Donelladan wrote:And I think you'd agree with me that having a maximum score of 6 for tribes with 1 member exclude them de facto for a possible medal.
I agree this is true, but it is entirely their fault not to sign up second member in more than 10 days how much the tournament was waiting for players so they suffer for their inactivity in signing players in.
As I already said :
Donelladan wrote:64 places. On the clan tab I count 34 clans, plus 4 primitive tribes and one advanced tribe.
Potentially 39 - making 64 members still not sufficient to accept everyone when the tournament was created.
And I'll tell you, I looked at this tournament, and decided not to join when I saw one LHDD member was already inside. ( later another LHDD joined but irrelevant).
Since it wasn't possible in any case to have 2 members for every tribe and clans, I don't think it's acceptable to punish tribe with only one member.
Also, usually in other tribe tournaments, the number of players necessary is given. Here it was 2 max, not 2 players.
josko.ri wrote:It is also paradoxical that in "tribal" tournament which is by default competition of MANY individuals one single member can win it all.
Two or one doesn't make much difference. It's 1vs1 game anyway.
I believe before the format change, it was supposed to be direct elimination, meaning only 1 player would have won at the end. Potentially the last turn could have been 2 players from the same tribe facing each other
Furthermore you asked very relevant questions earlier in this thread
josko.ri wrote:Thanks a lot. Now I see the system changed and it is not anymore 64 but is 56 players. And members from 31 tribes signed in which mean some tribes will have only 1 player. I think it is the best to return to original 64 players and send pms to tribes which are not fully in that we need 1 more or 2 players from their tribe.
Check my post, if you let it start with 56 members, there will be 31 Tribes and not every tribe will have 2 members. That will cause confusion in the tournament scoring. Better revert to original 64 players and send pms to Tribes which did not fully join to sign up their representatives.
josko.ri wrote:Now you have members from 32 tribes signed in and 55 total. That is 23 tribes with 2 players and 9 tribes with 1 player. The way to go is to send pm to 9 players which are lone from their tribe to recruit 1 more member and make it 64 players. Otherwise with 56 players you will have 8 tribes with only 1 member and that will be mess up.
The tournament has been open for sign ups for over a week now. That is ample time for those interested to enter the tournament and for people to recruit their fellow tribe members to join. Even if we were to move the number of players back up to 64 there is still a possibility that not all clans will have two representatives a piece. I do not see how the discrepancy with number of players per clan will affect the scoreboard.
To which CatchersMitt14 replied "I do not see how the discrepancy with number of players per clan will affect the scoreboard." which was true if it was a direct elimination tournament.
But which is not true anymore if it's total of wins per tribes/clans with some having twice more games than other.
In a direct elimination tournament with 1 winner at the end, of course having 2 members instead of one increase your chance of having someone of your tribe being 1st, but it's still totally possible for a tribe with 1 member to finish 1st as well.
Right now it's 100% impossible for a tribe with 1 member to finish in the top 4.
Since the format changed, it is now extremely important to have 2 members for your tribe, but during signing up, it was not. Therefore you can't blame tribe with 1 member saying it's their own fault, should they have expected change of rule ??
Btw, at the end of the day, I don't care, LHDD has 2 members anyway, and winning this tournament isn't such a big deal, I just think current system is unfair.