If the ladder is really marketed towards newer players, then such a change in the MC would be good.
I just don't like having the MC completely random. If it was one way or the other, at least you'd know what you were getting into
| theFarWilds.com http://thefarwilds.com/forum/ | |
| Minor Clash suggestion http://thefarwilds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1059 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Keyser [ Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Minor Clash suggestion |
Rather than randomly pairing people in the MC, have you considered pairings based on rankings? i.e. the two highest ranked players get each other round 1. The two lowest ranked players get each round 1. Etc, etc... As it is now, it's a luck of the draw for some of us if we make it to the final 3 or not. Pair me up against newer players for most of the rounds, and I'll make it. Pair me up against Hithlim round one, and I won't (unless he's "testing" out a new deck, then I have a small chance). If it were paired by rankings, your newer players would stand a chance making it to the final four, as would a middle player, and a top rated player. In other words, the final four would most likely have a top rate, a middle rated, AND a new player in it. |
|
| Author: | Theohe [ Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Minor Clash suggestion |
I'd suggest just the opposite, have top ranked play the lowest ranked. Most tournament structures use this format. That way you're not automatically knocking out a player who deserves to be in the finals in the first round. I know this isn't friendly to the new players, but I think the ladder is more targetted to putting people on fair footing. This could act as a reward for maintaining high ratings that may deter the ranking tanking that people have been worried about with the ladder. I know I'd much rather have a better seed every MC than be able to play in the 1100 brackets of the ladder. |
|
| Author: | Keyser [ Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Minor Clash suggestion |
If the ladder is really marketed towards newer players, then such a change in the MC would be good. I just don't like having the MC completely random. If it was one way or the other, at least you'd know what you were getting into
|
|
| Author: | Loopy [ Mon Aug 03, 2009 7:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Minor Clash suggestion |
And just to be contrary, I'll say leave them as random pairings. If you want to level the playing field, just make a small chance for a pure default deck MC, perhaps with random assignment to one of the three default decks. |
|
| Author: | kash [ Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Minor Clash suggestion |
From a competitive perspective, I have a mild preference for the minor clash to be seeded by rankings to eliminate the cases where top players meet in the first round. That said, I have a much stronger preference for more players, both in MC and in the game in general. Its no fun for a poorly ranked guy if every time he joins he has to play a top player. A little randomness gives him hope of winning a game and maybe even getting second or third if the draw is particularly unbalanced. For a more intermediate player, the possibility of an occasional easier draw leads to more runs to the finals and more incentive to play. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ | |