g8keepr wrote:I prefer a low game load as well - wait, I like a low work load for organizing the tourney as well.
I am fine with the change - but slighty different as we have a lot of good teams (going with 8 would be a shame) and I dont want to make it lasting for too long. 2 games will be sent out; if a team wins both games, the teams advances. in case of a 1-1 two more games are sent out. the team leading 3-1 advances - in case of a draw we will have a tie-breaker. So kind of a best of 5 but with less games to handle.
Hope that works for all - moreover I appreciate if the teams could inform me if the round is decided or more games are needed.
All fine with this setting?
g8keepr wrote:Josko, I do understand your concerns. but there has to be a winner and a tie breaker is always kind of luck - I assume you know that better than me one as you are involved in the clan scene with tie breakers after 60 games. moreover I personally can't run a tourney to go for a "until a team leads by 2" (time consuming to look after and duration). The last one with 16 teams and a best of 3 took 4 months - I assume this one will be 8 months. hope you are still in.
g8keepr wrote:Maybe there are 2 clan scenes at CC - the clan wars I just checked (again) have 1 game as a tie breaker, but I guess it could differ between official events and "private" challenges.
And of course we could play 3 games at once. Why did I come up with it? Because interested players wrote "so signing up for tourney with 3 games at once would be too much ATM" or wrote that they prefer a lower game load.
So I will wait for more feedback to settle the format.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest