|
Looks like we're back to status quo. Hope more of you lurkers unburrow and talk with us. :3 If you have any issues or comments about the new design, feel free to PM Neo. |
United States37500 Posts
On May 25 2013 06:53 Numy wrote: Officially they aren't allowed to have 2 teams under the same brand right? The rules don't say they aren't allowed to have 2 teams under same management but different brands correct? Yeah, that's the idea.
No idea about C9's significance. It just sounds nice.
|
Don't forget 1 time "Reddit Nation" for the Lone Star Clash lol
but yeah thanks Neo, forgot that they've been C9 twice already
|
On May 25 2013 06:53 Numy wrote: Officially they aren't allowed to have 2 teams under the same brand right? The rules don't say they aren't allowed to have 2 teams under same management but different brands correct? Last I heard Jack stepped down from manager of TSM though.
|
technically Jack isn't TSM's GM anymore, so they're not exactly under the same management...
|
TIME TO SPEND A BUNCH OF MONEY ON SKINS
RIOT PLZ LOVE ME
|
Oh that new filter thing, I thought we lost all LoL, damnz
|
By the way, Riot's stupid "No teams under the same brand" rule is probably a reason that the scenes aren't developing. TSM + TSM II (with both in the LCS) would mean you have real scrim partners that can be trusted not to leak.
|
On May 25 2013 07:11 cLutZ wrote: By the way, Riot's stupid "No teams under the same brand" rule is probably a reason that the scenes aren't developing. TSM + TSM II (with both in the LCS) would mean you have real scrim partners that can be trusted not to leak.
I understand it, TSM vs TSM doesn't make for an exciting finals and teams with less money and resources have a significant disadvantage. I just think it's bullshit that Korea gets a free pass while NA and EU aren't allowed to have B-teams.
|
Time to play nothing but TPA skin champions to justify the $20 I just spent on RP
|
On May 25 2013 07:13 overt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2013 07:11 cLutZ wrote: By the way, Riot's stupid "No teams under the same brand" rule is probably a reason that the scenes aren't developing. TSM + TSM II (with both in the LCS) would mean you have real scrim partners that can be trusted not to leak. I understand it, TSM vs TSM doesn't make for an exciting finals and teams with less money and resources have a significant disadvantage. I just think it's bullshit that Korea gets a free pass while NA and EU aren't allowed to have B-teams. Korea already has a developed eSports scene though; I think Riot wants to try and coax more sponsor into the Western markets.
|
Welp, looks like I will be buying 5 more skins tonight -_-
|
On May 25 2013 07:16 xes wrote:Show nested quote +On May 25 2013 07:13 overt wrote:On May 25 2013 07:11 cLutZ wrote: By the way, Riot's stupid "No teams under the same brand" rule is probably a reason that the scenes aren't developing. TSM + TSM II (with both in the LCS) would mean you have real scrim partners that can be trusted not to leak. I understand it, TSM vs TSM doesn't make for an exciting finals and teams with less money and resources have a significant disadvantage. I just think it's bullshit that Korea gets a free pass while NA and EU aren't allowed to have B-teams. Korea already has a developed eSports scene though; I think Riot wants to try and coax more sponsor into the Western markets.
It'd be really dumb for Riot to tell Koreans they can't do what they were already doing for SC and for the start of League. But it's just as dumb to allow something that makes teams far stronger in one region but then go and ban it in other regions. Handicapping regions just to bring in more sponsors seems silly to me.
|
Is there really a rule against teams having B teams?
Or is the rule just against the B teams competing in the LCS?
Couldn't an organization have a B team living in their house / scrimming with them / streaming / etc, and just use them as substitute players in the LCS model rather than having them compete as an LCS team?
|
On May 25 2013 07:31 Ketara wrote: Is there really a rule against teams having B teams?
Or is the rule just against the B teams competing in the LCS?
Couldn't an organization have a B team living in their house / scrimming with them / streaming / etc, and just use them as substitute players in the LCS model rather than having them compete as an LCS team? Things cost money yo
LCS = pays for your team to be a team
|
So the complaint is more like "Riot isn't paying people enough" then?
I thought we were happy that they were paying people at all, when did we all get angry about this?
|
Riot most likely doesn't want more than one team under one organization, because of the possibility of poaching between the organizations.
|
On May 25 2013 07:33 Ketara wrote: So the complaint is more like "Riot isn't paying people enough" then?
I thought we were happy that they were paying people at all, when did we all get angry about this?
That's not the complaint at all. The complaint is that there is not enough structure in place for growth of new talent in the NA scene or enough support to encourage existing amateur teams in NA. However way you want to phrase it.
You can probably ask gtrsrs for his thoughts on this. I'm pretty sure he would agree with the above.
|
I don't get how to show the LoL forum on the sidebar again :/
|
On May 25 2013 07:31 Ketara wrote: Is there really a rule against teams having B teams?
Or is the rule just against the B teams competing in the LCS?
Couldn't an organization have a B team living in their house / scrimming with them / streaming / etc, and just use them as substitute players in the LCS model rather than having them compete as an LCS team?
Curse has Curse academy that I think most of the players are too young for LCS so the rule seems to be can't have multiple teams in the LCS.
|
Straight outta Johto18973 Posts
On May 25 2013 07:52 mr_tolkien wrote: I don't get how to show the LoL forum on the sidebar again :/ If you miss having LoL back on your TeamLiquid side bar, enable the "Other" tab at the top of the new menu bar
|
|
|
|