I get your point. The thing is that Mycy got 32 people to manage. If one makes 2 mistakes about reporting 1:0 instead of 2:0 and then another of reporting 2:1 instead of 2:0, and Mycy gets no message whatsoever, then Mycy got no choice but to follow plain "wins/losses" rule, especially if one was granted walkover.

Quote

First of all, the way the score is counted is done by TUS’s own system

By that system anyone with 2:0, 2:0, 2:0 victories get "3/6", the same number that people get after having 2:1, 2:1, 2:1 or 2:0, 2:0, 2:1. You are basically just proving my point by refering to the TUS system. TUS doesn't care if you lost the round when winning, you are on equal position as somebody who won 2:0. Spare everybody's time and do your research next time.

In that case obviously not since the matches won number wouldn’t be the same among players. Then you wouldn’t need to use the extra rounds to untie. Number of rounds won is just a tie break system used in case players had the same amount of matches won. And if TUS didn’t care about extra round wins, their number wouldn’t be showing in the Won column. BlankASD and Liav are actually 2/5 there, whereas Mai is actually 2/4. If TUS didn’t care about the rounds, it’d just show 2 for each of the three.

I don’t care what Mycy will decide. I’m just clearing things up here; both ways are acceptable as it all depends on what rules the cup is being played on.

May I suggest something for TUS website (not necessarily the app)? I think the scheme upload/editor could receive some new fields. There are many schemes which have completely blank description. This is not the ideal. I think some Scheme Setup fields would be good, because they would encourage players to put more information about the schemes. For example, a field with the number of worms, a field with the map requirements, a description and maybe a slot for map examples (download links). A section just for the rules of the scheme... Even sections for the history of the development of the scheme or the scheme tactics/tips would be good. Of course these fields don't need to be mandatory, but I believe at least people would think more about describing the scheme they made. Scheme making beginners don't know very well that many people will have no idea about the scheme if they don't write about it. Another thing I would like to know is the scheme image/icon ideal dimensions (this could be informed too). Maybe the text box could have a pre-written suggestion text to encourage people to write, but if they don't write anything, it would still be in blank.

First of all, the way the score is counted is done by TUS’s own system, but since it’s a machine, it can’t be used by itself; it needs a host behind it to manually advance the players since odd results like these might appear. TUS’s algorithms do include the tie breaks I mentioned and they must be there for a reason. Mycy just never stated in the cup description what his rules are for ties in the group stage.

So you are basically allowing victories to be "weaker or stronger" that is a total opposite of what group match should be.

Being able to beat your opponent 1 round even in a lost match still means merit, therefore it CAN be used as extra points for tie breaks (as long as it’s not Bo1, but groups here are Bo3), because it means you were not as easily beaten. Losing 2-1 is better than losing 2-0.

You will never see that in any football cup. How about we start counting how many worms Mai had left with his victories, how many Health Points by % he kept? How about we start counting losses, not just wins, and then it would turn out Diogofelt would could give one extra loss to Liav, that he spared him of, and then what? That is so so flawed bro.

You are saying a bunch of things I didn’t say there. Don’t mix things that happen inside the game with game results. And TUS’s tie breaks don’t count losses as you could see.

How about we start counting losses, not just wins, and then it would turn out Diogofelt would could give one extra loss to Liav, that he spared him of, and then what?

That part’s a bit illegible. But they aren’t even in the same group anyway. You’re again mixing things here.

I wouldn't want to be in Mai's shoes. Cup is for people to explain things to each other via confrontation, often additional, not by avoidance and some micro statistics that would decide.

Nothing wrong with different forms of justice, but I think they should be equal among all participants.

Mycy is 100% right that fundamentally they have 2/3 wins and all 3 should repeat. Since liav is not exactly in the cup now, them 2 fighting seems to be the only sensible thing to do.

Sure the host could do that, but it wouldn’t be 100% fair for Liav for the reason I explained in my previous post.

If Mycy decides to do so, I can even let all 3 repeat their group games and I will agree to have my bracket win removed.

I also agree with this way of resolving ties. Like I said, it’s another valid form of justice. If you don’t mind losing your progress in the cup to allow the 3 to compete among each other fairly, this is a reasonable option too.

Nobody knew if you would untie players with tie breaks and play-offs or only with play-offs, but considering you advanced group 3, I assumed you would include tie breaks. When players have the same number of matches won, they can untie by direct confrontation and rounds won. That group doesn’t need play-offs since they don’t actually have the same amount of points. Mai beat BlankASD 2-1, BlankASD beat Liav 2-1 and Liav beat Mai 2-0 (if you pay attention to the replays date, the round in which Mai supposedly beat Liav doesn’t count as he beat him only after Liav had already beat him 2-0), so because Mai have one round won less than the other two, he is in 3rd place. That leaves only BlankASD and Liav to untie in direct confrontation, where BlankASD has the advantage, thus granting him the 1st place and Liav being in 2nd.

If you were to consider only the matches won, the three should do play-offs, but since Liav was already advanced, doing play-offs only between the other two would be unfair for Liav as he had no equal chance as them of achieving 1st place in the play-offs. So considering you already advanced Liav in his appropriate position following the tie breaks, I’d say the best and fairest thing to do would be to simply follow the tie breaks for the other players too and advance BlankASD with no play-offs. And you’d apply the same tie breaks for the other groups so that all competitors play by the same rules.