bit of a dumb thread but just wanted confirmation, FPX and Fnatic are locked into iceland now, right? Even if either teams lose both of their next games they should still get 3rd seed
0
FPX locked into iceland?
posted in
General Discussion
Comments:
Threaded
Linear
Daniveus [#3]yes they played one match in playoffs and qualified. It's dumb but whatever
fnc already won 5 games before that and fpx 4 (including beating m3c)
Daniveus [#3]yes they played one match in playoffs and qualified. It's dumb but whatever
they also topped their groups so imo they need a reward for it unlike NA where it is just seeding
arecyc [#4]fnc already won 5 games before that and fpx 4 (including beating m3c)
I know, still 1 game playoffs is dumb
Daniveus [#3]yes they played one match in playoffs and qualified. It's dumb but whatever
yeah, that's what i was a bit confused about. thanks
Daniveus [#6]I know, still 1 game playoffs is dumb
What else do you suggest to do with a 6 teams playoff?
DELUSIONAL_SCOURGE_FAN [#9]a
they go to lowerbracket finals if they lose so they will be top 3 no matter what
keekzinho [#11]they go to lowerbracket finals if they lose so they will be top 3 no matter what
Yea ik i edited it i forgot they had 3 slots
Mortadelo [#8]What else do you suggest to do with a 6 teams playoff?
even if #5 doesn't like it. I think seeding is better than this. It should be at least 2 games to qualify, 1 game just doesn't feel right.
Or like #10, make it 8 team playoffs. Even tho I don't like that, for example, teams like LG advanced being negative (2-3). It surely works better than this.
Daniveus [#3]yes they played one match in playoffs and qualified. It's dumb but whatever
its not, you should be rewarded for doing well in your group
Daniveus [#3]yes they played one match in playoffs and qualified. It's dumb but whatever
Riot fanboys dont like to read factos, riot is shitt
jackb2016 [#14]its not, you should be rewarded for doing well in your group
u also shouldn't make it to masters by winning only one match in playoffs. It's a trade-off.
Daniveus [#13]even if #5 doesn't like it. I think seeding is better than this. It should be at least 2 games to qualify, 1 game just doesn't feel right.
Or like #10, make it 8 team playoffs. Even tho I don't like that, for example, teams like LG advanced being negative (2-3). It surely works better than this.
Agree, 8 teams playoffs and the reward for being top is just seeding.
I thought about a 10 team playoffs so the top teams can have a Bye round and since last teams go to promotion it could work, its more teams, more time and more matches but since there are 3 teams that qualify i think that would be the most competitive format.
Or something like the APAC format, double elimination group stage and double elimination playoffs,
Daniveus [#13]even if #5 doesn't like it. I think seeding is better than this. It should be at least 2 games to qualify, 1 game just doesn't feel right.
Or like #10, make it 8 team playoffs. Even tho I don't like that, for example, teams like LG advanced being negative (2-3). It surely works better than this.
What I’m saying is how to you do a 6 teams playoffs where they have to play more than 1 game to qualify? The only other option it’s an 8 teams playoffs which is not much better
Daniveus [#13]even if #5 doesn't like it. I think seeding is better than this. It should be at least 2 games to qualify, 1 game just doesn't feel right.
Or like #10, make it 8 team playoffs. Even tho I don't like that, for example, teams like LG advanced being negative (2-3). It surely works better than this.
It's not just a reward for besting their respective groups, but also, it's 1 game because EMEA has 3 teams going instead of 2. So being the very best right now is CRUCIAL.
For example, look at TL by contrast. We got team liquid still with the micky mouse comps that change every iteration of a map. Unlike the top teams that continue to get rewarded for good form, TL will keep struggling with more matches for underperforming.
Daniveus [#16]u also shouldn't make it to masters by winning only one match in playoffs. It's a trade-off.
lets say a team went 3-2 in groups...should that team go to masters by winning 2 games vs a 5-0 team that wins 1 game?
Mortadelo [#18]What I’m saying is how to you do a 6 teams playoffs where they have to play more than 1 game to qualify? The only other option it’s an 8 teams playoffs which is not much better
ye, It's possible but it would be some weird bracket, like having two upper brackets and two lower brackets. Not the best idea as well.
jackb2016 [#20]lets say a team went 3-2 in groups...should that team go to masters by winning 2 games vs a 5-0 team that wins 1 game?
It's obvious the team that went 5-0 should go, but I am not pointing that out. What I am saying is that playoffs should matter more than 1 game for any team, even if u went first in groups.
There's a reason most games have an upper and lower bracket system, it's because one game doesn't define consistency. Like fnatic vs gambit could have gone either way, minor mistakes and luck made the difference. Also, one team might have had a super bad/good day and so the final result doesn't define how good a team is.
Daniveus [#22]It's obvious the team that went 5-0 should go, but I am not pointing that out. What I am saying is that playoffs should matter more than 1 game for any team, even if u went first in groups.
There's a reason most games have an upper and lower bracket system, it's because one game doesn't define consistency. Like fnatic vs gambit could have gone either way, minor mistakes and luck made the difference. Also, one team might have had a super bad/good day and so the final result doesn't define how good a team is.
what playoff format would you suggest?
jackb2016 [#23]what playoff format would you suggest?
bro idk, I think NA's is better.
I also prefer swiss-system instead of round-robin in groups, but that is just my personal opinion.
Daniveus [#21]ye, It's possible but it would be some weird bracket, like having two upper brackets and two lower brackets. Not the best idea as well.
That’s why when you don’t like a format you have to propose something better instead, many times is not really their choice, more like the only one
Mortadelo [#25]That’s why when you don’t like a format you have to propose something better instead, many times is not really their choice, more like the only one
making it 8 teams instead of 6 is still preferable
Daniveus [#26]making it 8 teams instead of 6 is still preferable
That makes all the regular season lose too much meaning imo, but I guess it’s a matter of opinions
Daniveus [#24]bro idk, I think NA's is better.
I also prefer swiss-system instead of round-robin in groups, but that is just my personal opinion.
i think NA's is worse personally, but i agree swiss is better (only should be done with 16 teams tho)
Discord