gibson wrote:the point is what if bram can play 7 civs well and the other guy can only play four. Bram wins because he knows more civs, not because he was the better player.
Still cant win vs colonels otto iro. And a colonel is still quite good even with his bad civs...
well it probably wont make a difference between a colonel and a 1 lt but it might between a major and a colonel or a 1 lt and a major.
ovi12 wrote:He can also ban your 3 best civs. And if youre banning his non iro otto civs and he bans your iro otto, he has the option to play a few games with to get the hang of iro and otto before the series and then easily win.
the point is what if bram can play 7 civs well and the other guy can only play four. Bram wins because he knows more civs, not because he was the better player.
Tbh if diversity in civ knowledge is not a relevant factor in player skill we might as well just ban everything except french mirrors.
gibson wrote:the point is what if bram can play 7 civs well and the other guy can only play four. Bram wins because he knows more civs, not because he was the better player.
Tbh if diversity in civ knowledge is not a relevant factor in player skill we might as well just ban everything except french mirrors.
One may argue that being the best within a one civ environment means to be the best player overall. And actually it has been that way for years in the past.
gibson wrote:the point is what if bram can play 7 civs well and the other guy can only play four. Bram wins because he knows more civs, not because he was the better player.
Tbh if diversity in civ knowledge is not a relevant factor in player skill we might as well just ban everything except french mirrors.
civ knowledge is obviously a relevant factor since one player cant play the same civ every game. It is not the most important factor, however, which is why players shouldnt have to know 7 civs in order to compete in the tourney.
ponipoika wrote:Tbh if diversity in civ knowledge is not a relevant factor in player skill we might as well just ban everything except french mirrors.
One may argue that being the best within a one civ environment means to be the best player overall. And actually it has been that way for years in the past.
I certainly think thats a reasonable argument to make, though I would not consider it as clear cut as that. Another factor is that for a tourney with a prize pool to be viable in the long-term, the tourney will need to be entertaining' ultimately these kinds of rules will centre around finding a balance between that and finding the most skilled player in the pool.
adv wrote:I''ll be disappointed if I don''t see H2O playing Japan and Sam not playing French. Aren''t you? Otto mirror should be allowed. Iro is just boring imo.
allow otto good idea bro
"Losing to Callen was the worst night of my life" Gibthedurrty 2019
"If hazza can get pr42 with team i can get pr50 with 1v1" Gibthedurrty 2018
Lecastete wrote: Dude i hate this game. I am bad and i also dont have luck
That's nothing to do with picking-order. Picking-order by definition involves one player picking his civilization before the other, adapting accordingly.
zoom wrote:That''s nothing to do with picking-order. Picking-order by definition involves one player picking his civilization before the other, adapting accordingly.
I guess so. I was mixing two formats, where in one you have to knock out certain decks of your opponent, so your opponent keeps playing those decks untill they lose with them.
Thatd fix the ordering, but is very problematic for variety.
Maybe a loser picks last system? Its really tough because counter civving is a real thing.
zoom wrote:Thats nothing to do with picking-order. Picking-order by definition involves one player picking his civilization before the other, adapting accordingly.
I guess so. I was mixing two formats, where in one you have to knock out certain decks of your opponent, so your opponent keeps playing those decks untill they lose with them.
Thatd fix the ordering, but is very problematic for variety.
Maybe a loser picks last system? Its really tough because counter civving is a real thing.
So pick intelligently in a way that minimizes (likely even eliminates) the potential of counter-civing. It only adds to the beauty and ingenuity of the thing by benefitting civilization, map and player knowledge.
marco1698 wrote:Rules of spring / summer tournaments are fine. So keep them instead of trying to change them
They aren''t fine. They are lacking in terms of civilization variety and underprivileging game knowledge. I also find the handling of civilization selection disputes idiotic, and the section on civilization availability throughout a series is clearly in dire need of consensus and clarification (I can say as much after inquiring about it with the various responsible parties).
Pre set civs for the maps beforehand seems like a solid idea. But don't you think players would get lucky with matchups? I do however like the idea of only being able to use a civ once per matchup. But it does screw people that love/play strong with 1-2 civs.
KINGofOsmane 
Mimsy for President 
Hazza54321 
Marco1698 
. Aztec is my least played civ. I''ve actually never played them actively I believe.
