[Format discussion] 2v2 weekly showmatch - The Commanders of Calypso


Disclaimer : this is the thread to ask questions and discuss about the Commanders of Calypso, to register please go to this thread.

Right below are outdated discussions from May 2021, when i first talked about the subject, updated rules are on the thread i linked above.


Hi there,
While everybody is concerned with the election, i'm entertaining the idea of resurrecting on old weekly tourney that was going on between 2007 and 2009 in the french community.

I'll spare you the cringe lore about the secret guild of pirate commanders hidden on the planet Calypso, their mighty leaders designated by the law of the strongest, the pantheon .. etc. I might translate all this old post later to hype people up, but for now i'll just stick with explaining the format :

  • 2v2 weekly match between two teams
  • the winning team is the champion team, next challengers fight the champions next week, on a map the challengers choose. You beat the champions, you become the champions.
  • the tourney goes on as long as people register to challenge the champion
  • after X consecutive wins, the champions enter the "pantheon" and can't play anymore. They are forever champions of Calypso and get a mighty avatar. This opens the title for weaker teams (notably if the champions are just steam rolling everybody).
  • if this goes long enough, you can even have tourneys or showmatches between teams in the pantheon.

So that's it, basically. Few rules have to be set up :

  • do you go for one single match (it used to promote cheese strats), or some BO3 for a longer stream
  • how many consecutive wins to enter pantheon
  • a map pool or some rules regarding the map chosen by the challengers
  • few rules to avoid "base donation"
  • a rating limit to avoid stacks of the top 20 best players fighting eachother forever ?

💡 This last point is important and has to be discussed. I remember this tourney to be very "casual" : the champions used to be good, but not unbeatable. It used to be a big deal, because everybody in the community thought they had a chance, and also because you would be featured in an event followed by everybody with around 100 viewers weekly (it was just the french community remember !).

Now i'm not sure we can recreate that .. without rating limit, it would become a big show of all the pros, which can be interesting. With a rating limit, it can appeal to a more casual player base ... I'm really torn on this.

Don't hesitate to comment on this idea. I have an exam in June, so won't host anything until this summer, so plenty of time to talk it out.

This looks to me like how WWPC was for a while. Which I’m all for, as long as there are people around to run it.

Also, I want to read the cringe lore

Really cool idea. It seems FaF has gained some momentum in being viewed and some old players are joining back in. As much exposure as possible is good.

Idea - for the teams maybe teams can been clans fighting it out. Only different clans can challenge until you get to the big pantheon...

Looking forward to it!

Sounds like a fun event, as for the rules I think:

  • The matches should be BO3 if you're looking for more competitive games, 1 game a week isn't a lot (also, will there only be 2 teams playing a week, or can multiple teams challenge eachother?)
  • I'd say 3 consecutive wins might be a reasonable amount, it's pretty difficult to win 3 BO3's in a row in an even matchup, but not unattainable
  • Think you can use a mappool of decent 2v2 maps, but if you're aiming for a more casual experience, you can use maps you don't usually see played 2v2. This might make pros less interested though
  • I don't think base donation is an issue unless there's a huge rating discrepancy between the two teammates. I guess if you want to prevent that, ban base donation for all teams
  • I think a rating limit would be good, because currently there could be maybe 3 possible teams that are equally skilled to eachother, but will completely outmatch everyone else. If you put a rating limit at e.g. 4000 global/3800 ladder(?) it makes for more possible teams, and u end up with maybe 6 teams that will be equally skilled, but not far superior to other contenders

If you decide not to put a rating limit, I think we'll end up with champions that are unbeatable. If you get a team of 2 2200s it already rules out a massive portion of the playerbase from ever winning

Sure! Count me in!

You can count me in too 🙂

A work of art is never finished, merely abandoned

I'll also play

@noundedelkwoob said in The Commanders of Calypso - 2v2 weekly showmatch:

If you decide not to put a rating limit, I think we'll end up with champions that are unbeatable. If you get a team of 2 2200s it already rules out a massive portion of the playerbase from ever winning

I get the issue, but you shouldnt underestimate the lack of motivation for high rated players to play with rating limits. Also not sure how big of an issue this is considering most of them are currently not too active

@thewheelie Well that's why I put the rating limit pretty high. 4000 global, potentially 3800 ladder since some good players are 2400/2500 global right now, kind of impossible to get a good teammate with 1500-1600 rating remaining)

I understand 2200 + 1200 vs 2 1700s isn't very fun to play, but surely 2200 + 1600 (or maybe if the limit is slightly higher 2200+17-1800) vs 2 ~1900-2000 is a lot more fair/enjoyable.

You could also lower the rating limit if you want to cater this tournament to the more "average" players, but this would, like you said, decrease the motivation for pros to play by a lot. Rating limit just prevents the biggest bois from teaming up and crushing everyone while still keeping it competitive

As for the movitation part, I also have a rather big lack of motivation to play when it's vs a team I know I can't beat imfine

I think this is an awesome idea. Hope it evolves to use TMM rating as that builds up, and then eventually Division placement.

I am interested, though I would need a team mate.

Curious by the way, "Rise of Immortals" (iirc) had a concept where for example 3x 700 rated could play vs. 1x 2100 rated. Anyone aware what the post tournament verdict was on this?

@Valki here we go 😄

A work of art is never finished, merely abandoned

Ok coming back to you with more details. I'll create a proper thread for people to register, with the lore and all rules later, this one is just a discussion thread for now.


  • Weekly matches. Sundays, 3pm Paris time (should be playable for Aussies and West America ?).
  • Champions need to win 3 times (so 3 BO3) in a row in order to enter the Pantheon of Calypso. As Challengers, beat the champions to take their place and try to ascend to the Pantheon !
  • There will be two pools with different rating limits.


  • Normal weeks : 2 BO3 are played (one for the pro pool, and one for average joes)
    • 1st game is a 2v2
    • 2nd game is a shared army game (that could be fun, what do you think ? 💡 )
    • 3rd is a 2v2 on 10x10 mapgen with 1 vetos for each team
    Draws are counted as challenger wins. No faction ban.

  • All maps are chosen by the challengers. No 5x5 or 40x40. They submit their choice to the TD at least one week before for validation. I haven't thought (yet) of many rules for what is a valid 2v2 map, except "no obvious cheat map". I really want it to be quite open. If the challengers want astro and dual gap, why not :))

  • Rating limits : 4000 (highest ratings among the 3 at the time of register) for the Kings of Calypso and 2800 for the Admirals.

  • Share until death or Full Share ? I personally like the idea of giants falling to a coordinated and prepared cheese snipe. Games would also be shorter with share until death (which is less work for the streamers ...), since one ACU death will often be game over. But i don't want people to just hide in their base in fear of snipes ... So i think full share is a more reasonable option for more quality of gameplay. And it can lead to interesting 2v1 games too.
    💡 To be discussed more

Additional rules

  • Managing player registrations : registration is always opened. First to register is first to play. If more than 4-5 teams are registered, the TD can choose to organize a special event where several teams will play (see below). This is to avoid much waiting for the next teams who want to register. Main idea : if you register for Calypso, you’re sure to play your game in the upcoming month. If there is more than a month of waiting, we organize a special brawl. This kind of event shouldn’t happen more than once a month/two month.

Special events : BO1
Specials events are sundays where many challengers can participate. Instead of the normal BO3, we have fast BO1, 2v2 with map selected by the challengers.

A win in this special event would count as half a win for the champions, since it's only BO1.

I plan to open the whole Calypso tournament with such an event, in order to select the first champions (if enough players register).

  • Challengers can substitute another player (within the rating limit), but once the duo is champion they have to keep playing together !

  • To accomodate players (champions would have to be there every week ..), champions can delay a match once. Games would then be played at another time and the replay will be casted instead of the live game. We want to avoid that if possible, and do as much live casting as possible, but we also want to avoid player no show that would end up in no live at all. The idea is : every sunday there is something to cast, no matter what.

  • Once in the Pantheon, you can’t play anymore … But there will be showmatches between members of the Pantheon later !

Streamer/caster/TD every sunday.
That's a tricky part. For casting, it should represent 2-3 hours every week. I am currently not very familiar with casting stuff on twitch. I can comment the games and be the hype guy, but i would need an experienced FAF co-caster at least during the first month of this for technical purposes and commenting support.

The management of the registration, i can deal with, but having one or two people as back up in case of emergency would be great. This would be very necessary to maintain this event during a long time. I might be available this summer, but i'm not sure i can maintain this whole event for more than a month and a half. As i remember, the TDs in 2007 were just 2 or 3 people, and the calypso was active for a full year between september and july, with just small breaks on holidays. Not much manpower is needed, but 2-3 people seem the minimum to me 🙂

Of course, registration can be closed for a period of time so the tourney can take "a break" if not enough people are here to play or to organize it.

I might have missed some stuff, but i've been writting for an hour straight now and i need to go. Don't hesitate to comment on the format right below !

@Auricocorico I understand that you propose 2 games played at Sunday 3 pm Paris time?

Only the challenger team plays against the sitting team (king/admiral), other teams sit and wait for their weekend?


Wait, so what happens if the champions are on holiday/vacation one week? Do they lose out and are booted from calypsos?

I think draws are rare enough in 2v2 that this won’t be an issue, but on certain maps you will start to see this used often: eg astro crater which is more like a 5x5 rather a 10x10.

Other than that, this looks like a nice revival of 2v2 wwpc with a twist. Nice job, Aurico.

I'm Auriko not Autisco 😞 edit : ok you eddited ^^
Champions used to have the right for one "joker", delaying the next match for one week. But I don't like this, because it means no content for that sunday and delays matches for all the challengers. I'm offering an alternative to that : instead of delaying for one week, we would allow the teams to play another day that is more convenient to them, and cast the replay on Sunday as scheduled. That way there is content to cast every sunday.

You're right about draws, challengers could pick maps where you have intense acu fight and high risk of draw to abuse the rule. It would lead to very aggressive gameplay, and force champions to adapt, which i like. This draw rule is here to say "champions, you have to win, drawing isn't showing your strenght !"

@auricocorico that is a bit weak, you need a real solution.

Like perhaps resolving a draw as a score victory. If score miraculously draws then coinflip literally.

@auricocorico said in [Format discussion] 2v2 weekly showmatch - The Commanders of Calypso:

I'm Auriko not Autisco 😞 edit : ok you eddited ^^

Yeah sorry my phone auto correct picked a rather imposing nickname hahaha.

Champions used to have the right for one "joker", delaying the next match for one week. But I don't like this, because it means no content for that sunday and delays matches for all the challengers. I'm offering an alternative to that : instead of delaying for one week, we would allow the teams to play another day that is more convenient to them, and cast the replay on Sunday as scheduled. That way there is content to cast every sunday.

Hmm, well, fair. I know myself at least enjoy going on week-long or more vacations, although that is at most 2 times a year? I am certain others do as well so it might be tough to do this weekly. It is your call - of course - but do know that adhering to so many schedules gets to be impossible.

I guess we can find solutions on the fly as the situation arises. Ultimately it's the the responsability of the TD to discuss with the players to find the best solution. I'm thinking of potential solutions right now because it used to be recuring problem for the Calypso (remember it used to run for the whole year !), but truely, i'm sure we would find a way to accomodate everybody