Yeah, you’re kind of facing a slippery slope issue right now with that.
I’ve decided to mostly mono- after my vs. set because he has soft matchups against nearly the entire cast but he’s kind of an okay character who can steal games every now and then. Ideal for the format. I’m having a lot of success in it right now, but yeah just like 19XX or LLL or any other oddball format, we’re kind of testing a wider set of skills that don’t all have to do with playing the game well, which is… interesting, at least. You still have to win matches and play well! But maybe the character selection strategy is getting really skewed. Maybe it isn’t, maybe it’s not a problem. Not really a way to tell after only like 5 weeks or whatever.
About “getting +2 points for a set win”: I was thinking about the “ideal” way to win a set in that format. It seems like it’s WAY good to win the first 3 games in a set (and score around 15 points) and then in game 4 you obviously try to win, but if you lose, you get to “hard counterpick” your opponent by going into a 2-8 if they are playing or or something. So their Game 4 pick kind of can’t be any character that has a good matchup because you are guaranteed to get the +2 points already; might as well swing for the fences and go for another 7 points or something and get a 4-1.
I think the thing we want overall is just to see different matchups. I think we can get there by having lots of different types of players, as IYL tends to produce. You have lots of character specialists in all of the different divisions so it tends to lead to some pretty varied gameplay. Maybe the players are the ones who rise to the top at the end? Doesn’t seem to have been that way in last IYL.