Dance Dance Revolution Arcades website. Seattle, Tacoma, Portland DDR and Arcade Games forum.Get New Topic Alerts
PNWBemani RSS PNWBemani on Twitter
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
January 01, 2011, 01:14:24 PM - ORIGINAL POST -

Hey guys, I think it's time we had another tournament. Maybe we could even have a DDR and ITG tournament? I'll figure something out. Anyway, before I go calling up Bill or anything, I'd like to check to see that there's enough interest to fill up a 16 player bracket.

I'm busy for most of February flying out to the east coast for music school auditions, but I'll be up for hosting on sometime in the period of February to April. If people could post what month they'd prefer to have the tournament in (keep in mind there will also likely be a SakuraCon tournament this year as well), as well as a preferred format, that would be cool.
Read January 01, 2011, 02:22:33 PM #1

Any month works for me in terms of weekends.
I might be busy some, but I know I could make time for this.

Standard format is always fun.
Not sure if you've heard of the Iron-Man format, but it's really fun in that it tests you on every aspect of the game.
Read January 01, 2011, 08:22:24 PM #2

I'm interested and would participate in an iron man style tournament (similar to what they recently did at the PiU tournament in Portland). However, I probably won't bother going to a standard format tournament. Anytime is fine for me. Weekends are preferable.
Read January 02, 2011, 01:56:04 PM #3

     I'm always interested in ITG tournaments, however very few people around here play doubles (or no bar) and so I highly doubt this will be received as well as a standard tournament. I can't even play above about a 10 on doubles because I can't use the bar and reach the corners of the pad due to being so short, and can't even execute certain types of long-reaching steps for the same reason. I believe the only two people in the entire area who could hope to do well at bar singles, no bar singles, and doubles are Keby and James, because theyre good at singles and tall enough to play and actually do play doubles proficiently.
     I do however know that there are a whole lot of new faces at Acme that don't really post up here that have come to play regularly and have gotten quite good that I'm sure would love to see a standard tournament run. Considering we haven't had an ITG tournament that wasn't crashed by world class players in all the time Ive played in the area (I got knocked out of the last/only two by KevBo and Flaire (or however you spell it)), I think we should just endeavor to just have a normal one in the first place. If you want to do an Iron Man tournament, do it on a DDR Extreme machine not ITG in my opinion.
     Anyway if its any kind of standard ITG tournament I'm in. If it includes doubles, I'm out. I sincerely hope the former works out since we're long long overdue for a good real actually semi-competitive local tournament.
Read January 02, 2011, 02:05:21 PM #4

I actually agree with allan on this. I went to acme last night and ended up seeing quite a few new faces I've never seen before (granted I've been away from ACME for a long time) which is a very nice thing to see. More players = better community.
Iron Man is a fantastic format, but I think we should wait maybe a little while to give more players a fighting chance. Maybe at Sakura-con depending on the time they allow us to hold a tourny there.

« Last Edit: January 02, 2011, 02:25:59 PM by Keby »
Read January 02, 2011, 02:49:55 PM #5

I would love for there to be an ITG tournament. My suggestion though (I kind of hate to say it, but it's true) is to maybe have two divisions, one for expert and one for pretty good, but not fantastic, players like me. I can pass some 12's and I can 99 lower songs, so I could compete, but I'd have more fun if I were playing against other people more in my skill range. Say, have half in one division with it capped at 11's maybe and then have the other guys doing the crazy stuff. I think we'd have more close matches that way and everyone would have more fun. I've seen plenty of people that can get great scores on 9's and 10's (better than mine : ) ) but who can't pass 12's or just don't have the accuracy to seriously compete at that difficulty.
Perhaps to determine where people should go we should qualify with more than one song for each person?
I'd still compete in a standard tournament with everybody in it though : ) Even if I don't stand a chance at winning the thing I might win a couple songs and I'd still have a good time.
Read January 02, 2011, 03:26:51 PM #6

     Hollie and I were throwing some ideas around and we agreed pretty well that splitting up the difficulties on a standard tournament would draw a whole lot of interest and could make everyone happy. Our suggestion, and feel free to build off this or whatever, was to have everyone seed on 2-3 songs and add the scores (so we get a more accurate seeding, and even this is very optional), have the top 4-6 or so players in the "Expert" division and do tennis style round robin amongst the best players, and then the rest have the "Standard" division and set a difficulty cap of 11 or maybe 12 in the finals or semifinals for that and run Double Elimination. Maybe have the winner also compete in the Expert division or something.
     Essentially what Hollie was arguing is that there are a few of us who are really good by comparison (Tuan, Keby, Rudo, James etc) who are very close and would like a serious competition with more than just single or double elim, and then a whole bunch of players who are really good at 9s/10s area but don't really play anything above 11s or maybe 12s (or not that often or whatever), such as Hollie, Tony, Laura, Suko, Zach, etc and a large number of the players who currently play at Acme semi-regularly (I can think of at least 10 people in this range who play at Acme besides the aforementioned players). These mid-range players tend to be intimidated by the few of us who arrow stomp 14s all night and are thus less inclined to come, but we would probably have a very good turnout if they knew that we 100-mongerers are just duking it out with each other and they could have a much closer, more interesting tournament with others of comparable skill level.
     So essentially my thought was something like 20 people show up, top 5 are in the expert tournament plus whoever wins the standard tournament. Lower 15 seeds do double elim, then the remaining 6 players do tennis style round robin, either the same or a different day. Again this is just preliminary thought but what do you guys think?
Read January 02, 2011, 04:24:11 PM #7

I really like the idea of seeding into the two divisions rather than forcing players to choose to enter one or the other.  This eliminates the unfortunate scenario where somebody who could compete in the top six enters the standard division tournament instead just to guarantee victory; let the organizers decide where players belong! I'm also a big fan of round robin for groups of 6 and under, so I think this works great for the experts. Smiley

I would totally enter an ITG tournament that was capped at 11s, provided it was at least a month and a half out.  I can't start practicing until about two weeks from now, thanks to my surgery, and I'd like to not *completely* embarrass myself. Grin
Read January 02, 2011, 04:40:28 PM #8

Ooo I'm liking the format we're coming up with here.
Yeah I remember this is how my friends spork ran tourny's back in colorado. there was Upper heavy, heavy, and standard divisions.

In terms of how the divisions should go.
For the expert players I would still like it so you can choose hard songs rather than forcing expert songs only.
*Changes* Hard chart represent!!!
Read January 02, 2011, 09:46:08 PM #9

ill be there
More players = better community.
, kyradnaidns coming
Read January 03, 2011, 01:23:08 PM #10

I really support the idea of a tournament! Every friend of mine asks me when the next tournament is, and before this idea was thought up i assumed one would happen in early 2011! As long as we get a date set up a good deal in advance (at least 2 weeks prior) so i can get work off that day. Speaking only for myself, Mid-march onward is quite free since I'll be finished with winter quarter and on spring break. Regardless, anytime between february-april is perfectly okay with me.

I agree with my friend Allan and Laura here, the division will make it a proper format. As long as it is capped at 11&12 i think everyone should be happy.

We've spoken about the range of players that are upper (can do everything even 12s-14s with finesse and upper 90s score) as well as those who make constellations appear on 8s-10s but do not often play 11s and 12s.

But there are also a few of us (Dr. Z, I, and notably a few others) that can definitely hold their own on 9s-10s (maybe not always constellations guaranteed on every one, but very solidly with a deal of star scores), but also can also do nicely on 11s, 12s, and pass 13s. A cap at 9/10 would harm the competitive chance for this sector of players, but a cap of 11/12 is perfect to give all players in the "pretty good" division tournament a good competitive chance with one another, regardless of their strengths. I hope i wasn't too confusing on what i was speaking of just now.

Ideas I support:
-Round robin for upper division
-double elim for other division
-at least 2 song qualifier for seeding
-11&12 difficulty cap for double elim tourney
-integration of other division winner to join upper

« Last Edit: January 03, 2011, 01:24:52 PM by neempoppa »
Read January 03, 2011, 09:15:34 PM #11

     I like the positive response here Smiley I think 12 is a reasonable difficulty cap for finals and semi-finals of the standard division. I'm sure some will argue 11s, but we have a reasonable number of people in the standard bracket who can pass 12s so even though there's a decent chance no one will even pick one, I would think this should at least be allowed for the end matches. I don't think anyone from the expert bracket would sandbag into the standard, so I don't think that should be an issue.
     Keby's suggestion to throw in Hard charts seems very appropriate for the standard division, however I don't think this is really necessary for the Expert people. We all know roughly the skill level that's in the Expert division and any Hard chart is just going to be two people stomping the holy God out of the pad vying for the higher high-99 and that's no fun. If the song doesn't have an Expert chart it's fine of course, but I'd say keep it at Expert for the Expert division.
     I think a two-song seed is a good idea; Hollie and I were throwing ideas around and it seems like a good idea to seed using one 9 and one 10, one of which from ITG 1/2 and one from 3/Rebirth, selected out of a preselected list of songs determined by someone who isn't entering and having the list of possible seeds posted before the tournament, then selecting the actual songs on the day of. So like the last ITG tourney at Acme had four possible 9s that we knew about ahead of time and one was picked for the seed on the day of the tournament. This would be the same, something like two possible 9s and two 10s from each of ITG 1/2 and 3/Rebirth posted ahead of time. And yes, we should have at least a month's notice to get everyone practiced up!
     Anyway just a few thoughts Smiley Keep the discussion rollin...
Read January 03, 2011, 10:55:54 PM #12

I agree with that. Leaving 11's to only the semi-final/final rounds would thwart a good deal of players in the standard category  Sad, most of us which can do nicely on 11's. Not to mention there's a good deal of us in the standard division that would really like to play 11's on any round. I like 12's, but wouldn't mind if those were only left for semi's and finals, whether they end up getting picked or not.

As long as it's not capped lower than 11's for all rounds, and 12's for final rounds. count me in this tourney for sure friends. Cheesy

As for incorporating hard charts, it wouldn't be too much of an issue given that the hard chart is reasonable (e.g. Energizer hard 10). I don't know how everyone (even in standard division) would feel if someone whips out Wham Bam Boogie or Birdie on a "hard" chart. Would the hard charts be incorporated into the seed song list? would there be any such minimum on a hard chart?

I also thought it would be neat if we kept a detailed bracket (after the tournament) of the matchups and who advanced in each round (pretty much a bracket with seed number, name, and possibly small picture). It would be pretty cool to look back on that or for people who can't stay the whole time to check the results.
Read January 04, 2011, 12:56:15 AM #13

On the incorporation of hard charts.
I believe songs without expert charts should be allowed in the tournament, but not in seeding.
That and we should have a constant bottom cap. So say nothing below a 7 for standard players.
Should that apply to the expert bracket as well?

Good discussion guys Cheesy
Best we've had in awhile
Read January 04, 2011, 09:33:32 AM #14

     My thoughts on Hard charts: no hard charts in the list of possible seeds, and no charts below 7s in either tournament, no hard charts in the Expert tournament except those without Expert charts, and realistically I hope the expert tournament has better songs played than these anyway.
     As far as picking Wam Bam Boogie or Birdie on Hard for the standard bracket, I would say most hard charts are easy enough sight reads if you don't know the chart, and someone who picks a hard chart is probably banking on their timing to give them the edge, which seems fine to me. I know if someone picked a Hard chart on me, even if I hadn't seen it before, it would be a very risky move for them because I'm gonna get within about 5 excellents even on a sight read and even the best players won't have the consistency to really get much closer to a 100 than my sight read, even if theyve practiced it plenty. I mean someone could pick it figuring they have at best a 60 or 70% chance to outscore me on it, but you should really be picking songs youre close to 100% sure you can outscore them at. I certainly will be. Better practice up your crossovers and teals Wink
     If you're worried about a Hard chart knocking you out of the tournament I'd say practice up your timing. If you're thinking of using a Hard chart in the tournament, I'd say be really sure who you're going up against has clearly worse timing than you, and then reconsider playing an expert 9 that you've practiced where your advantage in timing will cause a larger margin of score anyway.
Read January 04, 2011, 11:29:20 AM #15

I would argue that since the point is to make the standard division the most accessible it can be to the greatest number of players, one OR the other of the following would be the best choice:

-Any chart of any difficulty, say, 6 and above, playable at any stage in the tournament AND several rounds capped at 12s OR

-7 and up at any difficulty until semifinals at which point it's expert only, but it's capped at 11s.

The reason I say this is that there are a lot of standard-level players who bank on PA the same way some of the other players bank on stamina. There are many players who can pass 12s, and many others who can't but know that they can win on Hip Hop Jam on hard. I just feel like if the point is to draw more players, playing to the strengths of everyone is a better choice.

I'd enter a standard division more or less regardless of rules, and I'm not going to get all upset if people don't agree with me, but as a standard level player I do sort of feel like 12s are overkill unless there's something to compensate like opening up the range of permissible songs on the other end.
Read January 04, 2011, 12:39:52 PM #16

I'd be happy playing a 12 and I wouldn't mind playing a 6. I would say though that the later rounds should be above 6 and maybe 12s shouldn't be included at the beginning.
Read January 04, 2011, 02:12:16 PM #17

I think that's an excellent compromise. Smiley Maybe we could even do a cap that shifts with the rounds - 6-10, then 7-11, then 8-12 for semifinals/9-12 for the finals? 

The main issue is just to make sure that the standard division appeals to the players who would enter it. It seems like we have two contingents of "second tier" players: those who focus on stamina over timing and can pass 12s/13s but not with the same scores as the pros, or those who can time in line with the pros but can't pass higher level songs. Since they're both entering the same tournament, skewing the rules one way or the other is important to avoid (unless we want to try and separate these players out even more and have three tournaments, but that'd be a nightmare to organize.)
Read January 04, 2011, 04:56:38 PM #18

I'm certainly game for attending the next tourny if I can. My own availability would be Friday evening or anytime on Saturday most weeks.
Not at all familiar with the said Iron Man format or what "teals" are, but if you do incorporate this division of a standard sub-tournament, I might be able to drag a couple more friends to enter along with me. A shifting cap with 10s being the max to begin with sounds fair :]

Don't know if I'm all that keen on having our photos in the seeding bracket, Nimm. Perhaps for the winners & around the top, but I don't think the ones out in the first round would necessarily like a picture of themselves all obvious in the losers division.
I'm all about encouraging a competitive yet comfortable environment that most will want to experience more than once.
Read January 04, 2011, 07:48:47 PM #19

I'll be blunt. If the tournament is going to have 12 step songs, even if only for the last few rounds, then I won't bother entering. Go ahead and judge me as you will, but I know for a FACT that if anything above 10s will be played, then I will lose. No doubt about it.

I don't see the purpose of getting all the way to a final round just to know that I'm going to lose because there's no way I can beat any one else in the final rounds on those kinds of songs.

People seemed to enjoy the DDR US Championship qualifiers at Narrows and Evergreen Lanes. Those didn't really need any intense songs either. If the community wants a serious tournament, than I say do it. But from my point of view, you'll attract more newbies if you keep things a lot less hardcore.

« Last Edit: January 04, 2011, 07:51:41 PM by Suko »
Read January 05, 2011, 01:32:42 AM #20

I agree with you Kevin and Gerrak about the incorporation of the hard charts (where no expert chart exists) should be allowed, just not in seeding. That being said, I have no worries about a hard chart knocking me off a tournament, as a large majority of those charts will make it a game of timing, which I'd be happy to take part in if fate has it in store.  Wink It makes good sense. I think keby's idea of a minimum cap also helps distinguish the hard selections (so a hard chart with a 4 or 5 difficulty isn't picked) in the same fashion we set maximum caps also (so a 13 or something isnt picked).

I'm comfortable with anything 6-12, and I feel that either having a universal cap (for all rounds) or a cap that adjusts just once for final rounds (e.g. 11 for all rounds, 12 for semi/finals) is considerably less confusing than a shifting cap that changes with every round. I'd find myself thinking way too much of what songs to play if the cap shifted each round. Whereas opening 12s for the final rounds only opens a few songs, which more likely than not might not even be played.

Will each round face-off consist of 3 songs?

I'm totally okay if the photo bracket isn't implemented, I actually did not think of that comfort aspect, and that is a good point Dr.Z. though it is cool to see brackets and how things played out (e.g. NBA finals and their team logos). perhaps maybe a basic bracket if nothing at all.

We're not aiming to have 12s as qualifiers, that would be a little tough for a seed. The DDR US championship qualifiers were also constricted to a small set of songs (which we're doing for the seed songs) but we shouldn't carry that to the tournament as a whole (as there are hundreds of great songs to choose from).

In response to Suko: These newbies you speak of bringing in will most likely be playing to play, and see where it takes them: win, lose, or draw. They won't be turned off because they lose in the final round of the first tournament they've ever played. They would be proud of making it to that point (at least I hope they would), heck, even I would be happy advancing once. While its true that these same newbies may be intimidated by such "hardcore" songs, they'd also be intimidated getting smashed on a "non hardcore" song they can't ever get a star on. Every player has their strengths and weaknesses and may play their cards to compete. But it wouldn't necessarily be fair to remove all cards from the deck, as favorable as it may be to anyone. Just like Gerrak said we all better practice up. (though i won't specify what i advise my opponents to practice  Wink )

Laura speaks a relevant point, that the rules shouldn't be skewed to overcater to one sector of the "second tier" players. The exact rule boundaries won't affect me signing up for the tournament (as it's been that way since the first one i've played in). I won't be upset if anyone feels differently on the cap issue than i do: But yes, whipping out some 12's in the first rounds may be little intense! But if two players make it to the semis/finals, I'd imagine more doors would be opened up to them as they worked hard to get there (e.g. being able to play 12's as well as easier songs on the other end). So possibly a cap of 11 for all rounds up to semis/finals where it would be 12 works? At least in my view that's plenty appropriate. But that is just my input and will be up to the tournament organizers. Any tourney is a tourney that makes me happy  Smiley

Likewise with my friend Zach, I'll be able to bring a few friends to the tournament if there is a standard division tournament separate from the expert elite division.  Smiley (p.s. i apologize for the lengthy post, this is a very enthusiastic discussion, and I'm pleased where this is all going, and I'm excited to see when this will happen)

« Last Edit: January 05, 2011, 01:48:11 AM by neempoppa »
Read January 05, 2011, 10:38:54 AM #21

     I think it would be inappropriate to have 12s available in the standard division until the finals or semi finals, and would be inappropriate to have 11s allowed in the first round at least (first 2 rounds if it's double-elimination I'd say), however I don't think 12s should be disallowed from the standard division entirely. Ultimately, keeping in mind I know a lot of the players that will be in the standard division, most players in this category can at least pass a good number of 12s, and ultimately in the grand scheme of (even local) ITG, 12s are not all that bad. I can no bar a lot of 12s, and 98+ most of them with bar, and I could stand to lose another 15-20 lbs so not exactly in the greatest shape anyway. Not to say that everyone should be able to do this, but I do believe that all the players in the area could get to the point of passing 12s with some hard work. The 12-threshold is a hard one to crack but with dedication isn't as bad as you think (no pain no gain though!).
     Timing has always been a better asset than stamina anyway in this kind of tournament; at the very least the third round is typically random and there are waaay more 9s and 10s than 12s. So even if you can't pass a 12 at all, you've still got a good shot at winning the whole thing if your timing is good enough to win your pick and the random. If you can't pass a 12 with the 2-3 months notice we'll get for this, I'd say it's no more of a disadvantage than being unable to 98-99 a 9 by that time, and would represent a lack of real dedication to the physical aspect of the game the same as exclusively playing 11+s would be a lack of timing practice. You/we should all address our weaknesses in preparation for tournaments, be it stamina, speed, or timing. Hence why me, Keby, Tuan, Rudo, etc. play tons of 9s and 10s as well as 12+s. While the standard division isn't as rigorous as the expert, I don't think anyone wants it to be as physically easy and absolutely timing-dependent as a DDR tournament, and hence 12s really should at least be allowed for the final bouts, in my opinion anyway. What do you guys think?

Oh also,
Will each round face-off consist of 3 songs?

I'm totally okay if the photo bracket isn't implemented, I actually did not think of that comfort aspect, and that is a good point Dr.Z. though it is cool to see brackets and how things played out (e.g. NBA finals and their team logos). perhaps maybe a basic bracket if nothing at all.

We're not aiming to have 12s as qualifiers, that would be a little tough for a seed. The DDR US championship qualifiers were also constricted to a small set of songs (which we're doing for the seed songs) but we shouldn't carry that to the tournament as a whole (as there are hundreds of great songs to choose from).
Yes, it would most likely be a standard double-elimination for the standard bracket, consisting of 3 songs per match, one chosen by each player and one random if each wins 1. I do not believe that the Flash packs nor the Sakuracon packs should be allowed for use in the tournaments (believe me, no one wants me picking Bring Me To Life from the Flash pack on them) due to the lack of syncing and strange charts/songs in the Sakuracon pack, and the presence of so many gimmicks in the Flash pack, but certainly ITG 1-Rebirth songs would be allowed. I don't personally care if we throw in the Customs Pack 1 songs (presumably we wouldnt be allowed to pick the Long Versions though, such as Loituma, and the song Seven I can't imagine people would want to be allowed), since they're all well synced and fairly well known, however this would be for others to decide. Photo brackets also seem like a lot of unnecessary work, maybe just put this in the expert division if at all. Id say, given a 16man double elim, it should be 7-10, 7-10, 8-11, 8-12, 9-12 difficulties for the 5 rounds (9-12 for the 6th round if applicable). Again, my opinion, but a starting point I hope. Discuss!  Smiley

« Last Edit: January 05, 2011, 10:57:49 AM by Gerrak »
Read January 05, 2011, 12:08:24 PM #22

I'll wait and see what the final rules are, but I'm a bit burnt out on the "standard format". Since I moved here in '08, that's the only kind of tournaments I've seen (with maybe two exceptions). The winners for this will likely be Keby, Gerrak, and James (Godai). I suggested Iron Man because it really and truly does make it completely unknown who the winners will be. When you start adding things like doubles, great attack, and lowest % into the mix, it's anyone's tournament at that point and that's what I thought would make it great.

I think it would be inappropriate to have 12s available in the standard division until the finals or semi finals, and would be inappropriate to have 11s allowed in the first round at least (first 2 rounds if it's double-elimination I'd say)
I'm amazed that you think it's OK to have 12s in a standard tournament at all. Why not cap the STANDARD tournament at 10 and let the upper division play the hardcore songs? Just because a person can pass a song doesn't mean it's tournament worthy. I never considered a player who could pass a 12 a "standard" player. They're better than standard at that point. Maybe to you guys who can 99+ these songs, they're standard, but to me (and most of us non-stamina players), 12s are pushing are limits.

Let me put it this way; a 12 for me would be the same as a 14 or 15 for Gerrak or Keby. I bet they can pass it, but you'd have to be playing at the peak of your game just to get through it with anything above an 80%.

I've made my comments and that's all I have to say. I'll take a look at the rules when they're released, but I doubt I'll be participating if the STANDARD division has 12s in it. I think the tournament will go down just like all the ones before it. Same winners, different day. I just don't see the point if the tournament ends up being a stamina and endurance test.

Sorry if I come across as rude. I was just hoping for something new and different with this. Even if it was a custom stepchart tournament where no one had played the charts before. Anything other than another standard setup would have been welcome.

« Last Edit: January 05, 2011, 12:18:40 PM by Suko »
Read January 05, 2011, 04:28:22 PM #23

A 14 or 15?
mmmm probably a 16 now.

ahaha I would love to see us do an Ironman tournament format for this as well Suko, but it seems most people are against us on that.
I'll argue for it once more. Ironman is perfect in my opinion. You can fail rounds outright completely and still come out on top in the end if you kick ass on everything else. From what I noticed this format gives more play time than any else for lower tier players. It's only about the halfway point do people start getting cut out fast. That and it's just way more fun to watch people play things that they normally don't.

Sure there are those who can't play doubles well. Then there are those who can't do stamina that well. And then there are those who can sightread mods better than anyone else.

Ironman format is designed to be balanced in such a way that EVERYONE has a chance to win. Even if in the slightest, they still have a chance.

but granted there's still no excuse for not practicing. So practice up people. Because well if you can't say you did if you never tried in the first place.
I do like the rules that are coming out for a standard format tourney.
Something people need to keep in mind. These are tournaments. It's good to have sportsmanship. So like picking a 12 on someone who cannot pass it. Well....You'll just get to wear the Douche hat for the tournament then.

« Last Edit: January 05, 2011, 04:31:22 PM by Keby »
Read January 05, 2011, 05:55:45 PM #24

As far as departing from the standard tournament format and songs, I have plenty of those ideas kicking around, but there would need to be interest:

-Challenge tournaments! I will keep running these at Sakuracon, but I'd love to have a big one if people would enter!
-Team tournaments! When we were joking about challenging Canada, Tony and I came up with this cool idea for tournaments that assumed teams of five players challenging each other, and essentially what would happen is one team would pick a song and send their best player at that song up, and then the other team would figure out who was their best player for that song and send them up.  It's not as cool an idea with lots of teams, but stuff like that is fun if you can work with it.
-An oldschool DDR tournament on an ITG machine.  So basically, you'd have the tighter ITG timing, but the song packs would be DDR 1st-5th Mix only. This would also eliminate the significant stamina disparities between players entirely, since there is nothing 10+ in those song packs.

RE 12s in a Standard Tourney: I tend to agree with Suko that 12s are a little "WTF" for a standard tourney; for me personally, passing an 11 took three months of daily practice, and that was only one.  Then again, I was recently diagnosed with asthma and didn't have an inhaler at the time, so I'll find out in the coming weeks how skewed my ideas about that skill level hump are. However, if that is legitimately the level of play that most of the competitors are capable of, I feel like the best thing to do is allow them in the finals.  But be warned: If I make it there and you try to pick one on me, I may retaliate by embarrassing you by forcing you to lose horribly against me at some shitty Bambee song, possibly while I'm wearing a sparkly pink tracksuit and pigtails just to destroy your ego even more. Wink

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Jump to: