Recap of the Spring Tournament for future tourneys..

[redguy]

Hey everyone, the last tournament was good and fun, but it had some big flaws that i want to address and recap here for possible future tournaments.

Starting with the format. Single map double elim wasn't a bad idea, especially with 9 teams, however even the best teams only played against 3 or 4 teams, and some teams were out after 2 matches. Personally i didn't liked it, and i also think there were too many teams that didn't liked waiting for matches. That's another flaw of the format: the long waiting for matches. Cm8t had to wait 2 (or 3?) matches, crown even more. Terrible. I think the best solution here for future tournaments is to create a „league“ system that was made in JMR‘s Anniversary Tourney, where every team played against every other team, and the winner is rank 1 of the table (or with playoffs?).
This will most likely be more work for the hoster, but a much better alternative for teams (and will also lead to a longer tournament).
I really like this idea, mainly because it gives the hoster the possibility to penalize teams that misbehaved with „penalty point's" (e.g. not posting sshots, delaying the matches and so on).

15 minutes for each map. Yep, i will change it to 20 minutes. Intention behind 15 minutes was to keep it as short as possible, but i have to admit that 15 is too short and 5 minutes more can really change the outcome of a match.

Maps. This was another big flaw in my opinion. Some teams („unintentionally“) played on the same „boring“ map, because both sides eliminated all the other maps, where the enemy team has a better performance(?). Out of the 9 maps i gave „only“ 6 were played, and 3 of those were played three or more times. The map elim. Rule also wasn't that handy for matches, teams were not really sure who would start with the elimination, sometimes maps were eliminated 2 times (which was ofc corrected) and naming 9 maps in the short dp-chat isn't that good.
I think i will add a bigger mappool next-time (with more „unused“ maps) and the rule that the bottom of the bracket will name 3 maps, that will be played. The top bracket can choose then one of those maps. If the top don't like one of the firstly named maps, they can once skip all three of them (or 1 or 2 specific maps of the list) and also can choose the teamcolor. I will also try to get weaker to the top of brackets and favourites to the bottom, so the weaker ones have the possibility to play on their preferred maps. I hope to see more intense and interesting scores, because i think there are various maps that each team prefer.
(I honestly don't like to “force” maps as a hoster, but if this will be seen as the best way, I will be more than happy with it).

I think those were the main flaws of the Spring Tournament. If you remember another one, feel free to name it. I am also open for every idea and will add those If I like them. The final format will be announced in future tournament threads.

[Squeeze]

I think top bracket should offer maps to be picked, since they are seed1 in the particular matchup and should be rewarded by this. 2nd seed choose one map.

If you want to run a league, JMR had very good system, 10 mins per map, he also picked a map to be played and every single team had to play that particular map in the particular matchup. Then teams plays diff teams and JMR changed map for round 2 to diff one, and so on. all teams were playing at the same time against their enemy on all offered servers. If you want to run a league instead of tournament, JMR did a great job with it, so you can maybe give it a look.

It was not bad format, but in this format it should be 10 mins per map in bo1's, so the waiting is not that big, in league map time does not matter that match, since it's faster. If you took this idea from watching my stream, I said that stuff just because I was cocky and wanted to smash every team that participated, not only chosen ones. You did very good job with the tournament.

[Ranger]

Althought I did not participate I know from previous tournaments how it goes and I must say its always better to keep the timelimit standard 20 min, everybody is used to it. Regarding map elimination we had once a quite fair system for that and I have to say it was my invention - every map from a maplist got a number from 1 to 14 // For example 1) Propaint1 2) Fusionr 3) Xb_map1 4) Shazam33 5) Shock 6) Razzle 7) Pb_cup  8 ) Rome 9) Ub_cliff 10) Temple22 11) Shazam22 12) Rally 13) Fusionr 14) Airtime // In a beginning of a match every team had to say secretly one number to the referee - if one team said 4 and other team said 7, referee did 7+4=11 and 7-4=3. Eleventh map from the maplist is Shazam22 and third map from the maplist is Xb_map1 and these two were played in this particular match. ...Of course it requires a neutral maplist in order to give a fair chance for winning everybody (note: considering some siege maps might not be a bad idea also). Most teams participating in your Spring tournament dont play on a regular basis or "dont play at all" and maplist you choosed was "advanced tactic and high cooperation required". Thats my opinion, but nonetheless I think you gave it first class level and organization.

[JeongWa]

I'd prefer the format with the less waiting time and the more matches. The " league" type of tournament in which each teams faces one time would probably the one filling those criteria.

Concerning the map list it was pretty much the most basic maps you could get in matches and our team played 4 different maps out of the 4 maps we had to play. Perhaps the big flaw you mentioned concerning the maps were rather the map elimination choices of certain teams ? The map list will always be criticized anyways, i'm down with a change of pace but if there is 9 different maps and it turn out you only play 1 map in all of your matches, problem isn't the map list.

And last, for whether a game should last in between 10 or 20 minutes, reducing the length to 10minutes is better for teams that finishes their matches faster so they don't have to wait extra time.