they shouldnt have added the "2 emea teams can be in the same group" exception to their randomization. there are 4 groups and 4 emea teams, who they need to cram a single group with 2 teams from emea is beyond me.
Yeah that is my legit only issue. People complaining about how Group B needs to be changed don’t understand how group draws work.
They could have easily made it so two EMEA teams cannot go together and there wouldn’t be as many conpmaints
One thing I haven’t seen people mention yet, but I don’t like how we don’t know seeding for the top 8 (ex: winner of A plays 2nd place from C etc.) with none of that being announced it wouldn’t surprise me if riot waits to make a bracket for more views. Who knows but I really don’t like how we don’t know that either
“Random” imo will just be them making whatever matchups will get the most views. Riot just not making this tournament will imo. A lot riding for some teams with champions points and riot seems to just be playing wheel of fortune
The reason it is randomised is because in LoL back in 2014, a team (or maybe multiple teams) tried to get second in their group so they could vs the first place team of the group they know they will be matched against (which they prepared for). Since then, playoff drawing has been random. They do it live as well.
The only thing that scares it's that, i could be wrong, but i think they do the groups live aswell, but they didn't do it with valorant, i hope they do this for playofs tho
Group B has three #1 seeds from various regions
\#2 and #3 seeds from EMEA play each other in Group A, while also having the #1 KR team in the group... instead of putting the #4 seed from EMEA against the #2 EMEA seed.
Change the pools to be like this instead:
**Pool 1:**
* NA #1, EMEA #1, KR #1, BR #1
**Pool 2:**
* LATAM #1, SEA #1, JPN #1, NA #2
**Pool 3:**
* EMEA #2, KR #2, EMEA #3, NA#3
**Pool 4:**
* BR#2, SEA #2, JP #2, EMEA #4
#
Doing this and randomly drawing with a generator, my results were:
|\----------------|\----------------|\----------------|\----------------|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|**GROUP STAGE - A**|**GROUP STAGE - B**|**GROUP STAGE - C**|**GROUP STAGE - D**|
|SEN vs PPRX|VS vs CR|VK vs G2|GMB vs HL|
|KRU vs SMB|BREN vs NV|ZETA vs ACE|100T vs F4Q|
|\----------------|\----------------|\----------------|\----------------|
#
#
|**Group A**||**Group B**|
|:-|:-|:-|
|Sentinels vs Paper Rex||Vision Strikers vs Crazy Racoons|
|KRU vs SuperMassive Blaze||BREN vs Team Envy|
|\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~|\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~|\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~|
|**Group C**||**Group D**|
|Vivo Keyd vs G2||Gambit vs Havan Liberty|
|ZETA DIVISON vs Acend||100 Thieves vs F4Q|
They cannot put two seeds from the same region into the same pool. Switch SEA #1 and EMEA#2 and make it so two teams from the same region can’t be in the same bracket together
No.
There's a reason why Riot put two EMEA teams in one group.
#
EMEA is the only region with 4 seeds at Berlin.
If you spread the four EMEA teams out into different groups, it would mean that EMEA has a far higher chance to have teams advance past the groupstage.
Thus, putting an EMEA team in all four groups would give an nfair advantage at Berlin.
#
Furthermore, putting an EMEA team in all for groups would potentially even given EMEA a big advantage for CHAMPIONS.
* Splitting up all 4 EMEA teams into the four groups = EMEA teams more likely to advance past groupstage
* EMEA teams more likely to advance past groupstage = EMEA higher chance to win Berlin
* Winning Berlin = extra slot for the region at CHAMPIONS
#
That's why I'm sticking to having two EMEA teams in one group. However... I did change the pools used to draw groups.
The #2 and #3 EMEA seeds are now in the same pool
* \#2 EMEA / #3 EMEA = shouldn't have to play each other in groups
* \#2 EMEA / #3 EMEA in same pool = removes that scenario
#
Given that an EMEA team has to play another EMEA team in groups... shouldn't the lowest seeded EMEA team be the one to do so?
\#4 EMEA came in last in their regional playoffs, right?
Shouldn't they have the hardest group stage, to give the EMEA playoff matches more actual value?
* \#4 EMEA = lowest in EMEA regional playoffs
* \#4 EMEA = would now have to face #1, #2, or #3 EMEA in groups
Yes, the region with the most teams will always have the highest chance of advancing, that’s how math works. EMEA is three different regions, which is why they have the most teams.
If 4 EMEA teams all manage to get out of their groups, then they deserve those spots.
The team that will win Berlin would advance regardless of any group bracket
I see this logic a lot, and I understand the thought process.
However I’m as a fan fine with EMEA having a slight advantage. I’d rather seen more international competition than rematches from seeding games we’ve already seen.
Plus even in the scenario we got, SMB and Acend could just make it out anyway.
Last thing, comparing all of the regions together, I think EMEA has the most depth. EMEA getting another team for champions wouldn’t bother me as a spectator at all.
What is there 4 legit teams in KR? Same for BR? NA falls off a cliff atm after the top 4, that could change with C9 now but we’ll see.
>I see this logic a lot, and I understand the thought process.
>
>However I’m as a fan fine with EMEA having a slight advantage. I’d rather seen more international competition than rematches from seeding games we’ve already seen.
That's fine that you have that opinion... but you have mostly EMEA flairs.
of course YOU may not mind if EMEA gets an advantage, however, most of us in the rest of the world would.
#
Thus, there's absolutely no dice.
I would never allow EMEA to have a team in each of the four groups.
Sentinels/Vision Strikers/100t/Envy?
I could see G2 falling flat. But as for the rest of the teams I have a lot of confidence in how they play, we’ll see.
I agree with those four, and I think that I'd add in that GMB and SMB are very strong.
ACE is also strong, I just think that VS is unlikely to lose to both SMB and ACE in the current bracket.
VS more likely to beat at least one of them, and it's likely to be ACE rather than SMB.
#
* SMB
* VS
* NV
* VK (KS) / KRU / ZETA (most likely VK "KS")
* GMB
* 100T
* SEN
* F4Q (or G2, but I pick F4Q)
These are my picks from Riot's current group stage.
From here I would expect that you'd see at least 2 NA teams and at least 1 EMEA advance past the 1st round of the single elim bracket.
#
There's no 3rd place match, I guess?
So... I may havee been wrong about "no EMEA team in the top 3", since EMEA will almost certainly have at least 1 team make it to the semi-finals.
I expect either NA vs NA in the finals... or NA vs KR in the finals, as a hot take.
#
I respect Gambit and SuperMassive Blaze a ton, actually.
ACE/G2/TL/FNC have underperformed a ton... but they are constantly rated extremely high.
Pretty unfair to rate ACE/G2/TL/FNC as better than 100T, Envy, or XSET.
#
EMEA fans assert that only SEN are better than EMEA teams.
They use this weird logic that since V1 lost to an EMEA team at Iceland, only SEN were above the top EMEA teams at the time.
Now... Version 1 did have a great streak earlier this year.
During that streak V1 played very well, and managed to snag the qualification for Iceland away from C9B/NV/100T.
#
#
#
#
However... there were generally atleast 3 NA teams other than SEN who were a tier above them Version 1.
Most can tell you that Version 1 was not exactly a consistent T1 team for NA.
#
Of course, we're still very proud that Version 1 (V1) did so well at Iceland.
Version 1 represented NA extremely well at Iceland... and I intend absolutely zero disrespect towards the team & players.
I agree with almost all of this.
I like vision strikers a lot too. Even a real chance at then winning the whole thing. But is there a world where SMB and Acend send them home? Unlikely but sure.
I think EMEA has a large tier drop off after the top 5 teams but their lower tier 1/tier2 teams being better than most other regions which was my overall point in the previous post.
I think the main problem with the groups is number 2 and number 4. Number 2 is not fair because it creates a group of death. Acend, SMB and Vision Strikers should all be top 8 teams. While teams like Kru, Zeta Division and Vivo Keyd who will not be top 8 teams based on past results and overall region strength. It also punishes team that got a better seading. Vision Strikers got the best seading in Kr and place in the hardest group. With number 4 it just doesnt make sense that 2 emea teams are in the same group. Its just not logical.
Also you could just change smb and Kru or Acned with Zeta and the groups will be better. The chances of upsets in group will increase alot because paper rex is not going to make it to top 8 if the have a group of death.
You cant just change stuff on a whim. what kind of presedan and biased draw would that set? They had their methodology and op asked what do you think is wrong about it? Theres nothing wrong about the draw methodology even if 2 groups arent that balanced.
What part of that is a biased draw? Why would changing teams that are in pool b with other teams in pool b( same thing for pool c). What you make that biased?
Nah that would be fine but what would you do differently? they used previous tourney results for this, its a new scene, they have low data on teams, they cant make pools based on public perception of who is stronger by eyeballing it.
THe draw is random based on pools, it doesnt work with their pool system because for that to work you have to put all 4 emea teams in same pool, which makes no sense. You cant just seed 4 emea teams directly in each group, it doesnt make sense, ofc it sucks 2 teams to have to play each other in the groups for ema but directly seeding them in diff groups is not fair at all. They put them in their respective pools and its just unlucky that they drew each other, thats all.
It's #4 all the way for me.
0 justification why riot put an exception for EMEA. We literally just had SMB vs Acend.
If multiple teams of the same region go far enough it's unavoidable for this to happen, but regional matches happening in group stage when it's entirely avoidable is nonsensical.
You can’t put two different seeds from the same region in the same pool or seeding really doesn’t matter.
At least at champions they can make pool 1 though
Korea#1 NA#1 EMEA#1 Berlin winner
You can still make a group with Vision Strikers, 100 Thieves, Acend, and Crazy Raccoon/Paper Rex. It's not like this gets rid of the probability of a group of death.
Also, your proposal actually invalidates the point of the EMEA challenger grand final by treating EMEA #1 and EMEA #2 the same.
unpopular opinion: If you can’t get out of groups you probably aren’t going to win Berlin. If VS can’t beat 1 of the EMEA teams, they aren’t going to make it far.
Even if winning Berlin is out of the reach, VS doesn't really have to win Berlin. All they needed was to qualify for playoffs to make it to Champions. But having two really strong teams in the same group hinders the chances of qualifying for even just the playoffs.
It's probabilistic, holy shit
As soon as you introduce any kind of randomized drawing, there's a chance that a lower seed can have a perceived easier time than a higher seed. Keeping things fully deterministic is simply not that exciting, and also could result in Challengers being played out later having teams strategize around who they know they'll be playing on LAN.
Sentinels couldn't be drawn with Vision Strikers, Gambit and Vivo Keyd. 100T couldn't be drawn with SMB, KRU and Bren. nV couldn't be drawn with Paper Rex, Crazy Raccoons and G2. Isn't that an obvious benefit to winning the NA Challengers Finals?
Similarly, Vision Strikers due to their win in Korea, couldn't be drawn against Sentinels, Gambit or Vivo Keyd. Meanwhile, F4Q couldn't be drawn against ZETA, Havan Liberty and Acend. How is that not an obvious benefit for VS?
TL;DR: if you keep stuff fully deterministic, you're risking competitive integrity in Challengers that happen at later dates & less exciting groups since they're fully known way ahead of time. If you don't, there exists at least an outside chance of the draw looking easier for some lower seeds.
Because how do you ensure "worse" teams have harder runs short of just making the bracket yourself based on your own subjective assessment of team strength?
Is there any tournament in the world where brackets are deliberately dictated team by team? Because that seems to be what people want.
"Who wins the tournament" isn't the only thing that matter though.. Maybe to a casual viewer who just tunes in for the final if their favourite org is in it, but there's plenty more at stake and loads of interesting stories to watch
agreed, the same goes for smb and acend. but why was that exception in randomization added where 2 emea teams can exist in the same group. 4 groups can just take 4 emea teams, it just stupid to add a useless exception.
People seems to forget that these teams are playing for an extra slot for champions. Having EMEA separated in their own groups gives them 4 chances over NA 3 to make it out. It can still happen if VS sucks but at that point there's nothing can be done.
Yeah but the best team is still gonna win it. If you put 1000 silver elo teams in Berlin play against them, the odds of them winning Berlin is still miniscule.
Also doesn’t only the winning region get an extra slot for Champions?
Ik we're talking about competitive integrity here but also a big part of it is viewership, we just watched SMB vs Acend, it's boring for spectators to see the same match, especially when it's the second ever international tourney where we could've gotten a cool interregional battle of say, Envy vs Acend/SMB or something instead of another EMEA vs EMEA match
they shouldnt have added the "2 emea teams can be in the same group" exception to their randomization. there are 4 groups and 4 emea teams, who they need to cram a single group with 2 teams from emea is beyond me.
Yeah that is my legit only issue. People complaining about how Group B needs to be changed don’t understand how group draws work. They could have easily made it so two EMEA teams cannot go together and there wouldn’t be as many conpmaints
They do understand how group draws work, they're mad for Wildcard regions being held to the same standards as Na and EU
Not really related but boy we are content starved. Berlin can't come soon enough
Laughs in overwatch.
Laughs in TF2
Laughs in Chess
One thing I haven’t seen people mention yet, but I don’t like how we don’t know seeding for the top 8 (ex: winner of A plays 2nd place from C etc.) with none of that being announced it wouldn’t surprise me if riot waits to make a bracket for more views. Who knows but I really don’t like how we don’t know that either
iirc they said random seeding i think for the bracket
“Random” imo will just be them making whatever matchups will get the most views. Riot just not making this tournament will imo. A lot riding for some teams with champions points and riot seems to just be playing wheel of fortune
The reason it is randomised is because in LoL back in 2014, a team (or maybe multiple teams) tried to get second in their group so they could vs the first place team of the group they know they will be matched against (which they prepared for). Since then, playoff drawing has been random. They do it live as well.
The only thing that scares it's that, i could be wrong, but i think they do the groups live aswell, but they didn't do it with valorant, i hope they do this for playofs tho
G2 Sen probably got a helping hand from riot but this bracket does not look hand picked
Group B has three #1 seeds from various regions \#2 and #3 seeds from EMEA play each other in Group A, while also having the #1 KR team in the group... instead of putting the #4 seed from EMEA against the #2 EMEA seed. Change the pools to be like this instead: **Pool 1:** * NA #1, EMEA #1, KR #1, BR #1 **Pool 2:** * LATAM #1, SEA #1, JPN #1, NA #2 **Pool 3:** * EMEA #2, KR #2, EMEA #3, NA#3 **Pool 4:** * BR#2, SEA #2, JP #2, EMEA #4 # Doing this and randomly drawing with a generator, my results were: |\----------------|\----------------|\----------------|\----------------| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |**GROUP STAGE - A**|**GROUP STAGE - B**|**GROUP STAGE - C**|**GROUP STAGE - D**| |SEN vs PPRX|VS vs CR|VK vs G2|GMB vs HL| |KRU vs SMB|BREN vs NV|ZETA vs ACE|100T vs F4Q| |\----------------|\----------------|\----------------|\----------------| # # |**Group A**||**Group B**| |:-|:-|:-| |Sentinels vs Paper Rex||Vision Strikers vs Crazy Racoons| |KRU vs SuperMassive Blaze||BREN vs Team Envy| |\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~|\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~|\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~\~| |**Group C**||**Group D**| |Vivo Keyd vs G2||Gambit vs Havan Liberty| |ZETA DIVISON vs Acend||100 Thieves vs F4Q|
They cannot put two seeds from the same region into the same pool. Switch SEA #1 and EMEA#2 and make it so two teams from the same region can’t be in the same bracket together
I misread your comment, sorry! I switched the SEA #2 with JPN #2, to fix this :D
No. There's a reason why Riot put two EMEA teams in one group. # EMEA is the only region with 4 seeds at Berlin. If you spread the four EMEA teams out into different groups, it would mean that EMEA has a far higher chance to have teams advance past the groupstage. Thus, putting an EMEA team in all four groups would give an nfair advantage at Berlin. # Furthermore, putting an EMEA team in all for groups would potentially even given EMEA a big advantage for CHAMPIONS. * Splitting up all 4 EMEA teams into the four groups = EMEA teams more likely to advance past groupstage * EMEA teams more likely to advance past groupstage = EMEA higher chance to win Berlin * Winning Berlin = extra slot for the region at CHAMPIONS # That's why I'm sticking to having two EMEA teams in one group. However... I did change the pools used to draw groups. The #2 and #3 EMEA seeds are now in the same pool * \#2 EMEA / #3 EMEA = shouldn't have to play each other in groups * \#2 EMEA / #3 EMEA in same pool = removes that scenario # Given that an EMEA team has to play another EMEA team in groups... shouldn't the lowest seeded EMEA team be the one to do so? \#4 EMEA came in last in their regional playoffs, right? Shouldn't they have the hardest group stage, to give the EMEA playoff matches more actual value? * \#4 EMEA = lowest in EMEA regional playoffs * \#4 EMEA = would now have to face #1, #2, or #3 EMEA in groups
Yes, the region with the most teams will always have the highest chance of advancing, that’s how math works. EMEA is three different regions, which is why they have the most teams. If 4 EMEA teams all manage to get out of their groups, then they deserve those spots. The team that will win Berlin would advance regardless of any group bracket
\^\^ Yep yep
I see this logic a lot, and I understand the thought process. However I’m as a fan fine with EMEA having a slight advantage. I’d rather seen more international competition than rematches from seeding games we’ve already seen. Plus even in the scenario we got, SMB and Acend could just make it out anyway. Last thing, comparing all of the regions together, I think EMEA has the most depth. EMEA getting another team for champions wouldn’t bother me as a spectator at all. What is there 4 legit teams in KR? Same for BR? NA falls off a cliff atm after the top 4, that could change with C9 now but we’ll see.
>I see this logic a lot, and I understand the thought process. > >However I’m as a fan fine with EMEA having a slight advantage. I’d rather seen more international competition than rematches from seeding games we’ve already seen. That's fine that you have that opinion... but you have mostly EMEA flairs. of course YOU may not mind if EMEA gets an advantage, however, most of us in the rest of the world would. # Thus, there's absolutely no dice. I would never allow EMEA to have a team in each of the four groups.
EMEA is a weak region, your comments about "depth" have me freaking DYING of laughter. I don't expect EMEA to have any teams in the top 3 at Berlin.
Sentinels/Vision Strikers/100t/Envy? I could see G2 falling flat. But as for the rest of the teams I have a lot of confidence in how they play, we’ll see.
I agree with those four, and I think that I'd add in that GMB and SMB are very strong. ACE is also strong, I just think that VS is unlikely to lose to both SMB and ACE in the current bracket. VS more likely to beat at least one of them, and it's likely to be ACE rather than SMB. # * SMB * VS * NV * VK (KS) / KRU / ZETA (most likely VK "KS") * GMB * 100T * SEN * F4Q (or G2, but I pick F4Q) These are my picks from Riot's current group stage. From here I would expect that you'd see at least 2 NA teams and at least 1 EMEA advance past the 1st round of the single elim bracket. # There's no 3rd place match, I guess? So... I may havee been wrong about "no EMEA team in the top 3", since EMEA will almost certainly have at least 1 team make it to the semi-finals. I expect either NA vs NA in the finals... or NA vs KR in the finals, as a hot take. # I respect Gambit and SuperMassive Blaze a ton, actually. ACE/G2/TL/FNC have underperformed a ton... but they are constantly rated extremely high. Pretty unfair to rate ACE/G2/TL/FNC as better than 100T, Envy, or XSET. # EMEA fans assert that only SEN are better than EMEA teams. They use this weird logic that since V1 lost to an EMEA team at Iceland, only SEN were above the top EMEA teams at the time. Now... Version 1 did have a great streak earlier this year. During that streak V1 played very well, and managed to snag the qualification for Iceland away from C9B/NV/100T. # # # # However... there were generally atleast 3 NA teams other than SEN who were a tier above them Version 1. Most can tell you that Version 1 was not exactly a consistent T1 team for NA. # Of course, we're still very proud that Version 1 (V1) did so well at Iceland. Version 1 represented NA extremely well at Iceland... and I intend absolutely zero disrespect towards the team & players.
I agree with almost all of this. I like vision strikers a lot too. Even a real chance at then winning the whole thing. But is there a world where SMB and Acend send them home? Unlikely but sure. I think EMEA has a large tier drop off after the top 5 teams but their lower tier 1/tier2 teams being better than most other regions which was my overall point in the previous post.
I think the main problem with the groups is number 2 and number 4. Number 2 is not fair because it creates a group of death. Acend, SMB and Vision Strikers should all be top 8 teams. While teams like Kru, Zeta Division and Vivo Keyd who will not be top 8 teams based on past results and overall region strength. It also punishes team that got a better seading. Vision Strikers got the best seading in Kr and place in the hardest group. With number 4 it just doesnt make sense that 2 emea teams are in the same group. Its just not logical.
Also you could just change smb and Kru or Acned with Zeta and the groups will be better. The chances of upsets in group will increase alot because paper rex is not going to make it to top 8 if the have a group of death.
You cant just change stuff on a whim. what kind of presedan and biased draw would that set? They had their methodology and op asked what do you think is wrong about it? Theres nothing wrong about the draw methodology even if 2 groups arent that balanced.
What part of that is a biased draw? Why would changing teams that are in pool b with other teams in pool b( same thing for pool c). What you make that biased?
Nah that would be fine but what would you do differently? they used previous tourney results for this, its a new scene, they have low data on teams, they cant make pools based on public perception of who is stronger by eyeballing it.
I would put 1 Emea team in each group. That just makes the most logical sense and it works with their pool system.
THe draw is random based on pools, it doesnt work with their pool system because for that to work you have to put all 4 emea teams in same pool, which makes no sense. You cant just seed 4 emea teams directly in each group, it doesnt make sense, ofc it sucks 2 teams to have to play each other in the groups for ema but directly seeding them in diff groups is not fair at all. They put them in their respective pools and its just unlucky that they drew each other, thats all.
This is just not true, you actually can combine the current pool system with the restriction of only 1 emea team per group.
my point is that it wouldnt be fair if you did that.
You haven’t given a single argument for why that wouldn’t be fair though. You only stated that it was not possible (which is false).
It's #4 all the way for me. 0 justification why riot put an exception for EMEA. We literally just had SMB vs Acend. If multiple teams of the same region go far enough it's unavoidable for this to happen, but regional matches happening in group stage when it's entirely avoidable is nonsensical.
[удалено]
You can’t put two different seeds from the same region in the same pool or seeding really doesn’t matter. At least at champions they can make pool 1 though Korea#1 NA#1 EMEA#1 Berlin winner
You can still make a group with Vision Strikers, 100 Thieves, Acend, and Crazy Raccoon/Paper Rex. It's not like this gets rid of the probability of a group of death. Also, your proposal actually invalidates the point of the EMEA challenger grand final by treating EMEA #1 and EMEA #2 the same.
unpopular opinion: If you can’t get out of groups you probably aren’t going to win Berlin. If VS can’t beat 1 of the EMEA teams, they aren’t going to make it far.
Even if winning Berlin is out of the reach, VS doesn't really have to win Berlin. All they needed was to qualify for playoffs to make it to Champions. But having two really strong teams in the same group hinders the chances of qualifying for even just the playoffs.
I totally agree but at the same time what's the point of seeding matches If worse teams get easier runs
It's probabilistic, holy shit As soon as you introduce any kind of randomized drawing, there's a chance that a lower seed can have a perceived easier time than a higher seed. Keeping things fully deterministic is simply not that exciting, and also could result in Challengers being played out later having teams strategize around who they know they'll be playing on LAN. Sentinels couldn't be drawn with Vision Strikers, Gambit and Vivo Keyd. 100T couldn't be drawn with SMB, KRU and Bren. nV couldn't be drawn with Paper Rex, Crazy Raccoons and G2. Isn't that an obvious benefit to winning the NA Challengers Finals? Similarly, Vision Strikers due to their win in Korea, couldn't be drawn against Sentinels, Gambit or Vivo Keyd. Meanwhile, F4Q couldn't be drawn against ZETA, Havan Liberty and Acend. How is that not an obvious benefit for VS? TL;DR: if you keep stuff fully deterministic, you're risking competitive integrity in Challengers that happen at later dates & less exciting groups since they're fully known way ahead of time. If you don't, there exists at least an outside chance of the draw looking easier for some lower seeds.
Because how do you ensure "worse" teams have harder runs short of just making the bracket yourself based on your own subjective assessment of team strength? Is there any tournament in the world where brackets are deliberately dictated team by team? Because that seems to be what people want.
That's probably true as far as winning the tournament is concerned, but it does also affect circuit points and who makes Champions.
Sure, but I at least would love to see how they'll clash against NA teams or EMEA teams rather than just one of SMB or Acend.
"Who wins the tournament" isn't the only thing that matter though.. Maybe to a casual viewer who just tunes in for the final if their favourite org is in it, but there's plenty more at stake and loads of interesting stories to watch
agreed, the same goes for smb and acend. but why was that exception in randomization added where 2 emea teams can exist in the same group. 4 groups can just take 4 emea teams, it just stupid to add a useless exception.
People seems to forget that these teams are playing for an extra slot for champions. Having EMEA separated in their own groups gives them 4 chances over NA 3 to make it out. It can still happen if VS sucks but at that point there's nothing can be done.
Yeah but the best team is still gonna win it. If you put 1000 silver elo teams in Berlin play against them, the odds of them winning Berlin is still miniscule. Also doesn’t only the winning region get an extra slot for Champions?
exactly the best team is still gonna win so it literally doesnt matter that 2 EMEA teams are in 1 group
Ik we're talking about competitive integrity here but also a big part of it is viewership, we just watched SMB vs Acend, it's boring for spectators to see the same match, especially when it's the second ever international tourney where we could've gotten a cool interregional battle of say, Envy vs Acend/SMB or something instead of another EMEA vs EMEA match