EPTI'm, however surprised, that, Liquid declined to participate in somewhat unfavorable conditions, they only would've applied to EU vs KOR games, and half of TL lineup (Ret, TLO, Tyler) would've been able to play those comfortably.
EG launch $10,000 Master's Cup Series League - Page 24
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Go0g3n
Russian Federation410 Posts
I'm, however surprised, that, Liquid declined to participate in somewhat unfavorable conditions, they only would've applied to EU vs KOR games, and half of TL lineup (Ret, TLO, Tyler) would've been able to play those comfortably. | ||
|
Gheed
United States972 Posts
Fairness is everyone agreeing to and following a set of rules. Equality is creating rules such that everyone is on equal footing. If EG wants to create a league where the rules are that everyone must play on the NA server, and everyone agrees to do so, then that's fair, even if the result of those rules are games where both players do not have 100% equal chance to win. So, I think any animus toward EG is unwarranted, since it's their show, and they should be able to establish whatever rules they wish, so long as those rules are applied to everyone. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 02 2011 19:27 Klive5ive wrote: It's not the first time TL has told other tournaments what they should be doing. It's happened many many times in BroodWar and now in SC2; a lot of it was justified but recently it's too much. It's good for drama, say what you want, but you have to be able to take as well as give. The rules of this clanleague are fair. The rules are set out and apply to every team; they are consistent and therefore fair. Do the rules makes it easy for TL to participate? No they don't. Fair enough ask for a rule change, but then when it's denied just bow out respectfully. To start moaning at the organisers for not accomodating your specific requirements is really un-classy. TL the site and TL the team are two separate entities... How this thread went was: 1) Random forum poster: Wheres TL! 2) EG: TL declined to participate. 3) Random: Why? 4) TL: Because X Yes, some hostility from both sides, but I think explaining why we feel something is unfair is a pretty reasonable. | ||
|
Pipeline
Sweden1673 Posts
If you want good games, then you need the players to play with the same (or close to) conditions | ||
|
Dakmaniac
212 Posts
srsly this event sounds awesome and comes with a promising production value :D thumbs uP ! | ||
|
nihlon
Sweden5581 Posts
On May 02 2011 19:27 Klive5ive wrote: It's not the first time TL has told other tournaments what they should be doing. It's happened many many times in BroodWar and now in SC2; a lot of it was justified but recently it's too much. It's good for drama, say what you want, but you have to be able to take as well as give. The rules of this clanleague are fair. The rules are set out and apply to every team; they are consistent and therefore fair. Do the rules makes it easy for TL to participate? No they don't. Fair enough ask for a rule change, but then when it's denied just bow out respectfully. To start moaning at the organisers for not accomodating your specific requirements is really un-classy. How is "applying to all teams" + "consistent" = "fair?" That doesn't make sense. It might or might not be fair but those two things have nothing to do with it. | ||
|
Greggor
Sweden119 Posts
Allways more exciting to watch, cool to see how 2v2 games turn out. | ||
|
eGo.SiGns
Germany48 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. 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. First of all, i would like to mention that you cant just ignore the lag between EU and NA. The players you mentioned are all NA-Players and are profiting the most from the current rules. It may sound a bit "dark" but i think you are too naive if you just take their "no difference" for granted. Furthermore the only EU player that has made a post in this thread is Naniwa and he clearly stated that even though the lag may not be as bad as KR / NA, there is a disadvantage for european players playing on NA and that given the opportunity the EU Teams would obviously choose the system mentioned by TL.net. Regarding your "Option 2:" It seems like most people dont understand that the only teams affected by this change would be the NA Teams. Looking at the invited teams i think one can assume that sixjaxx would not have been invited if TL had accepted their invitation... That would mean, that while the 3 NA Teams would only lose their evident advantage, all other 5 teams would benefit from this change. Stating things like "inconvinience" for all other teams is just wrong, as shown above most teams benefit from it anyway. I'm sorry, but the only logical reason to hold on to their old / bad rules regarding the servers is that they want to make sure that their players have an unfair advantage above everyone else and therefore make sure the money stays in NA. I really hope this underhanded scheme will fail and Dignitas will win this thing... a hope that is not really that farfetched imo. Greetings, SiGns | ||
|
SayTT
Sweden2158 Posts
On May 02 2011 11:15 Zlasher wrote: The 2v2 is probably going to favor EG the most if you ask me. Axslav and Strifecro are like, the best 2v2 team around, they went undefeated with ease in that machinima realm invitational, and they were basically top of the ladder whenever they found time to play. They were also known to be one of the best 2v2 teams in WC3. It depends on if MyM picks up Testie. Mondi hinted on him and Testie playing 2v2 in sc2 in the future, that duo would overshadow everyone if they trained for it. | ||
|
shell
Portugal2722 Posts
I guess everyone should always try and make the fairest tournaments possible but in this case i guess cross servers would "benefit" TL over the other teams just because almost no NA player has played in KR atleast i think so and the koreans TLers have played in NA, so they have some edge there. I also don't think that the euros should play on the NA vs NA players but i guess that is also the easy way of doing things.. Considering everything i feel TL did the right thing by not accepting the invite and EG also because they did what they think is better for them since they are the ones that have to run it and make it work.. Liquid is not evil for not accepting, Jinro/HuK/Haypro are not the devil! EG is not evil for not changing the rules, idra/incontrol are not the devil! Everyone that feels this league will bring excitment and good games just watch it, everybody that hates simply ignore it! | ||
|
JKira
Canada1002 Posts
On May 02 2011 19:27 Klive5ive wrote: It's not the first time TL has told other tournaments what they should be doing. It's happened many many times in BroodWar and now in SC2; a lot of it was justified but recently it's too much. It's good for drama, say what you want, but you have to be able to take as well as give. The rules of this clanleague are fair. The rules are set out and apply to every team; they are consistent and therefore fair. Do the rules makes it easy for TL to participate? No they don't. Fair enough ask for a rule change, but then when it's denied just bow out respectfully. To start moaning at the organisers for not accomodating your specific requirements is really un-classy. What other tournaments has TL been complaining about recently? How does consistent and applying to every team correlate to fairness? Imagine this same league with TL participating and the rules were that every game was to be hosted on the KR server. This applies consistently and to all teams. Would you really say this is fair? You make think TL bringing this issue out in public is childish and moaning, but they want to set a standard for how international tournaments should be handled. I think a lot of people would agree that EU and KR has a larger quantity of high quality players than NA, yet a lot of tournaments and starleagues are hosted as NA only because a lot more financial investment is coming from NA. Does that seem fair? | ||
|
ArnaudF
France993 Posts
On May 02 2011 19:50 SayTT wrote: It depends on if MyM picks up Testie. Mondi hinted on him and Testie playing 2v2 in sc2 in the future, that duo would overshadow everyone if they trained for it. The 2v2 team of Millenium made of Stephano and DieStar is pretty good aswell, they have a very good sinergy. | ||
|
hinnolinn
212 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? Heres the thing: Is lag so bad that you cant win if you play from KR to NA? NO. Look at any FXOpen, every single one of them has been won by Koreans and the last one had an all-korean Top 4. Is it OPTIMAL to only play on NA when it would be fairer, and very possible logistically, to play half the games on KR, half on NA? No, it obviously isnt. I dont mind playing on the US that badly, I think its possible to play good still. But when its entirely possible to make the playing conditions more fair, and we offered to accomodate any team we play by providing accounts and so forth, then I dont feel that its right to not go the extra step and implement it. Okay, so I've been pondering on this whole question for a few hours now. I believe at the current state of the game this is NOT the most objectively fair system. The most objectively fair system would be to play all games on the server that minimized the DIFFERENCE between player latencies. This is along the same reasoning why all KR-EU matches are played on the US server. The latencies are not equal, but both players have at least a reasonable ability to play the game, rather then each player having outrageous latencies when playing on the opposing players home server. I don't know the answer to the question of which server is best for each continental match-up, except that US seems best for KR-EU. But if you can figure it out, that seems like the best server to play all games involving those countries on. | ||
|
Maliris
Northern Ireland2557 Posts
| ||
|
PopoChampion
Australia91 Posts
| ||
|
eGo.SiGns
Germany48 Posts
Its just 1 game, while 4 games are still 1vs1. If your teams is that much better and you win all 1vs1, you dont even need those 2vs2 anyway - even though i would assume they will play out all 5 games, at least thats what happens normally - . Yeah, they may be some imbalances in 2on2 because blizzard cant balance 2vs2 in the same way they do 1vs1, but all those players know these imbalances and can react accordingly. Their is no strategy in 2on2 thats completly unbeatable , even though it may force you to pit 2 players together just because you want 2 specific races playing together. And plz, dont start with stuff like "2v2 is boring and unskilled", there are many people out there, that enjoy watching a nice 2v2 game, and if it were that unskilled, how come the same players always seem to shine in these team competitions? IMO it actually requires more skills, because the whole aspect of working together with your partner is completly new. The skills as such may not have the same "deepth" , but you obviously need new and other skills additionally to your outstanding micro,marco, observational skills. Greetings, SiGns | ||
|
ReketSomething
United States6012 Posts
ggogoGGOgogOGO ROOT | ||
|
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 02 2011 19:53 hinnolinn wrote: Okay, so I've been pondering on this whole question for a few hours now. I believe at the current state of the game this is NOT the most objectively fair system. The most objectively fair system would be to play all games on the server that minimized the DIFFERENCE between player latencies. This is along the same reasoning why all KR-EU matches are played on the US server. The latencies are not equal, but both players have at least a reasonable ability to play the game, rather then each player having outrageous latencies when playing on the opposing players home server. I don't know the answer to the question of which server is best for each continental match-up, except that US seems best for KR-EU. But if you can figure it out, that seems like the best server to play all games involving those countries on. Well I would be open to trying Sea as a middle ground in future events. | ||
|
Nerchio
Poland2633 Posts
| ||
|
deL
Australia5540 Posts
On May 02 2011 20:11 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Well I would be open to trying Sea as a middle ground in future events. In general, I think SEA would have a favourable ping for Korea over the others, and be quite poor for both EU and NA participants. Maybe only as bad as NA-EU though so I guess it's worth a shot, it gets lonely on SEA sometimes :3 | ||
| ||
