What kind of ** is this?

[laba-laba]

Imagine FIFA tried this system for world cup.
Here would be your final 8 teams basically

Germany
USA
Ghana
Burkina Faso
Finland
Estonia
Qatar
Namibia

Yeah, that makes sense.

That's comparing apples and oranges. What we have is a league table, not a knock-out tournament.
There is no final 8 in a league table, preliminaries only sorts the guilds into proper leagues.
Each guild in same league would be more or less balance towards each other, thats the goal, not to pick the best 8.

edit: For those who has no clue about tournament types, please read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_t...ranking_system

[KrazycatSS2]

Wait so you want the top guild to crush the bottom guild? If your guild is second strongest, then chances are it would rank pretty highly(There are 4 prelims after all). Also, strength =/= rank, as you do need a strategy to overpower your opponent, and your members to actually participate. OP is full of butthurt and doesn't know this.

[daunapu]

would be perfectly fine if all matching in preliminaries were random, then you can earn your spot, now i dont think so

[Arlad]

my preferred matching is random 1st match, but with extended prelims if the participants reached certain capacity. e/g: 4 prelims with 32 participants, 5 prelims with 64 participants, 6 with 128, and so on. make it twice a week if it took too long.

but hey, whatever we suggest wont matter anyway.

[CrizzyB]

remember what i said about limiting the participants? i was thinking if it's limited to 64, only 4 teams with "lucky spots", and #1 deserved the spot anyways, leaving 3 "lucky teams" in #17, #33 and #49 and #17 kinda still acceptable.
#16 would never lost every matches, remember the 2nd and subsequent matching based on victory and points earned before the BR.

now back to my question, what kind of matching will be right for this event? should we go full random instead, leaving things to the hands of fortune?

Yes but assuming this works purely along the points/wins, and the bigger teams can put up more points......#16 would lose to 15 first week. would lose to #14 second week, would lose to #12 third week, would lose to #8 fourth week.
Always playing similar people with 0 victories but high point totals and BR.

There is always a slight bit of flex coming in because of points acquired if you pull off a good performance.

Honestly, it's hard to make a 4 week preliminary with 135 (or 264 in FB Wartune case) teams.

Teams should have been split up into smaler groupings before it started so the weakest guilds can't luck out and make finals over people 4 times stronger.

Subsequently, making pools where teams need to break out of pool would be a better idea. If you perform well you can pull an upset, but you won't face nightmare matching where the strongest are always fighting the strongest and the weakest fighting the weakest, with 1 loss knocking you out of a shot from the finals.

We won't make finals because we don't deserve to, and neither does a rank around #113. The finals should work out to #1-#8 teams on the top, with the exception of any upsets that somebody pulled on them.

[Arlad]

Honestly, it's hard to make a 4 week preliminary with 135 (or 264 in FB Wartune case) teams.

that's why i said about limiting the participants or extending the prelims matches according the numbers in my previous posts.

[CrizzyB]

That's comparing apples and oranges. What we have is a league table, not a knock-out tournament.
There is no final 8 in a league table, preliminaries only sorts the guilds into proper leagues.
Each guild in same league would be more or less balance towards each other, thats the goal, not to pick the best 8.

edit: For those who has no clue about tournament types, please read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_t...ranking_system

It is effectively a knock out tournament to make the final 8. As there will be many undefeated teams, team #2 losing in week 1 means they can never go undefeated and will never see top 8.
That was the final right there, the very first week. #1 will beat #3 this week (barring an upset). Sorry #3...you can't go undefeated now, you're not in the top 8 (well, you are in reality, but too bad for you).

Thanks for the link, but I've been in many tournaments and many leagues, so i already know the formats. This is not a proper format.
Even looking in your examples, you must consider that those leagues contain a limited number of teams, not 135, not 264, and they also play 10, 20, 30 match league seasons in order to average out the wins and losses. Trying to filter hundreds of competitors in a 4 week season is ridiculous by pitting the best vs the best every week and then going by wins.

How about this for an idea....make an extra week 1 where you fight some kind of ward tower or cpu team. Based on this performance/points, you are placed in a grouping where a proper league format can then be used. Like a qualifier to determine your real strength and eliminate the pure luck teams from the very bottom of the rankings.

[CrizzyB]

that's why i said about limiting the participants or extending the prelims matches according the numbers in my previous posts.

Yes, totally agree, this would be a big part of any solution.

They tried to cram an open entry tournament into a 4-week preliminary which is just ridiculous. There is no way to gauge real strenght in that time and with this current format.