EPTEG launch $10,000 Master's Cup Series League - Page 19
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Klaent
Sweden374 Posts
| ||
|
Deindar
United States302 Posts
 | ||
|
dtz
5834 Posts
On May 02 2011 16:54 Liquid`Jinro wrote: ... Explain how that is not the objectively fairest solution then? Option 1: Everyone plays on NA Option 2: EU vs NA 50/50 eu/na, EU vs KR 100% NA, NA vs KR 50/50 KR/NA How is this not more fair? I really dont understand why its fine for me to play in lag, but as soon as its proposed that NA players play half their games under the same conditions, its suddenly unfair? Why? For the spectator here is the point of view that I think has been said by various people Option 1. Only 3 KR players have lag while Some EU players have not ideal latency but very playable according to a lot of people ( idra - playable, drewbie - zero lag). Unfair for KR. Slightly unfair for EU but ensure the highest number of players playing in as ideal condition as possible. Option 2. Much more teams have lag issues. Frustration ensue + Lower quality of play. Option 2 also means that Team Liquid has advantage in ace matches because they will never be at a disadvantage server wise. Otherwise, fair all around because everyone who plays cross server lags. No solution is fair at the moment because the way cross server region is coded at the moment. But option 1 will put 3 people at a disadvantage while the rest will be relatively happy. While option 2 makes everyone frustrated. | ||
|
Liquid`Nazgul
22427 Posts
I agree with you that it would be fairer and I also think any tourney that can feasibly alternate between servers should do so even if there is only one player from KR. I don't know all the work that goes into making a tourney like this happen but I don't see how it can be that inconvenient. However as far as I'm concerned TL is full of hypocrites now. People suggesting lag affected results were banned and flooded by negative responses. Then the very people who were completely downplaying the lag refuse to join a tourney for that very reason. This completely shows that TSL shouldn't be used by anyone to judge anything relating to player skill. This seems an entirely wrong understanding of the situation. Jinro even made a forum post during TSL which said there is a delay, but that when properly prepared you can deal with it. That was regarding Europe vs Korea play; something which we ask no changes for here, something which we would be ready to prepare for. We are basically asking for the exact same conditions as TSL was played in so how does that make anyone a hypocrite? Please try to understand the situation better if you're going to make posts like this. | ||
|
Skipton
United States707 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:11 Asha` wrote: I was excited, then I read there was 2v2. Not this shit again  Exactly, it diminishes the status of the league. There are honestly no positive aspects at all of 2v2 matches in a competitive format. I don't see how any player in the league would rather have a 2v2 match than an extra 1v1 match. | ||
|
FXOpen
Australia1844 Posts
Kudos to EG for having a team league. Sounds very entertaining. Would have been nice to see liquid play but oh well.. To try add a little perspective to the people who think the better players are in europe so it all should be done on europe. In terms of viewer demographics (I think I am entitled to post this), North America trumps any other continent. It is more lucrative for any team to host on the NA server at NA times, this is just plain business sense. Viewers = money. I think that the community is a little bit blind to how much catering to players actually goes on. And that if e-sports are going to be truely professional, the ones who get paid should be the ones who have to adapt, not the spectators, or organisers (ones who are paying). I am all for tournaments on every server, including SEA and RU, TW.. The unknowns per se. But saying that e-Sports belongs somewhere is ridiculous. In the end, its all about business. | ||
|
Zicco
18 Posts
| ||
|
Frozenserpent
United States143 Posts
On May 02 2011 16:54 Liquid`Jinro wrote: ... Explain how that is not the objectively fairest solution then? Option 1: Everyone plays on NA Option 2: EU vs NA 50/50 eu/na, EU vs KR 100% NA, NA vs KR 50/50 KR/NA How is this not more fair? I really dont understand why its fine for me to play in lag, but as soon as its proposed that NA players play half their games under the same conditions, its suddenly unfair? Why? Well NA players suffer the most under the proposed rule change. KOR-NA latency is different from EU-NA latency and has different timings. So while KOR players just need to practice no latency and KOR-NA delay, and while EU players just need to practice no latency and EU-NA delay, NA players must split their practice between KOR-NA delay and EU-NA delay. Having to switch up between different delays can be quite troubling, while having an expected delay isn't so much. In fact, I imagine most players would fare very poorly at adjusting to 3 different timings between games (NA-NA latency, EU-NA latency, and KOR-NA latency). This can even be used to mess with player's timings in a cw. First play in a KOR-NA latency, then send in a EU player to get them to play in EU-NA latency in a short period of time. This is much worse than just playing in a set EU-NA latency or KOR-NA latency for both sets. So I don't really consider the proposed change to be completely fair, either. Now if you were to ask me what would be the most fair choice after all. Then I suppose the best way to deal with it is to restrict it to NA/EU regions only, and then to alternate between NA and EU. In this case, it ends up with it being NA/EU, but not a mandatory alternating between NA and EU servers. I suspect that if there were enough top level NA teams, EG would have invited only NA teams, so it seems that they only invited non-NA teams because there simply aren't 8 NA teams that are competitive at the top level. | ||
|
CryMeAReaper
Denmark1135 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:16 Zicco wrote: i agree with EG. sorry its ok | ||
BLinD-RawR
ALLEYCAT BLUES51080 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:15 Skipton wrote: Exactly, it diminishes the status of the league. There are honestly no positive aspects at all of 2v2 matches in a competitive format. I don't see how any player in the league would rather have a 2v2 match than an extra 1v1 match. Day[9] Disagrees,watch all the dailies of last week,he makes 2v2 Interesting.I wonder what happens when 2 money dumping teams play against each other. | ||
|
Hatorade
299 Posts
| ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:18 BLinD-RawR wrote: Day[9] Disagrees,watch all the dailies of last week,he makes 2v2 Interesting.I wonder what happens when 2 money dumping teams play against each other. The game isn't balanced around 2v2 though. There are certain race combos which are objectively better across the board. I'm not anti-2v2 tho since I enjoyed it back in the BW days. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:14 dtz wrote: For the spectator here is the point of view that I think has been said by various people Option 1. Only 3 KR players have lag while Some EU players have not ideal latency but very playable according to a lot of people ( idra - playable, drewbie - zero lag). Unfair for KR. Slightly unfair for EU but ensure the highest number of players playing in as ideal condition as possible. Option 2. Much more teams have lag issues. Frustration ensue + Lower quality of play. Option 2 also means that Team Liquid has advantage in ace matches because they will never be at a disadvantage server wise. Otherwise, fair all around because everyone who plays cross server lags. Wait, why do we have an advantage in ace matches? Why is there more lag? There is not more lag, the lag is just distributed between more players. OK so theres 8 teams, so we would have played 7 matches. Lets say we use one kor player per game. So every week we have 1 laggy bo3, and KOR player has played 7 laggy series, lets say they all ended 2-0 in whatever favor, so 14 games. If we do the 50/50 solution, the KOR player has still played 7 laggy series, but only 7 laggy games. From each team we played, they will have had 1 player who had to play 1 laggy game. For the viewer the quality is unchanged. | ||
|
firehand101
Australia3152 Posts
(P:S ^ jinro you're so legend!) | ||
|
Skipton
United States707 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:18 BLinD-RawR wrote: Day[9] Disagrees,watch all the dailies of last week,he makes 2v2 Interesting.I wonder what happens when 2 money dumping teams play against each other. I'm not really concerned that he disagrees. Look at the ratio of the dailies he does on 1v1 play than look at the ratio of 2v2 play. It's different for a reason. The game is not balanced for competitive play in a 2v2 format and the level of play will not be up to the standard that 1v1 is currently at. I can't possibly see how it is entertaining for a player to start from scratch in playing 2v2 or for a spectator to watch their favorite team loose a match because their team lost the 2v2 and it couldn't go to the final bo3 ace match. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:15 Skipton wrote: Exactly, it diminishes the status of the league. There are honestly no positive aspects at all of 2v2 matches in a competitive format. I don't see how any player in the league would rather have a 2v2 match than an extra 1v1 match. 2v2 matches are very entertaining to watch. isnt that the purpose of a league? | ||
|
Skipton
United States707 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:22 dAPhREAk wrote: 2v2 matches are very entertaining to watch. isnt that the purpose of a league? FFA are entertaining to watch as well, it doesn't mean its healthy for the league. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:24 Skipton wrote: FFA are entertaining to watch as well, it doesn't mean its healthy for the league. not sure how that even relates. how are you going to do a ffa in a team league? i am also ignoring the fact that ffa games don't reflect skill as it has more to do with luck than anything else. 2v2 is entertaining, involves well developed skills and strategies, and fits with a team league. | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:15 FXOpen wrote: Wow this thread is a mind boggler. Kudos to EG for having a team league. Sounds very entertaining. Would have been nice to see liquid play but oh well.. To try add a little perspective to the people who think the better players are in europe so it all should be done on europe. In terms of viewer demographics (I think I am entitled to post this), North America trumps any other continent. It is more lucrative for any team to host on the NA server at NA times, this is just plain business sense. Viewers = money. I think that the community is a little bit blind to how much catering to players actually goes on. And that if e-sports are going to be truely professional, the ones who get paid should be the ones who have to adapt, not the spectators, or organisers (ones who are paying). I am all for tournaments on every server, including SEA and RU, TW.. The unknowns per se. But saying that e-Sports belongs somewhere is ridiculous. In the end, its all about business. You realize of course that the server you play your games on, has nothing to do with broadcasting times? All games are pre-played and broadcast from replays. In the case of NASL I understand why it has to be on US - they record all their games as they are played, yes they arent broadcast live but they have casters etc there. I think its the wrong way to do it, but I understand why it would never work to switch servers in such a situation. Thats fine, this is different. | ||
|
firehand101
Australia3152 Posts
On May 02 2011 17:22 dAPhREAk wrote: 2v2 matches are very entertaining to watch. isnt that the purpose of a league? 2v2 is somewhat entertaining, and i'm sure it is very exciting for many people. But trying to get blizzard to balance that is just plain impossible. Maybe it does have a place in tourneys, but not as a main event. Maybe as fun for the spectators pre-tourney they could have random pros teaming up to showcase crazy tactics! eg. MC and Julyzerg vs Idra and HuK ! lol And then the winners get $100 or something, but it wont ever be as big as 1v1 | ||
| ||
