|
On May 07 2016 02:25 Moobutt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 02:23 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 02:16 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:08 Moobutt wrote:On May 07 2016 02:01 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 01:56 Moobutt wrote:
Top 4 from last Major get invited, 2 more teams are invited based on non-major performance. 10 qualifier slots allotted based on a region's dominance/relevance. So 3 Europe, 3 China, 2 America, 2 SEA. How do you propose measuring relevance/dominance? So, I'm totally spitballing... Top 4 previous major + 2 performance invites non-related to majors. 10 left Give every region an automatic 1 qualifier slot. 6 slots left. Then, look at previous major results for relevance/dominance. More I think about it, the less I'm sure it would work. Each region would need a different format for the different amount of Qualifier spots. It could work, but they'd need a system to decide how to count results for each region. As it is, they look at results from the last six months for their invite, which in my opinion is too large of a time, and it's why they had to invite this many teams. They had to invite this many teams this time around to avoid fucking up both EU qualifiers and main event. EHOME was a trade. They didn't. They could've done eight teams; we all thought they were going to do eight teams; and many of us already had an idea about the eight teams to invite. Secret, Liquid, EG, MVP seem obvious, the next 4 seem a little debatable.
It's not that hard.
Don't invite:
LGD, because what the fuck have they done?
Swindlemelonzz's team, because their best result is a six at Shanghai
Fnatic, same
OG, because since the start of this year they have not got past third in a tournament
Then you have eight teams, all of which have wins in recent tournaments, except Natus Vincere, which is there only because they're the best team from that region at the time of the invite. You can change Natus Vincere out for OG, even, in case you want to go back six months.
|
|
|
Russian Federation40186 Posts
On May 07 2016 02:32 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 02:25 Moobutt wrote:On May 07 2016 02:23 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 02:16 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:08 Moobutt wrote:On May 07 2016 02:01 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 01:56 Moobutt wrote:
Top 4 from last Major get invited, 2 more teams are invited based on non-major performance. 10 qualifier slots allotted based on a region's dominance/relevance. So 3 Europe, 3 China, 2 America, 2 SEA. How do you propose measuring relevance/dominance? So, I'm totally spitballing... Top 4 previous major + 2 performance invites non-related to majors. 10 left Give every region an automatic 1 qualifier slot. 6 slots left. Then, look at previous major results for relevance/dominance. More I think about it, the less I'm sure it would work. Each region would need a different format for the different amount of Qualifier spots. It could work, but they'd need a system to decide how to count results for each region. As it is, they look at results from the last six months for their invite, which in my opinion is too large of a time, and it's why they had to invite this many teams. They had to invite this many teams this time around to avoid fucking up both EU qualifiers and main event. EHOME was a trade. They didn't. They could've done eight teams; we all thought they were going to do eight teams; and many of us already had an idea about the eight teams to invite. Secret, Liquid, EG, MVP seem obvious, the next 4 seem a little debatable. It's not that hard. Don't invite: LGD, because what the fuck have they done? Complexity, because their best result is a 6th place at Shanghai Fnatic, same as Complexity OG, because since the start of this year they have not got past 3rd place in a tournament Then you have eight teams, all of which have wins in recent tournaments, and Natus Vincere, which is there only because they're the best team from that region. You can change Natus Vincere out for OG, even, in case you want to go back six months.
Just saying: complexity has top 4 at Dota Pit (and top 6 at Manilla only losing to winner) and Fnatic have top 4 at ESL Manilla only losing to winner of tournament. So no, coL has more claims to invite than Navi. As does Fnatic.
|
Is Skylark's 2 web placements standard for Radiant offlane? Seems like the further north one is unusual
|
On May 07 2016 02:34 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 02:32 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:25 Moobutt wrote:On May 07 2016 02:23 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 02:16 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:08 Moobutt wrote:On May 07 2016 02:01 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 01:56 Moobutt wrote:
Top 4 from last Major get invited, 2 more teams are invited based on non-major performance. 10 qualifier slots allotted based on a region's dominance/relevance. So 3 Europe, 3 China, 2 America, 2 SEA. How do you propose measuring relevance/dominance? So, I'm totally spitballing... Top 4 previous major + 2 performance invites non-related to majors. 10 left Give every region an automatic 1 qualifier slot. 6 slots left. Then, look at previous major results for relevance/dominance. More I think about it, the less I'm sure it would work. Each region would need a different format for the different amount of Qualifier spots. It could work, but they'd need a system to decide how to count results for each region. As it is, they look at results from the last six months for their invite, which in my opinion is too large of a time, and it's why they had to invite this many teams. They had to invite this many teams this time around to avoid fucking up both EU qualifiers and main event. EHOME was a trade. They didn't. They could've done eight teams; we all thought they were going to do eight teams; and many of us already had an idea about the eight teams to invite. Secret, Liquid, EG, MVP seem obvious, the next 4 seem a little debatable. It's not that hard. Don't invite: LGD, because what the fuck have they done? Complexity, because their best result is a 6th place at Shanghai Fnatic, same as Complexity OG, because since the start of this year they have not got past 3rd place in a tournament Then you have eight teams, all of which have wins in recent tournaments, and Natus Vincere, which is there only because they're the best team from that region. You can change Natus Vincere out for OG, even, in case you want to go back six months. Just saying: complexity has top 4 at Dota Pit (and top 6 at Manilla only losing to winner) and Fnatic have top 4 at ESL Manilla only losing to winner of tournament. So no, coL has more claims to invite than Navi. As does Fnatic.
I don't think there's any cause to look past third for invite. I'd only invite Natus Vincere, in any case, because of region. Had that not been the case, they could just invite OG for a "win" invite instead.
|
I did enjoy how no one on the panel seemed to pick up on Slacks making fun of Tobi's reaction to Techies.
|
Russian Federation40186 Posts
On May 07 2016 02:36 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 02:34 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 02:32 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:25 Moobutt wrote:On May 07 2016 02:23 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 02:16 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:08 Moobutt wrote:On May 07 2016 02:01 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 01:56 Moobutt wrote:
Top 4 from last Major get invited, 2 more teams are invited based on non-major performance. 10 qualifier slots allotted based on a region's dominance/relevance. So 3 Europe, 3 China, 2 America, 2 SEA. How do you propose measuring relevance/dominance? So, I'm totally spitballing... Top 4 previous major + 2 performance invites non-related to majors. 10 left Give every region an automatic 1 qualifier slot. 6 slots left. Then, look at previous major results for relevance/dominance. More I think about it, the less I'm sure it would work. Each region would need a different format for the different amount of Qualifier spots. It could work, but they'd need a system to decide how to count results for each region. As it is, they look at results from the last six months for their invite, which in my opinion is too large of a time, and it's why they had to invite this many teams. They had to invite this many teams this time around to avoid fucking up both EU qualifiers and main event. EHOME was a trade. They didn't. They could've done eight teams; we all thought they were going to do eight teams; and many of us already had an idea about the eight teams to invite. Secret, Liquid, EG, MVP seem obvious, the next 4 seem a little debatable. It's not that hard. Don't invite: LGD, because what the fuck have they done? Complexity, because their best result is a 6th place at Shanghai Fnatic, same as Complexity OG, because since the start of this year they have not got past 3rd place in a tournament Then you have eight teams, all of which have wins in recent tournaments, and Natus Vincere, which is there only because they're the best team from that region. You can change Natus Vincere out for OG, even, in case you want to go back six months. Just saying: complexity has top 4 at Dota Pit (and top 6 at Manilla only losing to winner) and Fnatic have top 4 at ESL Manilla only losing to winner of tournament. So no, coL has more claims to invite than Navi. As does Fnatic. I don't think there's any reason to look past third for invite. I'd only invite Natus Vincere, in any case, because of region. Had that not been the case, they could just invite OG for a "win" invite instead.
Both of these are single elim brackets, so both col and Fnatic share 3rd place. So, once again your point flies straight into trashcan.
|
On May 07 2016 02:38 lolfail9001 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 02:36 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:34 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 02:32 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:25 Moobutt wrote:On May 07 2016 02:23 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:18 lolfail9001 wrote:On May 07 2016 02:16 Azarkon wrote:On May 07 2016 02:08 Moobutt wrote:On May 07 2016 02:01 lolfail9001 wrote:
[quote]
How do you propose measuring relevance/dominance? So, I'm totally spitballing... Top 4 previous major + 2 performance invites non-related to majors. 10 left Give every region an automatic 1 qualifier slot. 6 slots left. Then, look at previous major results for relevance/dominance. More I think about it, the less I'm sure it would work. Each region would need a different format for the different amount of Qualifier spots. It could work, but they'd need a system to decide how to count results for each region. As it is, they look at results from the last six months for their invite, which in my opinion is too large of a time, and it's why they had to invite this many teams. They had to invite this many teams this time around to avoid fucking up both EU qualifiers and main event. EHOME was a trade. They didn't. They could've done eight teams; we all thought they were going to do eight teams; and many of us already had an idea about the eight teams to invite. Secret, Liquid, EG, MVP seem obvious, the next 4 seem a little debatable. It's not that hard. Don't invite: LGD, because what the fuck have they done? Complexity, because their best result is a 6th place at Shanghai Fnatic, same as Complexity OG, because since the start of this year they have not got past 3rd place in a tournament Then you have eight teams, all of which have wins in recent tournaments, and Natus Vincere, which is there only because they're the best team from that region. You can change Natus Vincere out for OG, even, in case you want to go back six months. Just saying: complexity has top 4 at Dota Pit (and top 6 at Manilla only losing to winner) and Fnatic have top 4 at ESL Manilla only losing to winner of tournament. So no, coL has more claims to invite than Navi. As does Fnatic. I don't think there's any reason to look past third for invite. I'd only invite Natus Vincere, in any case, because of region. Had that not been the case, they could just invite OG for a "win" invite instead. Both of these are single elim brackets, so both col and Fnatic share 3rd place. So, once again your point flies straight into trashcan.
For such tournaments, I wouldn't go past second. You don't just invite any team that manages to go past the group/weak team in a tournament. An invite should be for a team that has results that you can't argue with; in case you can't find such a team, then don't invite.
|
On May 07 2016 02:31 lolfail9001 wrote:
Servers do matter, for starters, even Korea->SEA ping is horrendous enough for MVP.P to play their online matches from Singapore. CIS usually does not have this problem with EU except Russia (starting from Ural) but that's mainly because Russia is too big for it's own good.
That's besides the point man. We're dividing regions because of how one country decides to govern and operate their internet. Its simply not fair that SEA+China are separate, but EU+CIS is one region yet its twice, perhaps even 3 times as big as China+SEA.
|
Empire starting out on fire
Not sure how bounty hunter can be this useless that hero's insane
|
On May 07 2016 02:42 FreakyDroid wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 02:31 lolfail9001 wrote:
Servers do matter, for starters, even Korea->SEA ping is horrendous enough for MVP.P to play their online matches from Singapore. CIS usually does not have this problem with EU except Russia (starting from Ural) but that's mainly because Russia is too big for it's own good.
That's besides the point man. We're dividing regions because of how one country decides to govern and operate their internet. Its simply not fair that SEA+China are separate, but EU+CIS is one region yet its twice, perhaps even 3 times as big as China+SEA.
If we saperate eu and cis into 2 regions this qualifier we at the most get 2 teams in EU qualifier ..and I don't think other open qualifier teams in eu region are much more worth inviting to eu qualifiers over sea and China qualifiers .
|
all this fight but AF is still really well in farm.
this is not looking that great for empire IMO
|
On May 07 2016 02:49 Faruko wrote:
all this fight but AF is still really well in farm.
this is not looking that great for empire IMO
They have chrono and beastmaster to kite sven later tho
|
i mean mirana is going for the meme build it seems
a single pipe from bounty will negate most damage from Empire
|
Empire get kills but can't secure the farm to keep up against AF's cores who scale better in terms of damage anyways.
|
On May 07 2016 02:46 Kamisamanachi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2016 02:42 FreakyDroid wrote:On May 07 2016 02:31 lolfail9001 wrote:
Servers do matter, for starters, even Korea->SEA ping is horrendous enough for MVP.P to play their online matches from Singapore. CIS usually does not have this problem with EU except Russia (starting from Ural) but that's mainly because Russia is too big for it's own good.
That's besides the point man. We're dividing regions because of how one country decides to govern and operate their internet. Its simply not fair that SEA+China are separate, but EU+CIS is one region yet its twice, perhaps even 3 times as big as China+SEA. If we saperate eu and cis into 2 regions this qualifier we at the most get 2 teams in EU qualifier ..and I don't think other open qualifier teams are much more worth inviting to eu qualifiers over sea and China qualifiers .
I doubt that, but lets assume what you're saying is true, then some teams who are arguably of equal caliber as SEA/China teams dont have the same chance to advance to majors because they are competing in a very large region.
Right now a CIS and EU team are competing against eachother for the same slot. Do you think Mineski is better than any of these two teams?
|
Russian Federation40186 Posts
|
Russian Federation40186 Posts
|
Alright that was a good teamfight that could swing things.
|
OK. I don't really get how that happened.
BKB down --> run away.
AF don't agree
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
