Mirrors in tourney games

[forgrin]

What do you guys think of the trend to play standard mirrors in tourneys? Is it good/bad, why did it arise, etc.
I think it's alright, but not great for determining the most skilled player. Mirrors are easily upset by the tiniest of mistakes or misplays, and comebacks are pretty much impossible barring equal mistakes on your opponent's part. It's also kinda boring only watching mirrors from the spectator PoV.

[blasdg]

Its super boring and super annoying. Hey german vs german doppel age 2, wuhuu...

The problem is that no one is forced to pick first in the matchup so people can simply dodge certain matchups. That is why people dont even bother playing anything else vs Japan than Japan but here in the forums there are tons of people saying that Japan is not that great vs say Aztecs. Then bloody tell me, why does nobody pick it vs Japan? There is no real argument for that other than them being wrong (and Japan player can just dodge the matchup). People should be forced to firstpick in the tournament with additional rules that limit the amount of civs that they are able to play.

[Jaeger]

Usually both players go for the same build in mirrors so the game is only decided by macro and micro. That's why imo non mirrors are more fun, because macro and micro is important but you have many other factors on top of those as well. Mirrors where both players go for different builds can be interesting to watch tho because they show a civ's strengths and weaknesses more clearly.

[momuuu]

Mirrors are extremely boring. Especially because the tourney had like 5-6 mirrors being played, and not 14. There are 196 match ups and the tourney players play 6. Call me crazy, but I think thats a waste of an amazing game.