Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
As I understand it, only 3 games are played in each group before a winner is determined. This seems unfair to me. Why didn't they implement a system with six games in a group, like a home-and-away format?
Otherwise, it turns out that, for example, I might host in two games, while someone else is the "non-host" in two games. And the host, in my opinion, has an obvious advantage in choosing a race.
The only thing that could justify this tournament organization is reducing the time spent on this stage. But on the other hand, we're not playing full-fledged games, but just duels, so the time spent is reduced not just by a factor of two, but by a factor of ten.
Therefore, I suggest conducting a poll among the participants regarding the addition of "away" rounds. Of course, I understand that many may not like the increase in the number of games, because most of us are adults with our own concerns and a lack of time. Therefore, I suggest conducting only a poll for now. Moreover, there aren't that many of us. Look at the "trios" or "fives" – the number of participants in their tournaments is in the dozens. So, that's it.
P.S. Please don't be too harsh if I'm wrong. And preferably, I'm waiting for approval. :)