TLR's Lore, Legends, And More Action (LLAMA), brought to you by ASBet — Round Two

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bloody hell how am I going to get someone interested to play when they have no chance of making it @___@

EDIT: Bloody tag features
 
k I am going to gauge something from the public here before round three:

What do people prefer moving forward: A top three per group cut or a top two per group cut?
 
Top 2. Top 3 is 50% which makes the entire round robin irrelevant when the same is accomplished by single elim

Edit: for the record I've been pushing this for weeks, well before red and I was anywhere close to finishing
 
Last edited:
Agreeing to top 2 for similar reasons to Texas.

EDIT: Not entirely sure how DQ works here given the emphasis on damage given-damage taken ratio as a tiebreaker. If that's really screwy or ends up deciding more than one pool's second place, going to top three might be wise. But that would be the only compelling reason I can think of.
 
top 2 and top 3 is the choice between having a 2/3 cut now after swiss or later on a simple three-way. I Feel the Swiss Rounds are more reliable to be the grounds for a bigger cut, so I am going with Top 2.

EDIT: Also I agree with Texas. If one round of single elimination ends up netting a similar result to three rounds of swiss, you will end up with more work for refs and more time spent for...not that much better results.
 
Last edited:
Texas Cloverleaf said:
Top 2. Top 3 is 50% which makes the entire round robin irrelevant when the same is accomplished by single elim

Edit: for the record I've been pushing this for weeks, well before red and I was anywhere close to finishing
Click to expand...

Guys Top 3 is 50% but it is not equal to Single Elimination because people get more chances to come back after the first loss (which they could have lost due to busy / haxed and stuff).

The reason I said Top 3 was because, if a player wins two battles and loses out on the opportunity to go to the next round because of Tie Breaker, then it would be meh.

We will have more ref work and more battles, sure. But it would be a fair trade off for being able to give the players who lost their first round another chance to come back into the tournament. If we are going for Top 2, we wouldn't have needed a Swiss in the first place. We could have as well gone for a single elimination. Again, this is just my thinking and I could be wrong. But Top 3 seems fair, and we shouldn't be changing stuff one too many times, during the swiss rounds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top