Sonneborn Burger Score.

Maybe somebody else already asked this question before, but I couldn't find it anywhere. Because in Open, you still have teams with the same amount of maps won and lost. The team I'm in for example is in fourth place, but we have the same amount of points as three other teams. What makes us 4th and not 7th?

I suggest not giving the new tiers the same names as ESEA, it's bad for brand differentiation.

[...] [...] How will these be done?

What would this mean for map schedules? how many maps per week? 1 like ESEA (better option) playing 2 teams? 2 playing 1 team? And does this mean one more map to the list?

Since it seems that the number of rounds won/lost is having a greater importance, as they will be counted when two team are tied by points, will you just keep golden caps as they are? Maybe I see things from the wrong perspective, but with the new system I would eliminate golden caps entirely.

Will the standings/points be decided as they are in UGC (where it's strictly the number of wins/losses, then done by map points etc), or will points be allocated as under current ETF2L rules of 6 for a win, 4 for a GC win etc? Essentially, if you win week 1 off a GC, are you more likely to play someone else who won a GC, or are only strict wins looked at as in UGC?

I think having like 184 teams in 1 Tier (5&6) would be quite an overkill, there should be div like Sub-Tiers, Sub-Tier for Tier 4 and maybe 3, with 30 teams or so in each of them...Having 184 in 1 Tier would be an Overkill

So winning div 2, 4 and 6 last season was pointless now? Not sure I like the idea of playing in the same 'Tier' for 4 seasons in a row. However i'm open to the change so not a huge deal just a bit skeptical.

All I think that the people who want to have a vote are tired of the prem circlejerk deciding everything while they put in just as much time and effort. What happens now is people are arguing which is better, letting the people who "apperently" have a far greater and more intelligent understanding of how the game should be played, or let everyone vote. Both are bad. Just find a good compromise which will benefit not just the premiership players.

Haven't read the whole thread so this might have been said, but I suggest seperating div 5 and 6. They both have plenty to fill one each anyway.

Also using round difference as a deciding factor for tiebreakers seems arbitrary. If I am behind in a match with limited time I am likely going to take big risks to go for the win rather than keep playing the same way and hope for a different outcome. Yet a team who turtles for the low scoring loss could be automatically rated above me in tiebreaker? I don't have a better solution and it's probably a non-issue in terms of weekly ranking, but if I missed out on the playoffs because of this I would be mad 8)

How many teams willl be in the playoffs?

When does S20 open sign ups?

when will recruitment be changed?

[...] I remember the excuse for this never happening earlier was because there was no one in the community to do the work. So I assume it's not cherry.

cherry are you gonna re code the website to fit the new system or?