|
On May 03 2011 00:41 Scribble wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2011 14:35 Jotoco wrote:
I think we can all agree on one point:
In the end the blame is on Blizzard.
If we had:
1 - LAN;
2 - P2P Connection.
We would not have this problem.
For piracy concerns, each player should be connected to his "home" server for authentication and we would all be happy and would enjoy the best possible lag situation every game, every league. (and in Ladder too)
EDIT: Not to mention all the embarrassing problems with battle net on several tournaments so far. How would LAN help in this situation? I agree that LAN is a necessity as much as anyone, but your point doesn't make a lick of sense.
well i think he was generally speaking in terms of live tournaments and a P2P connection would be better than bnet,and with lan we could potentially have an online lan latency modifier like in broodwar.
|
Pretty good rules for EG (2vs2 for which they have the best team, NA only, invite teams that will get roflstomped over teams that would have a good chance), but their money, their rules, so everything is good imo.
|
On May 03 2011 00:59 tentoff wrote:
It's EG's tournament, so let them set the rules and other teams can choose
<snip>
Jinro and Tyler should not start complaining as though EG is doing a terrible thing.
Thats just one man's opinion.
I think you're reading the events out of order. The question of TL not participating was bound to come up and Tyler was initially just responding to Colbi, who had tried to slip in a biased perspective before the full story came out.
Had Colbi, up-front and truthfully, answered the question about Liquid not participating with a reasonably thorough, diplomatic explanation, this wouldn't have be the issue it's become.
|
|
|
On May 03 2011 01:13 Dayrlan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 00:59 tentoff wrote:
It's EG's tournament, so let them set the rules and other teams can choose
<snip>
Jinro and Tyler should not start complaining as though EG is doing a terrible thing.
Thats just one man's opinion. I think you're reading the events out of order. The question of TL not participating was bound to come up and Tyler was initially just responding to Colbi, who had tried to slip in a biased perspective before the full story came out. Had Colbi, up-front and truthfully, answered the question about Liquid not participating with a reasonably thorough, diplomatic explanation, this wouldn't have be the issue it's become.
I don't think that Colbi intended to deceive anyone with his reply. It was asked why TL was not participating/invited and Colbi gave the response I would expect from an event organizer.
"Liquid was invited, but chose not to participate." <- Satisfactorily answers the question asked. I don't think it is fair to expect Colbi to opine as to TL's reasoning behind the decision not to participate.
|
On May 03 2011 00:41 Scribble wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2011 14:35 Jotoco wrote:
I think we can all agree on one point:
In the end the blame is on Blizzard.
If we had:
1 - LAN;
2 - P2P Connection.
We would not have this problem.
For piracy concerns, each player should be connected to his "home" server for authentication and we would all be happy and would enjoy the best possible lag situation every game, every league. (and in Ladder too)
EDIT: Not to mention all the embarrassing problems with battle net on several tournaments so far. How would LAN help in this situation? I agree that LAN is a necessity as much as anyone, but your point doesn't make a lick of sense.
Hamachi?
It has been used before, and it still exists.
|
On May 03 2011 01:13 Dayrlan wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 00:59 tentoff wrote:
It's EG's tournament, so let them set the rules and other teams can choose
<snip>
Jinro and Tyler should not start complaining as though EG is doing a terrible thing.
Thats just one man's opinion. I think you're reading the events out of order. The question of TL not participating was bound to come up and Tyler was initially just responding to Colbi, who had tried to slip in a biased perspective before the full story came out. Had Colbi, up-front and truthfully, answered the question about Liquid not participating with a reasonably thorough, diplomatic explanation, this wouldn't have be the issue it's become.
Wait... what? Colbi answered the question perfectly fine when he said they were invited but chose not to participate. He has no reason to put a detailed post about why they chose not to play when he was asked why tl wasn't invited. And the post that started most of the drama was
On May 02 2011 10:20 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2011 10:11 KiNGxXx wrote:
No Liquid?
But the tournament sounds good! Liquid showed interest, but EG chose not to accommodate us. Ah, perspective!
Which makes EG out to be the bad guys for absolutely no reason.
|
On May 02 2011 16:29 IdrA wrote:
playing cross server destroys game quality and makes for meaningless results. liquid tries to downplay the effects of latency to make their tournament seem more legitimate, but how many people really think all the players from korea deserved to lose as early as they did to the people they did in tsl?
expecting a foreign team league to allow that to accommodate the one team that has a significant number of players in korea is fuckin silly.
until blizzard fixes battlenet players have to choose to focus on foreign or korean events and deal with the consequences.
Koreans seems to destroy pretty much everyone in all FXOpens to this date.. so yeah, so yeah those korean players deserved to lose... you are just butt hurt with TSL, because you lost in the most embarrasing way against Cruncher after bm'ing and bulling him to no end in the game lobby.
cross-server play will always produce lag, physical distance is not something blizzard can fix, no matter what you use, P2P, tunneling or internet... it's up to the tournament organizers to figure out a way to avoid a schism in the community.
|
Russian Federation94 Posts
Machinma invitational is a weird example of 2v2. Almost nobody prepared for 2v2 games and didn't even watch vods. Even the same cheese every game on the same map from some team was unexpected every time for their opponents. It wasn't top level of 2v2.
|
In before Drewbie wins every 2v2 match.
|
Well I just spent half an hour reading through all the posts.
Personally the issue for me boils down to, why Blizzard can't implement server switching and lan latency, not to mention lan play in general. So that said, I think everyone should channel their animosity into some massive complaint mail to Blizzard instead of at the various SC2 teams and sponsors.
Seriously, if Blizzard had managed to replicate the options that the original Battle.Net had, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
|
2v2 is hard to look at from any standpoint, because the game is probably not balanced for it. We don't really know that though until we see some league incorporate team games into their setup. It's just a different kind of league, guys.
I think getting some different types of formats is interesting and I hope for some great games.
|
On May 02 2011 14:08 Hot_Bid wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2011 14:02 Skipton wrote:On May 02 2011 13:59 hmunkey wrote:
There's a lot of bitching in this thread and it's pretty depressing. EG gets to pick how the tourney is set up. If Liquid doesn't like it, they don't have to play. It's pretty simple.
It doesn't matter what anyone thinks; EG is ponying up the cash so they make the rules. Get the fuck over it. And you are posting on the TEAM LIQUID FORUM. If individuals feel like expressing their discontent over something in relation to the tournament in the thread meant to discuss it, than they will express it. EG picks how the tourney is set up, in that regard you are absolutely correct. Everybody else on the internet decides how to respond to it, I'd like to state that just because this site is called "Team Liquid" it doesn't mean we don't have standards for fairness and impartiality. We put this in news, and we will cover / calendar / treat this tournament as any other major tournament regardless of whether Liquid is in it. Whether I believe either side is right in this instance doesn't change how we should treat this discussion on our site. "It's TeamLiquid's forum" should never be used to support unjustified criticism. The best result that can come of this discussion is that 1) people forget about this issue and enjoy that we have another $10,000 league, and 2) EG considers doing server switching for their next league.
This has to be quoted for awesomeness (which is the TL standard anyway)
Most people have to understand that teamliquid has a very, very high ethic standard, they always do what is fair, even if it contradicts their own interest. Having teamliquid as the starcraft main/most popular site is the better thing that could happen to starcraft (1 & 2)
The fact that they don't use their leverage to change the rules of this tournament is almost "naive" I feel. I mean, if this tourney is not on the calendar, it will lose what, 90% of its viewers ?
Not in the calendar = not existing.
|
On May 02 2011 18:24 LagLovah wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2011 18:11 eloist wrote:
WC3L was at its best when it still had 2v2 and I am excited to see it. Unfortunately they eventually removed it from the tournament because the players couldn't be arsed. I think it was a clear loss for the spectator.
But you know what the other thing was that WC3L had? Qualification and relegation. I have a hard time getting excited for anything invite based anymore. It really robs tournaments of meaningfulness. Particularly when casted off replays that may have been produced in non chronological order, it just kinda turns into a series of show matches to me. this post says it all. You people wondering why certain teams don't make the cut.... Eg is more interested in showing an already proven spectator approved product than taking a risk on bringing in a new team even if they are argueably better. Its a cruel cycle that is bad for the sport in the longrun As more of a viewer lately I can honestly say I would rather have qualifier brackets so I can see new talent and make up my own mind on who to cheer for, rather than having an orga telling me who I can watch and who I should be cheering for. since beta we have been watching the same player pool face off against each other in every event. New faces almost never are given the opportunity to compete. I understand from a marketting view why this is done, but it does not mean I have to like it. I mean sgl cevo and cal have not been successful for a reason.
Completely agree. I wish EG the best of luck, and from an organization stand point they're making the best decision. They need to invite the most popular players, otherwise it won't get the immediate exposure they're hoping for. However, me personally; I am just getting tired of watching the same players play over, and over again because they are the only ones invited or casted.
That being said, kind of excited for 2v2 as it will AT LEAST be something different in that aspect.
|
On May 03 2011 01:42 KeyHunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2011 18:24 LagLovah wrote:On May 02 2011 18:11 eloist wrote:
WC3L was at its best when it still had 2v2 and I am excited to see it. Unfortunately they eventually removed it from the tournament because the players couldn't be arsed. I think it was a clear loss for the spectator.
But you know what the other thing was that WC3L had? Qualification and relegation. I have a hard time getting excited for anything invite based anymore. It really robs tournaments of meaningfulness. Particularly when casted off replays that may have been produced in non chronological order, it just kinda turns into a series of show matches to me. this post says it all. You people wondering why certain teams don't make the cut.... Eg is more interested in showing an already proven spectator approved product than taking a risk on bringing in a new team even if they are argueably better. Its a cruel cycle that is bad for the sport in the longrun As more of a viewer lately I can honestly say I would rather have qualifier brackets so I can see new talent and make up my own mind on who to cheer for, rather than having an orga telling me who I can watch and who I should be cheering for. since beta we have been watching the same player pool face off against each other in every event. New faces almost never are given the opportunity to compete. I understand from a marketting view why this is done, but it does not mean I have to like it. I mean sgl cevo and cal have not been successful for a reason. Completely agree. I wish EG the best of luck, and from an organization stand point they're making the best decision. They need to invite the most popular players, otherwise it won't get the immediate exposure they're hoping for. However, me personally; I am just getting tired of watching the same players play over, and over again because they are the only ones invited or casted. That being said, kind of excited for 2v2 as it will AT LEAST be something different in that aspect.
Sixjax, Millennium, and MYM barely get invited to stuff so this isn't exactly "the same players over, and over again". And all 3 of those teams keep getting pointed to when people say why isn't Empire here or why isn't FXO here. So seems to me they did a pretty good job of inviting some of the known team as well as a few teams with players that get less exposure.
|
On May 03 2011 01:09 MrCon wrote:
Pretty good rules for EG (2vs2 for which they have the best team, NA only, invite teams that will get roflstomped over teams that would have a good chance), but their money, their rules, so everything is good imo.
What a ridiculous accusation. If that was what they are after with the ruleset, they would certainly want it to be all-kill. They invited all the top teams except perhaps Empire, but we aren't privy to reasons for not inviting them.
|
Millenium is strong: Lalush, Tarson, Stephano can take games/matches versus anyone.
|
As far as I can tell, this is the only response from a European player/team. He seems to agree with Liquid's posts, without adding real negativity. Obviously Dignitas agreed to play in the conditions, but I'm willing to bet they'd love it if Liquid's server solution was in place. Dignitas is such a dominant team I think they'll win even with the disadvantage and I'm definitely cheering from them.
On May 03 2011 00:54 Naniwa wrote:weird, as far as i know all the europeans ive spoken to have quite some lag on US  .
|
On May 02 2011 20:17 Nerchio wrote:
It's biased opinion but i guess Empire is a better team than half of those invited(someone mentioned Empire being 7-8 in GPCL, i think this point is not valid since there is me and Happy that joined after that league, maybe Beastyqt too but i am not too sure). Still i am looking forward to watching some of the matches and as some people already mentioned i prefer like KOTH system where 1 person can win with whole team(it's just more exciting to watch).
You are being humble here, your team would be a favorite to win it all, not just half of the matches.. I am so surprised this guys Xeris overlooked you guys... oh well, I hope you get the recognition you deserve sometime later.
|
On May 03 2011 01:58 wolverinehokie wrote:As far as I can tell, this is the only response from a European player/team. He seems to agree with Liquid's posts, without adding real negativity. Obviously Dignitas agreed to play in the conditions, but I'm willing to bet they'd love it if Liquid's server solution was in place. Dignitas is such a dominant team I think they'll win even with the disadvantage and I'm definitely cheering from them. Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 00:54 Naniwa wrote:weird, as far as i know all the europeans ive spoken to have quite some lag on US .
Yeh, I'm rooting for Dignitas unless DeMuslim is playing and even then, if it comes down to it they can use there American players SelecT
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
