Posts from Tournament rules for "One for All". Auto-translated

You are absolutely right, and that's the point I'm trying to get across to people. When distributing players into tiers before the draft begins, the strongest players in each tier will be chosen first. Therefore, each team will be formed not in order (by tiers), but based on the strength of players in different tiers – from the strongest to the least strong within their range. For example, the captain who has the right to choose first can immediately select the strongest player for the 3rd or 4th slot. Regarding the distribution based on rating, it's clear that when developing the rules, some exceptions need to be made: 1) The number of participants with different ratings may vary, so the organizer will have to assign a higher slot to some participants to equalize the number of participants in each tier. 2) Players with less than 20 rated games do not have a place in the overall rating, so the position of such players in the draw will be in the lowest tier. Further adjustments may be needed because we don't know how many participants will register. I've outlined the main ideas. When the rules are finalized, they will take into account all possible nuances of the tournament. And the tournament will take a maximum of 7 months to complete. There's also an idea to distribute players into tiers based on rating without being tied to a specific range, but rather based on a percentage of the number of registered participants: * The first 10% of participants – Tier 1; * The next 20% – Tiers 1-2; * The next 10% – Tier 2; * The next 20% – Tiers 2-3; * The next 10% – Tier 3; * The next 20% – Tiers 3-4; * The last 10% – Tier 4.

The idea of playing a single round in the group stage will significantly reduce the tournament duration. If Dima from SKD is the host, the tournament definitely won't drag on. Introducing a second round can be done at the playoff stage. If teams have the same primary and secondary scores and are competing for a spot, an additional game can be played between the captains, or they can be asked to choose one candidate from each team for such a game. In the playoffs, this issue can also be resolved in case of a tie after two rounds.

the objective reality is 20-24 teams of 4 people each,
with either 4 groups of 5 teams = 8 games (rounds) = 16 weeks, followed by 1/4 (approximately 5 weeks each stage of the playoffs);
or 6 groups of 4 teams = 6 games (rounds) = 12 weeks, but then starting from the 1/8 stage (approximately 5 weeks each stage)
in total, the tournament lasts a maximum of 7 months.

The objective reality is 20-24 teams of 4 people each,
with either 4 groups of 5 teams = 8 games (rounds) = 16 weeks, followed by 1/4 (approximately 5 weeks each stage of the playoffs);
or 6 groups of 4 teams = 6 games (rounds) = 12 weeks, but then starting from the 1/8 stage (approximately 5 weeks each stage)
in total, the tournament would last a maximum of 7 months.

There is also the option of reducing the time per game. There are hardly any tournaments happening now; why not shorten it to, for example, 10 days instead of 2 weeks?

-With 3 players playing and 1 or 2 reserves on the team, the tournament round duration can be reduced to a week or 10 days. Having reserves is essential – during the tournament, someone is guaranteed to “fall ill or get married,” not to mention business trips, vacations, and hangovers;
-There is no way to make the teams equal; appoint captains as Dirty suggests – based on rating, then proceed with a draft;
-Allow players to be moved between “pools,” limiting the number of such moves;
-Abandon the group stage; if this is impossible for “religious” reasons, then you can use the scheme used in Dota2 Majors, the meaning of which is that even in the groups, each match has tournament significance;
-Choose templates randomly or by drawing lots; it would be good to discuss the template pool itself, or better yet, put it to a vote;
-Remove AllRandom.

It seems like I will be the one organizing the tournament after all :)
There will be no ties to the ranking.
Many people are in favor of 3 players per team, but skd is right: the objective reality is teams of 4 players. And by the way, if more than a hundred people sign up, I don't see a problem in making 20 teams of 5 people.
All random or trading - we'll probably have to hold a vote.
As for substitutes, I think the last tournament had an optimal system: those who weren't chosen remain as substitutes, they can come in as a replacement in the last slot, while the other players move up to the higher tier. I don't know why Maretti didn't use the substitution.
Of all the ideas expressed, I liked Vova's suggestion the most: to add 2x2 format games if necessary. After all, this is a team tournament :D

I will try to open registration by the end of the week.

let’s just avoid any absurd or nonsensical suggestions.

Why not form teams of 3 people and have 3 versus 3 matches?

Why not form teams of 3 and play 3 versus 3?

Actually, let's go for 4 versus 4:smile04:

Why not, let's go with 4 vs 4:smile04:

We will take your suggestions into account :)

What the heck, let's go 4 vs 4:smile04:

S-sized map without a Dungeon, with fast roads.

S-unit without a Dungeon on fast roads.

and what?) with a 200% bonus, all-random, and a ban on red, blue, etc. rushes on map 111, it would be a very interesting sight.