Dirty_Player
Auto-translated
Having 4 people on a team is absurd for obvious reasons. There shouldn't be situations where the captain's game "weighs" more than others – that's not right. 5 is already too many. It turns out that the optimal number is 3. But then, difficulties arise with substitutions again, and we're back to square one. In this case, a possible option is to assemble a team of 4, but only 3 will play, like having one permanent substitute. But this option also has a downside – some players might not play at all. In the end, there is no optimal option.
Ultimately, I would suggest sticking to 3 players, but allowing free substitutions and tying them to a lowered rating. For example:
Captain substitution: no more than 1700
Second tier substitution: no more than 1600
Third tier substitution: no more than 1500
The numbers are arbitrary and can be adjusted at the organizer's discretion. Moreover, if the organizer decides that a player's rating is artificially lowered, they have the right to refuse the substitution.
Captains should be chosen not by voting, but simply by rating. This will save time and reduce variance, eliminating such paradoxes as captains with ratings of 1500, for example, Sticky or kalababa. With all my respect for them as people, they don't qualify for the first tier.
Regarding the tournament system, it seems too drawn out to me. Groups of 8 teams are too many; it's better to have more groups and an extra stage of BO1 playoffs. BO2 is ridiculous, of course.
As for the names and emblems, let's not make people laugh. We're not in kindergarten. If the guys want to call themselves "Beer Lovers," what's wrong with that? Emblems and mottos were never used anywhere except in the first post, and some teams didn't even bother to come up with names (Kobra's team, hello :D). I think we can limit it to just the name. IMHO.
Templates for slots – too much. We shouldn't overcomplicate the system. I think many people are used to the system of "their own" and "other people's" templates; I don't think we should deviate from that. As an option, we can tie a list of "their own" templates to each player, within which a pick is made when playing on "their own field." Or leave everything as it is.
Choosing the starting castle. It's unclear why the choice is random. Is there any justification for this? It's very unpleasant to get Inferno against Castle on Jebus in the final, or Necropolis against Citadel on Anarchy. Randomness is fun, but there's a limit. We can vote on this, of course.
P.S. Forget about BO2 in the playoffs. It's an unnecessary headache with calculating points, games of captains, etc. We need to minimize such moments.
Ultimately, I would suggest sticking to 3 players, but allowing free substitutions and tying them to a lowered rating. For example:
Captain substitution: no more than 1700
Second tier substitution: no more than 1600
Third tier substitution: no more than 1500
The numbers are arbitrary and can be adjusted at the organizer's discretion. Moreover, if the organizer decides that a player's rating is artificially lowered, they have the right to refuse the substitution.
Captains should be chosen not by voting, but simply by rating. This will save time and reduce variance, eliminating such paradoxes as captains with ratings of 1500, for example, Sticky or kalababa. With all my respect for them as people, they don't qualify for the first tier.
Regarding the tournament system, it seems too drawn out to me. Groups of 8 teams are too many; it's better to have more groups and an extra stage of BO1 playoffs. BO2 is ridiculous, of course.
As for the names and emblems, let's not make people laugh. We're not in kindergarten. If the guys want to call themselves "Beer Lovers," what's wrong with that? Emblems and mottos were never used anywhere except in the first post, and some teams didn't even bother to come up with names (Kobra's team, hello :D). I think we can limit it to just the name. IMHO.
Templates for slots – too much. We shouldn't overcomplicate the system. I think many people are used to the system of "their own" and "other people's" templates; I don't think we should deviate from that. As an option, we can tie a list of "their own" templates to each player, within which a pick is made when playing on "their own field." Or leave everything as it is.
Choosing the starting castle. It's unclear why the choice is random. Is there any justification for this? It's very unpleasant to get Inferno against Castle on Jebus in the final, or Necropolis against Citadel on Anarchy. Randomness is fun, but there's a limit. We can vote on this, of course.
P.S. Forget about BO2 in the playoffs. It's an unnecessary headache with calculating points, games of captains, etc. We need to minimize such moments.
