Why does it matter? The rounds do not matter unless Buchholz score fails to determine the "better" team when having the same amount of points.
I really don't understand why we count sets won instead of rounds. If a team wins a map 3:0 and 3:0 and then loses 3:2 and 3:2, it's pretty obvious who had the upper edge and IMO should be the winner of the match. The current system is demotivating at best. Is there an explanation for this decision? Or are we just pretending it is a better system than what we had in the past (Warband)?
@Ikea Knight @Aeronwen
Nobody is pretending there is a better system than in Warband, I'd like to add that nearly everyone on the administration staff has been part of the warband competitive scene at some point.
While it’s obviously frustrating to tie the game having dominated large portions of it, I think the outcome is ultimately fair, at least in the context of this tournament. It was a great game and a good comeback from DR, the onus was on us to win one of the last two sets and we couldn’t manage it. GG’s, well deserved
.
As you totally steamrolled us on Xauna, I'd say that even theoretically getting a draw motivated my people quite a lot to fight back as hard as possible. While I do see that the system now works against you, I want to thank for your sportsmanship. I'd like to add that I consider you the better team of yesterday's match and I hope for a rematch in the next tournament.
I didn't really expect backup by the adversaries being duped by the system, but since you guys jump to our defense, I'd like to add in something else, if we're talking sets, right?
The first two sets on Xauna ended after 3-0 being reached. One could argue now that the last two rounds were not played out and nobody could now if DR would be able to strike back these four rounds. Nobody will ever know. On the other hands all five rounds were played on Trading Post, giving you the score of 3-2.
I'd like to add on top that a team, winning the first set 3-0 could draw the opponent by losing 2-3, 2-3, 2-3. The opponent is winning three sets. Why should a tea m losing three sets get a draw? This is the boon of counting sets first.
I like that only the map win matters. Map win is the objective so its the only thing to be rewarded. You cannot blindly go all in every round just to win rounds, your eco has to support a map win.
On CSGO Majors for example there are 3 maps played and the team with 2 map win wins, nomatter how the round score was.
I guess playing a fifth map with mirror matchup is a great solution to remove all the draws.
DM vs RM was very even match. Im glad we did not win just because we won 1 round more (9 - 8 ) because honestly it was basically luck if we get that one round or dm.
I do agree to your point here. An uneven number of sets could actually do the trick in the future and it's a good suggestion.
