Should tournaments be best of 5?

[GLoRToR]

If someone is getting that rekt it's only gonna take 3 matches...

Anytime inexperienced players are playing everyone at the venue has like 5 other sets they can and usually do choose to watch, and those players don't get put on stream.

First to 3 lets the higher level players adapt and win sets when they get their download, even in pools. This game can be hard to collect information in, 1 match isn't enough.

If it won't affect views in a negative way I can't see why not, then. That was my only concern. Even some top players can be sleepers because they pull top tier setplay without adapting or because they pick characters like Kunt Jim.

 

[GAV]

If its truly going to become an e-sport, it can't apply what's best for the fans, players, or tournaments first. They must first protect the integrity of competition. Then, they must protect what is marketable.

They need a venue that people will pay to go to consistently - so venues must make concessions for those playing and those that paid to be there to keep them coming back. I actually think tournaments should be coupled with cosplay events set in the same universe to increase the people there - and it would also help to improve the product from a viewer standpoint.

Lastly, our competitors need to embrace fans. You don't see Lebron James shunning fans because they can't compete with him in basketball - and you shouldn't shun players that can't compete with you. If they're going to help support the sport, give them their moments here and there.

On whether to go to a best of 5 - since it helps with the integrity of competition - it is a great idea. I just wouldn't do it before top 8 because the larger tournaments would just be too long then.

 

[Alright RyRy]

Will we have challonge brackets? Please say there will be challonge brackets.

I will try my hardest, no guarantees though.

 

[STB Sgt Reed]

IDK, I kind of tend to want to side with the unknown and lesser players on subjects like this...

Longer and longer sets will ALWAYS favor the more experienced/better player. Which means there is less chance for that hype cinderella story type run through the bracket. As good as the guys like Fox, MIT, DJT, etc are.... I do like the underdogs having that small chance of an upset.

It's easier to catch a top player by surprise for 2 wins than it is for 3. lol

 

[Jer]

IDK, I kind of tend to want to side with the unknown and lesser players on subjects like this...

Longer and longer sets will ALWAYS favor the more experienced/better player. Which means there is less chance for that hype cinderella story type run through the bracket. As good as the guys like Fox, MIT, DJT, etc are.... I do like the underdogs having that small chance of an upset.

It's easier to catch a top player by surprise for 2 wins than it is for 3. lol

So it should be 2/3 so a lesser player can have a higher chance of randoming out the better player?

 

[Vagrant]

Largely prefer 3/5.

I know a comnmon argument for 2/3 is that the game is round based, like MK9 and SF4 but if you compare how quickly those matches move, to how quickly the MKX matches move I think you'll find a pretty noticeable difference.

In a game with 70+ character variations I think we can agree that no one is going to have all of their matchups down for a long while. One of the reasons I'm hoping for 3/5 is it gives player some additional time to adjust to a variation they may not be completely familiar with.

 

[STB Sgt Reed]

So it should be 2/3 so a lesser player can have a higher chance of randoming out the better player?

It should be 2/3 so anomalies like the odd MK Legend can happen. That was hype as fuck watching some random no one knew beating the top players and watching them all trying their damnedest to knock him out.

 

[Jer]

It should be 2/3 so anomalies like the odd MK Legend can happen. That was hype as fuck watching some random no one knew beating the top players and watching them all trying their damnedest to knock him out.

I get what you're saying, but if someone really is the better player, they should win the first to 3. For example at ECT I was somehow down 0-2 against two people, and won 3 straight. I dunno, I guess I just like having a longer set better to adapt. That's just me though

 

[DevilMaySpy]

That is some elitist attitude.

A regular guy who is going there for the first time to try out his luck, pays all the money, and goes home 0-2 very quickly wouldn't want to come back again. It's not like the large numbers of entrants we're always looking for are all pros.

There's nothing elitist about it. I've been doing it for 3 years and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I know exactly where my skill level is and I go to tournaments to support the community. I don't care if I lose 0-2 or 1-3, the fact of the matter is I got outplayed and I need to level up. Top 8 deserves 3/5 because they earned their way there.

 

[STB Sgt Reed]

I get what you're saying, but if someone really is the better player, they should win the first to 3. For example at ECT I was somehow down 0-2 against two people, and won 3 straight. I dunno, I guess I just like having a longer set better to adapt. That's just me though

I know that's why top players will ALWAYS want a longer set... they have the superior adaptation skills. And I totally get that. But every now and then it's cool to see an unknown win. Just my opinion.

 

[Jer]

I know that's why top players will ALWAYS want a longer set... they have the superior adaptation skills. And I totally get that. But every now and then it's cool to see an unknown win. Just my opinion.

I love the underdog thing as well for sure. If the underdog is better, they should be able to win 3

 

[STB Sgt Reed]

I love the underdog thing as well for sure. If the underdog is better, they should be able to win 3

But then... are they really an underdog or just a hermit top player?

lmao

 

[Jer]

But then... are they really an underdog or just a hermit top player?

lmao

In the eyes of the community, an underdog because if you don't place Top 8, you're a nobody.

 

[TeamCage]

These are competitions, and I'd define competitions as events whose goal is to establish a participant's relative level of ability. Randomness takes away from that, so 3/5. If time is a concern, I'd ask for better organisation and preparation before the optimal number of sets gets compromised. Also, NO game in which button checks take up some much time should have fans using a lack of time as a reason against 3/5.

 

[ChaosTheory]

In the eyes of the community, an underdog because if you don't place Top 8, you're a nobody.

Why is that, by the way? I've always wondered. Why is top 8 that much more impressive than top 16?

What ever happened to gold, silver, bronze being the places that mattered?

 

[Jer]

Why is that, by the way? I've always wondered. Why is top 8 that much more impressive than top 16?

What ever happened to gold, silver, bronze being the places that mattered?

That's the question isn't it? I don't know how it's going to be with MKX, but back in the MK9 days if you werent in a top 8, you weren't a top player. It was really weird.

 

[RiBBz22]

I think we should do first to 3 instead of best of 5. Best of 5 is dumb, and first to 3 would really be a lot better and make a lot more sense than best of 5.

Please vote for me for President.


Honestly though I would say that top 8 should all be best of 5 and the rest should be best of 3 to make things easier on the TOs and keep things moving.

 

[Braindead]

There's nothing elitist about it. I've been doing it for 3 years and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I know exactly where my skill level is and I go to tournaments to support the community. I don't care if I lose 0-2 or 1-3, the fact of the matter is I got outplayed and I need to level up. Top 8 deserves 3/5 because they earned their way there.

Yeah I know about you. If I lived in the US I would do the same and not care about the result. But that's because we're part of this community and we want to support it. I meant looking at it from the point of view of the new guys coming to tournaments. I'm pretty sure they would want the most bang for their buck.

 

[DevilMaySpy]

Yeah I know about you. If I lived in the US I would do the same and not care about the result. But that's because we're part of this community and we want to support it. I meant looking at it from the point of view of the new guys coming to tournaments. I'm pretty sure they would want the most bang for their buck.

Well, look at it from this perspective: the entirety of ECT was 3/5. Yes, we had some comebacks from 0-2, with the most notable being Sonic Fox against MIT, but the results of this tournament still mirrored those of the past with Sonic Fox in Grand Finals and Yomi dominating Top 8. Hell, it was the exact same Grand finals of TCW, which used the normal 2/3 format. This tells me that the random factor is there, but not as strong as some make it seem.

 

[GLoRToR]

If its truly going to become an e-sport, it can't apply what's best for the fans, players, or tournaments first. They must first protect the integrity of competition. Then, they must protect what is marketable.

Sad truth is that unless their funding is guaranteed outside of revenue (sponsors willing to bend over backwards, hence), the priority of what you just listed is not quite as-is. I don't see the marketing of tournaments but I can tell you that if they are boring they bring less than if they are exciting.

 

[Kevin 7]

As long as button checks or confusion of who's player 1 or 2 or who's account your supposed to pick so all the characters are unlocked. I say it has to be 2/3 as the beginning process of just sitting down figuring which account is what takes longer then the match itself.

I would love it to be 3/5 but the PS4 account/controllers nonsense has to get addressed before I can see a whole tournament being 3/5.

 

[chemist4hire]

If you play a gimmicky low tier that first to 3 is brutal.

 

[RiBBz22]

Yeah I know about you. If I lived in the US I would just get bodied offline by RiBBz22

Fixed

 

[Death]

Why is that, by the way? I've always wondered. Why is top 8 that much more impressive than top 16?

What ever happened to gold, silver, bronze being the places that mattered?

9th or worse= 0-2. It is what it is

 

[Jer]

9th or worse= 0-2. It is what it is

The thing is, getting top 16 in a tournament in other communities means something, and it should here as well. Oh well