I'm not even sure that Faria is responsable for the EMEA failure, complain at him about format, not about technics rules by EMEA team IMO

They are only one possibility, as explicated in the video (2 team in2-1 are first and bottom two are 1-2)

the question still stand :c

If KC 2-1 and TL have a better rounddiff than KC, what would be the ranking, since the rulebook dont mention it :]]]]]]
This is the rulebook APAC

Case 1 map differential is the key :

• KC and TL are booth +3, so FUT is last
• Tiebreaker reset with KC and TL, and KC > TL
• Conclusion KC > TL > FUT

Case 2 we sort out the first team in the tiebreaker first :

• KC and TL are booth +3, but the goal of tiebreaker is only to sort out only the first, so while the first isnt out, FUT is still in the tiebreaker (The same way Talon did, even if the case of Talon, RRQ was already out before we chack to the next step)
• TL have a better round diff, TL is out of the tiebreaker in 1st, remaining KC and FUT
• FUT > KC
• Conclusion TL > FUT > KC

What do you mean ?

You have the zsubtitile if you want ^^

The number doesnt count, you should give the correct cumulated time, I go for 42 minutes

"They should end first cause they wont get any trophy anyway" ftfw

If you complain about a region being too weak dont give them an handicap, you want to give them an advantage so when they fail you can shit on them

This year, beside Oceania, anyone can win it,

• VLT : got decent player
• Riddle : They where strong last year and probably still strong
• FearX : Ex Nongshim player that push the current Nongshim player to game 5 in final
• DK : Decent to mid team since Season 1 (Best Chokers in the list)
• Long and Friend : JFT core, Meh
• Full Sense : Always close
• Any other SEA team : Good

But to be fair I think the most realistic possibility is that Boom and NS manage to maintain into tier 1

Won 2 masters, thats already a lot, probably the most competitive region today

I wont leave my room for that è.é

That was last year, and it would have been so mush better (And this game would be even more important

Congrats guys, you probably managed to beat the French derby in terms of audience

Winner have a chance to be in the group of Koi, this matter a lot

If the venue is my room i'll consider it

Paris, not in Berlin, not a lot of techpause in KCX and the techpause in VCL was because of a fight !

Sure ! I'm the 2nd Valorant Vtuber ^-^

Yeah the loser of the final go to asc

True but they are no other choice

My bro... I literally propose a change in the rule that would keep the ranking the same (Plus I rather see TLN in the top 3 than another KR team)

Hi vlr, I wanted to make a small video to resume the TS drama

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9zTsfmGoNI

tldw ;

• Yes Riot did a mistake here
• If we follow only what the rulebook says without using "current usage" as an argument, NS isnt 4th, NS isnt 2nd, NS is 3rd
• The problem is not "Riot doesnt follow their rulebook and changed the rule because they hate Nongshim" no, the problem is "The Rulebook, doesn't follow what Riot wants because the rulebook is poorly worded"
• The rule where the team that is 1st in the tiebreaker should leave the tiebreaker before the last, should appear somewhere in the rulebook, and it seems it's not the case (I defy you to show me it)
• It would have been easier to make head to head for everyone, even for 4 team, it would have change noting to the ranking and avoid every drama
• It's another reason why I hate head to head, nobody is able to do the math, and it's really hard for the people that make their idea to turn them into word in a rulebook

They are nothing in the rulebook that says RRQ secure the first place before TLN secure the 4th place, with how it's worded, RRQ secure the 1st place in the same time than TLN secure the 4th place.

But I agree making RRQ 1st before TLN 4th is probably what Riot want to do since day 1, but thats not what is written in the rulebook x)

All of this team advances

"NS want talon out of the tiebreak in the map diff stage, no rule says that"
The rule (1) specify that we use "mapdiff", and nothing is precise about the best in mapdiff being out of the tiebreaker before the last in mapdiff, so if it's not written, both team should be out of the tiebreaker in the same time, so RRQ should be out of the tiebreaker in the same time of TLN, meaning if we follow the rulebook, TLN are out in the same time as RRQ meaning they are 4th

"Tiebreakers are there to decide who WINS right"
They are nothing that say that is the rulebook, it's a definition some people use, but it's not even the etymological meaning of the word (Tiebreaker are just... Breaking the tie, it can either say who win, but also say who loose). If Riot want to put the best team out of the tiebreaker before the worst team, then it SHOULD be written on the rulebook, and we just cant rely on "Yeah usually we do like that"

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/529726174549770240/1364245411870543962/GpI305Ma4AAXyKv.jpg?ex=6808f80c&is=6807a68c&hm=30164ccee805ec2b90c5007cd8f502396680abb78f9c96cd77827e3b1a3dc171&

But at least we are agree on the conclusion "Riot didnt change the rule, in their mind the rule where always like that and the rulebook is poorly worded"
tldr ; The problem is "Riot doesnt follow their rulebook", the problem is "The Rulebook, doesn't follow what Riot wants"

The problem isnt a lack of transparency, the problem, is that, if you stick to what the rulebook says, they are 3rd, not 2nd, they also did the mistake while doing math, forgetting the (a)

The only way you can defend what the rulebook say is by saying "Sure it's not written in the rulebook, but usually it works like that", they are nothing in the rulebook that says in the mapdiff, the best team is out of the tiebreaker before the last in the mapdiff

I think the problem isnt that they dont follow the rulebook. I think the problem if they have a precise idea, tried to write it in the rulebook, but failed at transcribe it in the rulebook, so when we follow what the rulebook says, we arrive at a different conclusion of what Riot wanted to do in the first place (And Riot stick to what they wanted to do in the first place), this is a really weird situation, because Riot is the guilty here, and the only way to defend them is to say "Sure it's not written in the rulebook, but usually it works like that", wish sint a good take

NS issue could also have been solved if the rulebook was better worded T.T

"current seeds are accurate representations of the skill displayed"
True, but current seed isn't an accurate representation of what the rulebook says

1/ "Ranking from highest to lowest is a standard method."
In some rulebook it is, and in some rulebook it's not, if it's the case in the rulebook, it needs to be written, you cant say "I saw other tournament where it's working like that, so it has to work like that too". I think the problem isnt that Riot can't read their rulebook, I think Riot didn't manage to do a rulebook that match with the idea they add :/
3/ Your point 3 is true, only with your interpretation of the rulebook, that is based on not what the rulebook says, but on what other rulebook you have read in the past says (Your argument "It's a standard method"), if we take exactly what the rulebook says and not try to use another rulebook to justify riot decision, RRQ and TLN are out of the rulebook in the exact same time.

Aaaaand thats exactly the reason why Head to Head sucks

Thats not the rule https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GpI305Ma4AAXyKv?format=jpg&name=medium
But it would have been better than what we have

Yup that's why I'm saying that it would be better if that was the rule because it would have been easier for riot to write it (Because the problem here, is that Riot wasnt able to explain how the rule work in the rulebook, and the way it's wrote, give a different outcome)

1/ Wrong, it's not stated "Best map differential", but "map differential" https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GpI305Ma4AAXyKv?format=jpg&name=medium, they are no reason to consider best is before last if we take the rulebook as it is.
2/ Not specified in the rulebook, and I challenge you again to find something that state it

5/ I take in account that rule
(1) mapdiff : RRQ > NS/T1 > TLN
(a) return to head to head : Tie is reduced to 2 teams, so we use the above tiebreaker of the 3 way tie, wish is head to head where T1 > NS

At least that would have been easier to be framed in the rulebook

HTH is the worst tiebreaker ever.

• In RR every game grant you one point, beating your direct opponent grant you 1 point and deny 1 point, wish mean the value for this game is 2, you dont need to make this game value 2,5 when every other value 1
• Riot isnt able to do a rulebook, that doesnt have mistake, they didnt specify that the 1st team in mapdiff should be out of the tiebreaker before the last and not in same time.
• Nobody is unable to do the match around it (Based on how the rulebook is written, NS isnt even 2nd but 3rd (1) mapdiff : RRQ > NS/T1 > TLN --> (a) return to head to head : Tie is reduced to 2 teams, so we use the above tiebreaker of the 3 way tie, wish is head to head where T1 > NS)

PS : And I would rather have Talon in winner bracket than another KR team (wish isnt sane for the game)

Why are you acting has if Riot have never failed to apply their own rulebook ?

Also, you can have a clear idea on how the tiebreaker are done, but being unable to write it on a rulebook.

It's really possible Riot always wanted the rule to be as you say, but that they where unable to write it correctly.

I challenge you to show me anything in the rulebook that says RRQ should be out before TLN. They are out of the tiebreaker by the same rule, so they are out in the same time

"Once a team wins a tiebreaker, the rules are reset for every other team." "The tiebreakers are to determine a winner, not a loser"
Not specified in the rulebook, if it's not written in the rulebook then they are no reason to remove the 1st team in the tiebreaker before the last, and both should be out in the same time. They are some rulebook, that take out the 2 team in the same time, and how it's framed it's how it should have been. You cant just say "it's not written in the rulebook, but it's the usual thing" (Especially when it's not)

NS said riot mistake their own tiebreaker rule and should be 2ndinstead of 4th https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GpI305Ma4AAXyKv?format=jpg&name=medium

Both are wrong and they should be 3rd
(1) mapdiff : RRQ > NS/T1 > TLN
(a) return to head to head : Tie is reduced to 2 teams, so we use the above tiebreaker of the 3 way tie, wish is head to head where T1 > NS

Yup, they are nothing in the rulebook that say we take out the 1st team out of the tiebreaker, before the last, since the same rule sort out in the same time they are out in the same time.

They could have make a rule where the 1st team is out of the tiebreaker before the last, but since it wasn't specified in the rulebook then we shouldn't do that

(1) mapdiff : RRQ > NS/T1 > TLN
(a) return to head to head : Tie is reduced to 2 teams, so we use the above tiebreaker of the 3 way tie, wish is head to head where T1 > NS

RRQ > T1 > NS > TLN

Another reason why Head to head rule suck :3, nobody is able to make the current math.

• NS isn't 2nd, NS isn't 4th, NS is 3rd
  (1) mapdiff : RRQ > NS/T1 > TLN
  (a) return to head to head : Tie is reduced to 2 teams, so we use the above tiebreaker of the 3 way tie, wish is head to head where T1 > NS

As a french I agree

bad link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pvdfuTS1A0

They got only bad 1 BR team in their group, no, no falt is on Lev betraying their region

"used to be" isnt compatible with "of all time" to be fair D:

Wait... :3 a French player ! Amazing <333

Try femboys

NV, EXL, I also trust TSM that might be the most historical team in NA (not in val, but in LoL)

Yeah, English and french have strong ties, we are the middleman between Latin language and english

(My english is shit, my spanish is worse, but I like try)