Quote:
|
Originally Posted by R3ptile
I had to choose one way, but it wouldn't be fair if I wouldn't ask the other people here. First of all, I want to present a new way of scoring system:
2x 1on1
2x 2on2
1x 3on3
Well, it sounds a bit weird, but 3on3's are usually based on luck. People just camp on both bases and sometimes there are lucky points. Also, 1on1's in JJ2 are required more skill than 3on3's. Then, each clan has to show its skills on dueling, teamplaying and the old fashioned way - 3on3's.
|
I would argue that this is not true at all. JJ2WC is meant for clans and should be a contest that determines which clan can play the best together. Having duels be a part of this will put an unnecessary advantage on those clans who have very strong individual players, not necessarily people who can play well with others.
Also, 5 rounds per match is excessive. There were already a number of time issues with JJ2WC when there were generally 2 rounds being played per match.
2on2s are reasonable but I still think that a 3on3 is more appropriate for a clan style tournament.
Quote:
|
Also, 1on1's are much more attractive than 2on2's or 3on3's and much nicer to watch, since the duelist must do his best and shouldn't trust other people to do the job, etc...
|
I'd argue that trusting your teammates and learning to play with them is the most important aspect of this tournament.
Quote:
|
So, each team could have it's own duelists and 2on2 teams... especially like WC3L clanwars on WC3. Indeed, the clanwars would take longer but we could start it two hours earlier and then it won't make any trouble.
|
This is still an excessive amount of time for one match.
|