EPTNASL and Teams: What's the Deal? - Page 11
| Blogs > Liquid`Tyler |
|
leo23
United States3075 Posts
| ||
|
Parnage
United States7414 Posts
The five player per team rule is a reasonable rule. If only because, can that team afford to send the entire line up? Does every player want to schedule around it?(ie if you have a player in Korea do they really want to handle the lag to play in NASL?) and does the team even have 5 players worth putting into the self described "Best 50 players"? At the moment these things really don't seem to be a big enough problem for it to work or not work. I do admit it's a problem that has to be delt with but at the time, most likely not. Players on a team? That's reasonable. If you are a solid good player, you should have no problems finding a team if only to play in NASL. People throw out a person like White-ra but let's be honest, White Ra could get a team faster then incontrol could break a nerds spine if he wanted to. I think in the future a bigger and more recognized league would be best to have a qualifier thats more open but for right now it's not a problem. It just seems to me that right now these minor problems are best left until NASL hit's it big as it where. | ||
|
Pwnographics
New Zealand1097 Posts
| ||
|
raf3776
United States1904 Posts
On February 24 2011 08:41 artoo[ wrote: YUP, join me in boycotting giving any money to these guys. We have plenty of good quality content in GSL and MLG on a regular basis, not to mention the Dreamhacks and others.... I'm really disappointed that idra and incontrol are so behind this... Saying things like this is just... not helping anything. You act like you want Esports to grow by the way you THINK this league is going to be run, but then you shit all over it before it has a chance to even do ne thing. THAT isnt going to make esports grow. Nothing, no problem at all. I only suggest that a 10 player team in a 50 Player Pool would be to Powerful, cause they can train together to arrange or abuse the bracket or ladder to there own best, thats all. So from that point of view, cutting it to 5 Players makes sense. Even if the team is only cut down to 5 players, a team is a team and they can still practice together to "abuse" the bracket. | ||
|
LittleAtari
Jordan1090 Posts
On February 24 2011 08:42 ScarletKnight wrote: While I agree with your argument on Haypro, he is indeed better than most players on other teams, it is his own perogative to be on Liquid and if he wants to participate in the NASL then maybe it's in his best interest to leave the team. Not because he doesn't deserve to be on Liquid mind you, but because for his career maybe it's better to be on a team where he can be "the guy" and not be seen as the 6th string odd man out. Again I take the analogy to real sports. A guy like Andrew Ladd of the Atlanta Thrashers played last year for the Chicago Blackhawks and won the Stanley Cup with them. He played on the 3rd line and was seen as not the best player on the team although he has tons of skill and didn't see much ice time throughout the season. He was traded to Atlanta over the off season and is now the captian of the team and getting more ice time. This has led to a career year in points and he is now widely more recognized for his skill and leadership. This could be a situation Haypro could be in if he were to switch teams. While I do not advocate it, or think he should, it's just something to think about. The issue is almost career suicide. Why leave one of the best teams that has the best practice setup out of the foreign teams? It's like, "Yea, I'll leave teamliquid and then end up joining a possibly lesser team which wont make me into a better player." What if Haypro was a super player? What if that does happen later? Would that make NASL change their mind? I think it's pretty easy to pin it on teamliquid and haypro because Tyler is the one arguing against it but it will cause problems for other teams. This is about a team knowing that they have a gem and not being able to use it in a tourney. Yea, he may have not proved himself to the rest of us, but he has to Liquid and in their eyes, that factors in a lot. On February 24 2011 08:18 ScarletKnight wrote: Although realistically I don't see Jinro leaving his Code S place in the GSL to come to the US to compete here, so he may get a spot in the NASL anyway. A good portion of NASL will take place online. So he could compete from Korea and then fly in for the finals. On February 24 2011 08:18 ScarletKnight wrote: I don't see how letting a powerhouse team run wild is a good thing. It will do nothing to encourage competition between teams if one team holds everything. If Liquid wins everything the scene will stagnate and become boring as we see the same people winning again and again. Parity is something that is needed for a league to survive and stay interesting. The thing is, I don't think we're at a point in which we have to worry about that yet. The issue is that everything about SC2 e-sports is in a baby stage and this is harmful to teams now. At least for now, I don't see how a rule like this will benefit us more than being without it. | ||
|
Logros
Netherlands9913 Posts
On February 24 2011 08:52 ScarletKnight wrote: I don't see how that's relevant. It's Haypros own perogative to determine what team he plays for. And why would Liquid recruit someone just to have them sit there and do nothing? Jinro is not leaving Korea any time soon it seems, considering he is still in Code S and is doing well out there. I don't know if Huk or Ret would come back to the US in order to compete either, as they are still trying to compete in the GSL. To be completely realistic, the players Liquid would send to the NASL as it stands now would be Tyler, TLO, and Haypro. Which is below the 5 man limit. But as it is an invitiational rather than a qualifier I don't know how the selections process will be done. But as I said before, if we're talking about the "best players" the 5 man limit should have no hindrance for the teams that would be able to send players to play. I also see this as being a bit of a non-issue. TL is basicly the only team atm that has more then 5 tip-top players who would compete in the NASL, but Jinro, Huk, Ret and Haypro are all in Korea atm and I don't see all 4 (especially Jinro) leaving soon. I thought the lag between Korea and the US was too much to be able to play from Korea (competitively), correct me if I'm wrong here. This is even disregarding any time-zone differences which can mess up scheduling. And apart from that they can always adjust the rules after 1 or 2 or 3 seasons if they and/or the community feels it is causing problems. | ||
|
joheinous
Iceland522 Posts
On February 24 2011 06:53 echO [W] wrote: Liquid`Tyler for president 2012. I support this and his running mate should be a black eyed horse. On a side note I completely agree with Tyler on all his points and it's specifically because of teams like team liquid. If there's a chance that this tournament, which is probably going to become the biggest western scene tournament, is excluding some of the best players in the world because they're on a good team then that's obviously ridiculous. If there are 50 foreign players in this tournament then every single one of team liquids guys should be in there and if one of them wasn't then there would be a less deserving player in the tournament. I'm not nut-hugging team liquid specifically but they're the obvious example and this argument is effectively what the issue boils down to. There are a lot of different concerns like how this would affect players decisions on what teams they want to join and logistical problems and such but at the end of the day if we're gonna miss out on a great, deserving player being in the tournament than that should be sufficient as the only reason to not implement this system because it won't be about the game and the players and the event will lose it's integrity as a true competition. That absolutely is not a path I think anyone wants to go down. Reference the nba and wwe style heels and heroes all you want but that kind of showmanship should take second place to the players and the integrity of sc2 competition. | ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On February 24 2011 08:42 ScarletKnight wrote: While I agree with your argument on Haypro, he is indeed better than most players on other teams, it is his own perogative to be on Liquid and if he wants to participate in the NASL then maybe it's in his best interest to leave the team. Not because he doesn't deserve to be on Liquid mind you, but because for his career maybe it's better to be on a team where he can be "the guy" and not be seen as the 6th string odd man out. But it isn't in his best interest. Obviously there are more competitions than NASL, but for the sake of argument and principle let's assume otherwise - in that situation, there is no good decision for Haypro. If he stays on TL, he can't compete in the highest profile tournament. If he quits and joins another team, he will lose a (probably) great contract with TL as well as many other benefits necessary for his career to progress (practice partners etc). No matter what he decides, his career will take a step for the worse, because there is no way he can improve as much outside of TL as he can within it (+ the financial factor will kick in), and he can't improve in TL either because he can't play in the most important tournament on the planet. It's a lose-lose situation. On February 24 2011 08:42 ScarletKnight wrote: Again I take the analogy to real sports. A guy like Andrew Ladd of the Atlanta Thrashers played last year for the Chicago Blackhawks and won the Stanley Cup with them. He played on the 3rd line and was seen as not the best player on the team although he has tons of skill and didn't see much ice time throughout the season. He was traded to Atlanta over the off season and is now the captian of the team and getting more ice time. This has led to a career year in points and he is now widely more recognized for his skill and leadership. This could be a situation Haypro could be in if he were to switch teams. While I do not advocate it, or think he should, it's just something to think about. Look, while I do appreciate with effort, every single analogy made in this topic was just bad, including that one. Instead of making superficial analogies with other sports disregarding all the essential differences, we should just focus on what's best for the actual Starcraft scene where, again, IT IS NOT ABOUT TEAMS. There isn't even a single team-based competition that is considered important right now (There was GCPL and that Machinima tournament that Liquid or Fnatic for example didn't even take seriously because they are irrelevant to the grand scheme of things). Starcraft is an individual sport, if you want to make analogies, make analogies to individual sports. But I would prefer no analogies as analogies suck in general to be honest. =P On February 24 2011 08:42 ScarletKnight wrote: I don't see how letting a powerhouse team run wild is a good thing. It will do nothing to encourage competition between teams if one team holds everything. If Liquid wins everything the scene will stagnate and become boring as we see the same people winning again and again. Parity is something that is needed for a league to survive and stay interesting. Liquid doesn't win things, the players do. Competition between players is what drives Starcraft, not competition between teams. It's Ret that won the Assembly, not Liquid. It's Jinro that made it to back-to-back semifinals in GSL, not Liquid. And if Jinro and Ret have to play each other, it will be between Jinro and Ret, not a Liquid and Liquid. Even in Korea that did eventually grow a team league competition and it became reasonably popular, a player achieves greatness only and ONLY by winning a Starleague (or a few), and all the legendary players are remembered for their performance in the individual leagues. Besides, if you want a team-based competition, first of all the NASL format is wrong from the beginning because it's structured like an individual league, not a team league. Second of all, you need actual pro teams. If you expect teams to just become professional by limiting powerhouses like Liquid so the others can catch up, you're just screwing up the powerhouses that drive the scene forward. I mean, Root as it is (a kickass team) can't get decent sponsorship deals, how do you expect other teams which are not nearly as good to catch up by preventing Haypro from playing in NASL? Haypro won't join a lesser team for lesser money, it's bad for his... well, life. He might just quit the game and do a different job that makes more sense, and the scene just lost an awesome player. | ||
|
MonsieurGrimm
Canada2441 Posts
On February 24 2011 08:38 ReachTheSky wrote: They really need to stop calling this thing a league. Its more like an invitational minus one spot(what a fucking joke). sigh. Whats funny is that this league was never about making esports big. It was about how one person saw how they could make a shitload of money. Yet its for esports!!! rofl what a joke. ALL the players and this community make up esports. Having a purely invite tourny does not benefit esports as a whole. GSL/KPGA/OSL/MSL all had prelims. Prelims that allowed EVERYONE to try their heart out. This is nothing but selection just so you folks can try and make dough. ;/ I'm disappointed in the direction this so called 'esports' is heading. Hopefully you get your act together. Maybe you missed the part about the open tournament that if you win, gives you an instant spot into the top 16? You also seem to have forgotten that the NASL isn't the only Starcraft 2 league in North America, people who want to get into the NASL can prove their worth at MLG or a smaller NA tourney/league as well as competitions outside of the states. You're saying that the league is a money grab without even backing up your claims with evidence or logic, which is a big fucking accusation. I'm glad that nobody involved in the league gives a shit about you or else you might ruin it for everyone. | ||
|
jtbem
Canada1404 Posts
team kills are suppose to happen its a 1v1 game...every man for themselves. | ||
Daigomi
South Africa4316 Posts
On February 24 2011 08:56 Parnage wrote: The five player per team rule is a reasonable rule. If only because, can that team afford to send the entire line up? Does every player want to schedule around it?(ie if you have a player in Korea do they really want to handle the lag to play in NASL?) and does the team even have 5 players worth putting into the self described "Best 50 players"? At the moment these things really don't seem to be a big enough problem for it to work or not work. I do admit it's a problem that has to be delt with but at the time, most likely not. Players on a team? That's reasonable. If you are a solid good player, you should have no problems finding a team if only to play in NASL. People throw out a person like White-ra but let's be honest, White Ra could get a team faster then incontrol could break a nerds spine if he wanted to. I think in the future a bigger and more recognized league would be best to have a qualifier thats more open but for right now it's not a problem. Shouldn't it be up to the team to decide if it wants to invest in its players participating in the tournament? And as has been mentioned countless times, the limitation ONLY excludes players good enough to qualify in strong teams. If the limitation has no practical effect right now, but could be damaging in future, including the limitation now is still unnecessary? Now seems to be the ideal time to get rid of unnecessary rules, as the organizers keep telling us that nothing is final yet. Why should players be forced to join a team to participate in an individual event. White-Ra has his own personal sponsor, so why should he be forced to take a demotion to a small team (it would need to be a small team because of the five player rule) in order to participate in the tournament. It's not about whether top players could find teams, it's about an arbitrary limitation that serves no purpose (you don't mention the good the limitation does either). The limitation seems to have no purpose, while at the same time excluding top players unless they abide by arbitrary and potentially harmful rules. Once again, it should be pointed out that the limitation is only a limitation if it excludes someone. If the limitation did not exclude a person from participating, then there would be no need to use it. So all this limitation can do is harm the competition, unless someone can provide a good reason why it should exist. | ||
|
love.less
United Kingdom293 Posts
seems really unfair in a more than a couple of ways | ||
|
Froadac
United States6733 Posts
Introducing team Froadac. All members will get free coupons for top ramen!! ^ What I hope doesn't happen | ||
|
Shanlan
United States41 Posts
There are a lot of unanswered questions dealing with this "starleague". Is it team oriented or individual oriented? Is the goal to find the 50 best players or 50 most famous? If this is an individual bases league then teams have no factor on how it should run. You wouldn't advertise anything about teams. When you watch all-star games you don't care what team the players are on, only how they are doing. If the goal is for 50 best players then the whole invite selection method is flawed as well. Lastly, for new tournaments there should be the least restrictions possible. The more rules you add the smaller the field, the more problems you have to solve. Rules are added later to deal with problems that arise. Rules that also only apply to specific instances are also not well written, they should address general problems. Saying that because in this case it doesn't create problems is short-sighted and narrow-minded. Best example of a good starting guideline is the US constitution, a general outline of what the goal of an organization wants to achieve and how they go about doing it. Then additional restrictions were added to address problems that developed. Right now rules are being added to restrict things that haven't even happened. The goals and ideas of this league are very confusing and vague, and the motivations behind them are questionable at best. | ||
|
gods_basement
United States305 Posts
Inctontrol thinks for a moment about what MLG did wrong, and says, "We need backstory." okay, what else? "Team kills suck." and that was really all the thought they put into it. Obviously, when you flesh out the arguments regarding collusion and equality and development of esports (like Tyler has), then they begin to crumble. So all thats happening right now is we're getting into a semantic argument of what is "fair." The bottom line is that it doesn't matter what is fair. The NASL is a event that needs spectators to survive; without it, no sponsors, no money, no players, no league. Well, what do the spectators want? obviously, if you read these posts, you will see that spectators want different things. Some want to see up and comers fight the odds and make it. I however, just want to see the best players playing the best damn Starcraft in the world. It logically follows that any rule about selecting players that doesn't include "Choose the best player" is limiting to what i want to see of NASL. | ||
|
ScarletKnight
United States691 Posts
On February 24 2011 08:53 Daigomi wrote: Any prestige Liquid has is prestige that they earned in a fair and open field. As I mention, the "cap" that they include in many professional sports is because certain teams have unfair advantages. New York has an advantage because they have a "guaranteed" 15,000,000 supporters. They didn't earn those 15,000,000 supporters. Liquid has no such advantage. You could try to argue that because of the forums, we have more supporters, but the team built these forums, just like Vile could build their own forums. Every advantage that Liquid hasm they earned in an equal playing field, and that's the way its supposed to be. I'm sorry if I don't follow or am misinterpreting you here, but I don't believe it is on even ground as it stands right now. While I agree that from the beginning Liquid was on even ground to build itself up from the beginning, as of the present this site and the team has more support and a following than any other foreigner SC2 team. Liquid would have a "guaranteed" support base as of now based on these forums alone. They would be the odds on favorite (maybe not skills wise, but definitely fan support wise) of any match because of this website and these forums, regardless of the fact that the team and the site are not one in the same. And my point is that the advantage that Liquid has right now may be too much for some teams to overcome. Which is why the 5-man limit would help. On February 24 2011 09:00 Talin wrote: But it isn't in his best interest. Obviously there are more competitions than NASL, but for the sake of argument and principle let's assume otherwise - in that situation, there is no good decision for Haypro. If he stays on TL, he can't compete in the highest profile tournament. If he quits and joins another team, he will lose a (probably) great contract with TL as well as many other benefits necessary for his career to progress (practice partners etc). No matter what he decides, his career will take a step for the worse, because there is no way he can improve as much outside of TL as he can within it (+ the financial factor will kick in), and he can't improve in TL either because he can't play in the most important tournament on the planet. It's a lose-lose situation. I see your point. I'll concede that arguement to you. Look, while I do appreciate with effort, every single analogy made in this topic was just bad, including that one. Instead of making superficial analogies with other sports disregarding all the essential differences, we should just focus on what's best for the actual Starcraft scene where, again, IT IS NOT ABOUT TEAMS. There isn't even a single team-based competition that is considered important right now (There was GCPL and that Machinima tournament that Liquid or Fnatic for example didn't even take seriously because they are irrelevant to the grand scheme of things). Starcraft is an individual sport, if you want to make analogies, make analogies to individual sports. But I would prefer no analogies as analogies suck in general to be honest. =P I agree it is not about the teams themselves per-se but the argument is based around a team restriction so unfortunately the teams will be affected. That I believe was the root of this topic in the first place. And I'll lay off the analogies now ^_^ Liquid doesn't win things, the players do. Competition between players is what drives Starcraft, not competition between teams. It's Ret that won the Assembly, not Liquid. It's Jinro that made it to back-to-back semifinals in GSL, not Liquid. And if Jinro and Ret have to play each other, it will be between Jinro and Ret, not a Liquid and Liquid. Even in Korea that did eventually grow a team league competition and it became reasonably popular, a player achieves greatness only and ONLY by winning a Starleague (or a few), and all the legendary players are remembered for their performance in the individual leagues. Besides, if you want a team-based competition, first of all the NASL format is wrong from the beginning because it's structured like an individual league, not a team league. Second of all, you need actual pro teams. If you expect teams to just become professional by limiting powerhouses like Liquid so the others can catch up, you're just screwing up the powerhouses that drive the scene forward. I mean, Root as it is (a kickass team) can't get decent sponsorship deals, how do you expect other teams which are not nearly as good to catch up? While I see your point, I addressed that in my other response above. The whole root of this issue is the fact that teams cannot send more than 5 players. And while it is in fact individuals creating the results, they are still associated with their team and representing their team. Jinro of TEAM LIQUID make back to back semi's. Ret of TEAM LIQUID won Assembly. Idra of EG won MLG DC. Huk of TEAM LIQUID won MLG Raleigh. And so on. I agree it's a problem that some players will not be able to go because of the team restrictions, but maybe this will create chances other players might not have had in the first place. Who knows? I'm willing to wait and find out. Again, I say Tyler made great points and I agree with most of them, I'm just playing Devils advocate here. | ||
|
Sylvr
United States524 Posts
The 5 players per team limit is fundamentally flawed. Since 5 is an arbitrary number (I know it's based off the number of divisions, but that in itself is arbitrary, so it carries over), you could assign it any number and carry it out to it's conclusion and see that it just doesn't make sense. For instance, let's say the limit were 2 players per team instead of 5. Now you are even LESS likely to have the top 50 players represented. If you want the best, then don't impose nonsensical limitations that might jeopardize that claim. If you want "fair representation", then don't advertise that you're providing the best. The accountability and collusion issues are too weak of excuses (even if these rules could be shown to actually address them, which I don't believe they do) to be worth diluting the quality of your players. That being said, if Russ is unwilling to give ground on this issue, the larger and more accomplished teams could make the best of it and perhaps hold televised in-house tournaments/show matches to determine who gets the 5 slots. It could create some more back-story for the main event. | ||
|
ptell
United States103 Posts
Tyler already mentioned in SOTG that TLAF-Liquid can technically "split" the team into two smaller teams (say Liquid-NA and Liquid-South Korea), hence circumventing the 5-player limit. In the end, it boils down to what constitutes a "team". White-ra might argue that Duckload is indeed a team with only one player. If TLAF-Liquid does play hardball and split into two teams, what can NASL do? Talk to the lawyers? | ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
| ||
|
Ikuu
United Kingdom97 Posts
We should try and make a list of the 50 people who deserve to be invited and see how many each team really has. | ||
| ||
