Cool! I think it sounds more interesting than most of the other formats. I think it’s because you can choose any character but you benefit from intentionally choosing weak characters. The “people tended to opt into bad MUs to limit the opponents’ point gain” is the most interesting part to me. Also that means the tier list is basically backwards, which is fun
The problem was more around counterpicking… In particular, because the losing player got to change, but the winning player had to stick, some folks (I think @Leontes ran into this) were winning their sets, but getting very few points for them because their opponents were picking into bad matchups, and it was a pretty bad feel to win all your games but be out of running for the tournament because you couldn’t rack up points.
Huh… that could be a problem. I guess give the winner CP? Maybe?
That was @Leontes’s explanation of the (possible) problem (although I would note that he went on to win the tournament).
@Niijima-san also suggested just doing less rounding of the MU numbers (to prevent issues with ties). Lastly, I now have better data about the theoretical MU numbers, so there’s the question of whether we should just use the historical data, or the data-scienced matchup values.
I would think use the scienced MU data, but whatever you think Is best. As for the meta-gamey aspect, I don’t know what to do or if that’s even really a problem.
Time for another idea.
4 chars team:
- One stable and declared at tourney sign up
- One choosen at the beginning of each set
- One picked by opponent
- One random
Match set up
Both player declare their 2nd stable for the set (higher tier player first)
Lower tier player choose opponent’s last char, then higher tier do the same.
Each round is double blind (random choice could be checked in chat window)
I know it’s been done before, but how would people feel about a draft style format, with picks and bans?
No please no.
I like the idea proposed in another thread of a points-based stable. There were some wrinkles in that to work out, though, IIRC.
I always find stable rules and similar formats to be really confusing. I would much rather have a set character lineup for the whole tournament. Even some of the crazy formats like LLL and 19XX keep that consistent.
I think most of the stable rules are predicated on picking a set of 3-4 characters at the beginning of the tournament, and then sticking to that all the way through. @MR75’s LETHAL MIX above seems to be more of an exception.
More of a tournament format than a character selection related, but I thought we could maybe crib the narrowing-swiss format from the Codex side of the house (it’s a swiss tournament, but you’re removed from the rotation after 3 losses).
Also, I think a Fantasy Strike style stable tournament (that is, randomized selection among the characters you haven’t won with yet) could be interesting (although I’ve already math-ed out enough to know it doesn’t completely eliminate the advantage of high-tier characters).
I was more referring to stuff like Pick Your Poison and the like. I don’t know what that type of format is called.
As for having a preselected list, I basically do that anyway and think that a one character only tournament could be interesting.
Cool. Thanks VengefulPickle
And what about
PATH OF THE VOID
This takes inspiration from Chizuru (KOF98) ULT (also named seal strike): if it hit, opponent cannot perform specials and supers for some time.
This variant denies only supers for whole game
- Full cast
- Mid Timer
- Bo7, standard CP
- No As allowed: you cannot play As as your combat card neither combo into, but you can still use them for powerup, pump, FD, Lum’s PF and discard)
What about a format where, if you lose with a particular character, you can’t use them again for the rest of the tournament? The last player to have characters left wins.
ROYAL RUMBLE (Yes it is a complete sentence forum please let me post in all caps.)
Soon I guess. I’ll stop being ill and then get things kicked off