Teams per region

View:
Threaded
Linear
Threaded
#1
Keustion
0
Frags
+

Is 12 good or should there be more or less

#2
Nollihd07
0
Frags
+

Prolly like 15

#3
DrudaL
0
Frags
+

16
6 patnership + 10 open qual

#4
Ronyko23
6
Frags
+

nope dogshit bottom barrel povery orgs gonna leave scene with no success.

We need stable rich t1 orgs for players job security.

#21
funnybunnyalt
1
Frags
+

rich - . . .

#7
sevenluvr
0
Frags
+

I fw this if it was the other way around

Having some competent challengers teams would balance out some of the shit teams we have in Americas for example.

Imagine we get something like ENVY vs NRG, EXL vs KRU...

And remove the age restriction rule

#8
TDR3000
0
Frags
+

for pacific
6 partnership (PRX, GENG, T1, DRX, RRQ, TALON)
10 open quals

#5
microbemay
0
Frags
+

staying at 12 per league is honestly great just audit the bottom two orgs per region biannually.

#6
TDR3000
0
Frags
+

14/16 should be ok for pacific (adds 1ID/PH, 1TH, 1VN, 1OCE)

#9
Aayan
0
Frags
+

I think 12 is fine for now but I’d like to see an 8-4 split in partnered to ascension teams

Plus they should make an exception to the 18+ rule for players who’ve qualified through ascension

#23
nzure16
0
Frags
+

Pretty sure the 18+ rule is there for legal reasons, and Ascension won't change that

#24
Aayan
0
Frags
+

Don't see why not, at least in EU or NA where other esports with more working hours do/have done it.

At most I can see it being more paperwork, which is why I'm suggesting it be limited only to players who've qualified through ascension. (This is one of the biggest problems Ascension has anyway, so it'd help alleviate that too)

#27
nzure16
0
Frags
+

I think it's the opposite. I would say that the amount of paperwork per player is not alot, but the base work (writing new contracts, checking with lawyers, etc) is, and thats why they don't wanna do it :(

#10
I_LOVE_LESS
0
Frags
+

there should be Less

#12
Re2
2
Frags
+

there should be Felipe "Less" Basso?

correct

#15
I_LOVE_LESS
0
Frags
+

yes.

#11
Astar
0
Frags
+

personally i think 12 is too little for EMEA and pacific. this 2 region is huge. eastern europe, mena and OCE are untouched and lowkey deserve some chance

#13
1One1
0
Frags
+

12 is fine
8 from partnership
4 from Ascension

#14
Luceus
0
Frags
+

either what 1One1 says
or 10 partner ship and 6 ascension

#16
Jivko
-1
Frags
+

20 teams (16 partnered +4 from Ascension), scrap VCL, make Premier Tier 2

#17
Jivko
0
Frags
+

*Riot should lower the age requirement to 16 or 17 in order for that to work tho

#19
Warlordwibz
0
Frags
+

so... 1 masters event + 1 champs event in 1 year then with that kind of schedule. Community won't stand bo1 to accommodate that many schedule bo3 matches weekly

#26
Jivko
0
Frags
+

uh.. no? I'd completely scrap IL's and just do qualification brackets with 3 Masters + Champs

#18
Warlordwibz
0
Frags
+

12 teams: 9 partnership + 3 Ascension.

3 ascension because it makes Lower Rounds 3 in playoffs more meaningful. Grand Final and Lower grand final already makes the 3 teams meaningless (since they pre much confirm), so lower round 3 will determine the final team making it to partnership.

As for partnership, 2 lowest performing GUARANTEE elimination back to Challengers, but the best performing ascended teams can re-enter ascension should they meet the playoff criteria AND based on champs pts.

#20
MrBulbe
0
Frags
+

12 is too much, we already have useless teams in each league. 8 would be perfect

#22
StalwartTiger_35
0
Frags
+

if they make T2 much much better, I can see it

#25
Re2
0
Frags
+

10 is fine

8 + 2

  • Preview
  • Edit
› check that that your post follows the forum rules and guidelines or get formatting help
Sign up or log in to post a comment