|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 03 2011 08:42 Defacer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 08:19 nehcnhoj wrote:In regards to the TL - EG debate, I believe that really nobody is in the wrong. It's just a different set of priorities. TL, having always taken the responsibility of upholding the highest standard in this scene, would obviously view fairness of tournaments as the utmost importance. As seen by TSL3, is anybody contesting there's a fairer way of running the tournament? No, and as of present, there really issin't. EG, however, puts game quality, hype, enjoyment of the participants, as the highest level. Now this philosophy will inevitably step on some toes, But it certainly works. IdrA's points were valid, it's just not as fun watching someone from EU play someone from KR on the NA server compared to a no-lag situation. "Fun" might be the wrong word here, but the lag takes something away from the game regardless. It sucks that Blizzard/technology (the vehicle of e-sports :DD) is not at the level where these differences result in some friction. The other alternative/solution is that in time, as more money flows into the scene, team-league events become an offline affair. I'm sure there are other solutions money can buy  My personal opinion as a viewer though, is that I would certainly enjoy the presence of Liquid and any other team that might ever have a similar situation, at the cost of a small loss of quality in the few games played between the EU/KR players. I think the guy from FXO put it best earlier in the thread, this is after all, a business, I think I agree with what you're saying, but the concept of 'fairness' and 'fun' is confusing. Based on Team Liquid's argument, they would rather have a tournament experience that is equally compromised/unfair for everyone, than a tournament experience that is optimal for 95% of the participants. On a tangential note, it's kind of reminds me of what's fundamentally wrong with communism. But it's worth repeating, that being 'fair' and having 'the highest standard' are not necessarily the same thing.
Its not like we are asking americans to play on KR when they play other americans, the amount of unfairness is exactly the same actually, its just not all distributed in the same direction -_-;
BO3:
Game 1 unfair for the KR player, cuz on NA
Game 2 unfair for the NA player, cuz on KR
BO3 only NA:
Game 1 unfair for KR
Game 2 unfair for KR
Equal amount of unfairness overall, equal amount of games that will be "compromised".
|
On May 03 2011 12:04 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On May 03 2011 11:06 KillaRM wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I don't think splitting the match-ups 50/50 on Us/KR is fair. It works fine in the TSL which is a 1v1 league but this a team league where that could very well be used to the advantage of Liquid. I don't think its the tournaments responsibility to accommodate players, the players know what they are getting into and if they don't like it they should just not play. People keep bringing up the NASL and the Korean players but they knew it would be at bad times and a different server and they still decided to play so it's their fault if they don't like the conditions not the NASL's. I dont understand how on EARTH it can work to our advantage, unless by advantage you mean "not handicapped".
It really depends on the situation and how the players are decided but lets say Incontrol plays Tyler set one on NA, then EG decided to send out Idra, Liquid can just say well lets send out Jinro and force Idra to play on KR and be at a huge disadvantage. Or, set one could be played on NA (Tyler) Set two KR (Huk, Jinro) Set Three on NA (TLO) and the 2v2 on KR? therefore giving Liquid the advantage and no real disadvantage compared to the other teams. At least that's how i see it, I maybe misunderstanding.
|
People need to realise that Liquid's demand are not "kneecapping" the other teams. Most of the matches won't be affected at all. Assuming the EU-NA lag is negligible, and the problem is essentially with KR.
Basically under the current rules, say Liquid has to cop 100 "units" of lag (not percent), while every other team has to deal with practically 0 units.
Liquid asked for changes which were: Liquid deals with 50 units of lag, while the other 50 units is distributed amongst the other teams, so say about 7 units each. This is still nowhere as bad as 50.
(Because for every other team, they only get affected when they play liquid, but even then the load is split half half with liquid)
TeamLiquid is automatically at a disadvantage regarding to lag, no matter what, by simply having players in Korea.
EG can't adapt the rules for this tournament, but understands and will consider it for next time. TL declines because playing with 100 units is very undesirable. All very reasonable.
People should try understand the situation properly better before complaining.
|
Ironically, the fact that this thread has reached 40 pages is already making the decision to exclude Liquid a very good idea from a PR point of view. Now, practically everyone who browses TL knows about this teamleague.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 03 2011 10:28 hinnolinn wrote:
Again, a full page of people saying that TL is asking for the most fair solution. How is switching servers for each game a more fair solution then playing on the server with the smallest difference in latency?
If player A is US, and player B is KR, and when they play on the US server A has 250 latency and B has 450 latency, but when they play on the KR server player B has 300 latency and player A has 600 latency, wouldn't it be more fair to play all the games on the server where the latency difference is only 200, as opposed to playing some games on the server with a 300 latency difference?
That is just an example with numbers pulled out of nowhere. I don't know which server is best for each continental match-up, but playing all match-ups on the same server that reduces the difference in latency would be the most objectively fair it seems.
... Because NA based players playing on NA have 0 latency, while KR players playing on NA have like 400 or something?
KR-NA and NA-KR is going to be equal both ways Im pretty sure, I dont see why the connection would be faster one way than the other.
As I said before, maybe SEA is a happy middleground server, but NA sure as hell isnt.
On May 03 2011 12:14 KillaRM wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 12:04 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On May 03 2011 11:06 KillaRM wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I don't think splitting the match-ups 50/50 on Us/KR is fair. It works fine in the TSL which is a 1v1 league but this a team league where that could very well be used to the advantage of Liquid. I don't think its the tournaments responsibility to accommodate players, the players know what they are getting into and if they don't like it they should just not play. People keep bringing up the NASL and the Korean players but they knew it would be at bad times and a different server and they still decided to play so it's their fault if they don't like the conditions not the NASL's. I dont understand how on EARTH it can work to our advantage, unless by advantage you mean "not handicapped". It really depends on the situation and how the players are decided but lets say Incontrol plays Tyler set one on NA, then EG decided to send out Idra, Liquid can just say well lets send out Jinro and force Idra to play on KR and be at a huge disadvantage. Or, set one could be played on NA (Tyler) Set two KR (Huk, Jinro) Set Three on NA (TLO) and the 2v2 on KR? therefore giving Liquid the advantage and no real disadvantage compared to the other teams. At least that's how i see it, I maybe misunderstanding.
I actually realized I had misread BO1 as BO3, so at first I didnt get what you were talking about, but I went and re-read the rules because of your post.
Yes, that could be problematic, but Im pretty sure the line-ups would be done beforehand so you cant intentionally try to gimp their best players, and the ace match is bo3 which means its no issue.
|
"EG can't adapt the rules for this tournament, but understands and will consider it for next time."
great dream, i wonder if this statement has any fundament or is just your speculation.
|
On May 03 2011 12:19 OrbitalPlane wrote:
"EG can't adapt the rules for this tournament, but understands and will consider it for next time."
great dream, i wonder if this statement has any fundament or is just your speculation.
If you read the thread you would see that either Colbi or Scoots said they would consider the feedback before next tourney.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 03 2011 12:13 Sephimos wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 12:04 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On May 03 2011 11:06 KillaRM wrote:
I don't think splitting the match-ups 50/50 on Us/KR is fair. It works fine in the TSL which is a 1v1 league but this a team league where that could very well be used to the advantage of Liquid. I don't think its the tournaments responsibility to accommodate players, the players know what they are getting into and if they don't like it they should just not play. People keep bringing up the NASL and the Korean players but they knew it would be at bad times and a different server and they still decided to play so it's their fault if they don't like the conditions not the NASL's. I dont understand how on EARTH it can work to our advantage, unless by advantage you mean "not handicapped". On May 03 2011 11:09 Sephimos wrote:
Epic league, epic format, major props to EG for trying something different. Will be hilarious to watch pros cobble together some 2v2 strats, can't wait.
On the dramabomb, EG's decision sounds fairly reasonable. I guess I respect Liquid for standing up for their players, but asking seven other teams to kneecap themselves for one team, who made a conscious decision to have some of their players in Korea, seems pretty out of line. You don't get to make demands of other peoples' tournaments, and arguing that you do makes you seem a little...self righteous. We want equal playing conditions and thats self-righteous? Liquid made a decision to keep some of their bigger names in Korea. You, HuK, and Haypro weren't kidnapped and whisked off to the Korean peninsula. It's been obvious for quite some time that there would be significant compartmentalization of competition since Blizzard has broken different regions up. If Liquid's going to keep people in Korea, it can't moan (cry and slur in Tyler's case) at everyone else for rules that happen to be bad for people in Korea. Any other argument turns into "we're Team Liquid, we deserve special breaks and accommodations, even though we've made a conscious business decision." I get that you want the best conditions, but I think you have to realize that until Blizzard gets its shit together, there are going to be prices for being in Korea. IdrA can't compete in GSL since he left Korea, and I don't hear him complaining that he isn't being catered to by GSL becoming an online tournament playable from NA.
And likewise you dont hear me bloodycomplaining that I cant go to the swedish WCG prelims or 99% of other european tournaments. Online is not = offline, there is no actual barrier towards making what we proposed happen, and they did invite us so apparently they are interested in having us play.
If latency wasn't an issue, TL wouldn't require multiple servers to participate. The reality is that it is a huge issue that impacts gameplay, which as IdrA intimated, TL tried to downplay during the TSL.
Ugh, you realize the rules we are asking for are the same as the ones used in TSL?
|
oh yeah i see, i must have oversight that:
"It is unfortunate and disappointing that Liquid will not be in this Master's Cup, but we do understand their reasons for declining the invitation. We admire and respect the whole crew here and as we plan out our next Master's Cup, we will absolutely be keeping this solid feedback in mind. "
thanks for the information, that's at least a bright spot.
But if they really believe that the solution TL suggests is better wouldn't they change it right now or had changed it when TL came up with it?
I don't see which circumstances will change with the next season.
|
On May 03 2011 12:04 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
I actually realized I had misread BO1 as BO3, so at first I didnt get what you were talking about, but I went and re-read the rules because of your post.
Yes, that could be problematic, but Im pretty sure the line-ups would be done beforehand so you cant intentionally try to gimp their best players, and the ace match is bo3 which means its no issue.
I would love to see Liquid in the tournament but i think as of right now their is no truly "fair" way of hosting it, if it was a BO3 i 100% agree with you but considering the circumstance i don't think it is possible to accompany everyone. It a bad situation and a tough choice but i think it may have been for the best to avoid all of the lag QQ. Also, thanks for the reply.
|
This thread is ridiculous. It should have stopped when Colbi explained it in his 2nd post. Yeah sucks theres no Liquid, but it was just retarded to drag it into this. It's EG's fucking tournament, that should be the end of it. If you don't like it, don't watch.
|
I think both sides have good resence for there point of view. But I think TL and EG talk past each other. It's an EG event. They make the rules. Everybody have to accept it. Of course everyone has the right to ask for changes. But it's still EGs right to reject them. And them it comes to you if you agree with these rule or not.
But on the other hand TL is on the right way. They try to make sc2 more fair. Even in every kind of sport the team switch sides in the half time. Why not in esport where the conditions are so unbalanced? I mean the effort is not that big. When a tournament has $10k prizepool it's a trifle to providing 10 accounts on each server (us/kr/eu)for the players and caster. And it also takes less then a blink of an eye to close the us client and open the kr or eu client. I mean a football keeper has to run across the whole football field 
And it's no argument that it's to must effort for 3 player who playes from korea, because in the future I hope we see more exciting tournements with eu, us, kr and chinese teams.
|
Artosis, from his stream: wouldn't play in 2nd NASL even if he qualified, unless they went to a 50%/50% server approach.
|
50/50 is very fair if it is a BO3 but this league is a BO1 x4 so its not very fair to switch off because Liquid can play Huk/Jinro/Ret/Haypro on the KR server and Tyler/TLO on the NA server. Its just not fair to the other teams,so it wont work for this tournament. Something has to change in order for it to be fair imo, I think it was for the best to keep it the same.
|
United States2095 Posts
I can't believe I read all of that. Phew. In all these clans playing, Goooo ROOT! Also FXO is sad we didn't get chance to qualify! ):
P.S. Sorry liquid too.
|
Starcraft 2 is too random already for my taste, map selection and spawn locations are determining factors in many of the games and they have nothing to do with skill. Alternating a latency handicap every game on top of all that would make the results practically meaningless. Specially in a tournament with a BO1's and ace matches, lol. The worst thing is that tournaments don't like to reveal to the viewers where every game is being played so you have no idea if a player is just playing horribly or if it's his turn to play off-region.
So yeah, have to side with EG here, tournaments should be hosted in the region of the organizers. This shouldn't be a problem on the long run if we also had European and Korean tournaments like this.
Also I think it's only natural that there are consequences to TL moving to Korea to play in GSL. We have one player that moved to the US to play in western tournaments, and possibly other players that don't move to Korea for the same reason. Why should we punish these players by making them play half of the games with severe latency?
|
On May 03 2011 12:27 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 12:13 Sephimos wrote:On May 03 2011 12:04 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On May 03 2011 11:06 KillaRM wrote:
I don't think splitting the match-ups 50/50 on Us/KR is fair. It works fine in the TSL which is a 1v1 league but this a team league where that could very well be used to the advantage of Liquid. I don't think its the tournaments responsibility to accommodate players, the players know what they are getting into and if they don't like it they should just not play. People keep bringing up the NASL and the Korean players but they knew it would be at bad times and a different server and they still decided to play so it's their fault if they don't like the conditions not the NASL's. I dont understand how on EARTH it can work to our advantage, unless by advantage you mean "not handicapped". On May 03 2011 11:09 Sephimos wrote:
Epic league, epic format, major props to EG for trying something different. Will be hilarious to watch pros cobble together some 2v2 strats, can't wait.
On the dramabomb, EG's decision sounds fairly reasonable. I guess I respect Liquid for standing up for their players, but asking seven other teams to kneecap themselves for one team, who made a conscious decision to have some of their players in Korea, seems pretty out of line. You don't get to make demands of other peoples' tournaments, and arguing that you do makes you seem a little...self righteous. We want equal playing conditions and thats self-righteous? Liquid made a decision to keep some of their bigger names in Korea. You, HuK, and Haypro weren't kidnapped and whisked off to the Korean peninsula. It's been obvious for quite some time that there would be significant compartmentalization of competition since Blizzard has broken different regions up. If Liquid's going to keep people in Korea, it can't moan (cry and slur in Tyler's case) at everyone else for rules that happen to be bad for people in Korea. Any other argument turns into "we're Team Liquid, we deserve special breaks and accommodations, even though we've made a conscious business decision." I get that you want the best conditions, but I think you have to realize that until Blizzard gets its shit together, there are going to be prices for being in Korea. IdrA can't compete in GSL since he left Korea, and I don't hear him complaining that he isn't being catered to by GSL becoming an online tournament playable from NA. And likewise you dont hear me bloodycomplaining that I cant go to the swedish WCG prelims or 99% of other european tournaments. Online is not = offline, there is no actual barrier towards making what we proposed happen, and they did invite us so apparently they are interested in having us play. Show nested quote +
If latency wasn't an issue, TL wouldn't require multiple servers to participate. The reality is that it is a huge issue that impacts gameplay, which as IdrA intimated, TL tried to downplay during the TSL.
Ugh, you realize the rules we are asking for are the same as the ones used in TSL?
Who's saying they didn't want your team to play? There isn't any physical barrier to mimicking TSL's format, but I don't know that TSL's format is optimal. TL naturally seems to think it is, I don't agree and it seems EG doesn't either.
My point was that staying in Korea has consequences, which you realize. One of those consequences is the retarded lag that seems to be an inescapable feature of the Korean server connecting abroad. It doesn't seem absurd to me for tournament organizers to just sidestep this unfortunate feature by hosting tournaments on the NA server. The big lesson is for Blizzard to just merge the servers effectively, until then, I think people just have to realize that they'll need to deal with compartmentalized tournaments and competitions. Picking and choosing effectively will be a major duty of team leaders.
Additionally, slandering reputable members of the community such as Colbi, Scoots, and EG at large serves no one well. I think their tournament sounds amazing, and I'm so glad they're taking a measured gamble with the 2v2 format. Has the potential for really memorable and entertaining games.
Also, does anyone else read djwheat's posts in djwheat's voice?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 02 2011 23:08 hugman wrote:
If the Liquid players think the KR <-> NA lag is so bad that they don't want to play with the disadvantage that lag gives them then that's them saying that the lag de-legitimizes the games. That means the games get de-legitimized regardless if you rotate servers, two wrongs doesn't make one right. If lag is a factor in the outcome of the games then you shouldn't play. People want to see the better player win, they don't want to have a discussion about how big of a role lag played.
Seriously. if the lag is that bad then there's no point in playing. Rotating servers means that Liquid is more likely to win than if you don't rotate servers because you're giving everyone a disadvantage, but what the hell are you competing in then? The ability to overcome lag? That's not what it should be about.
Thats not true, if you look at smaller individual leagues such as Sagacity plenty of us still play those.
I do think NA-KR is playable, I just think its more fair if we do 50/50 - that doesnt mean its unplayable if we dont, but because its possible, and because a team event is different from an individual league (IMO), we choose to make a stand this time.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 03 2011 12:33 KillaRM wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 12:04 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
I actually realized I had misread BO1 as BO3, so at first I didnt get what you were talking about, but I went and re-read the rules because of your post.
Yes, that could be problematic, but Im pretty sure the line-ups would be done beforehand so you cant intentionally try to gimp their best players, and the ace match is bo3 which means its no issue. I would love to see Liquid in the tournament but i think as of right now their is no truly "fair" way of hosting it, if it was a BO3 i 100% agree with you but considering the circumstance i don't think it is possible to accompany everyone. It a bad situation and a tough choice but i think it may have been for the best to avoid all of the lag QQ. Also, thanks for the reply.
Yeah, not being BO3 makes a huge difference and I have to think about it more now... I still think its probably the most fair option but its more annoying for the person that has to play the wrong server.
|
On May 03 2011 12:14 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 08:42 Defacer wrote:On May 03 2011 08:19 nehcnhoj wrote:In regards to the TL - EG debate, I believe that really nobody is in the wrong. It's just a different set of priorities. TL, having always taken the responsibility of upholding the highest standard in this scene, would obviously view fairness of tournaments as the utmost importance. As seen by TSL3, is anybody contesting there's a fairer way of running the tournament? No, and as of present, there really issin't. EG, however, puts game quality, hype, enjoyment of the participants, as the highest level. Now this philosophy will inevitably step on some toes, But it certainly works. IdrA's points were valid, it's just not as fun watching someone from EU play someone from KR on the NA server compared to a no-lag situation. "Fun" might be the wrong word here, but the lag takes something away from the game regardless. It sucks that Blizzard/technology (the vehicle of e-sports :DD) is not at the level where these differences result in some friction. The other alternative/solution is that in time, as more money flows into the scene, team-league events become an offline affair. I'm sure there are other solutions money can buy My personal opinion as a viewer though, is that I would certainly enjoy the presence of Liquid and any other team that might ever have a similar situation, at the cost of a small loss of quality in the few games played between the EU/KR players. I think the guy from FXO put it best earlier in the thread, this is after all, a business, I think I agree with what you're saying, but the concept of 'fairness' and 'fun' is confusing. Based on Team Liquid's argument, they would rather have a tournament experience that is equally compromised/unfair for everyone, than a tournament experience that is optimal for 95% of the participants. On a tangential note, it's kind of reminds me of what's fundamentally wrong with communism. But it's worth repeating, that being 'fair' and having 'the highest standard' are not necessarily the same thing. Its not like we are asking americans to play on KR when they play other americans, the amount of unfairness is exactly the same actually, its just not all distributed in the same direction -_-; BO3: Game 1 unfair for the KR player, cuz on NA Game 2 unfair for the NA player, cuz on KR BO3 only NA: Game 1 unfair for KR Game 2 unfair for KR Equal amount of unfairness overall, equal amount of games that will be "compromised".
Just curious, but given that most tournaments run BO3, what is your proposal for the third game? And how will this work for a team league with BO1s? Team Liquid has players in both NA and KR. I assume you can't just do a 50/50 split here because then Liquid can just send their NA players on NA and KR players on KR. Presumably, you would have to work out a system depending on who you field. For example, if you field Haypro and Huk, then you get one game on KR, three games on NA. But if you field TLO, Tyler, and Ret, then you have to do all four games on NA. Seems quite complicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
