KVD wrote on 06/20/14 at 00:12:14:


Also in those players eyes who are ranked from say 20th - 8th, it would mean they have a chance to fight their way through when they reach those stages. So if they had a bad run in the group stage and for example got done with lots of 3-1 losses due to lightnings, then they can have an opportunity.

On the old system if you got 15th / 16th then there would most likely be a Mr Lecoanet to contend with. We don't want to say that means 100% game over of course. But would you prefer to just have that and most likely be elimnated there or, a chance to work your way through vs rivals of your similar level, getting harder as you reach each higher level.

For me i dont mind, and im sure KVD is agreed. Just thinking for you guys, some like it as it motivates them when they reach qualifying stage. Maybe do a list of pro's and con's if not sure with this one.

Remember even with this system a good portion of the time is spend mixing players of all lvls (like traditional).
Actually with the limited nr of group stage matches there are with either system, the difference with previous years (in that regard) won't be as dramatic as you make it seem. Example: it's NOT like Graf faced 8 top players in group stage in 2012 compared to only 1 with the new system. Rather, the difference will be a lot smaller, say 4 to 2 or something; and in return we get a more accurate ranking for all the time that we spend in group stage.

With the SB system:

As far as i know it isnt the case that top players only play top players. The top lot will play a lot of the middle lot still and probably no one from right at the bottom of the list. And vice versa. I think middle players will still get an even spread. Correct? If it as close as can be to the group stages as before, only then that is fine.

The new playoff system may not be   just yet but is definitely   at least for a tryout for 2014.

If either system sucks like England did in last night's game vs Uruguay then change it again for 2015.

I want to take this opportunity to thank Djo for all the effort he's putting into making the system more balanced. I really appreciate that!  

Too bad I can't attend for this one, not enough money for it (unless I get money for my upcoming birthday, MAYBE)

I'll probably be the worst player, but you'll never know (I'm a quick learner)


holy shit, I made my first post in this board

Firewaster wrote on 06/20/14 at 08:35:51:

KVD wrote on 06/20/14 at 08:47:21:

Thanks guys

So will you come?

i tried not to come here in order not to influence people, but i have to tell Moll that i totally agree with him !
i can understand that some people would like to play more opponents of their level instead of too much "top vs noob" matchs, but it turns a bit into an unwished sort of segregation where worst players are not allowed to bother top players who want to play with other top players inatead of wasting their time crushing noobs.

i am also disappointed to see some people saying that 15 matchs is the maximum possible in regular phasis, because otherwise it is too long... assuming than 1 match is 20min long (including the time to find a place to play, play, and report the score), 15 matchs = 300min = 5 hours, perhaps from 14pm to 19pm : is it so long ? especially for a "smk world championship"?
for me (and maybe others), cdm is almost the only way to play smk with all sort of players, and i am a bit sad not to spend more time to play because some top players prefers to spend more time in final phasis than in regular phasis, sometimes with awesome breaks between quarter and semi finals... so to satisfate them, we had to set maximum regular matchs to 15.

the SB was a kind attention in the start, but i still find this system is unappropriated in the cdm : it is unfair because the ranking is harldy verifiable, and people don't play the same opponents. so djo had to include a new variable = the "opponents average level" to compense the disparities between 2 players (playerA faced stronger opponents than the playerB and thus had a harder path). but this compensation generated other inequities because playerA somehow gets too much points and playerB not enough points, so djo imputed antother compensation = some coefficient on results against extreme players (the 3 strongest and 3 worst). but the SB is still unfair and unbalanced to me, and will never be  
i was also hoping than number of participants would not be too great, so that we could avoid using the SB   but there are many newcomers, probably most of them with low/no skills, and like david said, it gives the sensation they are mainly welcomed to pay their subscription fees but not to have lots of opportunities to play top players.  

i would rather had an improved 2012 system, with a first normal/classic regular phasis, then a second one with players of the same levels, and then final phasis (why not with the progressive entrance of top players in the bracket).

i guess after the cdm, either the SB appears to be better than i expected => i will make my mea culpa and admit my mistaken mind about it ; or the SB will leads to a crappy cdm and i ll ask to people who didn't listen to our warnings to apology and retire from smk communauty forever (no, it is not disproportionned at all   )
i am not ok with the "we ll test in 2014 then we ll see for 2015" because cdm is only once per year, so it would be a real pity for me if cdm 2014 is totally bullshit because of the SB (but i sincerely hope that it will not be as bad as i fear)  

clbrun1 wrote on 07/01/14 at 02:58:10:

Haha, you've already told the same on the French MB. That might surpris you but I'd prefer to see the CDM improved in the end thanks to this system than a complete anarchy just to make me feel "you see, I was right".

But actually, I don't find this system is bad, I even find it excellent, but it's just way too complicated and I'm afraid it'll be hard to explain to 90% of the players, even among the regular attendees.

clbrun1 wrote on 07/01/14 at 13:16:25:

We are two

I'm very confident that people will loved this new system very flexible : you can choose the duration, no limit in terms of players, you can choose also now if you want more or less various matches (Light or High Shakedown), and so on

But of course like you my dear Cedric I will do my mea culpa if it's a mess! ... but the question is then : is there a better system with a great affluence?

Sami de la SMK wrote on 07/01/14 at 02:58:25:

Is 40 euros enough?

[quote author=487A76721B0 link=1391005657/150#170 date=1404294957]djo wrote on 07/02/14 at 01:09:58:


+1