I plan on posting that kind of stuff along with match reports and some stats after each round is completed.Is there a list where you can check which player used which civ?
I plan on posting that kind of stuff along with match reports and some stats after each round is completed.Is there a list where you can check which player used which civ?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jvVu9fn-Uu6mDVpS6CTHrHiwy4DXIuhhl1H6KKgHoZY/edit?usp=sharingIs there a list where you can check which player used which civ?
Marking the civs yellow might not be the best idea, since there's a decent chance they'll get drafted again, so maybe instead write the number of the round where the player picked that civ? That would also be appreciated for the civs that the players picked, so we have a bit more information in which round they used which civs.Can you mark civs in yellow that were drafted and not used?
And can you mark which civs are used by eliminated players?
Most people will disagree with your statement, myself included. (Example: MoAre5 Brackets ty gman )Guys, i have a serious problem with the seedings. (...) If the handbook stated from the start the calculation, it would've been more fair, but here and now, it is far from fair!
memb used a different system for seedings than it was written in the handbookMost people will disagree with your statement, myself included.
Aren't you shooting in another direction than the one i am pointing? feel free to couter argue any of my points(based on facts or artificial boosting for viper and lierey to be no1 and 2)Did you watch Membs stream where he did the seeding?
Viper doesnt care about his seeding, but its important for other players that hes seeded number one. Last Kotd he was seed #7 and sitll won, if hes not seeded at 1 that just means every player that is unlucky and has to face him in the first rounds wont be able to get far in this tournament, with him seedd at position number one those players are the ones who are not top seeds anyway.
Seeding for a tournament is never easy, so if you have a perfect solution for it i bet every tournament admin will be very happy to use your system.
The idea behind a seedingsystem is to have the best players with the lowest seeds and the worse players with higher seeds to avoid two better players meeting in early tournament stages.Guys, i have a serious problem with the seedings. The handbook states like this "The 32 players that make it into the tournament will be given a tournament rating. The rating will be calculated using a combination of their current elo, their highest achieved elo, their performance during the two weeks leading up to the tournament and potential alternative accounts. "
With that in mind, the seeding was done absolutely arbitrary, without considering the rule from the handbook and my opinion is that the points were added just so that viper and lierey go to spots no 1 and no2 .
In other e sports, before main event, you have a group stage where players play against each other so you determine the main brackets, here the group stage could have been considered the 2 weeks prior to kotd game on special arabia, the way it says in the handbook. keeping the rule serious, viper and lierey wouldn't have been top 5, neither of them doing good on kotd arabia.Players like the top chinese yo and vivi and daut , mbl from europe did much better!
Furthurmore, the current elo or top elo is a joke rule and i will explain why: Daut reached his top elo in those 2 weeks prior to the event , he had 15 games, still he played some more and lost some elo; if he didn't play any more game after passing 2600 elo, Daut would've been seed 2! this indicates the flaw!
You might be a fan of viper, but try to be objective: like this, viper will always be seed 1, putting him in prime position to win every event, making it a paradox , using the easier win to justify further seedings on no1 spot and facilitate more wins!
My problem is the rules in the handbook weren't respected , players could've worked their butt off to get a good seed and it would've been all in vain; a simple mathematical calculation shows that in order for a player to outseed the viper, he needed close to 2900 elo ; how does that sound?If the handbook stated from the start the calculation, it would've been more fair, but here and now, it is far from fair!
its the other way around in the beginning but i get what you are saying; however, don't the results on arabia in the prior 2 weeks get to have more relevance than one tournament viper won and another where he was second with the team?The idea behind a seedingsystem is to have the best players with the lowest seeds and the worse players with higher seeds to avoid two better players meeting in early tournament stages.
Since we all agree that ELO is not a perfect representation of actual strength memb used other methods to boost the rating of players that we know are at the top because they performed well at the latest tournaments.
If he wouldn't have done that (and viper would have been seeded #7) that does make it a liitle harder for him to reach semifinals but it also gives the #2seed an extreme unfair path having to face the best player in an early round.
Every seeding method that manages to give a ranking from best to worst as accurately as possible is a good seeding method
I AM RITE AND U ARE LWEFT END OF TALK!The major massive bloody huge flaw with your issue...
Memb + Chrazini wrote the handbook. It isn't an external handbook, it wasn't imposed by Microsoft it wasn't written by the league of Age of Empires II.
Effectively they can do what they like - your issue is they didn't write that they would take past tournaments into account? They said multiple times prior to the top 32 being selected that they would do it - they did it.
End of discussion.
No. The results in random games are worth way less than the previous tournament results, which are unfortunately not reflected in rating. Also I am not sure which tournaments you are referring to. The results that were taken into account were King of the Desert, Legacy of the Huns and some ECL 1v1 events, if I remember correctly.its the other way around in the beginning but i get what you are saying; however, don't the results on arabia in the prior 2 weeks get to have more relevance than one tournament viper won and another where he was second with the team?
Almost everyone here agrees that the seeding is more accurately representing the players' strengths, which is what a seeding is for, ergo it seems to be more fair than other seeding mechanisms used recently.This is the flaw loop: you put viper first so he has easier way to finals -> you give him more points next tournament cause he reached the final, like more players could've done if they had his route and you put him first again in the next tournament and so on.each tournament can have it's own seeding methods, as long as they are fair ...and this one isn't
This is the flaw loop: you put viper first so he has easier way to finals -> you give him more points next tournament cause he reached the final, like more players could've done if they had his route and you put him first again in the next tournament and so on.each tournament can have it's own seeding methods, as long as they are fair ...and this one isn't
Not sure why it isn't in the handbook but I read multiple times here that previous tourney results would be taken into account, so I don't see a major problem with that.Look guys : in the handbook it says you have to have good results on arabia in order to place higher in seedings
couple of weeks later: HAHAHAHA jokes on you suckers: you never could've come close to top 2 seedings ...unless you reach 2900 elo ...there,it is fair!
If you state in the tournament regulations that the games on arabia in the 2 weeks prior to the beginning will be taken in consideration, do they still count as random games?No. The results in random games are worth way less than the previous tournament results, which are unfortunately not reflected in rating. Also I am not sure which tournaments you are referring to. The results that were taken into account were King of the Desert, Legacy of the Huns and some ECL 1v1 events, if I remember correctly.
Almost everyone here agrees that the seeding is more accurately representing the players' strengths, which is what a seeding is for, ergo it seems to be more fair than other seeding mechanisms used recently.
I agree that the handbook should have given more information on that beforehand but this is a different issue.
Seems to be correct (I didn't see the "Seeding Stream").memb used a different system for seedings than it was written in the handbook
Possible, but not perfect for Membs tournament.I do have a perfect solution and it's been used by other e sports (...) have group stages (...) round robin and seed them using the results in the groups; the groupstage could've been those 2 weeks (...)
This is where you seem to go really wrong: Viper performing excellent in tournaments for years and years says a lot more about how good he really is than two weeks of playing some simple rated 1v1 games around Christmas. Same goes for other players and their performances in former tournaments.don't the results on arabia in the prior 2 weeks get to have more relevance than one tournament viper won and another where he was second with the team?
Handbook says different than what actually happened, ok.Look guys : in the handbook it says you have to have good results on arabia in order to place higher in seedings. couple of weeks later: HAHAHAHA jokes on you suckers: you never could've come close to top 2 seedings ...unless you reach 2900 elo ...there,it is fair!
This is where you seem to go really wrong: Viper performing excellent in tournaments for years and years says a lot more about how good he really is than two weeks of playing some simple rated 1v1 games around Christmas. Same goes for other players and their performances in former tournaments.
My guess: Memb knows all the players and their performances (tournament and rated 1v1 games) and tried to get an accurate and fair seeding from this knowledge.
^But again, what would the other option be for the admins? There is no reason for Viper to play random arabia games to get #1 seed, because he is a massive favorite in every matchup and doesnt have to care about his seed. As a result, he could be like seed #20 or some other random number, and make the seeding system totally meaningless and luck-based. Everyone still had the opportunity to fight whether they are seed 17 or seed 5, which still is very meaningfull. Actually it might be more meaningful now, than it would be if you could face Viper 1st round no matter what your seed is.
But memb stated in the rulebook that those games in the last 2 weeks will count for seedings; i took it as some sort of group stage, it's obviously not, but better than nothing ; at the end you are not giving anyone better chances than to viper and , even if he deserved the last 5 out of 5 first seedings, he shouldn't get the 6th for free, every quallification and seeding should be fought for
Players are with their minds on the game and strategies; i'm sure viewers know more about the handbook than the players, memb stated himself that some players don't know the rules cause they didn't read the handbook ; either way, a certain player getting seed n will not calculate all the seedings, will just believe that according to the system in place, he got to that seeding like stated in the rules, when in fact he didn't
What you don't know, doesn't hurt you, dunno if it's a saying in english..