FAForever Forums
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Login

    Teamgame Events

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Tournaments
    13 Posts 7 Posters 922 Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • waffelzNoobW Offline
      waffelzNoob
      last edited by

      in my opinion, option 2>3>1
      option 1 will obviously lead to a few stacked teams that dominate the tournament. this is fair to the pros though as it rewards their skill. just not very interesting for others to sign up so may lead to a very underpopulated tournament.
      options 2 and 3 are more fair across the board, but my preference goes out to 2 because it allows for freedom of choosing who you play with

      frick snoops!

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • FtXCommandoF Offline
        FtXCommando
        last edited by

        thank you bully, you have decided the fate of the whole event 👍

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
        • AskaholicA Offline
          Askaholic
          last edited by

          How about using players TMM 2v2 rating with minimum number of games? Not sure if that’s what you’re planning, but that would make sense for an ‘official’ FAF 2v2 tournament.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • FtXCommandoF Offline
            FtXCommando
            last edited by

            Yeah I'd like to transition to it eventually but since I'd like the event to happen next month I didn't feel like it would exactly be fair to require that on such short notice. I might try it out for one of the later events, maybe the one after this one that will be a 4v4 event which has a fair bit more matchmaker participation.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
            • AskaholicA Offline
              Askaholic
              last edited by

              Makes sense

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • C Offline
                Conorach
                last edited by

                I think the ranking cap makes sense. As a 1400~ player I would love to see different divisions (say 2500 - 3000, 3000-3500, and 3500-4000 or so) of teams to join. Would be neat if the winning team from a division gets included in the next higher division (I guess that's slightly inconvenient if the tournament is supposed to play on that day). Can have overall winner and divisional winners that way too.
                Otherwise, you could also completely randomize the teams (eg a 3v3 tournament) where you sort high + mid + low players together for the duration. But then again, it sucks to be stuck with a 1500 gap-only player :[

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • FemboyF Offline
                  Femboy Promotions team
                  last edited by

                  I agree as well with Bully. 2>3>1. I would advise setting the date of the ranking before the tournament is announced (maybe the same day team cap is announced, that's the date used for ratings) so people don't get to derank or anything. Also maybe forcing people to use highest rank would be good too, don't want some dude to pose as 1500 global and be 1700 ladder.

                  Also, would appreciate if you give me a headsup, would love trying to make some promotional stuff/media for any of these events. Specially since the prize pool seems quite high.

                  FAF Website Developer

                  MoraxM 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • MoraxM Offline
                    Morax @Femboy
                    last edited by

                    @javi said in Teamgame Events:

                    I don't want some dude to pose as 1500 global and be 1700 ladder.

                    Never happened in the history of FAF

                    FemboyF 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • FemboyF Offline
                      Femboy Promotions team @Morax
                      last edited by

                      @morax give me 1 month and I’ll be the 1400 global 1700 ladder

                      FAF Website Developer

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • BlackheartB Offline
                        Blackheart
                        last edited by

                        Just make a nice senton tourney no rating limit like we had some years back.

                        Ban Anime

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • FtXCommandoF Offline
                          FtXCommando
                          last edited by

                          That’s a showmatch not a tournament. I’m not interested in two team tournaments.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • FtXCommandoF Offline
                            FtXCommando
                            last edited by FtXCommando

                            NOTICE:

                            Future teamgame events (the next one will be in 2 months and be 4v4) will be utilizing the respective tmm rating rather than global rating for determining seeding and applicability to play. Players will be able to qualify by two methods to determine the validity of their rating:

                            • 30 total games in the matchmaker.
                            • Met the 10 game minimum to have been placed in the newest league that started in July.
                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • FtXCommandoF FtXCommando referenced this topic on
                            • FearghalF Fearghal referenced this topic on
                            • First post
                              Last post