Quote from: MonkeyIsland on November 29, 2008, 03:36 PM
Best of 5 for each game? or 7 ? Isn't that a lot?
If we're gonna leave the number of people which gonna take part in playoffs (50% won and 30 games played at least) open, Then best of some games wouldn't work and make it long. I guess one would be enough.

its not for each game, say its me vs you in playoffs and you have a better rating... you get to decide what scheme we play first, then after that game i get to decide one (not the same as yours) and we keep doing that untill one of us has 3 wins or 4 (depending on whether its bo5 or bo7)

Normally a player with higher position is a better player (Not always ). The advantage of being on a higher position is that you get to play with a lower position player, for example the 1st gets to play with the 8th.
I'm thinking giving the right of choosing the first scheme to the higher position player may be a bit wrong as he has enough advantage.

I agree with the bo5, But lets say if the lower positioned player pick the scheme OR site choose 5 schemes for the players, Like they start playing 1st and goto 5th if necessary.

idk the way i see it is that the higher position player deserves the first pick more, but u could always do a vote or whatever, thats just my oppinion

Quote from: MonkeyIsland on November 29, 2008, 06:17 PM
Normally a player with higher position is a better player (Not always ). The advantage of being on a higher position is that you get to play with a lower position player, for example the 1st gets to play with the 8th.
I'm thinking giving the right of choosing the first scheme to the higher position player may be a bit wrong as he has enough advantage.

I agree with the bo5, But lets say if the lower positioned player pick the scheme OR site choose 5 schemes for the players, Like they start playing 1st and goto 5th if necessary.

my opinion:

1. Best of 5.
2. Schemes are NOT chosen by system.
3. Higher rating picks first scheme.

Quote from: pr on November 29, 2008, 10:20 PM

Quote from: MonkeyIsland on November 29, 2008, 06:17 PM
Normally a player with higher position is a better player (Not always ). The advantage of being on a higher position is that you get to play with a lower position player, for example the 1st gets to play with the 8th.
I'm thinking giving the right of choosing the first scheme to the higher position player may be a bit wrong as he has enough advantage.

I agree with the bo5, But lets say if the lower positioned player pick the scheme OR site choose 5 schemes for the players, Like they start playing 1st and goto 5th if necessary.

my opinion:

1. Best of 5.
2. Schemes are NOT chosen by system.
3. Higher rating picks first scheme.

agree.

#1
vs   \
#8

#3
vs   /
#6

#5
vs   \
#4

#7
vs   /
#2

Isn't this how playoffs are usually seeded? #1 vs #2 in semi-finals doesn't really make sense.

Yea true, Must have lost this point while coding. It is fixed now.
Thanks man.

Will be Intermediate allowed to pick in Playoffs? Cause i don't play it (i think it had to be in Free League ).
So if u r my opponent in Playoffs and u want 1 easy win pick Intermediate, ill dont play it and its +1 for u )

po schemes that can be picked should be

elite
bng
roper
ttrr
t17
shopper

imo

po schemes should be same as now i can pick from classic league and the list can't be changed in this season.
i dont care of u f4st. rly. u hate inter, Tom hates smth too, MI hates hatreds, dt hates all wa community, i hate bng. who cares lol?

ps: sorry, dt. i forgot u like bytor 

Quote from: Chicken23 on December 13, 2008, 10:08 PM
po schemes that can be picked should be

elite
bng
roper
ttrr
t17
shopper

imo

I agree too.
By the way, what about the Clanner's po? If I'm not wrong, the clan has to play 30 games? that's too much as I see, playing at least 12 games would be better, is not so easy find a tus clanner and less  other clan agreeing with playing it. As example, clans like CKC or CF, it's not hard to see in their played, that not every clan wants to play against them, well I can't see the games played by CF at all because when I try it displays the games played by my clan xD. Will be a shame if those clans can't get into the PO only due they couldn't play 30 games

Also, I don't think that is a good idea have the 50% at least of games won. Clans that reach a not bad rating playing against anyone are better than a clan that have the best rating only avoiding clans with better players, therefore, delete that stipulation! avoid noobashing!.

Edit: Rofl xD why I have -1 of Karma xD. c@#!s! I'm the most friendly wormer haha.

I had forgotten to say. System do not check for 50% winning percentage. Only 30 games.
We have more than 2 weeks to end of this season, I guess there's still chance clans make it to the playoffs.

Quote from: pr on December 14, 2008, 09:12 AM
i dont care of u f4st. rly. u hate inter, Tom hates smth too, MI hates hatreds, dt hates all wa community, i hate bng. who cares lol?

U r a bit wrong man, i dont hate inter "only", i hate all luck based schemes, shoppa for a 2 good ropers is a cr8s luck scheme f.e.
Anyway read my post, if inter is allowed in PO np for me, pick it and +1 for u

Quote from: f4st on December 15, 2008, 09:19 AM

Quote from: pr on December 14, 2008, 09:12 AM
i dont care of u f4st. rly. u hate inter, Tom hates smth too, MI hates hatreds, dt hates all wa community, i hate bng. who cares lol?

U r a bit wrong man, i dont hate inter "only", i hate all luck based schemes, shoppa for a 2 good ropers is a cr8s luck scheme f.e.
Anyway read my post, if inter is allowed in PO np for me, pick it and +1 for u

look this:
https://www.tus-wa.com/leagues/classic-stats/Intermediate-stats/

do u rly think that it's about 90% of luck now?

Inter for Play Offs.