For what it's worth, people that are saying the scheme is best when it is bo3 are correct
Ok, maybe I'm NOT with James then!
Well, what are we talking about when saying "best"?
In what way is it the best? In this case, I assume we're talking about Bo3 balances out the luck of positions etc.
Though, if it's the "best" because it eliminates luck and "balances the scheme", then that just tells me personally that proper thought hasn't been put into the scheme in the first place!
Why not change the scheme settings to make it Bo1 to begin with? Rather than make it more luck based THEN added Bo3 to eliminate that luck... It seems pointless and a waste of time.
So, I'd possibly agree that THIS specific variation of Aerial is "best" when played Bo3 with the sole purpose in mind of making it more balanced in the context of "luck".
In terms of being a straight up better choice of what is better Aerial scheme overall though... I'd strongly disagree, and would rather make it more balanced initially without having to resort to Bo3.
I strongly believe any scheme that even needs Bo3 or more specifically for the purpose of balancing "luck" is an automatic nope in my opinion to begin with.
That's why I don't play Intermediate, ever.
I just like shorter and more games played/logged. I think inter should be bo1 too, ofc there is variance involved, but tus elo based system and more games played will selfcorrect over time. Sometimes everyone (myself included) gets so hung up on little amounts of variance that may swing games/series when elo exists to fix this on a longitudinal scale.
Inter bo3 just seems weird to me, if any scheme in all-round should be bo3 because of luck/turn variance it should be t17.
Yeah, I'd prefer Intermediate to be Bo1 as well, though would have to change the scheme... Though the problem with Intermediate being it is the most traditional scheme we know of, probably!
People aren't willing to change tradition because it can change the entire feeling of the game, to be honest Aerial is old enough now it kind of could suffer from the same thing. I really like Aerial but in my opinion it isn't a properly balanced scheme yet and never has been.
The biggest reasons why Intermediate is Bo3 - Automatic placements and barrels/mines.
We could make manual placement, but some people feel that's what makes the scheme so good.
Anyway, what's the issue with changing Aerial to be more balanced in Bo1? What's the problem? Wouldn't editing the scheme to be more suitable for Bo1 be better no?