ATD2018 - Rank the Playoffs Formats

[Johnny Engine]

Out of the options that have any chance here, I'd support #2 over #4, as the latter doesn't really give weaker teams the chance to experience any high-stakes debate against their direct peers. I think #4 will run pretty smoothly, but if we're tossing half the teams out after the regular season, we all be better be doing some Beatrice Kiddo level assassinating in the general thread.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Out of the options that have any chance here, I'd support #2 over #4, as the latter doesn't really give weaker teams the chance to experience any high-stakes debate against their direct peers. I think #4 will run pretty smoothly, but if we're tossing half the teams out after the regular season, we all be better be doing some Beatrice Kiddo level assassinating in the general thread.

This was my reasoning for supporting #2. How much would it suck for a new GM to be voted out of the game without having a chance to defend his team? I suppose we can encourage more vigorous comparisons in the single assassination thread, however.

 

[rmartin65]

If we are going with 4 (which it looks like), I certainly plan to compare my team to the other teams in my conference/division in the assassination thread.

 

[Theokritos]

If we are going with 4 (which it looks like), I certainly plan to compare my team to the other teams in my conference/division in the assassination thread.

So why go with #4 if you agree that a comparison with the other teams in your division is required? I really don't get the rationale for #4 over #2.

 

[rmartin65]

So why go with #4 if you agree that a comparison with the other teams in your division is required? I really don't get the rationale for #4 over #2.

I voted for 2 over 4. Now, I dont think it would be 'required', but I do think 2 gives everybody a little more involvement.

 

[Theokritos]

I voted for 2 over 4.

Fair enough!

 

[ResilientBeast]

2 then 4 others meh

 

[BenchBrawl]

So 2 and 4 are winning easily, with 4 winning over 2.

 

[Velociraptor]

246531

 

[BenchBrawl]

Going with the system 6pts for 1st place, 5pts for 2nd place and so on, we have:

4) 63 pts
2) 56 pts
5) 24 pts
6) 22 pts
3) 12 pts
1) 10 pts

edited for stoneberg

 

[Stoneberg]

2 over 4 for me.

The rest look irrelevant at this point.

 

[Voight]

Going w. 4

 

[BenchBrawl]

About the playoffs bracket, assuming 8 divisions of 3-4 teams where only the Top-2 will makes the playoffs, yielding 8 playoffs teams per conference, is everybody all right with doing "cross over" series, meaning the #2 seed in one division will face the #1 seed in another?

This is in order to avoid a "repetition" of what already occured in the regular season voting; if the #2 seed faces the #1 seed of his own division right off the bat, the result is very likely to be the same, with the #1 seed winning.If the same #2 seed faces the #1 seed of another division, things can change.

Of course, assuming say that the #1 and #2 seeds of the same division are the two best teams in a conference, they will meet again.But at least by this point the #2 seed had time to build momentum or fight through the field as much as it deserved.

Illustration of the first round:

Conference with divisions A, B, C and D.

#1(A) vs #2(C)
#1(B) vs #2(D)

#1(C) vs #2(B)
#1(D) vs #2(A)

What do you guys think?

 

[ImporterExporter]

About the playoffs bracket, assuming 8 divisions of 3-4 teams where only the Top-2 will makes the playoffs, yielding 8 playoffs teams per conference, is everybody all right with doing "cross over" series, meaning the #2 seed in one division will face the #1 seed in another?

This is in order to avoid a "repetition" of what already occured in the regular season voting; if the #2 seed faces the #1 seed of his own division right off the bat, the result is very likely to be the same, with the #1 seed winning.If the same #2 seed faces the #1 seed of another division, things can change.

Of course, assuming say that the #1 and #2 seeds of the same division are the two best teams in a conference, they will meet again.But at least by this point the #2 seed had time to build momentum or fight through the field as much as it deserved.

Illustration of the first round:

Conference with divisions A, B, C and D.

#1(A) vs #2(C)
#1(B) vs #2(D)

#1(C) vs #2(B)
#1(D) vs #2(A)

What do you guys think?

I like this.

 

[BenchBrawl]

So ignoring the other options, it is:

7 GMs prefer #4 over #2
8 GMs prefer #2 over #4

 

[VanIslander]

So ignoring the other options, it is:

7 GMs prefer #4 over #2
8 GMs prefer #2 over #4

So, whatever the final alignment, have ONLY two teams per division make the playoffs and most of us will be happy!

 

[Theokritos]

So, whatever the final alignment, have ONLY two teams per division make the playoffs and most of us will be happy!

That's the key takeaway. 15 out of 15 who voted so far prefer this.

 

[Namba 17]

About the playoffs bracket, assuming 8 divisions of 3-4 teams where only the Top-2 will makes the playoffs, yielding 8 playoffs teams per conference, is everybody all right with doing "cross over" series, meaning the #2 seed in one division will face the #1 seed in another?

This is in order to avoid a "repetition" of what already occured in the regular season voting; if the #2 seed faces the #1 seed of his own division right off the bat, the result is very likely to be the same, with the #1 seed winning.If the same #2 seed faces the #1 seed of another division, things can change.

Of course, assuming say that the #1 and #2 seeds of the same division are the two best teams in a conference, they will meet again.But at least by this point the #2 seed had time to build momentum or fight through the field as much as it deserved.

Illustration of the first round:

Conference with divisions A, B, C and D.

#1(A) vs #2(C)
#1(B) vs #2(D)

#1(C) vs #2(B)
#1(D) vs #2(A)

What do you guys think?

I like this.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I think we can settle this right now and just go with option #2, which was prefered over option #4 by more GMs.Given how we have first-time participants and fewer teams than we thought, we should give everyone a chance at selling and defending their team.

If anyone is strongly in favor of 4 over 2 and disagrees with what I just said, speak up.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Sounds good to me! I just hope participation doesn't wane but it is what it is. Either way, I'll be ready to rock and roll throughout....