Yeah, i dont agree with this pick thing too. You have to work with all possibilities, and no matter what you have to be prepared, if you dont A you get B and C, its easy and logical, and very very fair.

I dont agree either with myhand or gui when they say there is no challenge in 2v2 strategic, is just picks luck. I suppose that is correct if you dont mirror, because if you mirror, you always know exactly what you are going to get, and specially, which player gets what.

The 5v5 or 7v7 is similar, and i believe luck play even less. Its not about 1 or 2 players getting A or B because 2 bonuses will decide the game, its about positining, safety, baseing, comboing, attacking, defending. What makes the luck play so much is playing FFA in a team game.
If you end up getting beat after picking stage i doubt your picks were correct all the way, otherwise you are hoping for you get all you want, you just forgot to warn your enemy.

My team did talk a lot in the 7v7/5v5 games, but we talk and decided as a team, that is a part of the game. And the 2 games we lost was clear as water our flaws and what lead to defeat, and it wasnt luck, at all.


But i suppose 3 points is too much
i was thinking about something else
3 players each team playing 1v1 games worth 1 point, (9 points total)
2 2v2 games worth 2 points
2 3v3 games worth 2 points
1 5v5 games worth 2 points
this way 19 points total.

OK dunga.
+1 about games/point.
And i am ok for play Strategic 2v2 ladder settng ;)

Those points and games seem fair Dunga :D No problem for me with them.

Didn't see an answer to my question.

What is the desired amount of total teams?

I'm just curious if there would be a separation into two 'cups' if there were too many.

there is no team limitation chris

Thanks for that, dunga. I think your game settings are pretty solid, save for the fact that two 3v3 games seems a bit much. Three 1v1, two 2v2, one 3v3 and one 5v5 seems optimal to me. Last time it were the 3v3 games in particular that wore everyone on my team out and at the end it was hard to gather enough people to play two of those games.

Three different players on 1v1 is a great idea as well. It's good to get everyone on a team involved in different games and not just the 5v5. It's a team effort after all!

Are there any strict time limits in Nations Cup? What if one team has longer vacations?

@titron: last time the pacing was pretty slow with plenty of time for vacations. I don't expect much of a difference to that this time around. If you know before starting a round that you'll be gone for an extended amount of time then it's probably best to get a reserve to play for you instead so things can go a lot quicker.

Kingu: the same team can play both 3v3.

Gnuffone:
I think the idea was that many people like playing one of the 3vs3 games, but prefer not to play two 3vs3 games at the same time (and, at the same time as all the other games).

look past nation cup.
The nation with a top player with an undisputed leadership, who played all game, are in final.
Look Brazil, with Dunga that play all games.
look Norway, with Yeon taht play all games.
You want go on final of nation cup? best idea is put 1/2 top player and 3 decent player that listen you.
Reason:
if you are very good, you don't need to be helped of teammate. I HATE when i have to discuss with teammate for convince then to change their commit. Is a waste of time and you ended for play bad too, bc you focus to convince mate instead try best move. For this reason Italy lose soon on playoff. We were never of same opinion on the moves to make.
look line up of Usa east 1 2012. All very good player, but none of them were better than others. And they lose soon too.

i'm not sure what you are trying to prove but if you want you can do the same and play all games.

Could we please for the new Nations Cup avoid "vote to boot"/"direct boot" options? As in that the time limit for voting to boot/direct boot is the same as auto boot.

Simply for the same reason as ladder; you don't want to give those who are very eager with the boot button to have an advantage over those who are not.

I just cant fathom why the grammer nazis that dictate this forum dont pick up on Gnuffone's grammar, but instead decide to choose to bully people like Motocross and agressive, to name but a few :/

Gnuffone: ofcourse you don't need to be helped when you are a very good player, you should help the others instead.

Often happan on teamgames that teammate don't want listen you :/

leadership is a part of team play, making the team playing as a team is a skill.

What made me play all games so far its because thats the point of a nation selection, making the best teams for the games. I was inspired by the Davis Cup and Table Tennis team disputes.
I advice the teams to do the same, or at least try to have close to the best line-up possible. Its a serious competition imo, so, doing the best is the best option.

Also, we can put this to voting
will we limit each player to play 3 events maximum or he can play all 4?

oh cmon, don't became ridiculous.
Why we should put this limit? On past Nation Cup we never speak about this...
This is my opinion. Why we should don't allowe the best player to play all games?

Maybe to be this more like nation cup?

IMO a player can play in all catagories, but what you said about teammates who don't want to listen to you. Then there is no teamplay and, how bad this might be for you, your team doesn't deserve to win then.