So with the funds I’ve been allocated for tournaments I’ve determined to do a monthly event for FAF. Those paying attention would see that FAF has put $300 towards Swkoll’s Invitational. This is also what I intend to do with 2 other 1v1 events until this year’s LotS.

However, that leaves about $1100 funds leftover which I intend to put into teamgame events: 2 2v2s and a 4v4. To keep schedule, this makes July the time for the first FAF “official” 2v2 event.

So this posits a question on how exactly this sort of event should operate and I figured I might as well as put it to an open forum to see what people that would be impacted by the decision have to say about it.

Option 1: No restrictions, let teams form naturally

Pros: You give players maximum freedom, you reward the absolute best players in term of individual quality. Players are most likely to prep in this situation as they pick people they work best with and they have an interest in playing with.

Cons: This basically becomes a less competitive 1v1 tournament. It only rationally makes sense for the top and 2nd best player to team up and then the 3rd and 4th and so on.

Option 2: 4k Rating cap, players over 2200 count as 2200

Pros: Gives freedom just less so but still enables people to form voluntary duos that they are likely to have some level of synergy with. The additional amendment on top is mainly to reflect that the players at 2200+ are basically of around equivalent value in 2v2 and it allows everyone to feel like they have a teammate of at least competent quality. The issue comes down to the teams that need to be restricted are like the top 10 players from being able to play with one another as a duo.

Cons: The classic rating cap dilemma. Players will be incentivized to derank if they’re around 1900 and others will be looking to win by finding someone with low global but high ladder/tmm. I think you could get around this by picking an arbitrary date to look at ratings and since the cap makes the event 1800+ focused, there aren’t very many “outliers” to worry about as opposed to 1400 or 1500 level events.

Option 3: Captain picking with 1800+ minimum

Pros: Makes the most competitive event with essentially every team having relatively decent odds to compete.

Cons: Least freedom, possible for captains to get somebody they don’t really want to play with. Goal is to minimize this by attaching a minimum to sign up so no captains get saddled with a 1500 for instance.

To keep it simple I just kept stuff rating focused, events would likely also let people with decent 2v2 or 4v4 league position (for respective events) sign up as well.

Feel free to share input on what would be most appealing, another idea, questions, or whatever.

in my opinion, option 2>3>1
option 1 will obviously lead to a few stacked teams that dominate the tournament. this is fair to the pros though as it rewards their skill. just not very interesting for others to sign up so may lead to a very underpopulated tournament.
options 2 and 3 are more fair across the board, but my preference goes out to 2 because it allows for freedom of choosing who you play with

thank you bully, you have decided the fate of the whole event

How about using players TMM 2v2 rating with minimum number of games? Not sure if that’s what you’re planning, but that would make sense for an ‘official’ FAF 2v2 tournament.

Yeah I'd like to transition to it eventually but since I'd like the event to happen next month I didn't feel like it would exactly be fair to require that on such short notice. I might try it out for one of the later events, maybe the one after this one that will be a 4v4 event which has a fair bit more matchmaker participation.

Makes sense

I think the ranking cap makes sense. As a 1400~ player I would love to see different divisions (say 2500 - 3000, 3000-3500, and 3500-4000 or so) of teams to join. Would be neat if the winning team from a division gets included in the next higher division (I guess that's slightly inconvenient if the tournament is supposed to play on that day). Can have overall winner and divisional winners that way too.
Otherwise, you could also completely randomize the teams (eg a 3v3 tournament) where you sort high + mid + low players together for the duration. But then again, it sucks to be stuck with a 1500 gap-only player :[

I agree as well with Bully. 2>3>1. I would advise setting the date of the ranking before the tournament is announced (maybe the same day team cap is announced, that's the date used for ratings) so people don't get to derank or anything. Also maybe forcing people to use highest rank would be good too, don't want some dude to pose as 1500 global and be 1700 ladder.

Also, would appreciate if you give me a headsup, would love trying to make some promotional stuff/media for any of these events. Specially since the prize pool seems quite high.

@javi said in Teamgame Events:

I don't want some dude to pose as 1500 global and be 1700 ladder.

Never happened in the history of FAF

@morax give me 1 month and I’ll be the 1400 global 1700 ladder

Just make a nice senton tourney no rating limit like we had some years back.

That’s a showmatch not a tournament. I’m not interested in two team tournaments.

NOTICE:

Future teamgame events (the next one will be in 2 months and be 4v4) will be utilizing the respective tmm rating rather than global rating for determining seeding and applicability to play. Players will be able to qualify by two methods to determine the validity of their rating:

• 30 total games in the matchmaker.
• Met the 10 game minimum to have been placed in the newest league that started in July.