|
On November 01 2011 10:44 mrgerry wrote:
At the beginning of all his drama before the matches were played, I came across a post saying they only doing this because WCG trying to get one of their sponsor's teams into their tournament. Which at first I dismissed as funny but as a means of putting logic behind this whole fiasco I'm just going to say it's true because I refuse to believe that people can be this retarded.
Yeah I don't like WCG, their TV show was cool because it had incontrol and then Jwong, but they've got to be hiring the dumbest people in the world to work there.
That or everyone is too high up on their horse to get down and fix any of the shit storm the 3 incompetent people probably caused.
|
On November 01 2011 10:44 mrgerry wrote:
At the beginning of all his drama before the matches were played, I came across a post saying they only doing this because WCG trying to get one of their sponsor's teams into their tournament. Which at first I dismissed as funny but as a means of putting logic behind this whole fiasco I'm just going to say it's true because I refuse to believe that people can be this retarded.
I think I posted that on these forums from something I saw on reddit. The jist of it was, "Intel sponsors Dignitas and WCG. They're rather have a sponsored team that also sponsors them go to Korea than a bunch of unsponsored nerds." I don't think it's true cause I'm not gonna dive into conspiracy theories unless there's concrete proof...although this whole situation is reallyyy fishy.
What I think happened was something like this: Voyboy emailed a WCG admin telling him that the CA qualifiers were two sets and questioned if the US qualifiers should be as well. This information was inaccurate but thinking it to be true the WCG admin agreed with Voyboy wanting to keep the two tournaments he was hired to run consistent. Once they discovered this information to be inaccurate they talked to Riot/Matt Marcou and decided to stick with their initial ruling so that they wouldn't lose face over this. I think it has a lot more to do with them not wanting to admit they were wrong than it does with them being retarded. As in, I don't think the double elimination format that they're spouting now was ever intended and was made up on the spot in an attempt to legitimize their decision. I don't think it was something as sinister as them wanting Dignitas to go through due to sponsorships nor do I think it's just them hating on the people in CDE. Just WCG/Riot not wanting to admit that they fucked up.
|
I am so confused as to the drama. How exactly did Dignitas steal a spot in WCG? Through that one-set/two-set shenaniganry voyboy pulled?
|
1.) Jatt ineligible but not DQ'd
2.) Lose finals then given new finals
|
On November 01 2011 11:02 BrownBear wrote:
I am so confused as to the drama. How exactly did Dignitas steal a spot in WCG? Through that one-set/two-set shenaniganry voyboy pulled?
That is the belief among some players. Some people feel that Jatt shouldn't have been allowed to play in the US qualifiers because he also played in the CA qualifiers and dislike that he was DQ'd from the CA qualifiers after he already lost there. The other thing is that some people, such as Reginald, feel that Voyboy intentionally lied to the WCG admin about the CA qualifiers. I don't hold this belief however if Voyboy did know that the CA qualifiers weren't played in multiple sets and was intentionally lying then they definitely did weasel their way back into the qualifiers. But again, I don't hold this belief and there's nothing to support it either.
|
On November 01 2011 11:16 Craton wrote:
1.) Jatt ineligible but not DQ'd
2.) Lose finals then given new finals
Huh. If that's true, then that's pretty lame.
Isn't LociCero on Dignitas? I wonder if he has any input on the situation.
|
I don't think Voyboy is to blame. Dignitas did weasel themselves a spot that's completely undeserved.
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
On November 01 2011 11:20 BrownBear wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 11:16 Craton wrote:
1.) Jatt ineligible but not DQ'd
2.) Lose finals then given new finals Huh. If that's true, then that's pretty lame. Isn't LociCero on Dignitas? I wonder if he has any input on the situation.
Loci subbed in for Voyboy since he couldn't get into the casino for IPL. He isn't officially a part of Dignitas.
|
Well even if it wasn't intentional they still got a second shot at the finals when the whole reason the admins gave them a second shot was because they thought they were being consistent with how all the other qualifiers were being played when it was the exact opposite. The WCG USA finals was the only one where the team from the losing bracket had to win two bo3 instead of winning one bo3 with a one game disadvantage like all the other qualifiers.
Also TSM scrim vs MIG the team Locodoco is on.
http://www.own3d.tv/SoloMid
Jungle Karthus lol.
|
|
|
Question for TL, does anyone think that a universal set of rules to be used at all tournaments would be a good idea? Like a sort of rule set that all serious tournaments are expected to use? If this was done it'd be helpful for organizers as they wouldn't have to worry about changing rules or anything if the rules were written well enough. You could also make the rules easily accessible online so that everyone would know the rules for each and every respectable tournament.
It'd eliminate the possibility of an organization changing their rules mid tournament as they'd look pretty silly changing rules that weren't written by them. The problem of course comes in that groups like NESL, WCG, and Riot might think they're above using someone else's rules.
Still I think that it would solve a lot of the problems the LoL pro scene is having and it'd be a lot better than HSGG organizing future tournaments. -.-
|
No I don't believe a universal set of rules should be used. Some tournaments can be double elimination, some can be single; different rule sets help differentiate tournaments and give them character. It's up to the tournament host to decide what rules to use but what I do want is for the rules to be 100% clear and in a place that's easily accessible for the public.
|
On November 01 2011 11:46 ArC_man wrote:
No I don't believe a universal set of rules should be used. Some tournaments can be double elimination, some can be single; different rule sets help differentiate tournaments and give them character.
By a universal rule set I'm implying that there are rules for multiple formats and the host can choose which of these formats they use.
On November 01 2011 11:46 ArC_man wrote:
It's up to the tournament host to decide what rules to use but what I do want is for the rules to be 100% clear and in a place that's easily accessible for the public.
This has so far been a pretty rare thing in LoL. Not to mention the several bad rules that exist (ties and tie breakers at IEM events, re-seeding for DreamHack, this WCG mess).
|
It shouldn't be needed in the first place. The fact that Matt even exists is the bane of the LoL e-sports scene. If you can't referee your own tournament and make your own decisions you probably shouldn't be running a tournament in the first place. Having a standardized set of rules isn't really a good thing because it kinda stagnates the tournament scene. I don't want MLG and ESL to use the exact same format. It doesn't make sense.
Then you don't really have a universal ruleset. Most of the "rules" we need are common sense. While the tie breakers weren't publicly approved at least they followed the rules they laid out. Most of the league fiascos have been utter bullshit where rules aren't followed. I'm pretty sure they said they'd look into changing the tie breaker rule anyways, just not mid-season so I wouldn't worry about that.
|
On November 01 2011 09:10 I_Love_Bacon wrote:
I don't think there's anything more gratifying than playing a really good game on blitzcrank and just grabbing people into perfect combos consistently.
playing twitch and winning?
|
Haha:
+ Show Spoiler +MattMarcou: Hey guys did you wire me the money yet?
WCG CEO: Well done boys. I trust everything went as planned? Jatt you can get out from under the table now we are done with business. Clean yourself a bit boy.
Kevin Rosenblat (WCG USA Tournament Director): @MattMarcou - gtfo you loser! I did all the job so i get all teh moneyz.
P.S. Do you really believe that putting such a stain on reputation of your organization was worth it ? You underestimate how offended LOL community is with your ignorance.
GG... sometimes its nice to see all the pent up rage of the LoL community channeled at a good target
|
Man all these new champs are just kind of disappointing me, The dragon one looks fine but they just arent bringing any new and interesting skills or mechanics to the game.
I mean look at this:
Passive: Reduces cooldowns/buffs on attack, been done....Skarner....Ryze...
Q. Double attack, so lame, Basically the same as all attack time reset skills, Nasus...Trundle..Yi...Talon
W: DOT aura, so stale, Amumu/Nasus/Mundo/Mord
E: Single target fireball, reduces armor, boooring, every other skill in the game reduces armor or MR....Amumu/Ryze/Karth
R. Turns all your skills AOE and dashes+knocks in a direction....All mechanics that have been done to death with Renekton/Nasus/Ryze/Orianna/Lee
It just feels like they have a big list of skill attributes in a word file and then they just randomly mix them in pairs to make new champs. I mean Dota has all these odd skills and mechanics that havent been touched by LOL, how much more Armor shredding and auto attack resets do we need?
|
On November 01 2011 11:20 BrownBear wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 11:16 Craton wrote:
1.) Jatt ineligible but not DQ'd
2.) Lose finals then given new finals Huh. If that's true, then that's pretty lame. Isn't LociCero on Dignitas? I wonder if he has any input on the situation.
No. He was a ringer for one tournament.
|
There shouldn't have to be a universal set of rules.
Tournament organizers should be required to actually know their own tournament's rules beforehand and make the rules accessible to players.
|
On November 01 2011 11:53 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:
It shouldn't be needed in the first place. The fact that Matt even exists is the bane of the LoL e-sports scene. If you can't referee your own tournament and make your own decisions you probably shouldn't be running a tournament in the first place. Having a standardized set of rules isn't really a good thing because it kinda stagnates the tournament scene. I don't want MLG and ESL to use the exact same format. It doesn't make sense.
Then you don't really have a universal ruleset. Most of the "rules" we need are common sense. While the tie breakers weren't publicly approved at least they followed the rules they laid out. Most of the league fiascos have been utter bullshit where rules aren't followed. I'm pretty sure they said they'd look into changing the tie breaker rule anyways, just not mid-season so I wouldn't worry about that.
I'm actually thinking about how Brood War worked and it's my opinion that a lot of their success came from the standardizing of their rules between tournaments due to KeSPA. It gave the scene a lot of professionalism because OSL/MSL while having slightly different formats still had to abide by KeSPA rules. Laying out formats that actually make sense in tournaments and that are consistent is needed desperately in the LoL competitive scene. For all the shit KeSPA gets (and rightfully so in many cases) they are a large reason why Brood War was taken seriously.
Even rules as simple as, "Don't type in-game chat unless it's relevant to the game," would do wonders. It'd be a lot better if players only typed "pause" or "gg" instead of having Phreak or Zenon or whoever have to hide the chat every game.
I think that having standardized conduct rules for tournaments could go a long way for the LoL scene and since it's already a multi-national thing you would avoid having some government agency or big entity behind it like KeSPA. Dunno, I think it'd be a good idea for groups like Riot and NESL to sit down with the LoL community and high level players to agree on some rules that should apply at all tournaments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
