The One Man Left clan tournament! - Take 2 incoming on June 25th

[onealexleft]

(12-09-2012 05:23 AM)CombatEX Wrote:  Besides the joker system, this sounds a lot like GSTL All-Kill Format.

And, poweewee mentioned about one player wiping the other team is referred to as an "All-Kill". There is also a "Reverse All-Kill" where a team only has one player left who then does an All-Kill for a major comeback.

Anyway, this sounds fun and it certainly has worked out well for GomTV.

Exactly!

Although I'm not sure adding more constraints like fixed order all decided before the match improves anything? Unless there's logistics problems I'm not seeing. The core premise is you don't know who is coming next and the team leaders/members decide who to put up against the winner after each match as plans and strategies can change, etc. So basically the loser has a slight advantage of trying to put someone they think can take down the winner asap.

The other thing GSTL does is you can have a bench of players larger than 5 if you want. This keeps the other team is guessing who will come out to the very end. So basically your entire team is the 'player pool' but maybe in secret you know who the 5 actives are, but the opposing team does not know which 5 out of like 15 players you'd choose.

[laYahooz]

I think every clan has at least 2 players in the clan who are capable of “all kills". So I think it is pretty even

[CombatEX]

(12-09-2012 05:30 AM)onealexleft Wrote:  

(12-09-2012 05:23 AM)CombatEX Wrote:  Besides the joker system, this sounds a lot like GSTL All-Kill Format.

And, poweewee mentioned about one player wiping the other team is referred to as an "All-Kill". There is also a "Reverse All-Kill" where a team only has one player left who then does an All-Kill for a major comeback.

Anyway, this sounds fun and it certainly has worked out well for GomTV.

Exactly!

Although I'm not sure adding more constraints like fixed order all decided before the match improves anything? Unless there's logistics problems I'm not seeing. The core premise is you don't know who is coming next and the team leaders/members decide who to put up against the winner after each match as plans and strategies can change, etc. So basically the loser has a slight advantage of trying to put someone they think can take down the winner asap.

The other thing GSTL does is you can have a bench of players larger than 5 if you want. This keeps the other team is guessing who will come out to the very end. So basically your entire team is the 'player pool' but maybe in secret you know who the 5 actives are, but the opposing team does not know which 5 out of like 15 players you'd choose.

I agree. Here is what I said in an edit, but I'll just move it here now since people have commented since my last post.

As for suggestions, I think it would be good if teams can pick players as the match progresses. So in other words, if your clan lost the last game, you know who is playing next (the player on the opposing clan who just won) and you can try to strategically pick a player from your clan who you think can beat them. This is how it is done in GSTL anyway. Of course we don't have to imitate them exactly, but in this case I like they way they did it because it creates some strategic consideration for the clan who lost the previous game.

In other words I agree with Alex.

As for the joker system, it sounds interesting, but I'm not sure I understand how it will really fit into the organization. The issue is that in that case, the winner of the 2v2 match then chooses which player keeps playing in the 1v1? The other player in the 2v2 pair then sits out? I guess this is fine but I'm not sure I fancy the idea of 1v1 specialists having to play a 2v2 out of the blue. It doesn't allow 2v2 teams (like Mr.Banger and alexjiang1 or worldfamous' team) to really compete, just 1v1 players to play 2v2.

[Gf!sh]

(12-09-2012 05:34 AM)CombatEX Wrote:  As for suggestions, I think it would be good if teams can pick players as the match progresses. So in other words, if your clan lost the last game, you know who is playing next (the player on the opposing clan who just won) and you can try to strategically pick a player from your clan who you think can beat them. This is how it is done in GSTL anyway. Of course we don't have to imitate them exactly, but in this case I like they way they did it because it creates some strategic consideration for the clan who lost the previous game.

Well, if you look at it that way, it seems more awesome

(12-09-2012 05:34 AM)CombatEX Wrote:  As for the joker system, it sounds interesting, but I'm not sure I understand how it will really fit into the organization. The issue is that in that case, the winner of the 2v2 match then chooses which player keeps playing in the 1v1? The other player in the 2v2 pair then sits out? I guess this is fine but I'm not sure I fancy the idea of 1v1 specialists having to play a 2v2 out of the blue. It doesn't allow 2v2 teams (like Mr.Banger and alexjiang1 or worldfamous' team) to really compete, just 1v1 players to play 2v2.

I don't have a freaking clue, sorry.

[Mr.Banger]

Maybe how to incorporate 2v2 is having 2v2 players from both sides play a game. The winner of that game's team can "bring back to life" one of the 1v1 players that were essentially killed?

[CombatEX]

I like that suggestion Mr. Banger. It's better than just randomly having 1v1 players play a 2v2 match. This way clans can actually field their dedicated 2v2 players (also allows more people to participate since there are 2v2 specialists who probably wouldn't be chosen for the 1v1 gauntlet).

I don't know when it's best to field the 2v2 teams, but maybe after someone loses all 5 of their members in the 1v1? Then if the team that 'lost' wins the 2v2 they get to bring back a player as Mr.Banger suggested for an ace match.

[aaronINdayton]

So how would maps/P1 be decided?

What about a separate event for 2v2 and 1v1? Maybe 2v2 would be 3 seats(or pairs) instead of 5, With each player being limited to only 1 2v2 team (6 total players if all seats get matched)?

[onealexleft]

(12-11-2012 12:18 AM)aaronINdayton Wrote:  So how would maps/P1 be decided?

What about a separate event for 2v2 and 1v1? Maybe 2v2 would be 3 seats(or pairs) instead of 5, With each player being limited to only 1 2v2 team (6 total players if all seats get matched)?

Mixing 2v2 and 1v1 can make for interesting match-ups, but in the end they are quite different beasts. If there's interest enough in 2v2 then having a separate 2v2 tourney I think would be more favorable.

[CombatEX]

Ideally I would lean towards a separate 2v2 tournament as well. It can be conducted in the same way as the 1v1 tournament but with 2v2 instead. However, I didn't suggest this earlier because I don't know if there's enough interest for 2v2 and/or members for the 2v2 tournament since this is within clans where the available player pool is also much smaller.

[daHsu]

@CombatEX I think 2v2 is slowly becoming more and more popular, since matchups are so much more different than 1v1 (although 1v1 has become a lot more diverse with the new stages and updates)

I like the idea of incorporating 1v1 and 2v2 into the same tournament though! Not sure of a good way to do it, but keep thinking guys