[Baldie]

Originally Posted by ToRPox

at first glance it makes sense to seed ACL events based on ACL points and it's clearly unbiased. That said (and as my previous post made clear), it's not fair.

Originally Posted by ToRPox

clearly unbiased.

Originally Posted by ToRPox

it's not fair.

wut


In an ideal world I would have a single double elimination bracket. However the reality of the situation is we don't have sufficient computers to effectively manage that process. The whole reason we split brackets into two is so that I can sit down an entire bracket and allocate them a computer. That and double elim brackets get exponentially larger the more people in them so in theory having two smaller brackets reduces the total series required to be played. One of the largest waste of time at LANs is people setting up. People have to plug in their peripherals, sometimes download drivers and set the settings they want. So I try to avoid computer swapping where possible and that means delaying the other bracket until computers become available. Also please nobody counter-argue ACL should just buy more computers. It's not financially feasible for us to do this and in many places the space available wouldn't allow for more computers.

In regards to how seeding was done I seriously don't understand how anybody can argue seeding an ACL event using ACL points is not fair or not unbiased. In my opinion no admin should ever alter a bracket 'because it looks stacked' or 'because some really good guy gets a bad run', especially if the premise of seeding is based off previous qualifiers. What's the point of doing the qualifiers then? "Oh see this semi decent guy played in all the qualifiers and he's in the easier bracket but this guy here who is like top 2 protoss SEA is in the harder bracket hmm despite only playing in 1 qualifier let's swap them because it wont be as stacked then and it will make it more likely for this guy to advance because he really should." Makes me sick thinking about it. I definitely can see the merit in using 2013's model of seasons instead of yearly but that's all I can take from this entire discussion on it. There will always be people who get an easier bracket than others - welcome to a tournament.

Quick Comments

Asrathiel:

Definitely agree about admins altering brackets. Big can of worms once you start doing it

[Frustration]

Originally Posted by Baldie

wut


In an ideal world I would have a single double elimination bracket. However the reality of the situation is we don't have sufficient computers to effectively manage that process. The whole reason we split brackets into two is so that I can sit down an entire bracket and allocate them a computer. That and double elim brackets get exponentially larger the more people in them so in theory having two smaller brackets reduces the total series required to be played. One of the largest waste of time at LANs is people setting up. People have to plug in their peripherals, sometimes download drivers and set the settings they want. So I try to avoid computer swapping where possible and that means delaying the other bracket until computers become available. Also please nobody counter-argue ACL should just buy more computers. It's not financially feasible for us to do this and in many places the space available wouldn't allow for more computers.

In regards to how seeding was done I seriously don't understand how anybody can argue seeding an ACL event using ACL points is not fair or not unbiased. In my opinion no admin should ever alter a bracket 'because it looks stacked' or 'because some really good guy gets a bad run', especially if the premise of seeding is based off previous qualifiers. What's the point of doing the qualifiers then? "Oh see this semi decent guy played in all the qualifiers and he's in the easier bracket but this guy here who is like top 2 protoss SEA is in the harder bracket hmm despite only playing in 1 qualifier let's swap them because it wont be as stacked then and it will make it more likely for this guy to advance because he really should." Makes me sick thinking about it. I definitely can see the merit in using 2013's model of seasons instead of yearly but that's all I can take from this entire discussion on it. There will always be people who get an easier bracket than others - welcome to a tournament.

i 100% agree to this but i also want to add if you are a really good player or a top 2 protoss in sea you should be able to compete on a high level and should also be able to make it to groups, all players who "should" make it to groups or open bracket should also be able to get there and by players just missing out because of seeding is most likely because they didnt play better then the other good players on the day.

If Mk or Rival or who ever else just made it through missed out would you all be complaining as much, tbh i dont think so, so maybe we all just need to chill out and just take it for what it is

[Snx`Azz]

Originally Posted by Baldie

In regards to how seeding was done I seriously don't understand how anybody can argue seeding an ACL event using ACL points is not fair or not unbiased. In my opinion no admin should ever alter a bracket 'because it looks stacked' or 'because some really good guy gets a bad run', especially if the premise of seeding is based off previous qualifiers. What's the point of doing the qualifiers then? "Oh see this semi decent guy played in all the qualifiers and he's in the easier bracket but this guy here who is like top 2 protoss SEA is in the harder bracket hmm despite only playing in 1 qualifier let's swap them because it wont be as stacked then and it will make it more likely for this guy to advance because he really should." Makes me sick thinking about it. I definitely can see the merit in using 2013's model of seasons instead of yearly but that's all I can take from this entire discussion on it. There will always be people who get an easier bracket than others - welcome to a tournament.

The current system is fair for seeding as its a privilege to be seeded and you should do the work required to be assigned a higher seed. If you have to verse tougher opponents in the open bracket who are non-seeded it is your own fault for not placing higher and making it into groups.

If you are not strong enough to progress through the bracket it is your own lacking. This system is fine because you only pay for entry of the current round. Bracket luck is always present in all games.

Originally Posted by Baldie

In an ideal world I would have a single double elimination bracket. However the reality of the situation is we don't have sufficient computers to effectively manage that process. The whole reason we split brackets into two is so that I can sit down an entire bracket and allocate them a computer. That and double elim brackets get exponentially larger the more people in them so in theory having two smaller brackets reduces the total series required to be played. One of the largest waste of time at LANs is people setting up. People have to plug in their peripherals, sometimes download drivers and set the settings they want. So I try to avoid computer swapping where possible and that means delaying the other bracket until computers become available. Also please nobody counter-argue ACL should just buy more computers. It's not financially feasible for us to do this and in many places the space available wouldn't allow for more computers.

You can pursue the bracket setup in this manner however there are some issues:
1) There should be no bias in the first bracket to play in the selection. Bracket A should always start first.
2) This should be publicized in the game format so people can understand and plan for the eventuality of this setup as ACL offers more opportunities to participate in other events.
3) Have a strict schedule for this bracket type of when it should finish and when the other begins.

Having people wait around for 1 bracket to finish and slowly all computers 1 by 1 replaced by bracket A players is incredibly messy.

[|Erasmus|]

Originally Posted by Baldie

In regards to how seeding was done I seriously don't understand how anybody can argue seeding an ACL event using ACL points is not fair or not unbiased. In my opinion no admin should ever alter a bracket 'because it looks stacked' or 'because some really good guy gets a bad run', especially if the premise of seeding is based off previous qualifiers. What's the point of doing the qualifiers then? "Oh see this semi decent guy played in all the qualifiers and he's in the easier bracket but this guy here who is like top 2 protoss SEA is in the harder bracket hmm despite only playing in 1 qualifier let's swap them because it wont be as stacked then and it will make it more likely for this guy to advance because he really should." Makes me sick thinking about it. I definitely can see the merit in using 2013's model of seasons instead of yearly but that's all I can take from this entire discussion on it. There will always be people who get an easier bracket than others - welcome to a tournament.

Why would blysk have played in the qualifiers? Some of them were held long before it was known that this ACL was giving out a WCS seed or blizzard helped him with the cost of getting out here to compete for it.

The process is not entirely unfair as long as it's all known before the season starts. Changing it halfway through and then punishing players who didn't compete from the start of the year in events that at the time were completely pointless to them is indeed unfair.

Plenty of good things about this ACL though! For the first time it was actually a good experience as a spectator with the theatre and a really well run stage and interviews etc.

Quick Comments

ACL VaNzR:

OMG erasmus had something positive to say!! Thanks man :). Noted of course with the non ANZ players.