[Complete] The GRAND TAG! - a 2vs2 Tournament, 2nd Edition

[Faello]

Guys,

I've an idea regarding players that were already eliminated from the TGT - we need and we will need a subs throughout the whole tournament, so I was wondering if teams that advanced further could use a help of the players from already eliminated teams.

Every eliminated player could be a sub in 1 game only (to give a chance to sub others)

What do you think about it?

[grzywacz]

-1 If we eliminate some badass player I don't want him to come back from the dead to haunt me.

[Faello]

If couple more players (let's say 2) will vote "no" to this idea, it won't pass - feel free to post, it's thought mostly as a remedy to manpower problems but grzywacz point is valid here - dangerous player is still a dangerous player.

[deekay]

"no"

[alpha1]

sounds like a reasonable rule, but i doubt we really need a rule for everything. If a team needs a sub player, players should be able to choose whatever sub they want. Should this rule be voted down it could lead to problems in lets say semi finals, where there would be almost no subs due to the fact, that most decent 2vs2 players already participate in the TGT, yet wouldnt be able to sub, cause their teams were already eliminated.

tl;dr down with bureaucracy, let people manage their stuff themselves



also why only 2? for a democratic voting for or against one option we would need >50%

alpha is out.

[Faello]

also why only 2? for a democratic voting for or against one option we would need >50%

Because some players may have not liked this idea, but didn't want to "say it out loud" + it's pretty much a change in the tournament rules, during the ongoing tournament, thus such a change would need nearly total support to be acceptable

...and regarding the idea itself and your post - words of wisdom alpha1

Vox populi, vox Dei, I'm leaving this matter to the players, thanks for the votes guys

[tiboloid]

I vote YES !

[Imp]

The matches I have seen so far have been absolutely exciting. Hope it keeps up!

Another idea for the eliminated players is that they can vie for final tournament rankings. The finals determine the first and second place, and the teams eliminated in the semifinals could fight it out for third and fourth, etc. That way those eliminated early still get to play the full gamut of tournament games instead of being sidelined. There doesn't need to be any complicated system (unless there's secretly $100,000 USD difference between eighth place and ninth place?) and it also means more replays!

One thing that's a shame is that the games take so long, and the game lengths are unpredictable. If we can somehow shorten the time or make it more predictable (say a 4-hour block on Saturday and continuation if necessary in a 3-hour block on Sunday), it would become accessible to so many more players, especially with the different time zones and so many people working on weekends now too.

[grzywacz]

One thing that's a shame is that the games take so long, and the game lengths are unpredictable. If we can somehow shorten the time or make it more predictable (say a 4-hour block on Saturday and continuation if necessary in a 3-hour block on Sunday), it would become accessible to so many more players, especially with the different time zones and so many people working on weekends now too.

I, for one, find it much easier to schedule a longer block of time to play in, rather than split it on two separate days.

[Rigor]

1st round of tournament has already began - I won't change the rules atm, when Organisation Week is already over - players won't have enough time to train on it, not to mention all the negative opinions about it [...]

Eot.

seriously, stick to your own rules. there is no lack of players in the quarter/semi finals, is there?

[Faello]

Another idea for the eliminated players is that they can vie for final tournament rankings. The finals determine the first and second place, and the teams eliminated in the semifinals could fight it out for third and fourth, etc. That way those eliminated early still get to play the full gamut of tournament games instead of being sidelined.

It sounds cool, but (for example) I'm not interested in fighting for place no.9 in TGT for the next 3 rounds and I think that others might have similar attitude here.

There will be a match for a third place tho'

seriously, stick to your own rules. there is no lack of players in the quarter/semi finals, is there?

This matter wasn't decided in the rules, also I was asking about negative votes (not positive ones ) and I wanted to present something that would possibly prolong the TGT experience to others so pro bono publico.

Regarding lack of players - 10 out of 16 teams were (some of them still are) affected by some organisational problems connected with players avaibility (in case you haven't noticed, yours included ), there's also no certainty that we will evade them in the second round.

I vote YES !

If (let's hope not) some team will have a problem with finding a sub, "letting players decide" means that if every player in the Team A vs Team B matchup will agree on a substitute from already eliminated team, it's possible - if someone will protest - then it's not possible

I think that alpha1 is right and I won't interfere into this process.

[Cutler]

-1 If we eliminate some badass player I don't want him to come back from the dead to haunt me.

I also vote no, for the same reason.

[neki]

He he, Faello is a nice guy who thinks of the good of the tournament mainly, because I doubt it that anybody would choose exactly him as sub and if anybody would choose him, where's that bad-ass player coming back from the dead ?! - just kidding Faello, you play well

Anyways, the idea is Faello is a nice guy, he works a lot to fill in these free subs and we should give him a rule to help him out do this more efficently.

The second argument is: why be afraid, it's so fun to eliminate a player, have to play him again and eliminate him again, that's like a brutal overkill, baby!

And the third argument, which I think is the most important (hi hi ) is that Rigor might go out of the competition before the finals, where team RNG can kick his ass. So enforcing such a rule will increase the probability of meeting Rigor in the finals as a mercy substitute player , so it is obviously a good rule!

My vote is YES!

[grzywacz]

He he, Faello is a nice guy who thinks of the good of the tournament mainly, because I doubt it that anybody would choose exactly him as sub and if anybody would choose him, where's that bad-ass player coming back from the dead ?! - just kidding Faello, you play well

Anyways, the idea is Faello is a nice guy, he works a lot to fill in these free subs and we should give him a rule to help him out do this more efficently.

The second argument is: why be afraid, it's so fun to eliminate a player, have to play him again and eliminate him again, that's like a brutal overkill, baby!

And the third argument, which I think is the most important (hi hi ) is that Rigor might go out of the competition before the finals, where team RNG can kick his ass. So enforcing such a rule will increase the probability of meeting Rigor in the finals as a mercy substitute player , so it is obviously a good rule!

My vote is YES!

☃

[Dragonking]

☃

So true.