|
On September 03 2012 08:08 Firebolt145 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 08:04 Manit0u wrote:
Could someone enlighten me as to why no one seems to be ever picking up Desolator or MKB? Aren't they great damage for money items in DotA? Desolator requires you to get it quite early to be effective, and the minus armor is easily gotten by getting a medallion instead. It also gives you ONLY damage with no survivability at all, whereas other damage items that are generally rushed like Manta give additional abilities. By the time you start looking for pure damage items, it is too late and desolator is outclassed by other damage items such as MKB or Daedalus. MKB is only a great damage item on heroes that inherently have relatively low base damage, such as Windrunner or QoP. On most other heroes Daedalus is a better damage item.
Pretty sure I read somewhere that Desolater is almost always better than MKB\Daedalus unless you need to go through evasion, have an insane attack speed, or the enemy has a very large amount of armor. Getting medalion would just make Desolater even stronger, as long as you don't bring the target below 21 minus armor.
|
On September 03 2012 08:11 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 08:08 dtz wrote:On September 03 2012 08:03 Shikyo wrote:On September 03 2012 07:59 dtz wrote:On September 03 2012 07:58 Shikyo wrote:On September 03 2012 07:55 Salazarz wrote:
People just have to complain about everything. There's always hundreds of whine-posts in SC2 double-elim finals because one side having an advantage in grand finals before the actual grand finals even start is not very... grand. Now Valve does it this way and lo and behold, hundreds of whine posts again.
Personally, I like this way a lot more, especially if the grand finals are played on same day as other matches. There is absolutely no reason to think that coming from winner's bracket is NOT an advantage, so it's not like teams are going to throw games or whatever. You're going to be fresher, maybe have an extra special strat saved up, have an extra chance to observe your opponents' games... it is an advantage, however small you may want to claim it is - and the finals actually start off on even footing, which is nice. Just have single elim instead, then. Fairness is pretty important when a million dollars is on the line. Also those people who complain don't know the format. Don't give the team that wins all their sets a disadvantage in comparison to all the others. Does that make sense to you ? And with all that rant out of the way IG-LGD is starting, let's see what'll happen. Why not 16 teams league format for ultimate fairness then? They had the time to do it. Is this called a slippery slope argument? I'm not familiar with the English terms. If you do a double elimination format you don't do it up to the final stage and then remove it as if it never was there. Just do single elimination. Then just don't think of it as a double elim. This is not proper double elimination. It has been clear from the start that there is no 1-0 advantage for the wb winner. We can call it Valve 1.5 elimination. You were talking about fairness that is why i brought up the league format which would be the fairest format in determining the best team as everyone plays each other. So i was just wondering if you would prefer TI2 to be following that format from the start. It's double elimination to everyone but one single team. I don't understand how you're fine with everyone but a single team getting two lives. That'd be bullying at school, racism on the streets.
You will never give up will you? Why haven't you posted in the general section?
|
On September 03 2012 08:11 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 08:08 dtz wrote:On September 03 2012 08:03 Shikyo wrote:On September 03 2012 07:59 dtz wrote:On September 03 2012 07:58 Shikyo wrote:On September 03 2012 07:55 Salazarz wrote:
People just have to complain about everything. There's always hundreds of whine-posts in SC2 double-elim finals because one side having an advantage in grand finals before the actual grand finals even start is not very... grand. Now Valve does it this way and lo and behold, hundreds of whine posts again.
Personally, I like this way a lot more, especially if the grand finals are played on same day as other matches. There is absolutely no reason to think that coming from winner's bracket is NOT an advantage, so it's not like teams are going to throw games or whatever. You're going to be fresher, maybe have an extra special strat saved up, have an extra chance to observe your opponents' games... it is an advantage, however small you may want to claim it is - and the finals actually start off on even footing, which is nice. Just have single elim instead, then. Fairness is pretty important when a million dollars is on the line. Also those people who complain don't know the format. Don't give the team that wins all their sets a disadvantage in comparison to all the others. Does that make sense to you ? And with all that rant out of the way IG-LGD is starting, let's see what'll happen. Why not 16 teams league format for ultimate fairness then? They had the time to do it. Is this called a slippery slope argument? I'm not familiar with the English terms. If you do a double elimination format you don't do it up to the final stage and then remove it as if it never was there. Just do single elimination. Then just don't think of it as a double elim. This is not proper double elimination. It has been clear from the start that there is no 1-0 advantage for the wb winner. We can call it Valve 1.5 elimination. You were talking about fairness that is why i brought up the league format which would be the fairest format in determining the best team as everyone plays each other. So i was just wondering if you would prefer TI2 to be following that format from the start. It's double elimination to everyone but one single team. I don't understand how you're fine with everyone but a single team getting two lives. That'd be bullying at school, racism on the streets.
Because they also play less matches. How is it fair that LGD went 14-0 in group stages but the only advantage they got was their opponent in the first round?
|
On September 03 2012 08:12 Xpace wrote:
How do you pronounce "Na'Vi"?
It's just Na-vi, right?
Why do I keep hearing one of the casters putting a second pause between syllables, while exaggerating the "Vi" D: It's so strange hahah
it's tobi's accent.
|
|
|
Rofl @ freebie. Also that was mean of ferrari.
|
On September 03 2012 08:13 Itsmedudeman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 08:11 Shikyo wrote:On September 03 2012 08:08 dtz wrote:On September 03 2012 08:03 Shikyo wrote:On September 03 2012 07:59 dtz wrote:On September 03 2012 07:58 Shikyo wrote:On September 03 2012 07:55 Salazarz wrote:
People just have to complain about everything. There's always hundreds of whine-posts in SC2 double-elim finals because one side having an advantage in grand finals before the actual grand finals even start is not very... grand. Now Valve does it this way and lo and behold, hundreds of whine posts again.
Personally, I like this way a lot more, especially if the grand finals are played on same day as other matches. There is absolutely no reason to think that coming from winner's bracket is NOT an advantage, so it's not like teams are going to throw games or whatever. You're going to be fresher, maybe have an extra special strat saved up, have an extra chance to observe your opponents' games... it is an advantage, however small you may want to claim it is - and the finals actually start off on even footing, which is nice. Just have single elim instead, then. Fairness is pretty important when a million dollars is on the line. Also those people who complain don't know the format. Don't give the team that wins all their sets a disadvantage in comparison to all the others. Does that make sense to you ? And with all that rant out of the way IG-LGD is starting, let's see what'll happen. Why not 16 teams league format for ultimate fairness then? They had the time to do it. Is this called a slippery slope argument? I'm not familiar with the English terms. If you do a double elimination format you don't do it up to the final stage and then remove it as if it never was there. Just do single elimination. Then just don't think of it as a double elim. This is not proper double elimination. It has been clear from the start that there is no 1-0 advantage for the wb winner. We can call it Valve 1.5 elimination. You were talking about fairness that is why i brought up the league format which would be the fairest format in determining the best team as everyone plays each other. So i was just wondering if you would prefer TI2 to be following that format from the start. It's double elimination to everyone but one single team. I don't understand how you're fine with everyone but a single team getting two lives. That'd be bullying at school, racism on the streets. Because they also play less matches. How is it fair that LGD went 14-0 in group stages but the only advantage they got was their opponent in the first round?
Because their opponents also only got the advantage of opponents in the first round. Don't talk back at me if you want me to stop -.-
Man, IG doing such a good job in the teamfights. Now they might get Roshan... Or I guess not
|
Rubick is the Pudge of this year's International. :D So much fun!
|
|
|
On September 03 2012 08:11 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 08:08 dtz wrote:On September 03 2012 08:03 Shikyo wrote:On September 03 2012 07:59 dtz wrote:On September 03 2012 07:58 Shikyo wrote:On September 03 2012 07:55 Salazarz wrote:
People just have to complain about everything. There's always hundreds of whine-posts in SC2 double-elim finals because one side having an advantage in grand finals before the actual grand finals even start is not very... grand. Now Valve does it this way and lo and behold, hundreds of whine posts again.
Personally, I like this way a lot more, especially if the grand finals are played on same day as other matches. There is absolutely no reason to think that coming from winner's bracket is NOT an advantage, so it's not like teams are going to throw games or whatever. You're going to be fresher, maybe have an extra special strat saved up, have an extra chance to observe your opponents' games... it is an advantage, however small you may want to claim it is - and the finals actually start off on even footing, which is nice. Just have single elim instead, then. Fairness is pretty important when a million dollars is on the line. Also those people who complain don't know the format. Don't give the team that wins all their sets a disadvantage in comparison to all the others. Does that make sense to you ? And with all that rant out of the way IG-LGD is starting, let's see what'll happen. Why not 16 teams league format for ultimate fairness then? They had the time to do it. Is this called a slippery slope argument? I'm not familiar with the English terms. If you do a double elimination format you don't do it up to the final stage and then remove it as if it never was there. Just do single elimination. Then just don't think of it as a double elim. This is not proper double elimination. It has been clear from the start that there is no 1-0 advantage for the wb winner. We can call it Valve 1.5 elimination. You were talking about fairness that is why i brought up the league format which would be the fairest format in determining the best team as everyone plays each other. So i was just wondering if you would prefer TI2 to be following that format from the start. It's double elimination to everyone but one single team. I don't understand how you're fine with everyone but a single team getting two lives. That'd be bullying at school, racism on the streets.
Valve wanted to get the two best teams to the Grand Finals and then watch an even match between them. ALL teams knew this going into it and all agreed to the rules. What exactly is the problem again? If Na'Vi were in the Loser's Bracket they'd be glad as hell they didn't have to climb that Grand Finals mountain TWICE. They all knew the only advantage for staying in the Winner's Bracket would be lesser games and guaranteed second place if you won the Winner's Bracket. Just drop it please.
I could understand if this was a "surprise" to the teams but it wasn't.
|
BLACK HOLE WARDS SNARE
YOU CAN'T YOU CAN"T RUN
|
On September 03 2012 08:13 Earll wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 08:08 Firebolt145 wrote:On September 03 2012 08:04 Manit0u wrote:
Could someone enlighten me as to why no one seems to be ever picking up Desolator or MKB? Aren't they great damage for money items in DotA? Desolator requires you to get it quite early to be effective, and the minus armor is easily gotten by getting a medallion instead. It also gives you ONLY damage with no survivability at all, whereas other damage items that are generally rushed like Manta give additional abilities. By the time you start looking for pure damage items, it is too late and desolator is outclassed by other damage items such as MKB or Daedalus. MKB is only a great damage item on heroes that inherently have relatively low base damage, such as Windrunner or QoP. On most other heroes Daedalus is a better damage item. Pretty sure I read somewhere that Desolater is almost always better than MKB\Daedalus unless you need to go through evasion, have an insane attack speed, or the enemy has a very large amount of armor. Getting medalion would just make Desolater even stronger, as long as you don't bring the target below 21 minus armor.
That is very untrue. The most cost-effective dmg increase is medallion + crystallis. The fact that deso is a orb effect is huge. Especially on ranged heroes where they could get lifesteal + skadi instead of deso.
|
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5956 Posts
Boom, suddenly iG destroys!
|
On September 03 2012 08:12 Xpace wrote:
How do you pronounce "Na'Vi"?
It's just Na-vi, right?
Why do I keep hearing one of the casters putting a second pause between syllables, while exaggerating the "Vi" D: It's so strange hahah
Na Vi is short for Natus Vincere. Call it Na-Vi, its all about how you want to say it.
|
Dendi vs Ferrari, make it happen again please!!
|
I feel like LGD are exhausted judging from their plays 
|
I dont get the XBOCT bashing, i know the only reason he get to shine is because of his team. But he is doing it really well, he has even been outfarming BURNING in this tournament, thats no easy task.
|
17 min and no Relic for Druid. Come on. BurNing is making you look bad.
|
On September 03 2012 07:58 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 07:55 Salazarz wrote:
People just have to complain about everything. There's always hundreds of whine-posts in SC2 double-elim finals because one side having an advantage in grand finals before the actual grand finals even start is not very... grand. Now Valve does it this way and lo and behold, hundreds of whine posts again.
Personally, I like this way a lot more, especially if the grand finals are played on same day as other matches. There is absolutely no reason to think that coming from winner's bracket is NOT an advantage, so it's not like teams are going to throw games or whatever. You're going to be fresher, maybe have an extra special strat saved up, have an extra chance to observe your opponents' games... it is an advantage, however small you may want to claim it is - and the finals actually start off on even footing, which is nice. Just have single elim instead, then. Fairness is pretty important when a million dollars is on the line. Also those people who complain don't know the format. Don't give the team that wins all their sets a disadvantage in comparison to all the others. Does that make sense to you ? And with all that rant out of the way IG-LGD is starting, let's see what'll happen.
How can you talk about fairness and suggest single elim in the same sentence? Single elim is like, the least fair and least consistent of any tournament formats you could ever have, unless you deliberately rig stuff.
The team that wins all their sets does not have a disadvantage. They don't have as big of an advantage as you seem to be advocating for, but they absolutely do not have a disadvantage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
