News Shop
Events Forums

A percolation of tournament ideas: Am I crazy or could full cast double-blind cp be fun?


#1

I honestly can’t pinpoint where this idea ultimately came from thus the title. Short pitch is “why does conquest format need to be constricted to a three character stable?”. I spent about a day mulling over cp dynamics and rule tweeks before considering Double Blind counter pick. Let us really quickly consider why DB has never been popular in the past.

Feel bad scenarios outweigh the good, and the lack of control doesn’t usually sit well with people. Most people are of the mindset, and I agree, that playing a bad MU twice in a row for any reason outside of personal choice is pretty terrible feel-bad@tm. Consider the following:
Player A picks :zane: Vs player B :troq: in the tournament standard DB first round. Let us say Player A loses this one. In full DB there is a chance to accidently replay the same MU or player A switches to some other character, say Rook, only for player B to happen to switch to a proper cp like BBB or Arg. Both scenarios seem to be enough to taint the entire experience and single handedly bring the entire format down. The final nail in the coffin is that players have nothing to go off on the character select screen besides cold, dispassionate number crunching.

So how does conquest format change this? For one it completely eliminates to repeat MU since the winner has to switch and can’t use that character again. This also gives some info that both players can use to inform their picks instead of taking shots in the dark. For example, if player A wins with Arg then player B can pick Lum with the knowledge that the Lum Vs Arg MU will never happen regardless of what player A switches too.

While this reduces the chance of to losing player switching into a bad MU, and gives them a measure of control they didn’t have before, it unfortunately doesn’t prevent prevent it entirely. Is reduced bad outcomes and greater interactivity at character select enough to save the format? I’d love to hear your opinion so leave a comment down below and don’t forget to hit that like button! If you really liked it hit that subscribe button. This thread was brought to you by Squarespace.

So considering the rules “you must win with three different characters” and “double blind picks each round”, let’s theory up some pros and cons.

Pros:

  • Massive character variety. Players are encouraged to switch every round so it’s quite possible to play an entire five game set without any character being used twice.
  • Less used characters become more tournament viable in general as it’s easier to avoid thier worst MUs.
  • You aren’t forced into a “safe” pick if you are behind at match point because you will have to switch if you win anyways.
  • Improved character selection dynamics. More interactive and informed with out resorting to bland number crunching.

Cons:

  • Feel bad scenarios of DB still exist, even if reduced.
  • Forced character variety isn’t everyone’s cup of tea.
  • No guaranteed counter-picks. @Niijima-san probably wouldn’t be thrilled, especially since Setsuki is an even safer pick here.
  • Entirely possible that the emergent meta is degenerate or boring with its own version of the cp carousel.
  • Better info for character selection, but still incomplete and introduces a random element where there previously was none.
  • Probably better for long sets like bo7 than short Bo3

I think it could be fun and I would love to host a short one day tournament(s) to test it if anyone is interested.


#2

Uhg, soooooooo many grammar edits. I swear English is my native tongue!


#3

I think there’s enough of a possibility that it’ll be fun that you should run it. The “win with N different” without know CPs is a bit like the FSFG formula, without having to predeclare your stable (and without needing to deal with randomess on the forums). It seems like it’ll vafavor generally good chars, even if they have one or two hard CPs, which seems similar to the current meta.


#4

I think it’s likely you won’t get as much variety as you’d hope, just endless top-tiers since they’re safe picks and there’s no way to use a more situational character as a counterpick. But I still think it might be fun.


#5

I believe cycling top tiers is an inevitability in any format since, after all, they ARE top tiers for a reason. The safest way to play the game in standard is to either only play Troq with a pocket character for his more volitile MUs, or to leverage the some top tier carousal with little deviation. People don’t usually play that way even when the stakes are high for a whole host of reasons I won’t claim to fully understand.

More interesting in my mind is the potential use of characters with garbage MUs. In standard cp format if you like playing one character a lot and people know that, then you can guarantee 90% of the matches you play will be your worst MUs. Even if you have only one bad MU everything comes down to playing that one MU over and over and over.

The allure of DB to me personally is the potential to use whatever character you want without being forced into the same old frustrating or unfun MU EVERY SINGLE TIME!

Edit: this is also part of the appeal of the team battle system in FSFG which most likely contributed to this whole idea.


#6

That is the appeal of DB in my mind as well. The issue is that this format isn’t actually friendly to solomains because as soon as you win you have to switch off. I think full-cast DB is better without the “conquest” element personally. I used to hate double-blind and while that’s no longer the case I still prefer standard CP. DB could be nice in a tournament for a change though.


#7

I agree it’s not ideal for solomains. You don’t have to be a solomain to want to play a character you don’t feel is tournament viable though. I don’t want to jump on anyone who comments to contradict them. I know there are times when I want to play Persephone come hell and high water and I wouldn’t be able to do that here.


#8

You’re right, I’m not a huge fan of double blind. If I played this I’d probably just go full random (that’s what I do a lot of the time on the double-blind first game pick anyway).