Actually I am looking forward to the enemy rebuilding update. Time to have a new run for a harder machinery and watcher HQ.

my 3rd play file with dead drop BTW

The current tiebreak rule of OWCS NA/EMEA/CN is now all the same as the image attached:

when there are 2 or more team have the same win/loss of round robin, they will chose 1 top team by some rules one by one( head to head result; map +/-). After pick out the 1 team away from ties teams, the remaining team will considerate as a new tie to apply the same rule again.

I will show that the rule can even ask a team to loss more to guarantee a higher ranking.

considerate a 6 teams group as the same OWCS is now format, with team A B C D E F.

If A, B and C all loss to D and E; win F as following:

team	win/loss	map +/-
A	1-2	+1
B	1-2	0
C	1-2	0

and after above result, A 3:2 B; A 2:3 C.

then the sanding now is

team	win/loss	map +/-
A	2-3	+1(0 in ABC)
B	1-3	-1(-1 in ABC)
C	2-2	+1(+1 in ABC)

Below is the nonsense part of the rule:

the remaining 1 match of B and C:

if B 3:2 C the result:

team	win/loss	map +/-
A	2-3	+1(0 in ABC)
B	2-3	0(0 in ABC)
C	2-3	0(0 in ABC)

because the rule will pick out 1 top team among ties team, and in this case (i)(ii)(iii) are all the same for ABC. (iv) the overall map +/- will make A the 1st among the 3 teams. then the new tie of B C will consider as B win C first(rule (ii)), so B is 2nd; C is 3rd.

BUT if C 0:3 B:

team	win/loss	map +/-
A	2-3	+1(0 in ABC)
B	2-3	+3(+2 in ABC)
C	2-3	-3(-2 in ABC)

because the rule will pick out 1 top team among ties team, and in this case (i)(ii) are all the same for ABC. (iii) the map +/- among ties teams(ABC, in this case) will make B the 1st among the 3 teams. then the new tie of A C will consider as C win A first, so C is 2nd; A is 3rd.

This is what might happen in a 4 playoff slot situation, if team C doesn't want to have any risk of losing playoff slot, they just need to win less maps, while win 2 maps and loss the match will eventually cause they out of the top 4.

And the case 2 will wipe out team A which has better map +/- for both overall and among ABC than the one team C has.

This is because the rule "pick out" the 1 team and then pretending that the remaining teams is a new tie. But Why you try to pick out a team top-down? If you try to "kick out" a team bottom-up by the totally the same order of comparison index, you might get a completely different ranking, even the logic is basically the same, for example, the OWCS EMEA stage 2.

I don't see it's more fair to use bottom-up?

Yes, bottom-up isn't more fair, SO DOSE the top-down, because the rule is problematic. How can a rule punish a team for wining more maps?

Since you should not try to pick out a team first, you should try to determine the ranking AT ONCE by using map +/- first. For instance OWCS Korea/Asia is use map +/- for higher prior tiebreaking. In the Korea stage 2, both Falcons and T1 have match recording 6-2; T1 has a +13 maps, while Falcons has +10. Even FLC beat T1 head to head, T1 still rank above FLC for more map +/-.

Also in the 2026 OWCS Asia group B, Varrel lose to FLC and still rank above FLC because map +/-, if you use the rule of OWCS NA/EMEA/CN, then CR will pick out first then FLC will prevail Varrel under that rule.

please modify the tiebreak rules next season Blizzard

I use Basilisk shot with no damage falloff in the video but Frostbite already have a severe damage falloff. I think the Basilisk (fire sniper rifle) should have the larger max ADS range than the one of Frostbite(frost bolt action rifle). They definitely accidental swap the text of their ranges.