Skip to content

Posts from One for all and all for one 5

No ratings yet — be the first to rate!
Announcement
User Avatar
Auto-translated
One for All and All for One - 5


A new team marathon begins! No one knows who will be on their team, no one can win the tournament alone, but everyone will have to put in maximum effort to help each other achieve a common goal - victory! To battle, friends!

Organizational matters:

1. Tournament Lead – Sanin (ICQ - 423164784); judges – Amster (ICQ - 685884492), BISHOP (ICQ - 201539747), Dirty Player (ICQ - 408722873)
2. The tournament is official and regular, conducted according to the Rules for organizing, conducting, and participating in HOMM3 online tournaments.
3. All tournament games go into the HoMM3 HW Player Rating.
4. Disputed points, if any arise, are discussed outside the forum. For a resolution, you must contact the lead or one of the tournament judges via ICQ and provide daily saves, ICQ logs, and other necessary information.
5. Tournament games must be played within the established timeframe. For violation of game deadlines, by decision of the lead and tournament judges, a player may be penalized up to disqualification.
6. Deadlines:
Registration until 09.11.2016;
Captain selection 10.11.2016 - 11.11.2016;
Player draft - 13.11.2016 at 18:00 Moscow time;
Transfers: 14.11.2016 - 16.11.2016
Start of tournament games - 16.11.2016
7. Other:
- Persons registered on HeroesWorld later than 01.09.2016 will not be accepted into the tournament.
- Players with unconfirmed reports will not be accepted into the tournament.
- Disputed issues between players are resolved by the lead; disputed issues between players and the lead are resolved by the AC.
- The lead has the right to make any changes to the regulations and rules before the start of the tournament.
- Applications from players recently registered on the forum are considered on an individual basis.

REGULATIONS

1. Version for play: SoD 3.2 (4.0) +HD-mod with HW-Rules patch version 1.38 connected; tents, forts, and cartographers - checked; built second level and obelisks - disabled. On XL+U templates – rebuilding the Mages' Guild without banning the library.
Turn time varies for each template and may be changed by mutual agreement.
2. All registered players will be divided into teams (from 3 to 5 people depending on the number of participants) and competitions will take place between teams.

3.
1st stage: group

- In the tables, there is a color for each game.
- Games in groups are conducted using a round-robin system in 2 rounds (each team plays every other team twice).
- The main criterion for advancing from the group is the number of points earned (3 points for a team win, 1 for a draw, 0 for a loss). If several teams earn an equal number of points, additional indicators come into play (in order of priority):

a) Head-to-head matches between teams.
b) Berger coefficient.
c) Total number of wins.
d) Head-to-head matches between team captains.
e) Total number of wins by players who chose the game template (marked in blue in the tables).
f) Additional match between team captains on balance M - 200% template, 4 minutes.
g) Draw/Lottery.

Two teams from each group advance to the 2nd stage; it is possible for a 3rd place team to advance (based on the best result), which will be determined after the number of teams and groups is finalized.

2nd stage: play-offs using an Olympic system

- Games are played until 2 team wins; the loser leaves the tournament.

- In case one match ended in a draw and the second was won by one of the teams, a third game is not held.

- In the final, teams play until 3 team wins.

- In the final, a win for one of the teams is recorded at a score of 3-0 or 2.5-0.5 after three games, at a score of 3-1 or 2.5-1.5 after four games, and at a score of 3-2 after five games.

- Supplement for deciding play-off games:

At a score of 1-1 (or 2-2 in the final), only in deciding team games do players cross out templates. The player whose team is marked in blue in the play-off table starts crossing out templates, and after crossing out, they also start as blue in the game. After each subjective restart - change of colors.

1. Balance:
- The player who crosses out the penultimate remaining template (leaving balance) chooses the balance size.

2. Mini-nostalgia, nostalgia:
- The player who crosses out the penultimate remaining template, leaving nostalgia or mini-nostalgia, chooses which of them the game will be played on.

3. h3dm1 or mt_diamond
- The player who crosses out the penultimate remaining template, leaving h3dm1 or mt_diamond, chooses which of them the game will be played on.
GAME RULES:

1.TEMPLATES:

Selection is made from 15 templates or their groups:

1. skirmish (200%)
2. Balance of choice (M 200% or L-U 130%).
3. Panic
4. 2sm4d(3)
5. Ёлка
6. Anarchy (200%)
7. Mini Nostalgia or Nostalgia
8. 6LM10a
9. 8MM6a
10. 8xm12a
11. 8xm8a
12. Spider
13. diamond
14. Jebus Cross
15. h3dm1 or mt_diamond

Supplements and differences for the Ёлка template:
- Turn time limit (19:00+08:00+01:15)
- Starting Castle is random.
- Roads: medium and fast.
- Restart at will if your opponent's starting hero was born in their home castle. (meaning you must inform the opponent if your hero is in the home castle for a subsequent decision).
- No restart upon meeting.

Supplements and clarifications for h3dm1 and mt_diamond templates :
- Turn time limit (19:00+08:00+01:15)
- Subjective restarts 111.
- Roads are medium.
- It is allowed to pass by shifted passage guards.
- Redrush is forbidden, as there is no bargaining for color.

2.When two teams meet (for example, a team consists of 4 people including the captain), players in them will be marked with colors according to the following analogy:

Example:
Team_1 vs Team_2
Captain vs Captain
Player 2 vs Player 2
Player 3 vs Player 3
Player 4 vs Player 4

3. The blue player places a veto on one of the templates (template groups), after which the red player offers three templates for selection from the 15 provided templates (template groups). The blue player chooses one of these 3, on which the game will be played, and the color.

4. Selection of castles and heroes:
Templates skirmish m200, balance m200, Anarchy (200%) and Ёлка are played full random.

All other templates - bargaining for castle. The host generates a pair of random castles via a special button. Immediately after generation, each player may once request regeneration for 500 coins rollback to the opponent. If at least one castle is repeated during regeneration, that same player may (but is not obliged to) request free regeneration until a new pair of castles appears.

Mirror templates: bargaining for hero. Before bargaining begins, each player has the right to ban 1 hero, after which bargaining starts. The player playing as red bans first and makes the first bid (after bargaining, each participant secures the right to use one chosen hero as a starting hero. When taking a restart, a player has the right to change the starting hero to any other, except for the opponent's hero chosen after bargaining).

5. Color in the draw tables - for all generations! No change of colors after each SUBJECTIVE restart.

6. In all matches, captains will play against captains, player 2 against player 2, 3 against 3, 4 against 4.

7. Any changes to the game rules are permitted by mutual consent of the players, except for Fair Play rules.

8. If a disputed situation arises, at the moment it is discovered, one of the players MUST STOP continuing the game, save and send the necessary saves for review by the appropriate authority! If the game was continued, the disputed case in that specific single game is considered resolved and the result of the game is not subject to review, even if rules are subsequently changed in favor of the loser.

9. Default timer - chess.

TEAM FORMATION (Player Draft):


1. After registration ends on November 10, all tournament participants must send Sanin (ICQ - 423164784) a list of captains, i.e., they must choose from all participants (except themselves) those whom they consider worthy of captaincy. The number of captains will be announced.
Along with the list of captains, it will be necessary to vote for the city selection system: random or bargaining.
Sending the list of captains also serves as confirmation of participation in the tournament; those who do not send it will not participate in the draw.

2. After the captains are determined, all remaining players will be selected from the general list.

3. Team selection (draw) will take place in a Skype conference chat. (if someone does not have Skype, these captains will write via ICQ)

4. The list of captains will be compiled by the number of votes for captaincy in descending order.

- Captains who cannot be present at the draw may write their priority for selecting players for their team. When it is this captain's turn, they will receive the player at the top of their priority list among those not yet chosen by previous captains.

5. With an even number of players per team: the captain who received the fewest votes chooses first. Then the captain who placed 2nd from the bottom chooses, and so on. Players chosen first by captains receive conditional number 2 in the team. Once all captains have chosen one team member, selection continues in reverse order. Players chosen during the 2nd selection receive conditional number 3, and during the 3rd selection - number 4.

With an odd number of players per team: the captain who received the most votes chooses first. Then the captain who placed 2nd chooses, and so on.

6. After the draw, teams must come up with a name and emblem (coat of arms), as well as a motto, during the transfer period.

7. Transfers. After the team compositions are determined, there will be 2 days for player exchanges between teams. A transfer is possible only with the mutual consent of the team captains. Captains cannot change teams.

8. Provision is made for substitute players who remain unchosen as a result of the draft. Such a player can join a team that needs a replacement in the last slot. If the departing team player was from a higher basket, the captain must move their players to a higher basket.
AGREEMENT RULES FOR GAMES in play-offs:

1. No later than 7 days after the start of each round, players are obliged to contact their opponents and agree on the date and time for starting the game between them.
- When postponing a match, agree on its resumption date.

2. If within 7 days players cannot agree on any game date or one player writes to the opponent but receives no answer, the lead must be notified immediately and the message history for that specific game provided. Dates for games will then be assigned.

3. If one of the players fails to appear for a game for which an agreement was reached without explaining the reasons, and subsequently the players cannot find a common time to start the game, a technical defeat for the absent player may be considered.

4. Players who are unable to finish their games within the allotted timeframe must report the reasons in the forum thread or via private message to the lead in as detailed a manner as possible 24 hours before the deadlines expire. Any means of notification (including through other players) must be used. Failure to notify is considered a refusal to report this (negligent attitude, as an aggravating factor).

5. If at the end of the round timeframe a game is on a save (at least one full game week from both opposing sides), the last chance to finish the game will be a set MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE (MCD) (or players may finish earlier), which the lead will assign when distributing tournament stages. Failure to appear on the completion date will be considered a technical defeat regardless of the history of agreement problems, unless they previously led to an established technical result.

6. In the final game, all disputed cases, appeals to the organizer, and requests to set an MCD are submitted ONLY by the team captain.

Winners of past tournaments:

One for All and All for One Troglodytes in the Mist (Gomunguls, Kilgor, Егор Коробейников)
One for All and All for One 2 Plan B (BISHOP, Lim4, Diabler)
One for All and All for One 3 Maniacs (Dirty_Player, Nitro, ShadowManiac)
One for All and All for One 4 Tornado (Сатир, Amster, GUNAR, cost)
ICQ 423164784

In reply to skd
Auto-translated
skd
Let me quote Dandy from the discussion thread about the rules for "One for All":


4 players are better for a tournament (in general, an even number of players in a team) - as it creates more balanced team compositions.
5 players are more convenient for organization (an odd number of participants in a team) - as it reduces the chance of a draw in a particular series.

Based on the number of registered players, I'm in favor of 4 people per team.
I'm even curious as to what the reasoning is behind the conclusion that 4 people in a team create a more balanced composition than 5?!
The more people in a team, the smaller the variance between skill levels within a single group, and the more balanced the compositions in each group - this is simply logical.
discord: LuckyF#3482
icq: 681350680
In reply to skd
User Avatar
Auto-translated
skd
4 players are better for a tournament (an even number of players on a team is generally better) - as it creates more balanced teams.
5 players are more convenient for organization (an odd number of participants on a team) - as it reduces the chance of a draw in a particular series.

Based on the number of registered players, I'm in favor of 4 players per team.
I disagree.
4 players do create more balanced teams than 3, but not more balanced than 5, and the argument about avoiding draws makes a team of 5 people preferable.
Lutski was faster!
296524052
Весна 2012.
In reply to skd
Auto-translated
skd
I'll quote Dandy from the discussion thread about the "One for All" rules:


4 players are better for a tournament (in general, an even number of players on a team) - as it creates more balanced team compositions.
5 players are more convenient for organization (an odd number of participants on a team) - as it reduces the chance of a draw in a particular series.

Based on the number of people who have signed up, I'm in favor of 4 people per team.
4 players on a team create more balanced compositions than 5? Please explain.
Когда рестартов не осталось, обязательно ждите Гурниссона без балисты:D

Комплимент который сделал мой день:
Катя ЭПИК барышня) вы бы видели как пялились на её сиськи молодёж) я та с девушкой был) но всё равно пялился ) потому что хорошие) (с) Browser

Слабая раздача, которую заиграл исключительно из-за колпака на 111. (с) Сатир

In reply to aka.Ward3n
User Avatar
Auto-translated
aka.Ward3n
Are teams with 4 players more balanced than teams with 5? Explain.

So, you removed the explanation from the quoted text.))

The point is that with an even number of participants, the captains are in equal conditions – the "last captain" (A) picks from two pools first, while the "first captain" (B) picks from only one pool first. Based on this, hypothetically, in a draft with 4 players per team, the situation should unfold as follows, where the captain with fewer votes starts:
Player 1: B > A
Player 2: A > B
Player 3: B > A
Player 4: A > B
This makes the draft look more balanced than in the case of adding another participant.

UTC+03:00, icq 593626431
In reply to skd
Auto-translated
skd
So, you should have kept the explanation consistent with the provided quote. The point is that with an even number of participants, the captains are in equal conditions: the "last captain" (A) picks first in two rounds, and the "first captain" (B) picks first in only one round. Therefore, in a draft with 4 players per team, the captain who receives fewer votes should theoretically face the following situation: Player 1: B > A Player 2: A > B Player 3: B > A Player 4: A > B This looks more balanced than if you add another participant to the draft.
Now, pay close attention. By reducing the number of participants in one pool, we equalize the strength of the pools. I can name 16 players who are approximately equal in strength for the captain slot. Now look. We have 16 captains of equal strength (the difference in skill is minimal). Now, we repeat your scheme, and we will see that captain 1 will pick first twice and last twice, and captain 16 will pick first twice and last twice. At the same time, the team compositions in the pools will be more equal due to the reduced variance
Когда рестартов не осталось, обязательно ждите Гурниссона без балисты:D

Комплимент который сделал мой день:
Катя ЭПИК барышня) вы бы видели как пялились на её сиськи молодёж) я та с девушкой был) но всё равно пялился ) потому что хорошие) (с) Browser

Слабая раздача, которую заиграл исключительно из-за колпака на 111. (с) Сатир

In reply to skd
Auto-translated
skd
So, you're suggesting removing the explanation along with the quoted text. The point is that with an even number of participants, the captains are in equal conditions: the "last captain" (A) picks from the first two tiers, while the "first captain" (B) picks only from the first tier. Therefore, in a draft with 4 players per team, the team whose captain received fewer votes should theoretically have the following situation: Player 1: B > A Player 2: A > B Player 3: B > A Player 4: A > B This seems more balanced than if you add another participant to the draft.
So, you want to "balance" the teams in this way: in one team, the first two tiers clearly dominate in terms of skill, and in the other team, the third and fourth tiers do the same, leaving some percentage for randomness, so that one of the obvious underdogs, with a bit of luck, can sway the situation in favor of their team, right? I think this is fundamentally the wrong approach. If you want to create more balanced teams, it should be done by reducing the skill difference within each individual tier, and this is achieved by increasing the number of players per team, which in turn reduces the number of players per tier.
discord: LuckyF#3482
icq: 681350680
In reply to LuckyF
User Avatar
Auto-translated
Lucky, as a mathematician, I can further confirm that mathematically, more balanced teams will be formed with an even number of participants. Captains are chosen by voting, and the number of votes determines their ranking; for example, Gomunguls might be ranked number 1, and LuckyF might be ranked number 20 among the captains. Next, the captains choose their teams, with LuckyF choosing first, and Gomunguls choosing last. Essentially, the first two teams chosen are roughly equal in strength; the weakest captain chooses the best second team, and Gomunguls chooses last. With an even number of people on each team, the teams will be approximately equal in strength (assuming each captain takes the team selection seriously). With an odd number of people on each team, Gomunguls will have an advantage. This advantage is more significant with 3 participants than with 5. Lucky, your idea about reducing the number of people in the pool is also correct. However, it would then need to be limited to perhaps 5-8 people. This would result in 5-8 teams. I don't think this is a good idea for a team tournament.
Весна 2013.
In reply to Roger-ua
Auto-translated
Roger-ua
Lucky, as a mathematician, I can further confirm that mathematically, more balanced teams will be formed with an even number of participants.

Captains are chosen by voting, and the number of votes determines their ranking; for example, Gomunguls might be ranked number 1, while LuckyF might be ranked number 20 among the captains.

Then, the captains choose two players each. LuckyF starts, and Gomunguls chooses last. Essentially, the first two players chosen are roughly equal in terms of strength; the weakest captain chooses the best second player, and Gomunguls chooses last.

With an even number of players on each team, the teams will be approximately equal (assuming each captain takes the team selection seriously).

With an odd number of players on each team, Gomunguls will have an advantage. This advantage is more significant with 3 participants than with 5.
You say that Gomunguls will have an advantage with 5 participants compared to 4, solely due to his personal skill. Don't you see the contradiction? According to you, he needs to play worse?
Когда рестартов не осталось, обязательно ждите Гурниссона без балисты:D

Комплимент который сделал мой день:
Катя ЭПИК барышня) вы бы видели как пялились на её сиськи молодёж) я та с девушкой был) но всё равно пялился ) потому что хорошие) (с) Browser

Слабая раздача, которую заиграл исключительно из-за колпака на 111. (с) Сатир

In reply to aka.Ward3n
User Avatar
Auto-translated
aka.Ward3n
How do you conditionally call it? Gomunguls will have an advantage with 5 players compared to 4, solely due to PERSONAL skill. Don't you notice the contradiction? Should he, according to you, play worse?

Aka, you stand out by making conclusions for me that I haven't made? :D

Gomunguls will have an advantage on his first board due to skill, no matter what!

But choosing the last player for the second board, he will be in the worst position on the second board. On the third, he chooses first, and again, his team (in theory) will have an advantage. On the fourth, Gomunguls is again in the worst position, as he chooses last.

Conclusion: with an even number of participants, the teams are EQUAL - ACCORDING TO THE TEAM SELECTION PROCEDURE!

Aka, if I haven't convinced you yet, then sorry. You're probably a humanities person.:confused:
Весна 2013.
In reply to Roger-ua
Auto-translated
Roger-ua
Aka, are you making conclusions for me that I haven't made myself? :D

Gomungul will have an advantage on his first board due to the skill, no doubt!

But choosing the player last for the second board will put him in the worst position on that board. On the third board, he chooses first, and again, his team (in theory) will have an advantage. On the fourth board, Gomungul is again in the worst position, as he chooses last.

Conclusion: with an even number of participants, the teams are EQUAL - according to the team selection procedure!

Aka, if I haven't convinced you yet, I'm sorry. You're probably a humanities person then.:confused:
Yeah, a master of humanities (engineering) sciences.
I'll explain it again, the second and the last.
There are approximately 16 players of roughly equal strength in the captain position, strong enough to win against each other.
Now, having 5 players, with approximately equal first boards for all teams, we not only get the situation you described with an even number of groups, but we also reduce the skill dispersion among the players. Any more questions?
Когда рестартов не осталось, обязательно ждите Гурниссона без балисты:D

Комплимент который сделал мой день:
Катя ЭПИК барышня) вы бы видели как пялились на её сиськи молодёж) я та с девушкой был) но всё равно пялился ) потому что хорошие) (с) Browser

Слабая раздача, которую заиграл исключительно из-за колпака на 111. (с) Сатир

In reply to Roger-ua
Auto-translated
Roger-ua
As a mathematician, I can further confirm that, mathematically, more balanced teams will be formed with an even number of participants.

Let's assume there are n players in a tournament. The organizers decided to form m teams (captains) from n players. According to the tournament rules, the teams must have the same number of people, so each team has k people (baskets), and n = m * k (all numbers are integers). Question: with what number of people in a team (baskets) are the teams most balanced?

Each player has a certain rating Rn. Since the victory of players from any basket is equivalent, we define the strength of each team P[m] through the total rating of the team P[m] = SUM R(i = 1 ... k).

The total number of people n is divided into k baskets, and each i-th basket has a rating spread D(D= R[(i-1)*k] - R[i*k]).

Let's consider a specific case: the teams are formed by 2 out of m captains - the top-1 captain and the last-ranked captain.

The team of the last-ranked captain will have the following strength:
P1 = R[m] (captain's rating) + R[m+1] (since he is the first, he chooses the next-ranked player) + R[3*m] (he chooses last, i.e., after m-1 captains from this basket) + R[3*m+1] (he chooses first) + R[5*m] (chooses last) + ... (depends on the parity of the teams).
If the number of baskets k is odd, then this team has (k-1)/2 players who are top-1 in their baskets and 1+(k-1)/2 players who are losers in their baskets.
If the number of teams is even, then this team has (k-1)/2 players who are top-1 in their baskets and (k+1)/2 players who are losers in their baskets.

The strength of the team of the captain with the highest rating:
P2 = R1 (captain's rating) + R[2*m] (chooses last) + R[2m+1] (chooses first) + R[4*m] (last) + R[4*m+1] (chooses first) + ...
In this team, the situation with the top-1 and losers is reversed compared to the previous one, equal to 1+(k-1)/2 and (k-1)/2, respectively.

Let's find the difference in strength between teams 1 and 2:

P2 - P1 = (R[1] + R[2*m] + R[2*m+1] + R[4*m] + R[4*m+1] + ...) - (R[m] + R[m+1] + R[3*m] + R[3*m+1] + R[5*m] + ...)

Let's reorganize the expression, comparing the ratings of players from the same basket:

P2-P1 = (R[1] - R[m]) + (R[2*m] - R[m+1]) + (R[2*m+1] - R[3*m]) + (R[4*m] - R[3*m+1]) + (R[4*m+1] - R[5*m]) + ...

The differences in parentheses are nothing more than the rating spreads, that is:

P2-P1 = D[1] + (-D[2]) + D[3] + (-D[4]) + D[5] + ...

Thus, indeed, the parity of the teams affects the team's strength. If the number of people in the team is even:

P2-P1 = D[1] + (-D[2]) + D[3] + (-D[4])

then the spread of team strengths is less.

However, let's remember about the rating spread in the baskets. Obviously, the rating spread in the basket will decrease if we reduce the number of people in the basket, while maintaining the total number of participants, in other words, increasing the number of baskets. This can be clearly demonstrated by pushing the situation to the absurd: N people participate, let's make N/2 baskets of 2 people. The difference in ratings between pairs will be minimal, the spread tends to zero:

P2-P1 = D[1] + (-D[2]) + D[3] + (-D[4]) + D[5] + ... -> 0

the strengths of the teams are almost equal.

In this case, two options for balancing the teams are considered - making an even number or increasing the number of baskets. As shown above, each of the options balances the teams in its own way. But the option of an even number of baskets is associated with a big problem of the previous tournament - draws.
As a result, I am "for" increasing the number of baskets to 5.

P.S. if it is really needed, then it is possible to quantitatively assess the differences in team strengths by writing a program that calculates the strength of teams with different numbers of baskets, based on the actual rating of the players who registered for the tournament
In reply to Silence-
Auto-translated
And has anyone among the mathematical masterminds considered the complexity of playing all the games when there are 5 people on a team? Let's create 4 teams of 20 people each; that would be fair and magnificent. And no team will last until the end of the tournament...
In reply to Jelen117
Auto-translated
I disagree about team synergy. The ideal team size is three players; I don't think there will be a significant difference between teams of four or five, considering the many issues that arise during playoff games with four players. And the idea of equal versus unequal teams is just ridiculous; even Gubler managed to win a tournament :D
Мой стрим-канал: http://heroes3.tv/Grizvald.

Восстановил старый номер аси, теперь тут: 625045517

"Это нам идеально подходит" (с)

"Лабета - папашка на первую неделю" (с)

In reply to Grizvald
User Avatar
Auto-translated
Tournament registration is closed. A total of 83 participants have registered.
Since most participants prefer 5 people per team, let's try that format. This way, we will have 16 teams.

Today or tomorrow, each participant must send me a list of 16 captains via ICQ or in a private message on the forum. In addition, along with the list, you need to vote for the city selection system: random or trading. (m200, Anarchy, and Grove will be played with a random map in any case).

The voting will last until Saturday morning. Participation in the voting also confirms participation in the tournament; those who do not send a list will not participate in the tournament.
ICQ 423164784

In reply to aka.Ward3n
User Avatar
Auto-translated
aka.Ward3n
Now, pay close attention.
By reducing the number of participants in each tier, we equalize the strength of the tiers.
I can name 16 players who are approximately equal in strength for the captain slot. Now look. We have 16 captains of equal strength (the difference in skill is minimal).
Now, we repeat your scheme, and we will see that captain 1 will pick first 2 times and last 2 times, and captain 16 will pick first 2 times and last 2 times, and at the same time, the composition of participants in the tiers will be more equal due to the reduced variance.

The conclusion that the captains are equal is nonsense. Accordingly, everything else is incorrect.

Silens wrote a lot there, but I'm going to Poland; I'll be happy to look into his arguments when I return.

The experience of past tournaments has clearly shown that 4 players per team is much more balanced than 3.
And the probability that one of the 5 participants will drop out (not participate in the tournament) is definitely true.

Sanin has a desire to experiment – good luck. It would have been better to conduct a poll before registration.

I spent 5 minutes discussing it with Silens. Yes, mathematically, he correctly proved that an even number is correct. And he confirmed LuckyF's argument that the smaller the tiers, the better, i.e., in an ideal scenario, the most balanced compositions are achieved with two teams! All conclusions are correct! I don't see a problem with draws. In the playoffs, there are at least 2 games, and I think Silens can prove that they can end 3-2 and 2-3 (or 4-1 and 1-4) even with an odd number of participants, resulting in the same overall draw, and something else will need to be done.
Весна 2013.

Statistics

Welcome our newest member: Emil