Im up for it
Tei tei tei best map all timeMahiro Yasaka wrote:
also tei tei tei warm up every round
Last time this happened people complainedShimatora wrote:
Not sure I agree with randomized seeds. Wouldn't it make more sense to seed via pp rank? That way the top two favourites wont meet in Round 1, for instance.
If people don't like regular seeded tournaments they clearly have no idea what a tournament is about. It's there for the best to do well in and the people who aren't quite as good to get knocked out. It makes no sense if the #1 and #2 UK meet early than the finals. Otherwise, randomised seeds mean that one side of the bracket could get heavily stacked with the top 10 players, all of whom start knocking each other out leaving (probably) #1 for the finals. Then, on the other, lesser stacked side of the bracket you have the bottom 10 players. Essentially, if PP meant everything, you'd be getting #1 and #10 for the finals. Which makes very little sense!PortalLife wrote:
People will complain about it no matter what method is used. Seeding a tournament this big didn't work from my experience. We randomized it and what happened? #2 UK and #1 UK met. If it was seeded, this wouldn't of been the outcome.
People complain about everything. :S.Shimatora wrote:
If people don't like regular seeded tournaments they clearly have no idea what a tournament is about. It's there for the best to do well in and the people who aren't quite as good to get knocked out. It makes no sense if the #1 and #2 UK meet early than the finals. Otherwise, randomised seeds mean that one side of the bracket could get heavily stacked with the top 10 players, all of whom start knocking each other out leaving (probably) #1 for the finals. Then, on the other, lesser stacked side of the bracket you have the bottom 10 players. Essentially, if PP meant everything, you'd be getting #1 and #10 for the finals. Which makes very little sense!PortalLife wrote:
People will complain about it no matter what method is used. Seeding a tournament this big didn't work from my experience. We randomized it and what happened? #2 UK and #1 UK met. If it was seeded, this wouldn't of been the outcome.
Yeah. We will see. I'll get a poll or some crap and see if people want PP seeding ect.jesus1412 wrote:
I agree that seeding by pp would be/was way better.
That is not how seeding works.PortalLife wrote:
Does no one remember the last tournament? I seeded it and the bracket came down to all the good players knocking each other out and all the lower players knocking each other out. The finals would be awful. Randomization is in the best interest of a "epic" tournament.
Seeding means that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the highest seeded people to meet until the end. Are you sure you did it right? Besides, relying on RNG for seeding means that you could get a far worse bracket than you're implying you had with "proper" seeding. I'd advise you read this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed_%28sports%29PortalLife wrote:
That was the result of PPV2 seeding, when I did the brackets last time. As a result I dropped seeding and went for randomization and the tournament turned out to be a success.
It is as simple as I think it is. You seed players based on rank and then the site deals with the rest. Can I take a look at the bad seeding bracket? If you could enable seeding numbers to be shown too, that'd be great. Either you:PortalLife wrote:
I use that website as well. If I could show you how it looked back then, I would. But I saw it with my own two eyes. I'm confident with using randomization. The bracket generation will be live streamed on our official twitch channel for the event - http://www.twitch.tv/oukt3
I have confidence randomization will be fine. Trust me, seeding a 64 player tournament isn't as simple as you think it is.