Myrgard

GKG: 9 wins, 4 losses, 2 ties. 2 match wins, 1 match loss.
Zak: 9 wins, 5 losses, 1 tie. 3 match wins, 0 match losses
Ratking: 9 wins, 5 losses, 1 tie. 2 match wins, 1 match loss
GK: 7 wins, 7 losses, 1 tie. 1 match win, 1 match loss, 1 match tie.
Limp: 6 wins, 7 losses, 2 ties. 1 match win, 1 match loss, 1 match tie
Dantski: 6 wins, 7 losses, 2 ties. 1 match win, 2 match losses.
Paris: 5 wins, 9 losses, 1 tie. 1 match win, 2 match losses.
Asmodian: 4 wins, 9 losses, 2 ties. 1 match win, 2 match losses.


If we decide the seeds by overall game wins, GKG is #1 seed.

If we decide the seeds by overall match wins, Zak is the #1 seed.

match wins are critical in DE obv. Should be done by w-t-l in QR.

Still one week of QR right?

I don't care about the seeding as long as RK's team and Zak's team play each other before they play mine again.

I think that is the least you can do considering my team had the hardest QR schedule. We were the only team to not play paris, dantski, or asmo's team, which are clearly the 3 weakest teams. we pretty much played arguably the 3 strongest teams besides our own, which I think was due to some pretty heavy bias against my team.

GiantKillerGen wrote:I don't care about the seeding as long as RK's team and Zak's team play each other before they play mine again.

I think that is the least you can do considering my team had the hardest QR schedule. We were the only team to not play paris, dantski, or asmo's team, which are clearly the 3 weakest teams. we pretty much played arguably the 3 strongest teams besides our own, which I think was due to some pretty heavy bias against my team.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=en ... iacFw&NR=1[/youtube]

The milks on you chief and the milky bars are on me

We've consistently beat all competition we had, even the next best team in the tournament. We're the only team to not lose any matches. We faced steady competition in Dantski (6th), GK (4th), and GKG (1st). Sure he played good competition too, in Zak (2nd), ratking (3rd), and Limp (5th), but its pretty much the same.

However they should not get a higher seed than the undefeated team, especially when they lost to them. It is LUNACY!

Makes little difference to my team, we're probably in the 3rd seed anyway you look at it.

If zaks and gkgs team were tied at w-t-l of course zaks team would take first bc they won their match. Just my opinion that because gkg had the best record they should take first. Your still in 2nd spot zak whats the problem?

personally I think u have to give zak #1 seed. It doesn't make sense they are the only team to win all their matches, and they beat us. Match record is way more important than game record. Of course our QR schedule was way worse than anyone else's, but no1 is going to weight that. Honestly I don't care, I would take #8 seed as long as RK and Zak play each other first. My team can't get fucked with the hardest QR schedule and then the hardest elimination schedule too.

Guess that solves it. Lets get a bracket going

I would like to play every team otherwise how can I know I'm better than them and act like a condescending asshole in the future?

par73 wrote: Scoring will work like this:

Victory is worth 3 points.
A tie is worth 1 points.
A loss is worth 0 points.

^^^ this is from the thread with the rules

I then used Match Record to break ties

therefore


GKG: 9 wins, 4 losses, 2 ties. 2 match wins, 1 match loss.
Zak: 9 wins, 5 losses, 1 tie. 3 match wins, 0 match losses
Ratking: 9 wins, 5 losses, 1 tie. 2 match wins, 1 match loss
GK: 7 wins, 7 losses, 1 tie. 1 match win, 1 match loss, 1 match tie.
Limp: 6 wins, 7 losses, 2 ties. 1 match win, 1 match loss, 1 match tie
Dantski: 6 wins, 7 losses, 2 ties. 1 match win, 2 match losses.
Paris: 5 wins, 9 losses, 1 tie. 1 match win, 2 match losses.
Asmodian: 4 wins, 9 losses, 2 ties. 1 match win, 2 match losses.

equals this seeding:

GKG 29 - 1
Zak 28 - 2
RK 28 - 3
GK 22 - 4
Limp 20 - 5
Dantski 20 - 6
Paris 16 - 7
Asmodian 14 - 8

ER1 Seeding:
GKG vs Asmodian
Zak vs Paris
RK vs Dantski
GK vs Limp

I don't think it really matters how you split it between the "close" teams. For the purposes of this tournament I think it's more important that we strive to avoid repeated matchups in the first round of elimination (and obviously avoid #1 and #2 playing each other, but that's easy). Single elim can't really rank more than the top team anyways, so I wouldn't get too hung up on how the rest plays out. Personally I'd just rather get to play some more of the teams since the QR did not end up being a full round robin.

Paris this is retarded, you can not seriously be basing seeding on games won and not matches.

its like saying Oh I am sorry the Americans Invaded Afghanistan killed all their enemies took over their country and major facilities but they still retreated in a lot of guerrilla warfare skirmishes in the middle of nowhere and therefore lost a lot of matches. Guess that means America must be 2nd place. Just fucking ridiculous to base seeding on battles and not the war entirely.

That said let next week determine if we win/lose before jumping to any conclusion as there may be a much more clearer winner.

par73 wrote:

par73 wrote: Scoring will work like this:

Victory is worth 3 points.
A tie is worth 1 points.
A loss is worth 0 points.

^^^ this is from the thread with the rules

I then used Match Record to break ties

therefore

This is also taken from the thread with the rules:

"After the draft, teams will play each other week by week in order to determine their seeding for the finale of the tournament. Each team will play each other once. After this round, Eliminations take place."

My team was playing under the assumption that we would have a chance to play each team in the QR and establish ourselves as the dominant #1 seed, without anomalies like Ratking vs Asmo that fuck up the overall score of the QR. If you are going to take one rule from the rulebook like thats what you've been going with all along, you have to take this one too.

Not to mention the captain of the team you chose for # 1 seed says that team Zak should have that spot. GKG how about we just trade spots?

well like I said before, I don't care as long as you and RK play each other before playing me. Since with this seeding arrangement, that would be the case, then I am happy with it. I really don't think seeding matters at all otherwise, so who cares.

Well if these are brackets then no, you and I play again before ratking faces either of us. That doesn't make any sense at all. This is how it should have been typed:

GKG vs Asmo

GK vs Limp

Ratking vs Dantski

Zak vs Paris

well I think paris typed it just fine. in a standard seeding arrangement #1 plays #8, and then the winner of that plays #4 and #5, i.e. you match the top and bottom, and then you match the middles, rinse and repeat. Paris confirmed that that is the case as well.

i'd like limp to play dantski's team and volunteer to face against rk in the first round to avoid repeat unless limp already played dantski

thisforumsucks wrote: This is also taken from the thread with the rules:

"After the draft, teams will play each other week by week in order to determine their seeding for the finale of the tournament. Each team will play each other once. After this round, Eliminations take place."

My team was playing under the assumption that we would have a chance to play each team in the QR and establish ourselves as the dominant #1 seed, without anomalies like Ratking vs Asmo that *cruiser* up the overall score of the QR. If you are going to take one rule from the rulebook like thats what you've been going with all along, you have to take this one too.

Not to mention the captain of the team you chose for # 1 seed says that team Zak should have that spot. GKG how about we just trade spots?

Well Zak here's the thing. Let me do some explaining, I'm not here to argue.

When you make a QR 7 weeks long instead of 3, there's a whole lot of forfeits, and a huge drop of care. Examples of this are NML2010. This tournament needs to be concise, teams are not just playing for who's the best overall in the tournament, but which team was the best equipped and performed the best during this period of time. Those rules you cite were taken mostly from Asmo's previous draft tournament where there were 4 teams, now the amount of teams has doubled. I did not adjust this in the rules and apologise, and originally before we had 8 teams I believed this qualifying round was the most appropriate. I believe your team established yourselves as a dominant seed, whether you got #1 or #2. While I would personally love for another 4 weeks of QRs now that my top 3 picks are finally available to all play, this will not be the case. the next three or four weeks will be the most important in the tournament, and the QRs are essentially warm ups to build team chemistry and scrimmage with those results affecting who will play who in the ER. Now that the seeding process is complete, I think you should refocus your concerns from being a dominant #1 seed to being the most dominant team in the tournament (by winning).

It's cool that the captain of the team who won the #1 seed says you should have their spot. It also means that the first seed would rather be playing teams seeded 3, 6 and 7 instead of 4, 5 and 8. However, the results are in and if team GKG honestly wanted the second seed they could have easily forfeited a game to another team just in case. This was not the case. Your team could have also performed better by winning the games you tied or lost to another team in. In most organized sports, especially professional ones, seeding is in the back of the minds of the general managers as well as the players. It seems like this was overlooked by most, and people want to compensate this overlooking by requesting violations of rules just to wet their whistle.

In case of those who don't know how Seeding is run, the #1 Seed plays the lowest seed (#8), the #2 seed plays the second lowest seed (#7), the #3 seed plays the third lowest seed (#6) and the #4 seed plays the fourth lowest seed (#5th). Clearly a 'seeding upset' is more likely in the 4v5 or 3v6 matches, but are also possible in the 1v8 or 2v7 matches. You never know what will happen until it happens.

a mellow, well articulated post by paris.

what the fuck is going on

Sounds fine. So lets not play matches on Easter weekend mb!

Unfortunately Paris you never stated how seeding would work, so how can GKG or Zak (the top 2 seeds regardless of how it works) predict which way you'll score the QR? Zak's team + GKG's team both had legitimate claims to having #1 and #2 seed but without any explanation on how it works it is most certainly not a failure on their part.

I don't care, but I assumed seeding was by match. I forget who our 2nd match was against, but once we started 3-0, we (or just me) basically said "fuck it" and half-assed the last 2 games which ended up losses.

Zak's care is really high.

wwo wrote:I don't care, but I assumed seeding was by match. I forget who our 2nd match was against, but once we started 3-0, we (or just me) basically said "*cruiser* it" and half-assed the last 2 games which ended up losses.

Zak's care is really high.

We chose not to rehost for homer in game 4, and then homer suicided mid to end the game faster in game 5. We didn't know the rules at the time.

I only want whats best for my little zaklings wwo!

Dantski wrote:Unfortunately Paris you never stated how seeding would work, so how can GKG or Zak (the top 2 seeds regardless of how it works) predict which way you'll score the QR? Zak's team + GKG's team both had legitimate claims to having #1 and #2 seed but without any explanation on how it works it is most certainly not a failure on their part.

Listen, I stated seeding as 3-1-0 as W-T-L; this has been used before in tournaments and is a simple system to understand. It is my error for not making it more clear that this is referring to games rather than matches. Anyway if I worked on the seeding now I would weight the wins in terms of how that seeding system turned out for an overall score, but the seeding would be inaccurate and fucked up anyway since you had players playing way over their paygrade last week and thus was allowed to play with a team that was far more well rounded than any other team thus far in the tournament.

P.s. Speaking about 'clear rules'; Ksaize isn't even on the sublist so as far as i'm concerned have fun getting corned by whatever seed you face in the playoffs after you cheated and I asked you if everything about the team you had assembled in QR3 was legitimate and fair. then you also put zak in the game who is a 7 and made your team again overpowered over their allowed limit. if anything you should be penalized for infractions after i had trusted that you were being honest, but alas who really gives a shit and you probably don't even feel like playing anyway.

anyone who played in the last draft tournament should have been aware how seeding worked, but again i apologise for not being so clear.

Zak did not play a single game.

I was also totally fine with playing 6v6 but for some reason everyone was saying it was fine and we played 4 games without any complaint from you. Our subs were basically totally acceptable with you until we started winning.

We kinda got hosed by Asmo's subs the day before when he got to replace his 2 strongest players with 2 better players than them. Now this doesn't change the fact that in our game we replaced.

Shai 8 (LOL 8, my team wants me to get you to change Shais's rating to 9) with PK 8 this is a big downgrade.
Honkey 7 with Flat 7, you even questioned this in our match when it was you who did the ratings!
MC/Cookie 6+5? With wwo + ksiaze 6+5? Or is wwo a 7?

I don't see an issue with a player not on a team or sub list subbing, again you've only brought this up long after the match was played.

a substitute player needs to be on a sub list or a roster in order to participate in the tournament

It was a fun match for all players and ggs regardless of what was stated about the rules Dp.

Wow paris just wow.

I was fully expecting you to post a ragy, whiny ridiculous post and try to bullshit me and my team, however you actually were cool and mature about it so major props on that.

par wrote:a substitute player needs to be on a sub list or a roster in order to participate in the tournament

Was this an exception in week 1? It seemed like a bunch of people played then got an entry as subs afterwards. Since you personally can't be on for every single match in this tourney maybe this rule can be tweaked in case of you not being online at the time to approve and rate the proposed sub? Like maybe the 2 captains can agree on a player's sub rating or whatever?

well if u had said ksaize was a 5 i would have said he was a 7

coz he's definately a fookin 6 if not 7

coz he's definately a fookin 6 if not 7

I consider enculator better and he's a 5

i think you are overrating enc due to his involvement with your lrcg squad.

possibly, but most people think his rating is unfair!

holy shit, ksiaze is NOT a 7. 6 at best when he is active, and that's being generous.

I'd rate ksiaze the same as enculator for draft purposes for sure. If anything i might rate enc a tad higher but whatever.

Enc is NOT a 5.. some of the ratings are whack.

Both are 5's

adrenaline wrote:holy shit, ksiaze is NOT a 7. 6 at best when he is active, and that's being generous.

yeah but i would have given ksaize a 7 if that averaged out with dantski 5

Personally I think enc is a pretty good player. He's primarily a mixed squad guy, but does that quite well. Lacks in power roles tho and also capping and in-game awareness. I'd say a high 3/5, in this case a7 I guess.

Ksi is somewhat similar. Major differences here being a little better at power roles and game awareness. But I think in their primary roles (mixed squads) enc is a little better. Mid 3/5 - or a high 6 in this case

w/e ive seen enc and ksaize kill all of your units as well as mine i'm just saying if ksaize and enc squared off or were measured on the same scale, ksaize would pack more of a punch / win more games on my personally perceived axis of ability, awareness, situational and long-term personality.