On January 18 2015 11:54 Howie_Dewitt wrote: Someone needs to make a tier list because some of this shit is confusing
That would involve people agreeing on the qualifiers and then what each team is realistically capable of, which I don't ever see happening.
Would be a lot easier if people didn't tack on weird caveats like "can beat Tier 1 teams" or "is a team of Tier 1 players who just need X".
But FIRE basically falls into "will never get top 4 at a major tournament, will never get a direct invite, and wouldn't consistently get a qualifier spot if there were other decent teams in their region", whatever Tier that would fall under.
On January 18 2015 11:54 Howie_Dewitt wrote: Someone needs to make a tier list because some of this shit is confusing
That would involve people agreeing on the qualifiers and then what each team is realistically capable of, which I don't ever see happening.
Would be a lot easier if people didn't tack on weird caveats like "can beat Tier 1 teams" or "is a team of Tier 1 players who just need X".
But FIRE basically falls into "will never get top 4 at a major tournament, will never get a direct invite, and wouldn't consistently get a qualifier spot if there were other decent teams in their region", whatever Tier that would fall under.
How about a system where a team is rated based on their logos
On January 18 2015 11:54 Howie_Dewitt wrote: Someone needs to make a tier list because some of this shit is confusing
That would involve people agreeing on the qualifiers and then what each team is realistically capable of, which I don't ever see happening.
Would be a lot easier if people didn't tack on weird caveats like "can beat Tier 1 teams" or "is a team of Tier 1 players who just need X".
But FIRE basically falls into "will never get top 4 at a major tournament, will never get a direct invite, and wouldn't consistently get a qualifier spot if there were other decent teams in their region", whatever Tier that would fall under.
How about a system where a team is rated based on their logos
"I have my mustache since i was young and never really shaved it."
"I like to flame everyone just for fun" lol
"I think we'll probably play in the qualifiers we won't be invited over EG"
interesting mike thinks the big western 3 didn't got worse after the western reshuffle for some reason .. he also thinks NA dota is ok and the hate is kinda unfair ..
he thinks it's unfair comparing it to EU since EU is kinda huge and they usually have the better time for playing dota(since generally the games play out in night on EU so they can juggle between work and dota)
fluff changed the name to Fire since it sounded more professional and teams take them more seriously .. pubs are really really different from competitive scrimming (i somehow hear this all the time from pros)
i actually thought the interview is gonna be trolly but he did the interview legit
Has there been any definitive answer given by anyone as to why Brax is no longer with the team? I see in this thread that people didn't think that Brax was a good fit with TC and the rest of the team, but it all seemed to be opinion/analysis. Has Brax or anyone from Fire said anything concrete about this?
On January 31 2015 11:28 sickoota wrote: He was pretty vague, he mentioned role issues (no one wanted to carry) and also that they werent really getting much results
No one wanted to carry? Never thought I'd hear those 5 words in that exact order.
People in NA seem to be treating Dota 2 like a complete game as opposed to a profession. Seems like players are able to function together, and whenever there is a problem, they split up. Just like Teamliquid, Navi.US, every rendition of SNA... And well, besides that, there's never been any other NA team that has survived for any length of time and had decent success.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pb0N7.jpg)
