|
+ Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 08:36 renfree wrote:
Bulba, you have done it again! Anyway, BurNIng ain't leaving DK for anything, his personal relations with team's management/owner is too close. And TI3 Chinese teams needs a reshuffle draft- and strategy wise, not players. Players were fine if some a bit rusty, strategy wasn't.
About Na`Vi - Puppey also wanted to get rid of XBOCT when they were shuffling, but ZG was too against it, so they gave it a try. They were on a 2-month schedule of how this new lineup would work out and if it didn't, they would've changed again. Now, when the tension and old arguments arise again, i don't see them staying together unless Puppey puts money before everything.
It didn't work out?
|
if they kick puppey so Puppey [C/5]-Kuroky[2]-Vigoss [3]-Pajkatt [1] +1 reform KS.INT!! kurokoky is not a support player. he plays amazing at 2 back then.
|
On August 16 2013 08:38 kapiten22 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 08:36 renfree wrote:
Bulba, you have done it again! Anyway, BurNIng ain't leaving DK for anything, his personal relations with team's management/owner is too close. And TI3 Chinese teams needs a reshuffle draft- and strategy wise, not players. Players were fine if some a bit rusty, strategy wasn't.
About Na`Vi - Puppey also wanted to get rid of XBOCT when they were shuffling, but ZG was too against it, so they gave it a try. They were on a 2-month schedule of how this new lineup would work out and if it didn't, they would've changed again. Now, when the tension and old arguments arise again, i don't see them staying together unless Puppey puts money before everything. It didn't work out?
Who knows what they were aiming for in terms not only results, but also team chemistry. And taking into account the way they won particular games (I'm talking that they should've lost these games and they admitted it themselves, which speaks of a weak performance). They gave it all for the GrandFinals and played well, but other than that..
|
+ Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 08:45 renfree wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 08:38 kapiten22 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 08:36 renfree wrote:
Bulba, you have done it again! Anyway, BurNIng ain't leaving DK for anything, his personal relations with team's management/owner is too close. And TI3 Chinese teams needs a reshuffle draft- and strategy wise, not players. Players were fine if some a bit rusty, strategy wasn't.
About Na`Vi - Puppey also wanted to get rid of XBOCT when they were shuffling, but ZG was too against it, so they gave it a try. They were on a 2-month schedule of how this new lineup would work out and if it didn't, they would've changed again. Now, when the tension and old arguments arise again, i don't see them staying together unless Puppey puts money before everything. It didn't work out? Who knows what they were aiming for in terms not only results, but also team chemistry. And taking into account the way they won particular games (I'm talking that they should've lost these games and they admitted it themselves, which speaks of a weak performance). They gave it all for the GrandFinals and played well, but other than that..
Other than that they went 1st placed in groups without even braking a sweat and before the TI they won, BB2, jD Masters, EMS lan, Allienware Cup, d2l lan, and the Defence 4, and got 650k out of TI. Not bad in my mind.
|
Again, no surprises, but Sneyking just confirmed on stream that he is off Dignitas.
I find it cute Universe tried so hard to deny it earlier today.
|
People who think that Alliance are successful because they are stable have no clue what they're talking about. It's the exact opposite, they are stable because they are successful. If they hypothetically didn't do well during TI3 they would also have a high chance for changing rosters just like everyone else. And if they start underperforming at any point before TI4 invites (or do poorly during TI4), watch for roster changes as well.
|
On August 16 2013 08:59 Angra wrote:
People who think that Alliance are successful because they are stable have no clue what they're talking about. It's the exact opposite, they are stable because they are successful. If they hypothetically didn't do well during TI3 they would also have a high chance for changing rosters just like everyone else. And if they start underperforming at any point before TI4 invites (or do poorly during TI4), watch for roster changes as well.
TL has been a stable team longer than Alliance has
So, yeah...
|
On August 16 2013 09:00 Shaella wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 08:59 Angra wrote:
People who think that Alliance are successful because they are stable have no clue what they're talking about. It's the exact opposite, they are stable because they are successful. If they hypothetically didn't do well during TI3 they would also have a high chance for changing rosters just like everyone else. And if they start underperforming at any point before TI4 invites (or do poorly during TI4), watch for roster changes as well. TL has been a stable team longer than Alliance has So, yeah...
And now there's rumors that they are making roster changes. Of course teams are going to be stable pre-TI when they have been invited. That's why I specifically left out the period of time between TI invites and TI event when I was talking about when to look for Alliance making roster changes if they aren't doing well.
|
On August 16 2013 09:00 Shaella wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 08:59 Angra wrote:
People who think that Alliance are successful because they are stable have no clue what they're talking about. It's the exact opposite, they are stable because they are successful. If they hypothetically didn't do well during TI3 they would also have a high chance for changing rosters just like everyone else. And if they start underperforming at any point before TI4 invites (or do poorly during TI4), watch for roster changes as well. TL has been a stable team longer than Alliance has So, yeah...
Not saying he is right, but earlier in the year Liquid was dominating online tournaments. They went like 21-0 over a stretch of games. And by the time they were faltering (they still did okay, just not great) it was close enough to TI that they would incur the wraith of Valve if they shuffled.
|
On August 16 2013 09:03 Angra wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 09:00 Shaella wrote:On August 16 2013 08:59 Angra wrote:
People who think that Alliance are successful because they are stable have no clue what they're talking about. It's the exact opposite, they are stable because they are successful. If they hypothetically didn't do well during TI3 they would also have a high chance for changing rosters just like everyone else. And if they start underperforming at any point before TI4 invites (or do poorly during TI4), watch for roster changes as well. TL has been a stable team longer than Alliance has So, yeah... And now there's rumors that they are making roster changes. Of course teams are going to be stable pre-TI when they have been invited. That's why I specifically left out the period of time between TI invites and TI event when I was talking about when to look for Alliance making roster changes if they aren't doing well.
and i was just helping making the point that Stability = success 
|
On August 16 2013 09:00 Shaella wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 08:59 Angra wrote:
People who think that Alliance are successful because they are stable have no clue what they're talking about. It's the exact opposite, they are stable because they are successful. If they hypothetically didn't do well during TI3 they would also have a high chance for changing rosters just like everyone else. And if they start underperforming at any point before TI4 invites (or do poorly during TI4), watch for roster changes as well. TL has been a stable team longer than Alliance has So, yeah...
This honestly is probably the one team that would stick together through under-performing times. Case in point, remember that shit storm back when EE was replaced and the others basically stated at communication issues being a primary reason, and a lot of people gave them shit for that? Now all of a sudden other teams are citing the same things which led to issues at TI3.
Loda's been on enough teams where he was the centerpiece with mediocre supports and other teams just punished that notion. So relax, you guys make it sound like Loda hasn't been down this road, more than once, before.
|
People are acting like teams are being impulsive changing rosters right after TI3.
The problems/reasons that exist for these teams wanting change most likely have existed for quite some time but they simply did not want to change in order to keep their TI3/qualifier invite
|
On August 16 2013 09:10 hyptonic wrote:
People are acting like teams are being impulsive changing rosters right after TI3.
The problems/reasons that exist for these teams wanting change most likely have existed for quite some time but they simply did not want to change in order to keep their TI3/qualifier invite
This is why the invite system for so many teams seems so bad. Why not just invite the top 4 of the previous year's TI and then make everyone else qualify during the in between times through sanctioned qualifiers? Like even asking D2L, the Defense, Starladder, GEST, etc. should help the scene grow.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 09:14 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 09:10 hyptonic wrote:
People are acting like teams are being impulsive changing rosters right after TI3.
The problems/reasons that exist for these teams wanting change most likely have existed for quite some time but they simply did not want to change in order to keep their TI3/qualifier invite This is why the invite system for so many teams seems so bad. Why not just invite the top 4 of the previous year's TI and then make everyone else qualify during the in between times through sanctioned qualifiers? Like even asking D2L, the Defense, Starladder, GEST, etc. should help the scene grow.
That.
|
On August 16 2013 09:14 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 09:10 hyptonic wrote:
People are acting like teams are being impulsive changing rosters right after TI3.
The problems/reasons that exist for these teams wanting change most likely have existed for quite some time but they simply did not want to change in order to keep their TI3/qualifier invite This is why the invite system for so many teams seems so bad. Why not just invite the top 4 of the previous year's TI and then make everyone else qualify during the in between times through sanctioned qualifiers? Like even asking D2L, the Defense, Starladder, GEST, etc. should help the scene grow.
this is a pretty good idea
|
On August 16 2013 09:14 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 09:10 hyptonic wrote:
People are acting like teams are being impulsive changing rosters right after TI3.
The problems/reasons that exist for these teams wanting change most likely have existed for quite some time but they simply did not want to change in order to keep their TI3/qualifier invite This is why the invite system for so many teams seems so bad. Why not just invite the top 4 of the previous year's TI and then make everyone else qualify during the in between times through sanctioned qualifiers? Like even asking D2L, the Defense, Starladder, GEST, etc. should help the scene grow.
a. pretty sure icefrog already takes those tournament results into consideration before making invites, hence the mufc & lgdint invs
b. some teams break up after a deep International run, ala ehome
c. some teams don't remain as dominant as they were in the prior TIs, ala iG (admittedly, they are still far and away good enough to receive an invite anyhow). Maybe teams like MYM or Scythe can fall into this category although they fall into category b as well.
|
On August 16 2013 09:24 NGrNecris wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 09:14 Judicator wrote:On August 16 2013 09:10 hyptonic wrote:
People are acting like teams are being impulsive changing rosters right after TI3.
The problems/reasons that exist for these teams wanting change most likely have existed for quite some time but they simply did not want to change in order to keep their TI3/qualifier invite This is why the invite system for so many teams seems so bad. Why not just invite the top 4 of the previous year's TI and then make everyone else qualify during the in between times through sanctioned qualifiers? Like even asking D2L, the Defense, Starladder, GEST, etc. should help the scene grow. this is a pretty good idea
Maybe I'm just stupid but what does this change in regards to teams wanting to change rosters but being forced to stick together due to TI? And then what happens if say, Kaipi win one of these tourneys and earn their spot and then break up? And the next team down the list already has an invite?
Though I don't think it's a bad idea anyway
|
On August 16 2013 09:05 Shaella wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 09:03 Angra wrote:On August 16 2013 09:00 Shaella wrote:On August 16 2013 08:59 Angra wrote:
People who think that Alliance are successful because they are stable have no clue what they're talking about. It's the exact opposite, they are stable because they are successful. If they hypothetically didn't do well during TI3 they would also have a high chance for changing rosters just like everyone else. And if they start underperforming at any point before TI4 invites (or do poorly during TI4), watch for roster changes as well. TL has been a stable team longer than Alliance has So, yeah... And now there's rumors that they are making roster changes. Of course teams are going to be stable pre-TI when they have been invited. That's why I specifically left out the period of time between TI invites and TI event when I was talking about when to look for Alliance making roster changes if they aren't doing well. and i was just helping making the point that Stability = success
Ah my bad, must've read your post in the wrong way lol
|
On August 16 2013 09:14 Judicator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 09:10 hyptonic wrote:
People are acting like teams are being impulsive changing rosters right after TI3.
The problems/reasons that exist for these teams wanting change most likely have existed for quite some time but they simply did not want to change in order to keep their TI3/qualifier invite This is why the invite system for so many teams seems so bad. Why not just invite the top 4 of the previous year's TI and then make everyone else qualify during the in between times through sanctioned qualifiers? Like even asking D2L, the Defense, Starladder, GEST, etc. should help the scene grow.
But how would you do this? If a team wins said tournament their in? If thats the case what if a team wins more than one qualifier tournament? Also how many tournaments does the scene have before TI are there enough for finding all the other 12 teams and having a decent spread between East and West? I'm not a fan of the invite system either but I honestly don't know if there's anything truly better and if it truly helps the scene grow.
|
Valve does take into consideration achievements over the year and team stability/activeness when deciding who gets invited. Performances at tournaments over the year/season are thus very important.
The trouble with making certain events count as qualifiers, is how do you justify which events act as qualifiers, and even if a team wins an "qualifying" event, how certain are you that they'll keep running as the same 5 men by the time the next comes. If you go by a year round point system, the same issue still kinda applies (and now you've gotta think about whether the points carry forward with a new team). Then you gotta ask how will events be weighted, what if some teams can't attend many events, etc etc.
I foresee that as time goes by there'll be less and less invites and more qualifiers(off of Valve's own TI qualifiers) for the subsequent year TIs, or perhaps an expansion of The International to more than 16 teams.
Valve can try running the LCS/WCS model, but there are costs involved and even the WCS model has been inefficiently run. Slasher of Gamespot asked a lot of the casters and players regarding their views on Valve's TI model, and most of them agreed that it was the best for now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
