Thoughts on Ascension formats AMER/EMEA/CN vs APAC

What does everyone prefer, The group stage and playoff format of EMEA/AMER/CN or the full bracket double elim style of APAC?

imo double elim is better. Some games in the group stage are meaningless, but seeding by region performance from the last year is bad

honestly, I would put all the teams in one group, top 1 and 2 go to the upper bracket, top 3 and 4 go to the lower bracket, others are eliminated.
winner of the upper bracket goes straight to the finals, loser of the upper bracket faces off against the winner of the lower bracket

PP12123213123 [#2]

imo double elim is better. Some games in the group stage are meaningless, but seeding by region performance from the last year is bad

Group stage wouldn't be meaningless if 3rd and 4th would go directly in looser bracket.

Group stage are meaningless because for an unknow reason people dont want that team start in looser bracket, whish make absolutely no sense.

Anguibok [#4]

Group stage wouldn't be meaningless if 3rd and 4th would go directly in looser bracket.

Group stage are meaningless because for an unknow reason people dont want that team start in looser bracket, whish make absolutely no sense.

+1, the fact that you have a 2nd chance reserved only for top 2 makes it a massive boost already

Nef0r0 [#5]

+1, the fact that you have a 2nd chance reserved only for top 2 makes it a massive boost already

Another solution would be Korean LoL format, that might be the best, group stage --> King of the hill
Group stage ranking
Quater : 3rd vs 4th
Semi : 2nd vs winner quarter
Final : 1st vs winner semi

In that scenario the frist place really really matter

Anguibok [#6]

Another solution would be Korean LoL format, that might be the best, group stage --> King of the hill
Group stage ranking
Quater : 3rd vs 4th
Semi : 2nd vs winner quarter
Final : 1st vs winner semi

In that scenario the frist place really really matter

oh yeah, that's dope as well

Nef0r0 [#7]

oh yeah, that's dope as well

With that thing every place count, so lot of hype, some round robin game can become the equivalent of a semifinal so it's good.

But I don't know why people get mad about playoff doesn't have a double elim format, (Even if technically once in final you don't have a 2nd chance even if you didn't have lost your first chance yet)

Anguibok [#8]

With that thing every place count, so lot of hype, some round robin game can become the equivalent of a semifinal so it's good.

But I don't know why people get mad about playoff doesn't have a double elim format, (Even if technically once in final you don't have a 2nd chance even if you didn't have lost your first chance yet)

tbf double elim makes sense if it's just one event, too few events and all of them are too important so they should be more fair

Double elim is WAY better

The double elimination is far better

Double Elimination is always better.

It depends on the number of teams. CN is my favourite just because of how optimal it is (there's a reason we use it at Masters), but it only works because they've got 8 teams.

For 6 teams the Americas format works well, as it pits everyone against everyone to decide who makes playoffs to ensure the 4 best teams make it through.

As for 10 teams, I much prefer EMEA's format over Pacific's. Even with how weird the tiebreaker rules are, it's still a lot better than a straight double elimination bracket where 6 teams get byes and if you lose 2 games you go home.

Nef0r0 [#9]

tbf double elim makes sense if it's just one event, too few events and all of them are too important so they should be more fair

Hmmm I think you are right, CS fan are use for doble elim because they are no such concept as "regular season" so that conditioned them to think that everything that isnt a double bracket is heresy.
But in Val, we have plenty of group stage for structural reason (Because we have league and tier system we cant make like in CS some open qualifier that make ussure that we will have a power of 2 number of team) we need to have a regular season, and regular season plus making everyone go to winner bracket just unhype the regular season

Every one thinks that the opponents sword is longer, but guess what there are pros and cons of this thing

Anguibok [#14]

Hmmm I think you are right, CS fan are use for doble elim because they are no such concept as "regular season" so that conditioned them to think that everything that isnt a double bracket is heresy.
But in Val, we have plenty of group stage for structural reason (Because we have league and tier system we cant make like in CS some open qualifier that make ussure that we will have a power of 2 number of team) we need to have a regular season, and regular season plus making everyone go to winner bracket just unhype the regular season

double elim is only for groups, playoffs are stictly single elim

cloudberry [#13]

It depends on the number of teams. CN is my favourite just because of how optimal it is (there's a reason we use it at Masters), but it only works because they've got 8 teams.

For 6 teams the Americas format works well, as it pits everyone against everyone to decide who makes playoffs to ensure the 4 best teams make it through.

As for 10 teams, I much prefer EMEA's format over Pacific's. Even with how weird the tiebreaker rules are, it's still a lot better than a straight double elimination bracket where 6 teams get byes and if you lose 2 games you go home.

exactly. double elim with 10 teams with last year seeding is very bad