WAIT!!! This tourney is for fighting games!!! This whole time I thought that it was a bread baking contest!!! Nah, nah, I’m calling off all of my money matches. My famous sourdough will have to wait…
I’m pretty sure we were talking about team 3S this whole time…
edit: yup
http://forums.shoryuken.com/showpost.php?p=4880324&postcount=160, this is what got the ball rolling 
If it’s cool with Hogosha, I would want $5 minimum per game ($5 per head for 5x5s).
Also, re: dropping 3S doubles, doubles ran pretty quickly last time, but we also didn’t have that many people enter. If time is an issue, state > doubles. If time is not looking like a problem, singles + doubles + state teams sounds good to me. The more 3S, the better.
Also, I’d be down for CvS2 teams. How would that format work again?
well, we gotta get tahir in here on that.
for team lineups, i was thinking we can do something like:
team 1: A, B, C, D, E
team 2: F, G, H, I, J
match: A vs F, B vs G, C vs H, D vs I, E vs J
results: A, G, C, I, E
team 1: A, C, E
team 2: G, I
match: A vs G, C vs I
results: A, I
team 1: A, E
team 2: I
match: A vs I
results: I
match: E vs I
results: I
team 2 (or team that Nives is on) wins!
team line up is initially pre-determined by the team.
EDIT: basically all the people who lose on each team is removed, and shifted down, and u just go from left to right.
I dono, I still vouch for classic SBO style.
Yeah, agreed, James. I would rather just stick to tradition. So what, if one person OCV’s a team or two? These other set-ups sound like they’re getting really over-complicated. Don’t get me wrong, I think everyone’s had some really good ideas so far, but given the number of people, the time constraints, and seeing as this is our first time really running a big team tourney, why not just stick to a tried-and-true formula, you know?
I know this might take a while, BUt if we can do it like they do in japan with 2v2 or 3v3 then that will be great. But b4 this does get thrown out the window, SERIOUSLY, how many people do you REALLY Expect to play CVS2? For all we know, The tourney could end up a round robin tourney…
So please, if you guys find it in your heart, take this into consideration!!!
Thank you…
well, A, and I win in that loop, that means G and C got eliminated.
if A and C both lose, then E takes over and fights the remaining players.
The state v state and 2v2 tournaments must be regular team format (as some are refering to as “SBO style”). The other format that was discussed is simply not right; too much pre-determining, too much going on at once, too unfamiliar, some people may not get to watch matches that they had wanted to, etc, etc, etc. It will just be an unneccesary headache.
For the actual SBO tournament, each team is able to mixup their player order however they want - it is each team’s strategy how they place their player orders: best player first? best player last? ~ there are advantages and disadvantages that belong to each strategy.
Therefore, I am saying we will use the orignal/regular/SBO style team tournament format. There will not be any problems using this format, if there is - they can be dealt with quickly and with ease - as many of us are used to this way of things.
This is the format we should stick with. This is the way things are done.
Amen 
I’m fine with doing thing the regular way. I felt that my way offered pretty much all of the same good qualities as the normal way, but also added a guaranteed game played by every player on the team. I also thought that my way felt more like a team effort as opposed to seeing who the best player is and then noting which team he’s on and declaring them the winner.
Maybe it’s also the fact that I enjoy trying new things, but I don’t like the arguement stating only that “I don’t want to try that way because it’s different than what I’m used to”. I feel that it’s the same argument that Kiets is facing with his proposed SSBB tourney rules. Personally I think that if we simply fall into the same rut and never try anything different, things get really boring. I’ve seen it happen way too often in life that someone insists that they don’t want to do something different (like move from a pad to a stick - for a pertinent example). Then when they finally do try it, they really like it and can’t figure out why they had a big hangup about it.
I guess it’s just human nature to reject change & fear the unknown and want what’s known and comfortable.
Also, I wanted to address some of the “issues” you brought up with the proposed version of the 5 on 5:
You say that there is too much predetermining in my version, but then you go on to say that you like the fact that in the SBO version you can use strategy to determine your team order.
If you do like the ability to determine the team order/matchups, then we can certainly have that be a part of the 5 on 5. Each team assigns each member a number 1 to 5 and then the 1’s play the 1’s, 2’s play the 2’s, etc. You can try to figure out how the other team is going to assign their players and then try to counter that.
You also say “too much going on at once…some people may not get to watch matches that they had wanted to”. There’s no reason why the matches need to be run simultaneously. They can certainly be run sequentially just like the SBO version. The only big difference would be that instead of one player staying at the machine and another player leaving, we’d have 2 new players at the machine.
So you propose it being similar to how in japan they run 2 on 2s?
Team 1: A B
Team 2: C D
A plays C
A wins.
B plays D
D Wins
A plays D.
I guess that would work alright with a 5 on 5 but it seems better for 2 on 2.
Yes. In fact, that’s why I thought of doing the 5 on 5 that way. It made sense to me that since the 2 on 2’s were being proposed in that manner, why not run the 5 on 5’s the same way?
Good, we’ll do things the way I proposed then. Thank you.
?!? lol
Tried items. Don’t like it. Doesn’t feel competitive. Has never felt competitive in any Smash game. It’s a blast in the same way that FFA in Smash is a blast: you can’t care about the outcome, only the stupid things that happen that make you laugh during the game itself. We played with items after our tourney Monday for like two hours. It got some lawls, but it felt stupid competitively. Like when I played a guy in 3S who only played with system direction crap on. Was it interesting? A little. But it didn’t feel like the tried-and-true 3S I was used to, and not in a good way.
With that said, I’m not running Smash. So feel free to run it however the heck you guys want.
5 v 5 battles are gonna go the normal way. 2 v 2 is A vs C, B vs D, winner of each plays if needed. I’m hoping my team puts the anchors near or at the end of our team (which will probably put me in the front with my retarded Twelve), but hey, to each team their own.
As far as entry fee, if you guys want each of the 1 v 1 tourneys to be $5, I’m down with that. 2 v 2 tourneys, I’d like to keep at a lower entry fee, just so more people enter 'em. 5 v 5, I have no effing clue. That’s more one of those “if we got time” things.
But 5v5 will be so awesome, and there are already 4-5 states in on it.
Yeah, I’m not gonna lie, a great deal of my excitement for this tourney is because of the promise of a 5 vs. 5, “state vs. state” tourney. I’m all for individuals, but that’s at any and every tourney – no one EVER runs team tourneys.
5x5 > all. Especially since we have a confirmed team from IA, WI, IL, and MN. That’s epic. Throw in a Versus City Cabinet, and it might be a start of a beautiful thing.
Spoken like a true prodigy.
This shits gonna be hype.