Community > Community Events
Community eSports Sky League (March 22nd - April 26th)
Thomas:
In response to those reasons:
-The tournament was already dramatically changed. Although it hadn't gone into the matches yet, the sign-ups were closed and it was less than a week before the matches began. It had already 'started'. Essentially the format and rules we agreed to when everyone signed up were tossed out. That's like buying a car and instead having the dealership give you a truck. We do understand that it did have to happen because of the circumstances, but it does make that first line of reasoning fall apart.
-Most of the second points were debunked. Almost always if you win the first match, you're going to win a second one. Very very rarely does a team lose the first match to turn it around for a double win. An advantageous map has nothing to do with best of three or best of one, that's just from having random maps. Instead they should be announced ahead of time, as this removes the luck factor entirely. Teams can then prepare for that map and their enemy, leading to a much higher level of strategy and gameplay. Bugs and lag are treated the same in Bo3 and Bo1, and they effect these matches the exact same way. Having more matches does not necessarily mean that they'll have a smaller impact. Big issues result in a pause or reset, and there's not much you can do for lag. You can see how small their impact is on the outcome by remember that whoever wins the first round is 90% more likely to win the overall match regardless.
I think the big points in favor of best of one is that it's a lot more fun to watch, and a lot more fun to participate in. Double elimination was the original intent of the tournament, and what a lot of teams were looking forward to. I really don't mind double or single, but if it was to switch to something more exciting than Bo3, there would be some time to fill, and it would be a lot of fun to see those great teams try to work their way back up to ultimate victory. Instead of watching the same teams fight 2 or 3 times in a row.
Urz:
The distinction between changing the tournament structure before or after matches have been played is important. Once matches have already been played, we know which teams will be affected more positively than others, and thus any change would be potentially biased towards the teams who benefit the most from it. The parenthesized exception is also important here, as if I hadn't made those changes prior to the tournament starting, it would have been cancelled outright. Comparing participation in a free tournament run for your enjoyment to a motor vehicle purchase is not a particularly apt analogy either.
The rest of your points are primarily based on flawed data interpretation, but I will indulge you with a more detailed explanation. Those '20 or so videos' you pulled from the CeSports channel were likely from the more recent weekly tournaments. Those are events in which any team can sign up, show up, play, and be knocked out in a couple hours. With Sky League, by contrast, before we even get to the bracket half the teams have been filtered out. It is also a much longer event where each match has more significance. A more apt comparison would be the last major tournament, Anvalan Conflict, where in four of the eleven matches the team who lost the first game came back to win the set (37%).
Now to address your points specifically...
On maps: your argument is that allowing both teams equal time to prepare means both teams will be equal on every map. That is incorrect and discounts how certain maps favour certain styles of play.
On bugs: if somebody disconnects during a key engagement and their team wipes because of it, I'm not sure how you can say that has the same impact on both a Bo3 and Bo1. To try and explain this in the simplest way I can: 2 deaths out of 5 total versus 2 deaths out of 10 or 15 total (or 1 game out of 1 versus 1 game out of 3).
Thomas:
The thing about this tournament is that it's split into two sections, group and bracket. It's too late to change the group stage, since that's already happened. However, changing the bracket stage from bo3 to bo1 shouldn't be capable of giving one team an advantage over another. I'd say that the purchase of a vehicle is a decent analogy. Instead of money, we're committing our time and effort to participate in the tournament and make it successful, which provides entertainment for your viewers. If you want we can change it to signing up for a marathon only to have them change it to a 100-meter dash.
The data I used did come from the more recent videos where teams like the Ducks, Sac, The Gents, CSR, etc participate. Or 'the same exact groups that will be in this tournament'. There's also a lot more data to pull from. But it really depends on what data is chosen to be used and chosen to be ignored that really determine which way the statistics will go. And of course one of the biggest factors is the map luck.
maps: If you know what map is coming, and you know your playstyle doesn't work well on it, this gives you ample time to change or improve your playstyle for that map, which leads to a better match. This might actually be the biggest contributor to the belief that we need a best of three to determine who should win. If both teams know how things are going to go down, there's no excuses for 'well, my playstyle doesn't work well on this map', since they had the time to fix that.
bugs: It really depends on the bug. Most bugs and issues generally result in a pause of the match; and occasionally need a restart. Disconnecting in the middle of an engagement isn't all that common, at least as far as I'm aware. More importantly, bugs affect matches, not just kill counts. And even in Bo3, they try to have the most balanced matches possible. Pausing, resetting, etc when someone suffers a bug on that scale. This causes the matches to go much longer, and generally happens more than once. With a best of one, the total match time is much shorter since you only have to play one match. Making adjustments for critical bugs easier to accommodate.
Urz:
At this point we just disagree, so your opinion has been noted.
Omniraptor:
I would agree that knowing the map in advance would make the game more fun because it allows for deeper planning.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version