Your opinion is needed: competitive mode and game variants

[Romain672]

Personnally I would love to see some 'promoted ranking', something like 10 different game (or variants) who would have more value/rewards than the others.
Just for having some competitive leaderboard without waiting too much for playing these games.
-
It would be mainly the most popular game, but with 2/3 games who isn't popular (like Armadöra, a game where I rank 4th just by playing/teaching the game to friends cause there isn't much players).

[sprockitz]

Personnally I would love to see some 'promoted ranking', something like 10 different game (or variants) who would have more value/rewards than the others.
Just for having some competitive leaderboard without waiting too much for playing these games.
-
It would be mainly the most popular game, but with 2/3 games who isn't popular (like Armadöra, a game where I rank 4th just by playing/teaching the game to friends cause there isn't much players).

I think something like this could be good to promote some of the less popular games. My guess is the top 10% of games get half the plays and of the ~150 games on here probably the top half get 90% of the plays.
Perhaps cycling the bottom 100 so only 25 of them are promoted each season, with a bigger reward or whatever...hard to say exactly what without knowing the details of arena mode.

[Daggerheart]

Carcassonne has national and World Championships. 2-player, no expansions, no river, international rules.

I think, for ladder play, BGA should respect the international format Carcassonne is played with (above).

[cs2376jr]

I think we should still be able to pick player count and additions to the game. My favorite game is Terra Mystica and the game is really only good 4p, and if the bga team decides that arena mode will be 2 player, I will not be playing and a lot of the other players won’t be as well. Also, the add-ons like promo town tiles and landscapes and auction is what I like to use along with base, but people may like to play on lakes and without auction or something like that. There seems to be too many variables to make everyone happy while competing.

[dschingis27]

There seems to be too many variables to make everyone happy while competing.

Of course. That's why you can continue to play simple mode. But for competetive purpose I prefer the strict rules, which for me makes it more like a very official competition.

I don't know how this is ruled in esports? They must have the same issue that many popular games have hundreds of possible settings. But for the championship there will be only one or few settings accepted. Which makes sense to not get overloaded.

Perhaps we will have multiple disciplines for very popular games in the far future.

[Waterd103]

Fwiw, many of the most competitive games, are played at a competitive level in tournaments with many variants, from chess to specially magic. Even 1v1 to Team vs team.
So having a different tournament "formats" is common. Even sports like tennis have tournament play at different number of players.

Personally I like having different seasons variants, but I think it would be ok and better to have 1v1 world champion and Multiplayer world champion which allows for a range of players.

1v1 and multiplayer are drastically different. But once you go multiplayer the number of player is not that different.

I think for example eminent domain 1v1 and 3 or 4 players are so different that I think it's ok to have a world champion for each category, btw that also happens in other games and sports.

So i prefer it to be 2 ladders for some game 1v1 and Multiplayer, and all games are played in same variant.

[Robo65]

I'd love to see something like team vs team. Of course, this requires certain adjustments in ELO ranking, and the ability to define teams in the BGA system.

I have played Carcassonne im team mode (2 vs 2) since 2005. It's very interesting.

Robo