|
On May 03 2011 21:58 Ezze wrote:
Just read the whole thread in one go. Wow that was intense. I can't believe that IdrA of all people made the most sense in this entire thread.
Also, I never knew xeris was such a douchebag. Isn't he behind NASL? You'd think someone in that position would know better than to act like that.
And not sure what's going on with tyler lately, but swearing in chat in games, not GGing when he got outplayed by socke, bming on his stream, and now these self serving superiority complex comments... what kind of a professional are you if you can't lose with dignity??
I've learned since the beta that Xeris can come off as a bit of a douche in some of his his posts. That said, he tells it the way he sees it and gets the job done so in the end I don't really mind. A lot of it can simply be the tone of his posts being lost over the internet.
|
I love that Starcrat is a sport where you're totally immersed and involved with the community. How many other sports can you see the players working things out and arguing? You might see some football or basketball players snipe at each other over Twitter but never in depth discussion and debate such as this one. I think it's a great thing that Starcraft fans get to be such a part of the conversation and an active participant rather than just a viewer.
I wish something could be worked out because I would love to see Liquid in the league but I think regardless it will be a really enjoyable league to watch. I'm especially interested in seeing how the 2v2s turn out-- I can't recall them ever being used seriously in a league with this much money behind it.
|
For me as a neutral spectator ( by neutral i mean that i don't have "favorite" team) the lack of Liquid and Empire is pure loss because those teams have really great players that i want to watch.
The other thing i don't like is 2v2 matches. Everyone that watched SC:BW Proleague know why this format just don't have place in professional team league. For people that are new the problem is that you need entirely different skill set and tactics for 2v2 and in a pro level of play one person can't be really good in both 1v1 and 2v2 so the team need to choose the players that play 2v2 and they sacrifice their solo play.
On the other hand the person (or team or whatever) that gives money and does all the logistics for a tournament like this should have the right to make the rules and if you don't like them you just don't participate/watch it.
Rants about Blizzard not implementing LAN/P2P are so stupid for anyone that know how internet works that it's not even funny. No one can fix the ping issues (not the lag but the ping) from EU to NA to KR or to China. This is just a matter of technology we still lack. So please can we stop bitching on Blizzard for the regional servers and try to find a way to do what is the best for average Joe who just want to watch the best players fighting in the most optimal conditions we can have.
|
[QUOTE]On May 02 2011 13:41 Plexa wrote:
QUOTE]
HOLY SHIT!!!! PLEXA IS BACK IN DA HOUSE....
YAYYYYYYYYYYSDFGHJKL:"
|
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".
What about game 3 ? you said flip a coin earlier in the thread do you still stand by that ?
What about the fact its a bo5 with different players in each game and the 4th game being a 2v2?
There is just so many different situations that you are leaving out by only talking about how the first 2 games of a bo3 should be played, witch is completely irrelevant in this situation
|
Looking forward to this, particularly the 2v2  Gotta say though, some of the TL guys need to be a bit more professional when it comes to this sort of thing. Haypro, that post made you look like a bit of dick man  I still love your playlist though At the end of the day, EG has the right to decide the rules, who they invite and who competes, and TL has the right to decline said invitation if they don't feel it's fair to their players. The rest is just bullshit.
|
On May 03 2011 16:22 hakhu wrote:
At the next Soccer World Cup in Brazil I think it would be fair for all the South American teams do demand to play with the sun at their back (or the "better" half of the field) and not switch sides after half-time.
It's their tournament and their continent. Why should they have to suffer the inconvenience! Outrage!
It's the fault of the other teams that they live in Europe, Asia etc. It's their choice to live there, so they will just have to face the consequences.
HAHA.
But on a serious note: there are teams from SA that miss the WC but are still better then some other teams that make it. Demand more spots for SA! Obviously this is a decision made by FIFA, where everyone is represented and everyone accepts the decision (even if not completely fair, Chile could cry a river) which is based on business, so Africa/Asia is covered.
|
On May 03 2011 16:22 hakhu wrote:
At the next Soccer World Cup in Brazil I think it would be fair for all the South American teams do demand to play with the sun at their back (or the "better" half of the field) and not switch sides after half-time.
It's their tournament and their continent. Why should they have to suffer the inconvenience! Outrage!
It's the fault of the other teams that they live in Europe, Asia etc. It's their choice to live there, so they will just have to face the consequences.
Witty, but a fail analogy. Brazil doesn't get to determine the rules, FIFA does. In this tournament, EG ultimately makes the decision on the rules, it's their tournament.
|
On May 03 2011 23:52 DrunkenTemplar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 16:22 hakhu wrote:
At the next Soccer World Cup in Brazil I think it would be fair for all the South American teams do demand to play with the sun at their back (or the "better" half of the field) and not switch sides after half-time.
It's their tournament and their continent. Why should they have to suffer the inconvenience! Outrage!
It's the fault of the other teams that they live in Europe, Asia etc. It's their choice to live there, so they will just have to face the consequences. Witty, but a fail analogy. Brazil doesn't get to determine the rules, FIFA does. In this tournament, EG ultimately makes the decision on the rules, it's their tournament.
So if Brazil decided to arrange their own tournament, you'd think it would be fine?
|
On May 03 2011 14:08 bahl sofs tiil wrote:
Well, there is only one way to solve this: Liquid vs. EG showmatch!
Let's get this started.
First order of business, you need to decide which server to...
Oh.
LOL i just spilled coffee
|
On May 03 2011 23:55 nihlon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 23:52 DrunkenTemplar wrote:On May 03 2011 16:22 hakhu wrote:
At the next Soccer World Cup in Brazil I think it would be fair for all the South American teams do demand to play with the sun at their back (or the "better" half of the field) and not switch sides after half-time.
It's their tournament and their continent. Why should they have to suffer the inconvenience! Outrage!
It's the fault of the other teams that they live in Europe, Asia etc. It's their choice to live there, so they will just have to face the consequences. Witty, but a fail analogy. Brazil doesn't get to determine the rules, FIFA does. In this tournament, EG ultimately makes the decision on the rules, it's their tournament. So if Brazil decided to arrange their own tournament, you'd think it would be fine?
For that tournament, sure. But noone would turn up. Organiser makes the rules, and people can choose to participate, not a hard idea to get your head around.
|
On May 03 2011 23:56 DrunkenTemplar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 23:55 nihlon wrote:On May 03 2011 23:52 DrunkenTemplar wrote:On May 03 2011 16:22 hakhu wrote:
At the next Soccer World Cup in Brazil I think it would be fair for all the South American teams do demand to play with the sun at their back (or the "better" half of the field) and not switch sides after half-time.
It's their tournament and their continent. Why should they have to suffer the inconvenience! Outrage!
It's the fault of the other teams that they live in Europe, Asia etc. It's their choice to live there, so they will just have to face the consequences. Witty, but a fail analogy. Brazil doesn't get to determine the rules, FIFA does. In this tournament, EG ultimately makes the decision on the rules, it's their tournament. So if Brazil decided to arrange their own tournament, you'd think it would be fine? For that tournament, sure. But noone would turn up. Organiser makes the rules, and people can choose to participate, not a hard idea to get your head around.
So it "would be fine" but no one would turn up? Yeah that makes sense...
No one is arguing wheter or not EG have the right to do it like this. That doesn't mean is a good or fine thing. That shouldn't be that hard to get your head around.
|
On May 03 2011 21:28 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote ++ Show Spoiler +On May 03 2011 16:06 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:On May 03 2011 14:49 IdrA wrote:
na to eu is playable, na to korea is not. just about any competitive player who has played across both will tell you that.
the goal is producing a non-asian team league, as that is something that can be done well given the current state of battle.net. a truly international online league is not feasible right now. compare tsl and nasl results to the gsl world cup results. players playing from korea on foreign server's results are meaningless. including that kind of situation in a tournament is silly.
liquid received an invitation because they are clearly one of the top non korean teams. but accommodating their choice to have players in korea lowers the quality of the league, which is unacceptable. I agree that if we don't wan to play in these tournaments that are meant to be for non-Asian teams that we should just decline it, and we did. So we're on one line there. Here is my issue with your posts. - We were not told any of this to be the reason. By the official representative of the league we were told that the logistics of securing multiple accounts would be too much hassle on the league to accommodate the server switching. I would have preferred it if they used your reasoning but they didn't . Would have been much easier to understand. Is your stance official for the tournament organizers?
- If this is meant to be an international league for non-Asian teams why isn't this being stated publicly and why are there no server switches between US and Europe in the rules. What you are saying is again at a disconnect with what the rules are, if you are arguing against server switching between US and Korea. Unless there is server switching between US and Europe your argument makes no sense.
Again; I think everyone can agree that we can just decline invites that aren't accommodating an equal playing field at an international level. This is nothing new, but you are saying a lot of inaccurate things to go with it. This is starting to look less like a a transparent discussion about future leagues and more like a smear-campaign against EG. Why should the viewers get all these negative vibes? I understand that Liquid wanted the system to be optimal for themselves but failed to procure the accommodation. Now Tyler, Nazgul and Jinro are doing their best to show EG's tournament as sub-par, isolationist and poorly organized. The poor choice of words by Tyler and Jinro did not help either. As a viewer, I'd like to pitch in that I'd prefer to see the best quality of games (and yes, this includes lag-free) with the best available players. I've said it before in the thread, if Liquid wants to participate, they could also find sponsors to support their flights to the US. If not, I'm sad to see Liquid not participate, but I'm still going to enjoy the good games between other teams. And I would rather discuss the awesome 2v2 possibilities in this league than read more about Liquid being left out. It won't change, and future leagues should be discussed in other threads. Edit: TLDR: Can we please get a thread where we can discuss the new league, ie. a thread without a war of words between EG and Liquid.
QFT... I'm honestly flabbergasted as to how TL Mods are letting this continue. I know this is your website but it's obvious this is the only time you are letting this fly since it has to do with your SC2 Team.. If it was any other team you would have warned both sides to stop and everyone else to not discuss this meaningless drama further. If you guys really want to have a discussion on tournament standards or whatever shouldn't it merit being spoken about in a different thread...I really think we need some unbiased moderation going on here
|
On May 03 2011 23:58 nihlon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2011 23:56 DrunkenTemplar wrote:On May 03 2011 23:55 nihlon wrote:On May 03 2011 23:52 DrunkenTemplar wrote:On May 03 2011 16:22 hakhu wrote:
At the next Soccer World Cup in Brazil I think it would be fair for all the South American teams do demand to play with the sun at their back (or the "better" half of the field) and not switch sides after half-time.
It's their tournament and their continent. Why should they have to suffer the inconvenience! Outrage!
It's the fault of the other teams that they live in Europe, Asia etc. It's their choice to live there, so they will just have to face the consequences. Witty, but a fail analogy. Brazil doesn't get to determine the rules, FIFA does. In this tournament, EG ultimately makes the decision on the rules, it's their tournament. So if Brazil decided to arrange their own tournament, you'd think it would be fine? For that tournament, sure. But noone would turn up. Organiser makes the rules, and people can choose to participate, not a hard idea to get your head around. So it "would be fine" but no one would turn up? Yeah that makes sense... No one is arguing wheter or not EG have the right to do it like this. That doesn't mean is a good or fine thing. That shouldn't be that hard to get your head around.
First part: I took "fine" as meaning the organizer has the right to make whatever rules they want, and are responsible for what happens because of them. you took fine = the tournament was a success
Whether what EG decided good or right is one of opinion and I'm not debating that with you
|
since there are 2v2s in this league, why not 3s or 4s? it might be a silly suggestion, but it could be fun for some viewers to watch? since no one would really practice 4s, it could be fun for the players too. or would it just be annoying? i only play and follow 1v1, but i could imagine some viewers getting a kick out of larger team games. it also adds more "teaminess" :p
or are those formats just too silly? is the silliness cutoff at 2v2 ... with T/Z early aggro as the above comments discuss
|
On May 04 2011 00:11 price wrote:
since there are 2v2s in this league, why not 3s or 4s? it might be a silly suggestion, but it could be fun for some viewers to watch? since no one would really practice 4s, it could be fun for the players too. or would it just be annoying? i only play and follow 1v1, but i could imagine some viewers getting a kick out of larger team games. it also adds more "teaminess" :p
or are those formats just too silly? is the silliness cutoff at 2v2 ... with T/Z early aggro as the above comments discuss
Gotta remember that there's money on this though
|
On May 04 2011 00:16 DrunkenTemplar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 00:11 price wrote:
since there are 2v2s in this league, why not 3s or 4s? it might be a silly suggestion, but it could be fun for some viewers to watch? since no one would really practice 4s, it could be fun for the players too. or would it just be annoying? i only play and follow 1v1, but i could imagine some viewers getting a kick out of larger team games. it also adds more "teaminess" :p
or are those formats just too silly? is the silliness cutoff at 2v2 ... with T/Z early aggro as the above comments discuss Gotta remember that there's money on this though
so wouldn't be in the interest of the organizers re: advertisements to provide content that a wider variety of viewers would enjoy?
i mean, maybe larger games aren't worth it. i'm just curious.
|
On May 03 2011 06:26 Velr wrote:
Teamliquid being there is unfortunate, but you can just say it's a "political" decision which has nothing to do with the team. You just have to "eat" that. It's not good but they were given the rules, they did not like them, they did chose to not participate. Thats unfortunate but at least it's "clear" and somewhat "fair" (not the lag, but the "decision").
What really bothers me more and more are BIG invitational tournaments.
I reay get tired of it, no matter if the invites are made for teams or for single leagues.
Is it that hard (at least for single player events) to have some qualification tourneys WHITEOUT any pricemoney to get into a league instead of just randomly inviting people?
As long as players get chosen due to invites, it never will be "good" and people will allways find several justified reasons to bitch about it.
As long as there are invites there will be bias, knowingly, unknnowlingy... There just is bias. There is no way around that, you can't ask the community because the fanfavorites will win the polls.
The truth is: "BIG" Invitationals are bad and allways will be.
Btw: The Weekly cups in Europe are THE thing to show that your a top player... Some guys calling them "smaller/not important" Cups just show that they have no idea whats going on. Tons of very high profile players get regulary knocked out early in them...
BUT some players seem to be like ALLWAYS in the top 16 when they play in one. That probably says more about a player than winning one of said cups...
Team leagues are a bitch to organise as is, having an additional qualifier... I dunno. Lots of work for little gain, I think few people are putting the legitimacy of mouz, dignitas, EG, etc etc in question. If there's ever a proper ICCup style league, with several divisions, promotions/demotions etc. organised, then obviously.
All in all in this case, I think it's up to EG, and they chose not to do it for this event.
Also, I'm not sure which BIG invite only tournaments you're talking about. TSL had open qualifiers for half of its spots, IEM has qualifiers, MLG has an open bracket, NASL and IPL might've started as invite tournaments for season 1 (which is very reasonable btw) but will have open qualifiers for season 2 onwards.
That said, agreed on the rest of your posts. The "smaller" tournaments are a fantastic measurement for a player's skill and consistency.
|
On May 03 2011 17:20 TheGreenBee wrote:
I feel like even if TL is right in this case, having KR players compete in foreign tournaments is not a good idea given the current state of b.net.
Like when MC and other KR players lost in the TSL, most people are thinking: "Oh he only lost because of lag". which kinda invalidates their opponents and the tournament result..
MC played from denmark when he got knocked out of TSL, lag had nothing to do with his results
I get your point, though
|
On May 04 2011 00:19 price wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 00:16 DrunkenTemplar wrote:On May 04 2011 00:11 price wrote:
since there are 2v2s in this league, why not 3s or 4s? it might be a silly suggestion, but it could be fun for some viewers to watch? since no one would really practice 4s, it could be fun for the players too. or would it just be annoying? i only play and follow 1v1, but i could imagine some viewers getting a kick out of larger team games. it also adds more "teaminess" :p
or are those formats just too silly? is the silliness cutoff at 2v2 ... with T/Z early aggro as the above comments discuss Gotta remember that there's money on this though so wouldn't be in the interest of the organizers re: advertisements to provide content that a wider variety of viewers would enjoy? i mean, maybe larger games aren't worth it. i'm just curious.
yeah that's true but if i was doing this for a profession and i haven't practiced or trained for a specific event which has a lot of money on it, i'd be annoyed. not to mention the game is balanced around 1v1
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
