Very unhappy with the maintenance of match points for elimination rounds, especially with the suggestion to cut to top 4 or 8. I can understand how they may not like there being a run-away leader near the end of the Swiss able to strategically concede or play against certain people, but I don’t think that’s enough of a reason for not just running additional rounds of Swiss instead of elimination rounds, then cutting to the finals. There is an issue in smaller tournaments that additional rounds may create problems for making viable pairings, and I don’t know the likelihood of such a problem creating a significant impact on the tournament, but right now the current elimination round method still makes decks that require giving up points to win or that score poorly in losses (as if we need fewer reasons to play Jinteki and Shaper) be disfavored despite their ability to win individual games.
If you ran both your decks with a 70% chance to win but have to give up 6 points, and a 30% chance to lose but never score 6 points, you’d have to win both games - which would only happen 49% of the time. While certainly that example is contrived and unrealistic, it shows just how important it is to score well in losses and minimize points scored against you in wins. Given Corp will likely always be an underdog at competitive levels due to game design factors, this means reasonable winning Corp strategy will be to score as many points as possible, regardless of whether they can win the game. It’s a distortion of the game and I think it’s an abomination.
Play more Swiss and don’t cut to elimination rounds except for the Finals. Play 3 games if needed in the Finals. “Winner” of the “match” of the first two games (as decided by the current system) chooses sides for game 3. It’s not complicated.