BEAST - Bannerlord Early Access Skirmish Tournament

BEAST is the first Bannerlord Skirmish tournament in Europe.

Quick Overview

Category
Bannerlord
Language
English (UK)
Total members
245
Total events
0
Total discussions
192

Finals and Promotions - Tie Breaker map

Users who are viewing this thread

Just before the finals of BEAST5 it was suggested that reserving the map Town Outskirts for the tiebreaker was unfair to a team that would like to pick it for a promotion match.

While it was not an acceptable time, then, to make a change, it is now.
the original discussuion starts here

Unless the devs suddenly bring out a tie breaker map we should make the decision now whether to change the rule or not.
As I see it there are 2 options:
  1. Reserve a map as the tie breaker and allow each team to ban and then pick one map.
  2. Allow each team a map ban and then pick and have the last map (of 5 ) as the tie breaker.
1. Is the option the admins have used in the tournaments so far. Town Outskirts was chosen as the tiebreaker as it was considered the most equal map for both spawns. It was assumed that teams would not want to play TO as both a swapped spawn map AND a tie breaker. However there is no overwhelming reason that TO should be the tiebreaker map, or that one map should be reserved as the tie breaker.

2. This way the teams choose the tie breaker by default. The problem is that we might end up with a map that favours one spawn.

Pleae discuss this issue only.
If no-one cares enough to past about it then teh default would be to leave the rules as they are.
 

Koso

Squire
There should be even discussion about it? Since beginning of the tournament, for every final or promotion each team forced to pick&ban from 4 maps. While we have 5 maps -which is already a few.- make it 4 its not a good idea for the competition. I personally support this;
Allow each team a map ban and then pick and have the last map (of 5 ) as the tie breaker.
Hereby, variations will multiply. Also we already discuss this subject in the past thread. Just change this rule because there is no benefit in it.
 
There should be even discussion about it? Since beginning of the tournament, for every final or promotion each team forced to pick&ban from 4 maps. While we have 5 maps -which is already a few.- make it 4 its not a good idea for the competition. I personally support this;

Hereby, variations will multiply. Also we already discuss this subject in the past thread. Just change this rule because there is no benefit in it.

ofc there should be a discussion if we are going to change a rule simply because of the preference of a few players. This post has been up for 10 days and only you have responded. That is one player for change and about 300 who are happy with the rule the way it is.
 

Koso

Squire
This post has been up for 10 days and only you have responded.
Yes, because nobody cares right now. Even I saw this thread as a conclusion not a proposal while we had a tons of discussion and the only problem was this proposal present just before the final. Because of it I didn't write anything until I saw it again and read it properly.
That is one player for change and about 300 who are happy with the rule the way it is.
And yes most of the people agreed about changing the tie map when we talked about it but, the problem about it was just before the final week proposal. I see no point for another discussion about it while we already did so I am not the only one who wants to change this rule. Also there is no benefit in this rule like I said before, why are you still considering about it? While we have 5 maps for bans&picks, you make it 4 and saying we are happy with this. I didn't see any final or promotions match, gone for the tie map. It is just a waste of map. We shouldn't have discussed about it I would say.
 

IceNoVa

The Kaiser
Global Moderator
WBM&BVCNWWF&S
Until we have a properly mirrored map that would serve as an ideal tiebreaker, it'd fine if people just play whatever map none haven chosen/banned as the the remainder. Team A hosts by default I presume? Than it's all set and Outskirts is open to those that want to play it.
Was tie-breaker ever necessary so far? There were draws of course, but so far not in any promo match if I am not mistaken.
 
Until we have a properly mirrored map that would serve as an ideal tiebreaker, it'd fine if people just play whatever map none haven chosen/banned as the the remainder. Team A hosts by default I presume? Than it's all set and Outskirts is open to those that want to play it.
Was tie-breaker ever necessary so far? There were draws of course, but so far not in any promo match if I am not mistaken.

Since the tie rule was changed to rounds counting we have had a handful of ties in ladder stage but none in finals/promos.

In theory the higher placed team will host, they should always be placed on the left of the fixture.

Everyone has the opportunty to make their case here whether they think the possibility of having a spawn advantage in a tiebreaker in a final is worth making the change - or not.
 

Koso

Squire
Everyone has the opportunty to make their case here whether they think the possibility of having a spawn advantage in a tiebreaker in a final is worth making the change - or not.
Still %5 possibility for draw (despite never happened) doesnt affect my opinion about to remove map. I rather 5 map pool.
 
Still %5 possibility for draw (despite never happened) doesnt affect my opinion about to remove map. I rather 5 map pool.

Ye - if you accept the point that it may happen and still argue for the change that is fine. I just don't want people accepting change on the argument it won't happen, because then they will be unhappy when it does.
 

Koso

Squire
Ye - if you accept the point that it may happen and still argue for the change that is fine. I just don't want people accepting change on the argument it won't happen, because then they will be unhappy when it does.
My argument about isnt "We are not going to play tie map so, lets change it." I still defend we should change tiemap as a remaining map from bans&picks. When I look pros and cons, there is one cons like you said but, lots of pros.
 
My argument about isnt "We are not going to play tie map so, lets change it." I still defend we should change tiemap as a remaining map from bans&picks. When I look pros and cons, there is one cons like you said but, lots of pros.
Sure, I get that you understand the issue. The point is that there are 300 other players in the tournament who are not paying attention but who will have a view.
If they dont say anything here we have to assume they are happy with the status quo.
 

Jufasto

Sergeant at Arms
WBWF&SNW
Sure, I get that you understand the issue. The point is that there are 300 other players in the tournament who are not paying attention but who will have a view.
If they dont say anything here we have to assume they are happy with the status quo.
No they are just too lazy to check beast forum topics. We discussed way too much during first arguments. Just change the rule for equality and better competitive gameplay.
 

Koso

Squire
Sure, I get that you understand the issue. The point is that there are 300 other players in the tournament who are not paying attention but who will have a view.
If they dont say anything here we have to assume they are happy with the status quo.
People are too lazy to write anything about it and I am sure most probably no one read it again while we had discussion on previous topic. Also I can get it 300 players can be in the tournament but, tie map is the problem of 6 teams. We can't know who is going to play promotion or not. If we wait answer from at least 151 people we literally can't change anything.
 
People are too lazy to write anything about it and I am sure most probably no one read it again while we had discussion on previous topic. Also I can get it 300 players can be in the tournament but, tie map is the problem of 6 teams. We can't know who is going to play promotion or not. If we wait answer from at least 151 people we literally can't change anything.
This is true also.
The thing is, if you have been paying attention you will have noticed that every season there is a loud voice or two for some change or other and then, next season, after the admins have made the change there are some loud voices complainig about the change.
If we neglect that people satisfied with the way things are do not ordinarily post then we just seesaw changes each season.

If there is no wider input I will put the question to the consultants and see if there is a consensus there.

perhaps you feel strongly enough to write a concise summary of the pros and cons presented so far?
 

Koso

Squire
This is true also.
The thing is, if you have been paying attention you will have noticed that every season there is a loud voice or two for some change or other and then, next season, after the admins have made the change there are some loud voices complainig about the change.
If we neglect that people satisfied with the way things are do not ordinarily post then we just seesaw changes each season.
I get it what are you trying to say yes. However, when we had discussion about it no one was against it. The only problem was just because of the one week before finals and promotions. Even IkeaKnight told us to we changed to ruleset, you can pick&ban tie map also and then he changed his decision about it again. I don't see any problem about it. No one will against this because we have never played the tie map.
perhaps you feel strongly enough to write a concise summary of the pros and cons presented so far?
We have been talking about pros and cons so far. I hope we didn't talk empty and non-sense so far(?)
 
  1. Reserve a map as the tie breaker and allow each team to ban and then pick one map.
  2. Allow each team a map ban and then pick and have the last map (of 5 ) as the tie breaker.
There is a third option which combines both advatages with only a new minor disadvantage, I mentioned it before:

3. Town Outskirt remains the Tiebreaker map (because its mirrored) but it is still pickable.

So we neither have the problem that the tiebreaker map is unbalanced nor do we have the problem that there are only 4 maps in the pool.

Worst case: Town outskirt is played 3 sets. I would assume the chance of this minor downside even happening is really low and its negative effect can almost be ignored.
 
It seems that of those people that had any opinion on this the feeling is to change the rule. Of those that specified option 2 was chosen so we will change to that.
 
Top Bottom