NAC3 - Collecting Civ ideas

[Psyychoz]

Hereby, I propose a new system which I named PairMinator (TM):

When people want more variety to civs, they mainly want to see civs that are used less in tournaments. What I propose is pairing up civilizations according to a consensus ranking similar to the one in Escape Monociv cup. The best civ gets paired with the worst, the 2nd best, with the 2nd worst, and so on. When players draft, they draft pairs, instead of individual civs.

Bo5: Each player drafts 3 pairs, for a total of 6 civs to be used for each player. For Bo7, its 4 pairs, for Bo9, its 5 pairs.

Why is this good?

First, each player will have one extra civ compared to the number of matches. That means, that unlike a regular 5 civ draft for a Bo5, where at the final game, the players would be aware of what civ the opponent will use, here, there is some unpredictability that requires more strategic thinking from the players to have the most appropriate civ matchup.
Second: There is the big decision and potential drama (in a positive sense): will you use your strong civs early, but then left there with weaker civs at the end when it matters the most? Or will you try picking one of the weaker civs early, pull an upset against a stronger civ, and then unleash your strong civ on the weak one in the end?
Third: Map-civ synergy. Unlike drafting individual picks in any system (mirrors, pool-based, etc.), where you dedicate a civ for a certain match (e.g. you pick mayans specifically because you want to play it on Reg Fortress), here you have to do smarter thinking both with map and civ drafting, since picking one civ that is great for a given map will also result in another civ belonging to you, you will have to draft map combinations before the civ drafting appropriately.
Fourth: A lot of different approaches. You might think that the first and last civ combo is not neccessarily worth picking, and you pick a combination that is having two "average" teams, so you have a balanced civ pool. Or you could go for the #1 civ with the last, gambling to win the early games so you dont have to use it.
Fifth: Works with different civ lists, pairs. Bored of the pairs? You can mix it up in any way you want, leave out a few civs from pairing (e.g each day has 5 civs banned, rest organized into pairs), and so on.

Overall, the varieties are endless!

Sounds very interesting indeed, but also seems like there's a lot of potential for numerous civ wins if players go for a lot of top+bottom civ pairs..
With some way to reduce this possibility I think that would be a very elegant solution

 

[yodan]

I want to see the players adapt to the changes DE has to offer with new civs/balance and hopefully on some new maps. Forcing variety of strategy by complex civ pick rules is silly in this tournament since it'll still be when the meta isn't entirely determined.
Also any civ draft that removes possibility of a mirror matchup is counterproductive since the idea was to increase variety ... mirror matchups are unique in their own way.
I just want to see hidden pick no repeat for each set (or maybe for each pair of sets...)
However, players picking each other's civs for a game or two in a match is interesting as well I guess.

 

[Überrushung]

Hereby, I propose a new system which I named PairMinator (TM):

When people want more variety to civs, they mainly want to see civs that are used less in tournaments. What I propose is pairing up civilizations according to a consensus ranking similar to the one in Escape Monociv cup. The best civ gets paired with the worst, the 2nd best, with the 2nd worst, and so on. When players draft, they draft pairs, instead of individual civs.

Bo5: Each player drafts 3 pairs, for a total of 6 civs to be used for each player. For Bo7, its 4 pairs, for Bo9, its 5 pairs.

Why is this good?

First, each player will have one extra civ compared to the number of matches. That means, that unlike a regular 5 civ draft for a Bo5, where at the final game, the players would be aware of what civ the opponent will use, here, there is some unpredictability that requires more strategic thinking from the players to have the most appropriate civ matchup.
Second: There is the big decision and potential drama (in a positive sense): will you use your strong civs early, but then left there with weaker civs at the end when it matters the most? Or will you try picking one of the weaker civs early, pull an upset against a stronger civ, and then unleash your strong civ on the weak one in the end?
Third: Map-civ synergy. Unlike drafting individual picks in any system (mirrors, pool-based, etc.), where you dedicate a civ for a certain match (e.g. you pick mayans specifically because you want to play it on Reg Fortress), here you have to do smarter thinking both with map and civ drafting, since picking one civ that is great for a given map will also result in another civ belonging to you, you will have to draft map combinations before the civ drafting appropriately.
Fourth: A lot of different approaches. You might think that the first and last civ combo is not neccessarily worth picking, and you pick a combination that is having two "average" teams, so you have a balanced civ pool. Or you could go for the #1 civ with the last, gambling to win the early games so you dont have to use it.
Fifth: Works with different civ lists, pairs. Bored of the pairs? You can mix it up in any way you want, leave out a few civs from pairing (e.g each day has 5 civs banned, rest organized into pairs), and so on.

Overall, the varieties are endless!

I had a similar idea, where each player has to divide civs into groups and then the opponent gets to pick the group of civs that the first player has to use for their match-up.

so for a Bo7, you might have to divide the 35 civs into 5 groups of 7 civs. you would have to make sure that none of the groups are too weak and accomodate different maps, so you would have to evenly distribute top and bottom tier civs. the groups should be prepared in advance and then instead of a draft, the players just pick one of the groups.

I think you could showcase a lot of different civs with this format, it would be fairly quick and the civ ranking would remain subjective to each player's preferences.

edit: maybe the groups should be a little bigger than the number of games played, so it allows for some freedom to adjust and surprise your opponent.

 

[buhanisson]

nvm

 

[hightower]

If a complex drafting system is wanted, I like the idea of Überruschung. It would have a feeling like in card games where a player can have a prepared deck. And once the players have set up their decks (the night before), the drafting later on will go really fast and still allow for a big civ variety (but also quite a big chance for multiple civ wins each set).

If it is meant to be more simple and not forcing players on bad civs while also trying to avoid civ wins, and also avoiding obvious civ-map picks (indian on rehydration...), there could be hidden free civ pick with bans just for maps.

Means each player (global) bans a civ for each map. This civ can then still be picked on every other map (where it is not banned).

 

[iViktorius]

Does each set need the same civ settings or could they be different as well? (all quarters exact same civ settings or not)

As in, would it be an idea to have a set civ matchup with switch next game for the quarter finals, but each quarter final a different pair of civs? For example turk vs viet for Q1, pers vs vik for Q2, ita vs mag for Q3 and jap vs bur for Q4.

Same for the semis, only then 2 different pairs of civs ofc.

That way you'd have 12 different civs already being played and still have the ability for players to choose their favourite civs (in the other games of a set).

Obviously you'd need civ pairings that are quite close as to make sure it doesnt always end in a 1 -1 score after such a civ switch setup. But I'm sure a team of pro's + knowledgeable viewers/devs could make good pairings.

 

[TohoBuWaha]

I like the idea of LidaKor a lot.

But we also need to remember that NAC 3 will probably be the first major tournament of Age 2 DE, which not only brings 4 new Civs, but also quite some changes to the old civs. So I dont think the meta will be figured out as much as it is now - and even if it is to some extend, we will not have seen all the top matchups several times already. So for such an early tournament it might not be that bad of an idea to have a conventional system.

 

[mangojuice]

How about this: For every map, player 1 chooses two civs, and then player 2 chooses which of the two civs he wants to play. Obviously switch roles for the next map, etc. That way, people get benefit for preparing weird civs that are rarely played, but it should still be fair because there is incentive to always choose two civs that are as evenly matched as possible.

I think this is one of the best formats. Allows the players to prepare strats and surprise opponents and viewers. It's also very easy to explain it on stream, and doesn't feel arbitrary.

What I really like is asymmetric games. Arch vs kts. Aggression vs defense. Early game civ advantage vs late game civ advantage. I feel this format promotes this.

One possible strategy of this civ draft is going for civs that suit your strengths and force the other player into a playstyle they don't like. If one players is better at trush games, and one better at boom games, the first game will be trush civ vs trush civ, the second game boom civ vs boom civ. Those games will be fairly even without being mirror-civ.

What I hope will be more popular is going for mind games. Take a weird match-up and prepare a strategy for both options. Going into the game with a clear game plan vs going into it knowing your opponent is prepared gives you the mental edge. This only works without repeating your options, so we won't see the same match-ups throughout the whole event.

Obviously, this systems only works for an even amount of games. It can be used for only two games, or all but the decider game. I don't mind team random for the decider.

 

[Nicov]

Some huns war to spice things up, then hidden pick no repeat mixed with some set map/civ match ups would be the best at my eyes. I'm strongly against civ drafts. Its quite a big waste of time and usually one player gets an advantage for the whole match by getting better civs. Then you dont have wins due to skill difference.

 

[HyunaOP]

Mirror civs are boring like hell. Please dontmake come back huns war

Maybe on Arabia. But on other maps that aren't open land maps. Mirror is kinda necessary. Some civs are just auto win example; Indians on rehydration, chinese on land nomad etc etc. I'm not entirely against mirror civs in favour of more fairer games for the players but it's their decision how they want to go about civ variety.

 

[eC_Gurke]

A mixture of set mirrors (or prepared mirrors like in DMWC2), hidden pick, and pick out of a pool would be my favorite.

Important points:
1. On special maps ban strongest civ(s).
2. When using pools carefully design them ( Players input).
3. If you' re bold you can think about set non-mirror matchups. Very dicy topic since people might call " civwin". Again carefully design.

Personally i don' t wanna see draft and i dont think its needed to see viet, khmer, sara played just for the sake of variety. I would appreciate more of the middle pack being played. There are 35 civs ( in DE), if you can get spots 10-20(25) to be played more often thats enough variety, no need to force players to play with 30-35.

 

[Senor_Mordred]

My idea:

A mix of two pool and pooling. Every Player picks 2 civs for the other and then 1 for himself. Repeat 3 times. That way each player will have 9 civs (which do not have to be distinct, e.g. both can pick Mayans for themselves or Teutons for the other). That way each user has a 9 civ pool for 5 to 9 matches with a good mix of all round and situational (no civ is bad per se I think) and has to pick at least 1 they did not pick themselves to win BO7. Having the 3 rounds and non-exclusive means players can plan ahead and adapt civs for themselves and opponent and the draft is sped up by having them tell their civs at the same time.

 

[Tendo]

Its quite a big waste of time and usually one player gets an advantage for the whole match by getting better civs. Then you dont have wins due to skill difference.

For who do you think it's a waste of time?
I rly enjoy the Drafts, but wouldnt mind them to be offscreen or make them while the series before is still going and then make them additional exclusive Youtube VoD Content, for those who enjoy it.

Also I think it requires skill to have a better draft aswell.
It's just another skill.

 

[dodageka]

Assuming it is a Swiss system again with 5 rounds like NAC2:
- first round hidden pick, no repeat
- second round: hidden pick, no repeat but 3 civs most picked in first round are not allowed
- third round: hidden pick, no repeat, top 3 civs from first round and top 3 civs from second round are not allowed
-etc.

This means I’m the fifth round players can’t used the 12 most picked civs before which should allow for a lot of high quality picks.

Alternative options could be:
- make it map specific, so on every map the most picked civs aren’t allowed (makes it a bit more complicated and requires explanation to players and viewers, but could give even wider variety; might be helpful if map pool is very diverse)
- ban top 5 civs, but only from the previous round (so in round two the 5 most picked civs from round 1 are banned; and in round three those 5 civs are allowed again and the top 5 from round 2 are banned etc)

 

[kc_Ereon]

From what I've heard, the new Civs should be very stronk, right?
Then I suggest:
G1 Arabia (or some other well accepted map) New Civ Mirror could be a nice showcase for the new meta
G2 - G5/9 some method of picking Civs, no new Civs (or one at most)
(option: G5/G9 Hidden Free Pick no restrictions, another chance to see new or old civs' strengths)

 

[archxeon]

Along with all these great civ draft/ civ pool ideas, please have like a LOT of maps in the map-pool. Its boring watching CROSS 5 times a day every day (with the same civs match up). Also, one sided match ups are not that fun especially for a BO7 or BO9. Extend BO5 tennis style, where point difference has to be 2 to win.

 

[SouFire]

Drafts take a lot of time man, don't ever use that system again and as it has been pointed out those matches are about winning the draft and not the games.

If you are going to use the aoe 2DE then the new 4 civs are broken and Nac3 is not about promoting the new civs, so you can maybe ban cucumans and lithuanians.

What about making it a classic one, start the first map with Huns war, then random switch, in bo7 use khmer or another unused civ in btwn.

 

[HyunaOP]

For who do you think it's a waste of time?
I rly enjoy the Drafts, but wouldnt mind them to be offscreen or make them while the series before is still going and then make them additional exclusive Youtube VoD Content, for those who enjoy it.

Also I think it requires skill to have a better draft aswell.
It's just another skill.

You're not the one participating in the tournament so how would you know if drafts take "skill" if nicov himself was at NAC2 and said he doesn't really like it?

 

[tommie86]

Rank the civs (Attending casters and players) and put them into tiers.

Each tier has 4 civs with the lowest tier containing the worst.

The civs in each tier are worth a different amount of points (tbd) with only the lowest tier non draftable and meant as a backup.

Before each set the players will have an amount of points to spend on their civdraft.

The opponent will not see the draft – But the viewers and casters will. Drafting is held simultaneously to limit the amount of time it takes. The overlay guy will surely be able to com up with an awesome overlay!

After the civs are picked each player gets a (much) smaller amount of points to ban civs for the opponent.
----------------------------------------
Example:

Mr. Yo picks 5 tier 1 civs and has no points left.
His opponent, Joadn (Yes, he qualified ofc) bans the top 2 civs with his points.


Mr. Yo will now be left with 2 strong civs and the rest he has to pick from tier 6 which can not be drafted and banned.

Joadn on the other hand, picked medium tier civs and has the option to pick from a pool of 8 civs for the Bo5, even though Mr. Yo banned one of his civs.
So Joadn wins. As is to be expected. GG

 

[Tendo]

You're not the one participating in the tournament so how would you know if drafts take "skill" if nicov himself was at NAC2 and said he doesn't really like it?

I said "I Think", I didn't said "I know".
I can clearly be wrong with thinking this.
Just my viewpoint that Draft is not something based on "luck" and instead is a Mindgame which is based on Preparation and Decision-Making, what we would call "skill" in aoe2.

And btw Nicov is not participating either (sadly).

 

[BFuu]

Instead of forcing players into a mirror match or banning civs because of an advantage on one specific map, I would prefer to give players the option to go for "team random" if they feel like it. So if the map clearly favours Japanese and player 1 has drafted them, player 2 could go for "team random" to counter his drafting disadvantage. This option might be available once in a bo5 or could even be seen as 1 of 2 available restarts in a bo9.

This might also bring on some mind games tho. If I expect my opponent to go team random because I have the clearly favoured civ for one specific map, I might go for a weaker civ instead, cause it might be mirror anyway. Especially if the draft includes picking (some) civs for your opponent, this could end up in a Vietnamese mirror matchup - but maybe it'll just be Japanese mirror, who knows.

 

[Marteens]

Ban Cumans. For the entire tournament. No joke.

Still do they have all these nonsense features?

 

[TurboNoob]

Will there be tournament specific nerfs/buffs?

 

[Olutsch_95]

Many good and intressting ideas.

Just my random idea i came up with:

Every Player chooses double the civs for himself, (no restrictions, no draft, just choosing what you feel like is best for the upcoming maps) than possible matches for the set (e.g. 10 civs for a BO5).

Before every game during the set your opponent chooses two civs from your pool, of which you have to play one of them for the next game (your choice), the other is now banned for you for the rest of the set.

Surely, this can sometimes result in mirror matches or maybe civ wins. But I think any system for choosing civs can sometimes result in civ wins and maybe mirror matches could be somehow banned, if they are not wanted.

Open for suggestions for improvement

 

[Nikemenon]

Rank the civs in to 3 tiers 11- 12 civs based on player inputs.
Use each tier as the civ pool for 1 day each for the Swiss stage. This will help more civs to be selected but also avoid massive civ wins since players draft from the same tier. Since 5 days of swiss stage, use Tier 3 and Tier 2 civ pools for 2 days each and 1 day for Tier 1 civs. Map pool can be adjusted so that civ win maps are not on the same day as the best civs. e.g. land madness in map pool the day Franks is not in civ pool
Knockout stages should be drafting from the entire pool.
Fairly simple but also should not add a lot of time to drafting/ time in between games