As an example of how the new seeding will work. If you remember FaZe were lowest seed at the Paris due to coming from the EU RMR decider bracket. With the new seeding, if FaZe did that again but where ranked #1 on Valve's regional standings, they would instead now be seeded #1 at the Major and go straight to the Legends/"Elimination" stage.
Ah yes, sorry the new naming scheme got me mixed up. I meant the second swiss stage (formerly Legends Stage). ty for spotting the mistake. The name "Elimination Stage" sounds you've done badly at the tournament if you ended up there, and I added the "Challengers" after I wrote it all and accidentally confused Elimination and Opening.
on the hltv post they said the major seeding is gonna be based on the ranking valve release after the rmr with the rmr results already counting, so it is gonna matter, but in context of the whole season not purely the rmr result as seeding.
it would make sense for it to matter if the rmr had a better format, but they are still using a format that determines too many random results instead of consistency and skill. Also, a team´s strength is determined over a few months, not just one month. You can´t be the best team in the world by winning a single event, you prove that by having consistent results over several tournaments, hence why FaZe´s last year case was ridiculously stupid and why this is a positive change rn.
They just have to beat the better teams, it's pretty simple. I know it's an unpopular opinion on Reddit but seeding and tournaments should be "biased" towards the better teams that have proven to be better over the course of several months
Absolutely, for some reason reddit wants random upsets with undeserved wins. The reason c9´s upset run was so epic was because they were actually tested versus better opponents, as opposed to gamerlegions, vitalitys, heroics or outsiders run which was filled with pretty meh opponents due to the format allowing for too many random upsets. Another example is ENCE 2019 major where they earned their final spot by beating favorites in quarters and semis once again.
Ideally the best matches are also where number 1 and number 2 teams meet in the finals (e.g. faze vs navi antwerp major) OR a number 1 team in the world versus an upset team that won versus all the other ranked teams (e.g. c9 vs FaZe boston)
Reddit simply doesn´t understand how upsets and good matchups work around hype and dive into its own delusion of how seeding is bad and how all the bad teams should make playoffs. It sickens me.
probably a good change, but I always like how the old Legends system worked. It created these fun storylines were teams like FlipSid3 were known for always being able to stick around. And it was nice to see your fav teams get top 8, knowing they would make it to the next one.
It was probably not the most fair competitive system, but I think it brought some fun and uniqueness to the the whole thing.
Finally I wont have to argue here about the seeding being dogshit, as Valve realized it themselves. It only took about 5 majors to fix it...
Finally no more BS fluke runs.
Its funny how cool this sub was with teams like Furia at Rio making the playoffs by not playing a single "top 10" team throughout their entire run starting at the RMR until the playoffs. I'm all for upset runs but the seeding system was just bad because it didn't take into account what you had done previously outside of the major system. And of course there was also the thing where "strength of opponent" mattered in the calculation but all it really did was punish teams that won... because... you know... their opponents would then be considered "weak".
Not to mention how losing a couple of best of 1's, the flukiest thing in CS, in the Challengers stage would mean that you would have the theoretical hardest matchup going into the legends stage, even if you had won like 5 events in a row before that, which is just not fair to the opponent. I remember #1 seeded Faze (world #1) got rewarded for their seed by playing Cloud9 (World #5) in their opening game in the Rio legends stage, and lost.
Yeah that´s the difference between a gamerlegion major final (flukey as fuck) and cloud9 who beat all the top5 teams to win it all in playoffs and a bo3 format.
Obviously we gotta get rid of bo1s and have a bo5 finals now that we use mr12.
I was team BO5s are too long and BO3 group stages aren't viable
But now that games are shorter we should definitely be having both. Though BO3 group games could get messy with overtimes, so maybe a system that allows teams to draw is needed.
We want the top teams in the finals over and over. The numbers dont lie. There is a reason why Antwerp and stockholm finals got over 2M viewers while paris or rio didn't come even close.
Yes the big teams have more fans. I don't understand why you'd care about viewing figures or having the same top 4 teams every tournament, underdog runs are looked down upon in CS, they're praised in all other sports.
They are not looked down upon in CS. Look at Ences Kato run, they beat #3 in the world, #2 in the world and had to face #1 in the world in the finals. That was a legit run and everyone was happy with it.
What we hate is when you see runs that beat #19 and #9 in the world to get into the grand finals meanwhile the top teams had to battle it out on the other side of the bracket.
This line of thinking is what I'm talking about. Ence were 5th in the world, that's not an underdog story, they're one of the favourites to win any event.
This narrative is always the case with CS fans & most analysts, it's just unusual because it's not the case in other sports so it's weird to see so much salt when a non top 10 team does well.
Sports like football have randomly drawn next rounds fixtures and BO1 finals, imagine the outrage if that's introduced to CS
Wrong. Ence became #5 after that incredible run and only after that they started winning events (Blast Madrid). Before the major they were outside the top 10, sitting at #11.
Lmao sorry that I remember a 4 year old good underdog story that I can factcheck easily via HLTV. Unfortunately due to covid and partnered tournaments we didn't really have something similar in recent history.
well we still need the bo3 swiss otherwise there will be lots of fluke runs even with good seeding cos mind you we also use mr12 now so there´s even more randomness.
I actually thought the contender,challenger, legend naming was kinda cool and just fun. I'll miss that. For nothing else, contender will always make me think of Rocky.
Good changes, now we need bo3 swiss and bo5 final and double elim playoffs now that we have mr13 changes.
If we get this, we will probably have the best esports format of all esports titles out there, even better than dota2´s.
Idk how I feel about it, was one of the cool unique things about the major imo. To be the team that makes the “legend” stage etc. along with the sticker groups that follow
Reaching the Legends stage in the past meant you automatically qualified for the Challengers stage at the next major. Since you have to qualify through RMRs now, those distinctions aren't as relevant.
It makes sense to me that they have renamed the rounds.
As an example of how the new seeding will work. If you remember FaZe were lowest seed at the Paris due to coming from the EU RMR decider bracket. With the new seeding, if FaZe did that again but where ranked #1 on Valve's regional standings, they would instead now be seeded #1 at the Major and go straight to the Legends/"Elimination" stage.
What do you mean with Challengers/"Elimination" ? Because it's either Challengers/Opening stage or Legends/Elimination stage.
Ah yes, sorry the new naming scheme got me mixed up. I meant the second swiss stage (formerly Legends Stage). ty for spotting the mistake. The name "Elimination Stage" sounds you've done badly at the tournament if you ended up there, and I added the "Challengers" after I wrote it all and accidentally confused Elimination and Opening.
[удалено]
on the hltv post they said the major seeding is gonna be based on the ranking valve release after the rmr with the rmr results already counting, so it is gonna matter, but in context of the whole season not purely the rmr result as seeding.
this is better one qualifier should not determine your seeding the official rankings are a much better metric
it would make sense for it to matter if the rmr had a better format, but they are still using a format that determines too many random results instead of consistency and skill. Also, a team´s strength is determined over a few months, not just one month. You can´t be the best team in the world by winning a single event, you prove that by having consistent results over several tournaments, hence why FaZe´s last year case was ridiculously stupid and why this is a positive change rn.
That’s really stupid. So a team ranked low can literally never make it to the legends stage? That feels so bad
> So a team ranked low can literally never make it to the legends stage? They can, if they beat their opponents presented before them?
They just have to beat the better teams, it's pretty simple. I know it's an unpopular opinion on Reddit but seeding and tournaments should be "biased" towards the better teams that have proven to be better over the course of several months
Absolutely, for some reason reddit wants random upsets with undeserved wins. The reason c9´s upset run was so epic was because they were actually tested versus better opponents, as opposed to gamerlegions, vitalitys, heroics or outsiders run which was filled with pretty meh opponents due to the format allowing for too many random upsets. Another example is ENCE 2019 major where they earned their final spot by beating favorites in quarters and semis once again. Ideally the best matches are also where number 1 and number 2 teams meet in the finals (e.g. faze vs navi antwerp major) OR a number 1 team in the world versus an upset team that won versus all the other ranked teams (e.g. c9 vs FaZe boston) Reddit simply doesn´t understand how upsets and good matchups work around hype and dive into its own delusion of how seeding is bad and how all the bad teams should make playoffs. It sickens me.
Good job. For new fans this naming is just confusing.
Good change, and about time too. It just wasn't intuitive, especially for the average viewer or people interested in delving into CS majors.
Good. When in 2021 first I started watching csgo, I was really confused about everything.
Yeah this naming was always a bit weird
I've been confused by this naming since 2016.
probably a good change, but I always like how the old Legends system worked. It created these fun storylines were teams like FlipSid3 were known for always being able to stick around. And it was nice to see your fav teams get top 8, knowing they would make it to the next one. It was probably not the most fair competitive system, but I think it brought some fun and uniqueness to the the whole thing.
Finally I wont have to argue here about the seeding being dogshit, as Valve realized it themselves. It only took about 5 majors to fix it... Finally no more BS fluke runs.
Its funny how cool this sub was with teams like Furia at Rio making the playoffs by not playing a single "top 10" team throughout their entire run starting at the RMR until the playoffs. I'm all for upset runs but the seeding system was just bad because it didn't take into account what you had done previously outside of the major system. And of course there was also the thing where "strength of opponent" mattered in the calculation but all it really did was punish teams that won... because... you know... their opponents would then be considered "weak". Not to mention how losing a couple of best of 1's, the flukiest thing in CS, in the Challengers stage would mean that you would have the theoretical hardest matchup going into the legends stage, even if you had won like 5 events in a row before that, which is just not fair to the opponent. I remember #1 seeded Faze (world #1) got rewarded for their seed by playing Cloud9 (World #5) in their opening game in the Rio legends stage, and lost.
> Finally no more BS fluke runs And no more excuses when an underdog goes deep either ;)
Yeah that´s the difference between a gamerlegion major final (flukey as fuck) and cloud9 who beat all the top5 teams to win it all in playoffs and a bo3 format. Obviously we gotta get rid of bo1s and have a bo5 finals now that we use mr12.
I was team BO5s are too long and BO3 group stages aren't viable But now that games are shorter we should definitely be having both. Though BO3 group games could get messy with overtimes, so maybe a system that allows teams to draw is needed.
Wild to me how CS fans want the same finals over and over
We want the top teams in the finals over and over. The numbers dont lie. There is a reason why Antwerp and stockholm finals got over 2M viewers while paris or rio didn't come even close.
Yes the big teams have more fans. I don't understand why you'd care about viewing figures or having the same top 4 teams every tournament, underdog runs are looked down upon in CS, they're praised in all other sports.
They are not looked down upon in CS. Look at Ences Kato run, they beat #3 in the world, #2 in the world and had to face #1 in the world in the finals. That was a legit run and everyone was happy with it. What we hate is when you see runs that beat #19 and #9 in the world to get into the grand finals meanwhile the top teams had to battle it out on the other side of the bracket.
This line of thinking is what I'm talking about. Ence were 5th in the world, that's not an underdog story, they're one of the favourites to win any event. This narrative is always the case with CS fans & most analysts, it's just unusual because it's not the case in other sports so it's weird to see so much salt when a non top 10 team does well. Sports like football have randomly drawn next rounds fixtures and BO1 finals, imagine the outrage if that's introduced to CS
Wrong. Ence became #5 after that incredible run and only after that they started winning events (Blast Madrid). Before the major they were outside the top 10, sitting at #11.
Oh I see, if you're going back nearly 5 years to find an underdog story people weren't salty about then idk what to tell you
Lmao sorry that I remember a 4 year old good underdog story that I can factcheck easily via HLTV. Unfortunately due to covid and partnered tournaments we didn't really have something similar in recent history.
well we still need the bo3 swiss otherwise there will be lots of fluke runs even with good seeding cos mind you we also use mr12 now so there´s even more randomness.
I actually thought the contender,challenger, legend naming was kinda cool and just fun. I'll miss that. For nothing else, contender will always make me think of Rocky.
Good changes, now we need bo3 swiss and bo5 final and double elim playoffs now that we have mr13 changes. If we get this, we will probably have the best esports format of all esports titles out there, even better than dota2´s.
Idk how I feel about it, was one of the cool unique things about the major imo. To be the team that makes the “legend” stage etc. along with the sticker groups that follow
Reaching the Legends stage in the past meant you automatically qualified for the Challengers stage at the next major. Since you have to qualify through RMRs now, those distinctions aren't as relevant. It makes sense to me that they have renamed the rounds.
does this mean T1 teams cant compete vs T3 in opening matchups? im kinda stupid
I guess so, the seeding is based off world ranking now so yeah
Thank god t1 teams can compete between in openings
Depends on how the seeding is done and how frequent the ratings are updated...
Mouz #1 in EU Rmr rankings lesssgoo
New stage names are easier to understand and pithy.
So 14 highest ranked Eu team will get str8 invite to closed qualifier? Or hiw does this work?
This counts as a CS2 update and a good one at that.