|
On May 29 2009 15:02 Polemarch wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2009 14:33 baubo wrote:
Meh, looks cool to me.Hey, whatever they feel can make money. And after all, people do want to see stars. Why not give them a free pass into the MST.
The schedule change implies that apparently, no one wants to watch the same people over and over. So the entire plan is to have more people appear on TV on any given night. I like it, mainly because this favors Khan players who seem to be better when given preparation. Good calls on both points. I think both of those changes will boost ratings for next season, but if these rules seem to hokey it might damage the prestige of the MSL, and thus hurt their long-term business.
There have already been a few comments regarding this in the thread. Which got me curious. I'm not familiar with Korean culture, but how does this sort of stuff affect MSL's prestige?
|
nothing wrong wit old format - -
|
On May 29 2009 16:05 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
i mean fuck we are guaranteed one air force ace player in the round of 32 and people are complaining
lol this =DDD
|
On May 29 2009 16:05 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote:
i mean fuck we are guaranteed one air force ace player in the round of 32 and people are complaining
You got it wrong. They are not even guaranteed a spot in the R32 of the MSL. They are guaranteed a spot in the MST, the survivor tournament. So it's not like they get a free pass into the MSL. Kind of a halfway thing here where they still need to "earn" their spot in the MSL by clearing a tough round robin but they skip the offline prelims where there is a chance of an upset based on the sheer number of games that you need to win in a row.
I totally agree with FakeSteve here. Although I don't like the splitting of the BO5, I think giving the top KeSPA seed from every team to the MST (not MSL) is an excellent move. I think this gives the best players a better chance to qualify rather than rewarding washed up vets since the washed up vets will most likely not even be the #1 ranked player on their team anyway.
|
Splitting up Bo5's is gonna be weird. The MSL having Bo5's from the round of 8 (pretty sure that's when it starts) and not just Bo3 like the OSL is one things I actually enjoy more about the tournament. However, I actually think the entry into MST based on Kespa rank might be a good thing since you've got good players who don't have to deal with getting stuck in the offlines for seasons on end (Hi Best).
|
seed Nada that's all i care about 
|
On May 29 2009 14:52 konadora wrote:
Uh... they should stop screwing up MSL. Not that it was that good in the first place but...
I don't understand why it's become popular lately on TL to bash on the MSL. I know the OSL has been more prestigious forever but it seems like only in the past year or so that it turned into common knowledge on TL. Now everyone is quick to bash on MSL when convenient, or to make arguments about 1 OSL = 2 MSL or other ridiculous stuff.
I mean come on, none of these changes were really THAT bad. People are just biased against change from the MSL. When the new MST system came out a month ago a lot of people jumped on it and look how that's turned out. If the OSL made changes like this people would be saying stuff like "props to the OSL for innovating and rewarding top Kespa seeds while the MSL lets them die". Fakesteve put it best - take a look at the Kespa list ... it's really not that big of a deal. Remember when Jaedong got Han'd and BackHo'd out of OSL? Remember when Stork was double 5-pooled? Come on.
Good young new players will still find their way into MST like they always have before - it's all they have to practice for anyway and truly great players have never had any problem breaking into the scene.
P.S. I'm not trying to pick on konadora one bit - just semi-randomly picked an anti-MSL post. You're one of the greatest things to happen to TL .. thanks for all that you do.
|
On May 29 2009 14:22 ZBiR wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2009 14:17 Emlary wrote:
4.) The player with the highest KeSPA ranking of each team will get a free access to MST. (If the No.1 player of a team has already made into MST or MSL, I guess the No.2 player will take the spot.). I like this one.
Does this include ACE?
|
I think the first one is annoying, but i can live with it. Same with splitting up the best-of-5s in round of 8. Rule four, however, is just lame. Teams were just getting upset that they wern't getting any publicity during the starleagues and apperently MBC agreed and thought that this broken rule would fix all that. Players who didn't make it in the first time are not magically going to do better just because they get a free pass.
|
Everything else doesn't matter to me but splitting up bo5's is a fucking joke.
Seriously that is the HARDEST moment of any starcraft players career, they should be sitting there sweating it out back to back. That is where stars are made.
|
On May 29 2009 14:45 JWD wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2009 14:42 AzureEye wrote:I hate the breaking up of BO5 but I love the idea of giving free MST access to highest Kespa ranking players Less random no-names in tournaments I guess Every "highest KeSPA ranking player" was once a "random no-name". This rule change punishes up-and-coming talent - younger, generally more motivated and skilled players - thereby killing game quality. And let me say something about splitting up BoX series: it's fucking awful. Separating the conclusion of a series from its beginning by enough practice days for a player to a) adjust to a certain strategy or style and b) re-compose himself punishes innovative players and mentally tough players and decreases the utility of exciting new builds and playstyles immensely. Imagine if GGPlay had had a week to react to Fantasy's mech build in the middle of their OSL Ro4 series - Fantasy may not have even been able to win one Bo5 on a build that revolutionized the Terran versus Zerg matchup. The MSL's organizers may feel that separating series increases suspense - it may, but at the expense of every exciting series-long storyline. A comeback is much less exciting if it occurs across two days of play separated by a week of downtime (is it even a comeback?), and a sweep is much less of a statement if its last wins are delayed. Basically, splitting BoX series is bad for innovation (bad for gamers) and bad for drama (bad for fans). When the series is Bo3, both of these effects are limited enough to be tolerable (and it's less likely a player will prepare an earth-shattering strategy for a Bo3 series, for example) but across a Bo5 series - the ultimate test in professional SC - this split will be just awful. I'm really disappointed in the MSL for making this format change in particular.
I'd actually argue that splitting up the series creates more innovation as it gives time for the winner/loser to analyze their opponent's strategy. That means that each match has a lot more analysis and thought put into it. To me, this advances the metagame strategy--"innovation" if you will--a lot more than a consecutive game series. On the same token, the series becomes less about stamina and more about actual gameplay. Granted, this punishes star players who are familiar with the spotlight, but that's not necessarily a bad thing as it forces them to stay sharp.
But one thing is for sure though--the series will definitely lose its epicness.
|
On May 29 2009 19:16 gchan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2009 14:45 JWD wrote:On May 29 2009 14:42 AzureEye wrote:I hate the breaking up of BO5 but I love the idea of giving free MST access to highest Kespa ranking players Less random no-names in tournaments I guess Every "highest KeSPA ranking player" was once a "random no-name". This rule change punishes up-and-coming talent - younger, generally more motivated and skilled players - thereby killing game quality. And let me say something about splitting up BoX series: it's fucking awful. Separating the conclusion of a series from its beginning by enough practice days for a player to a) adjust to a certain strategy or style and b) re-compose himself punishes innovative players and mentally tough players and decreases the utility of exciting new builds and playstyles immensely. Imagine if GGPlay had had a week to react to Fantasy's mech build in the middle of their OSL Ro4 series - Fantasy may not have even been able to win one Bo5 on a build that revolutionized the Terran versus Zerg matchup. The MSL's organizers may feel that separating series increases suspense - it may, but at the expense of every exciting series-long storyline. A comeback is much less exciting if it occurs across two days of play separated by a week of downtime (is it even a comeback?), and a sweep is much less of a statement if its last wins are delayed. Basically, splitting BoX series is bad for innovation (bad for gamers) and bad for drama (bad for fans). When the series is Bo3, both of these effects are limited enough to be tolerable (and it's less likely a player will prepare an earth-shattering strategy for a Bo3 series, for example) but across a Bo5 series - the ultimate test in professional SC - this split will be just awful. I'm really disappointed in the MSL for making this format change in particular. I'd actually argue that splitting up the series creates more innovation as it gives time for the winner/loser to analyze their opponent's strategy. That means that each match has a lot more analysis and thought put into it. To me, this advances the metagame strategy--"innovation" if you will--a lot more than a consecutive game series. On the same token, the series becomes less about stamina and more about actual gameplay. Granted, this punishes star players who are familiar with the spotlight, but that's not necessarily a bad thing as it forces them to stay sharp. But one thing is for sure though--the series will definitely lose its epicness.
It might end up having the effect of making the semis and finals more epic, being the only "pure" BO5s.
|
On May 29 2009 19:09 AttackZerg wrote:
Everything else doesn't matter to me but splitting up bo5's is a fucking joke.
Seriously that is the HARDEST moment of any starcraft players career, they should be sitting there sweating it out back to back. That is where stars are made.
Well, they're only splitting up the RO8 games ... OSL doesn't even have BO5 in RO8.
|
On May 29 2009 19:16 gchan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2009 14:45 JWD wrote:On May 29 2009 14:42 AzureEye wrote:I hate the breaking up of BO5 but I love the idea of giving free MST access to highest Kespa ranking players Less random no-names in tournaments I guess Every "highest KeSPA ranking player" was once a "random no-name". This rule change punishes up-and-coming talent - younger, generally more motivated and skilled players - thereby killing game quality. And let me say something about splitting up BoX series: it's fucking awful. Separating the conclusion of a series from its beginning by enough practice days for a player to a) adjust to a certain strategy or style and b) re-compose himself punishes innovative players and mentally tough players and decreases the utility of exciting new builds and playstyles immensely. Imagine if GGPlay had had a week to react to Fantasy's mech build in the middle of their OSL Ro4 series - Fantasy may not have even been able to win one Bo5 on a build that revolutionized the Terran versus Zerg matchup. The MSL's organizers may feel that separating series increases suspense - it may, but at the expense of every exciting series-long storyline. A comeback is much less exciting if it occurs across two days of play separated by a week of downtime (is it even a comeback?), and a sweep is much less of a statement if its last wins are delayed. Basically, splitting BoX series is bad for innovation (bad for gamers) and bad for drama (bad for fans). When the series is Bo3, both of these effects are limited enough to be tolerable (and it's less likely a player will prepare an earth-shattering strategy for a Bo3 series, for example) but across a Bo5 series - the ultimate test in professional SC - this split will be just awful. I'm really disappointed in the MSL for making this format change in particular. I'd actually argue that splitting up the series creates more innovation as it gives time for the winner/loser to analyze their opponent's strategy. That means that each match has a lot more analysis and thought put into it. To me, this advances the metagame strategy--"innovation" if you will--a lot more than a consecutive game series. On the same token, the series becomes less about stamina and more about actual gameplay. Granted, this punishes star players who are familiar with the spotlight, but that's not necessarily a bad thing as it forces them to stay sharp. But one thing is for sure though--the series will definitely lose its epicness.
I don't think splitting the match creates more innovation. The chance that someone comes up with a completely new build right in the week in between games isn't too high. And if they had the new build before the first game already, they wouldn't use it and play a conventional style instead so the opponent has no time to prepare. Only in matches 2-5 would we see innovation.
|
I prefered watching the MSL since you had all games of a group in one day. Now with all the changes thats impossible. So confusing. Who whan what? Hard to remember when games are a month apart.
Giving players a seed because of their KeSPA ranking is bs too.
|
Well after reading numerous interviews players who passed MST saying that their goal is to avoid offline premilinaries (and complex qualifiers). For this MSL is listening progamers, which is good.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
This is fucking stupid. Go back to the fucking days of UZOO already. Thats a true fucking format.
Fuck helll rahhhhh
/MSL RAGE
More reason why I refuse to cover this piece of shit league
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On May 29 2009 18:05 darktreb wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2009 14:52 konadora wrote:
Uh... they should stop screwing up MSL. Not that it was that good in the first place but... I don't understand why it's become popular lately on TL to bash on the MSL. I know the OSL has been more prestigious forever but it seems like only in the past year or so that it turned into common knowledge on TL. Now everyone is quick to bash on MSL when convenient, or to make arguments about 1 OSL = 2 MSL or other ridiculous stuff
This is no new idea on TL. This has been long held common knowledge. Indeed, no one gave a shit about the MSL on TL until around about Uzoo/Cyon. Uzoo/YATGK didn't even get R&S threads lolz
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Splitting up Bo5s is stupid..... They are exciting because it's 5 games in a row, you want to kill all tension by packing up after 1 game? .___.
Splitting Bo3s I can SORT of understand but Bo5s >_
|
On May 29 2009 20:12 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Splitting up Bo5s is stupid..... They are exciting because it's 5 games in a row, you want to kill all tension by packing up after 1 game? .___.
Splitting Bo3s I can SORT of understand but Bo5s >_<??
splitting BO3s? thats so weird, but because OSL favorism here so it seems to be okay. I mean losing first game you are panicking next time you play, but at least BO5 you have 2 games to make comeback.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
