NA has 8 teams, and the qualifiers will last 4 days, EMEA has 12 teams, and the qualifiers will last 10 days. Which one is better in your opinion and why?
NA needs to have closed qualifier in-between opens and Challengers (with 8 auto-invited top-seeded teams like in EU / TR / CIS), feels like teams which win Chal.1 opens are getting too much advantage (they are proceed to Chal. 1, and if they lose there, Chal. 2 spot is guaranteed for them too).
Remember BBG? One fluke win over SEN and they didn't even need to grind opens anymore.
ravissant [#2]very obviously EU, when the games have this much weight teams should never be forced to play 2 in one day
I think single elim like korea might honestly be better if it meant teams didn't have to play twice in one day tbh
I agree with the first part but Ithink single elim is never a good format.
ravissant [#2]very obviously EU, when the games have this much weight teams should never be forced to play 2 in one day
I think single elim like korea might honestly be better if it meant teams didn't have to play twice in one day tbh
How is single elim better in a qualifier? Sure when only one team goes thru its aight but 2 teams qualify. What if the best 2 or 3 teams are on the same side of the bracket. Also EMEA format sucks u win first match then lose and your back to were u were. The schedule is better tho
sKi [#7]Compared to EMEA, NA is a smaller region coz it doesn't include other sub-regions like CIS and Turkey who also have been given EMEA slots,
It doesnt matter if there is a sub region because north amerika is huge. Rather MEEA just has more players. Saying mor regions makes no sense u can combine ocenia with latam and stilm get way less pöayers then NA
Stratum7 [#5]I agree with the first part but Ithink single elim is never a good format.
well yea I mean that's true but idk teams having to play 15 minutes after a super close match with overtimes etc where the other team has been sitting there watching for the last 4 hours is just super cringe