Bsrti-invert might be the best setup

There are a lot of discussions about the best setup going on. 

A lot of players are complaining about New Standard (Omatomix) And I don't fully understand why. But having Queens and Kings on the same diagonals might lead to too aggressive openings...

Old Standard is obviously not the way to go because as everybody knows it's a disadvantage for green and blue in Teams and in FFA.

So the suggestion is bsrti: Red and Blue king on the right, Yellow and Green King on the left.
This is a nice suggestion but I think the King on the left is a disadvantage and as moving later is obviously a disadvantage as well I would suggest bsrti-invert.

What do you think?

I think its good

I'd like to elaborate on the issues of the RB switch setup:

1. Yellow cannot open with king's pawn any safely, playing queen's pawn leads to a trivial check by green in most cases and as such this limits the opening ideas by yellow. Plus, given the fact that red bishop/queen and yellow queen/bishop point towards green's kingside, playing king's pawn and alike ideas with kingside fianchetto are not any safe, I played games with LazyImp in this setup to make sure that there aren't really many options for YG.

2. What's so worse, given that red plays queen's pawn, both blue and green are pretty limited, this is something I had analyzed extensively. 

3. Who attacks whom: given that blue has the easiest development most of the time they cannot really take advantage of both their development and of red's weak f-pawn, while in BY switch it is possible for YG, which overall leads to more passive gameplay by both blue and green.

Considering the above options, BYG is pretty limited in terms of options, and in teams, having both queen's bishop and the queen turned at your kingside is quite of an advantage, allowing for early sacrificial attacks.

Have you played the BY setup and tested it with many strong teams players? I did, and this way I actually got somewhat stronger in these setups.

Have you played the RB setup? I doubt it.

I think nobody havent played it

No More changes please !

I don't know what i'm playing anymore. Yesterday, I played 3 games and didn't know what was the setting. It was not labelled so I thought it was the new standard, but it wasn't. Don't know if it was old standard, Bsrti, inverted bsrti, etc. I just don't know what we're playing anymore. It's annoying.

I love aggressive play, you can never be too aggressive. The omatamix, however is stale in the opening. The same moves are always played in the opening, and RY still have a sizable advantage. Also, don't the engines favour bsrti the most?

@Magicsteph 
I totally agree with you. Those sudden changes really throw you off. We need to discuss what setup is the best (my favorite is Omatomix, but I think bsrti-invert is nice as well) And if we have a final solution, we should change it to that and keep it that way forever.

@suryangod
The problem that the same openings are played all the time is just a basic high elo thing in almost every sport. There is just not that much variation in high elo.
RY still have an advantage but much less then in the old Standard according to the engines. (Of the 16 permutations of Kings and Queens old Standard is by far the worst)
The Engines actually favour a non symmetrical setup where the red King is on the left and all other Kings are on the right, the most balanced symmetrical setup according to the engines is bsrti-invert

I don't understand what the problem with the omnimatrix was, it's much more balanced than the old standard, and it's much easier to play with green and blue, I've tried bsrti and it still seems to me that red and yellow have a lot of advantage. How would the position of Bsrti-invert be? Do you have a photo of the position? And what would be the position proposed by the module? and clearly going back to the past is a mistake, if we already know the position is not balanced.

Thats bsrti-invert. Red and Blue have their King on the left and Yellow and Green have it on their right. The Idea of the setup is that not both flank players have their queens pointing to your king. Because that is an issue that Omatomix has, it allowes very fast queen attacks because they are already on the right diagonal.

Omatomix is for sure more balanced than old Standard, because according to the engines everything is more balanced than old Standad. But a lot of Player don't like it. Maybe just because it's new, or maybe they've got their reasons.

I am a huge fan of Omatomix, but if people don't want it, I think bsrti-invert might be an option as well. As long as we don't go back to old Standard everything is fine.

There are 3 options already.

• 4PC = Omatamix
• Old Standard
• Bsrti

Players can decide. Do they decide? See the number of players in the screenshot.

Alternate standards don't get played. Same thing when old standard was the main standard for a few hours. The only way to test it is the way omatamix was tested, arenas going on constantly visible in the main lobby.

I already told you, SFA is just FFA and Solo combined. There's no point if FFA and Solo are simply revived.

Still, there has to be a Standard. The game you play if you don't adjust settings.

This Standard will be played most, just because it is easy to select. And this Standard should bring the most joy to the players.

Other Variants can still be available, I think nobody is against that.

NO that's not true, and Justin is right. Because players a) do not check different spaces and lobbies, and often are not even aware that there are plenty, and often do not know that they can configure the main lobby in order to see all formats as it has never been explained to them. So they simply DO NOT SEE all the available games. I've tried plenty of times to launch an Old Std game, impossible! Hardly 1 more player joins, and I've never succeeded to get 4 players together. So it is not fair to compare the figures: there are games in new std simply because most people only see that.

These spaces shouldn't be separated, it's cristal clear for me; otherwise you obtain ghettos for happy few and nobody in fact will join outside of some passionate players who won't be more than 0.1% of the base. ALL set-ups for FFA should be together and shown together, period.

And YES to open to the players the possibility to launch (and join) a game with any set-up and any scoring system, etc., but with ALL these FFA or Teams games shown together, counting for the same rating, etc. would a) make it easier to find a game and b) help us to determine within 3-4 months what is REALLY what players want/like.

Oh please, that is a ridiculous argument, and everyone here (including you) is aware of that.  People are not only influenced by what position they prefer, but the availability of games and players.  It's similar to looking at third-party candidates in US presidential elections.  Do less than 1% of people agree with them? Not necessarily, a lot of people don't vote for them because they don't have any realistic chance of winning.

+1

Setting a certain position as default and then observing that other positions are inferior because they are less commonly played is absurd.

> So it is not fair to compare the figures

I don't compare the figures. That screenshot doesn't prove that 100% of players prefer Omatamix's setup. It shows that 100% play it. Why do they play only this variant - this is a question we should answer.

But you literally said: "Make all setups available". They are available. Players have a choice. But they don't make a choice, as I said.

Why?

One explanation is: "Because players a) do not check different spaces and lobbies, and often are not even aware that there are plenty". How about another version: "The majority of players just don't care about the 4PC setup. Top players care. But 99% don't see any difference."?

There are thousands of players, club members, there are tournaments with different setups, Spacebar announced Omatamix setup months ago, some streamers and top players promoted it. Other streamers and top players are against the change, but still they informed players that the new setup is bad, and that also informed players about the new setup. Positive review or negative review - doesn't matter, any review informed the community about the setup. "You play Omatamix setup" phrase was added to game chats. It was not possible to ignore it. No one can say that the community was not informed.

You could expect 80% to play one setup and 20% another setup. Or a similar proportion. But we see the screenshot above. Do players care?

All right. Forget regular players for a moment. Where are those top players that love Old Standard or Bsrti more than Omatamix? I see them in Discord, I see them here at forums, but I don't see them playing their preferred setups. These guys are aware of the change. They do know how to start a game with any setup. But right now I look at the list and see: 180 Oma, 0 Old Standard, 0 Bsrti.

If a player wants to play Chaturaji, they join a queue and wait. Because they have motivation. They like that particular variant. If a top player says they hate Omatamix's setup and love Bsrti's one, they should have motivation to play what they like. Right?

What a load of rubbish.

First of all, let's make the observation that there are fewer and fewer top players who are active with each passing day, and those who do play (such as myself) play fewer games.  So in regards to why they aren't playing their preferred setup, one (of many) reason is they aren't just playing at all.  Why they aren't playing is due to a multitude of reasons, including a general lack of high level queues, along with differences/disagreements with the changes the merge may have brought.

Secondly, let's also make the observation that when the position was switched temporarily back to the old setup, everyone was playing that setup, and there were virtually no games with other setups.  That should make it clear that which setup players play is not based on any personal preference but instead other reasons (see below).

Next, you talk about one possible explanation: Most non-top players do not care about which setup is chosen.  If true, then the setup you choose should only be based on the players who do have an opinion, which in that case would be the top players.

Now, to answer your real question, which is: Why is no one (especially top players) playing other setups?  And the very simple answer is that most players do not want to wait half an hour (or longer) for a game with their preferred setup (or other parameters).  I have created a teams blitz 1550+ queue and gone along doing other things for an hour, and came back with no game starting.  One of my favorite 2pc variants is King of the Hill.  Do I play it on this site anymore? No, because I am not willing to sit in a queue for an hour just to play a couple games.  And for 2pc variants I only have to wait for one person to join.  4pc requires 3 other players to join and stay in the queue until it fills up.  So it's no wonder no one chooses to create or wait in queues that will take so long to fill up.   This is the reason you see no one play certain variants, but it is especially impactful when you ask the question in regards to which setup is played.  Unless you have the strongest of opinions on which setup is best, you will probably end up playing the setup everyone else is playing, just to get a game.  You'd rather play a setup you dislike with a game rather than a setup you prefer with no game.  Let's also note that those who have that strongest of opinions of which setup is best won't just sit in a game waiting for a someone to join, they will just not play at all.  Which is part of why you see old players not playing anymore.

BabYagun, seriously. Oma is the DEFAULT mode, and other are not easily reachable. Afterwards to compare is irrelevant and to pretend the positions are equally treated is not a bona fide argument.