|
Post by fabbi on Oct 27, 2014 20:08:57 GMT 1
Stupid question. Don't you think WVSC becomes a bit too much like WWWSC? I know it's meant to be a "copy" of it and Florian doesn't care about it but I've also taken part in the discussion NVSC - IMF. it's not our intention to copy at all. We found it's not fair just for the host to be prequalified, and that the 2nd & 3rd get a prize too. We are getting inspiration from WWWSC but not trying to copy them.. It was the first thing that came to my mind. But all in all it's nice to hear that.
|
|
Dylan
Moderator
he/him
12,344
29,252
Free Palestine🖤❤️🤍💚
|
Post by Dylan on Aug 26, 2015 15:00:50 GMT 1
Player limit will likely be 50 now, and there are a few reasons: -Well, it's likely that #18 will exceed 43, our previous "limit". -Having 50, semi finals would mean: 3 AQ's, leaving that with 47 semi finalists. It'd probably be 23 & 24 in SF's, which makes it difficult to qualify - as 11 only make it in the end. And also that'd mean a high number of NQ's. It's impossible to return the 3 semi final system as it's only two hosts, which means one wildcard couldn't be chosen - it could be done by popular opinion (the players voting for it) but then again, we've been using wildcards since #3, so I don't want this.. 50+ was achieved only once in #5, when we had 56, and it was quite difficult back then to handle it anyway. 50 was achieved in #4 but it was 3 semi finals and just the host qualified. I don't think we'll reach 50 or more just yet ( ) but it's good to consider the amount of participants
|
|
|
Post by fabbi on Aug 27, 2015 16:25:54 GMT 1
It's impossible to return the 3 semi final system as it's only two hosts, which means one wildcard couldn't be chosen - it could be done by popular opinion (the players voting for it) but then again, we've been using wildcards since #3, so I don't want this.. How do you want to introduce it with by "popular opinion"? A suggestion instead: You could do it also together as hosts = both of you decide 1.5 wildcards.
|
|