This is more one for curiosity. It's a decision I've had to mull over for other, non-CD tournaments I run. But which kind of finals brackets would work best, in general, in your view? Does it vary from game to game? Would CD be better with random?
From my view, seeded allows people to plot permutations of where there'll end up, which can create some interesting outlooks, and also provides higher seeds with 'easier' draws (in theory), thus rewarding them for their efforts to get high up the table. Random means then that people can't game the system (as I've seen it happen before) and also has the benefit of being potentially madcap
Thoughts from a group of fellow mental competition geeks?
Finals Brackets
Moderator: Jon O'Neill
-
- Acolyte
- Posts: 125
- Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2019 10:41 pm
- Location: Birmingham's Eastern Fleapit
Finals Brackets
The Vicar of Dudley*
*(Not ordained, nor do I live Dudley. Godspeed!)
*(Not ordained, nor do I live Dudley. Godspeed!)
Re: Finals Brackets
I think it entirely depends on the level of competitiveness.
If it's something casual amongst friends, then random is more fun.
But if people care about the result, then I think seeding is the best to try and reduce the influence of randomness in the results.
Co:events work beautifully with a bit of both
If it's something casual amongst friends, then random is more fun.
But if people care about the result, then I think seeding is the best to try and reduce the influence of randomness in the results.
Co:events work beautifully with a bit of both
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13317
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: Finals Brackets
I voted seeded but it depends on the situation (I think the CoCs should be seeded by the way). The worst way of doing it though (which some CO-events have been guilty of) is to redo the draw after each round based on the seeds left. So if 8 beats 1 in the QF, by rights they should play 4/5 in the SF. But some events would have them playing seed 2 (if 2 beats 7).