 1 of 4 things:

- invite the next best (fwiw, then retro, and so on) and give him 3 days to accept or decline
- invite the best on the 1v1 ladder (excluding myself, since i dont enjoy 1v1s very much & the 2 ladder games i have going are already 2 too many)
- just delete the tournament altogether and think it was worth a try
- delete the tournament and invite the worst 8 (who completed all 15 games) instead! (and name the new tournament "The Best of the Worst")

personally, i view Season I as an experiment (to make fizzer's Season II better) whose results can't be taken too seriously. each top 10 player played against only 1-5 other top players. their other 10-14 games were against bad, average, decent and above average players, with more games being played against weaker opponents than stronger. thus: if Player A's shitty opponents are less shitty than Player B's, A's rank will be higher!
Posts 1 - 9 of 9