Team Liquid will be going headstrong into the 2016 season as the first NA LCS team to utilize a full 10-man roster, and leading this front will be Yoonsup "Locodoco" Choi, Team Liquid's new Head Coach. We came to this decision after countless off-line and onsite interviews. When comparing the progress being made with the team with Loco to alternatives it was clear amongst management and players that significant progress was being made under his management. He has embarked on developing a personnel structure of coaches, analysts and strategy coaches for all players, finalizing proprietary coaching/analytical software and working in very close capacity with Steve “LiQuiD112” to define and map out future improvements.
Personally, I'm pretty surprised at this turn of events given what liquid112 has said in the past about who the head coach was supposed to be. It's nice to see Loco get another chance, I think he will be beneficial to the team.
well this is interesting. TL seems to be getting every man they can though, like holy shit a 10 man roster + analysts +positional coaches + whatever more positions they listed there.
wondering what the full roster is though. it'll be funny if it's TLA. how do the rules work? can TL play their LCS lineup for NACS or ?
On December 31 2015 11:51 Faeny wrote: Personally, I'm pretty surprised at this turn of events given what liquid112 has said in the past about who the head coach was supposed to be. It's nice to see Loco get another chance, I think he will be beneficial to the team.
But the 10-man roster, I'm not so sure about.
I think the 10-man roster is the better part, since you get in house scrims when you can't scrim other teams (and organizing scrims even 3 years into LCS is still a fiasco).
But Locodoco has said a ton of times since his move to "content creator" on his vlog and other avenues that he didn't think he was right to be coach and didn't have the passion to dedicate to it more than just a basic job so not sure how much it will help improve the issues TL has had over the last season.
While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Same. Not to mention you can swap players only before champ select starts so there isn't really a "wasting bans" factor. All it does is make the roster of 5 practice less.
The game just isn't on a level where you would have a different starter depending on who you are playing against. I expect this to just be some trick to play around something and them to just use 5 starters and if someone sucks too much just try the other guy.
Don't think 10 man roster is really viable in LoL because there is always going to be a "best" roster and it's not like you need subs like in sports because of injuries and fatigue. Most players also don't really have a different champion pool, but only learn the top 3-4 optimal meta picks. Hope it works though and now they have a Coach that can communicate properly with Piglet and Fenix.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
After they brought him in as a content creator and what loco said and having a ten man roster? I really don't see this working out as well as they hoped.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
I disagree with someone therefore he's an idiot
Hey look, it's every nafta post ever
But it's legitimately retarded to claim that sister teams = matchfixing.
It has never happened and the only case which could throw people off was SKT T1 S losing to Optimus Prime 0-2 to give SKT T1 K chance to beat them in a tiebreaker match in OGN Spring 2014. Knowing SKT T1, accusing the whole team of the matchfixing is pretty retarded as well.
If you have arguments, then use them but blindly accusing sister teams of matchfixing instead of actually praising them for spending more resources into developing/grooming players is almost a bannable thing.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
I disagree with someone therefore he's an idiot
Hey look, it's every nafta post ever
But it's legitimately retarded to claim that sister teams = matchfixing.
It has never happened and the only case which could throw people off was SKT T1 S losing to Optimus Prime 0-2 to give SKT T1 K chance to beat them in a tiebreaker match in OGN Spring 2014. Knowing SKT T1, accusing the whole team of the matchfixing is pretty retarded as well.
If you have arguments, then use them but blindly accusing sister teams of matchfixing instead of actually praising them for spending more resources into developing/grooming players is almost a bannable thing.
You're saying it hasn't happened before, therefore it cannot happen ever? Yeah no. You're putting the incentive there, and expecting orgs to take the high ground and avoid the temptation every single time. And when Sister Team B is fighting for 9th place with another team, trying to avoid auto-relegation, and in one of the last games of the season it gets a win vs. Sister Team A, which didn't need the win because it was gonna finish 4th or 5th anyway? It won't look suspicious at all, I'm sure.
Sister teams doesn't guarantee matchfixing, but it definitely opens the door to it. I'd rather keep that door closed.
On December 31 2015 22:20 Ansibled wrote: If sister teams cause match fixing, I guess every SC pro needs to find an individual sponsor
I'm pretty sure every case of match fixing has been due to making money from gambling.
The incentive isn't the same for SC individual leagues. One player's gain is the others' loss, so it's a zero-sum game and you can't game the system with match-fixing there. In LoL, where one more win in the LCS regular split can mean the difference between being auto-relegated (and therefore losing your million-dollar spot) vs. getting a shot at the promotion tournament? The incentive to game the system with match-fixing is much, much greater.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
I disagree with someone therefore he's an idiot
Hey look, it's every nafta post ever
But it's legitimately retarded to claim that sister teams = matchfixing.
It has never happened and the only case which could throw people off was SKT T1 S losing to Optimus Prime 0-2 to give SKT T1 K chance to beat them in a tiebreaker match in OGN Spring 2014. Knowing SKT T1, accusing the whole team of the matchfixing is pretty retarded as well.
If you have arguments, then use them but blindly accusing sister teams of matchfixing instead of actually praising them for spending more resources into developing/grooming players is almost a bannable thing.
You're saying it hasn't happened before, therefore it cannot happen ever? Yeah no. You're putting the incentive there, and expecting orgs to take the high ground and avoid the temptation every single time. And when Sister Team B is fighting for 9th place with another team, trying to avoid auto-relegation, and in one of the last games of the season it gets a win vs. Sister Team A, which didn't need the win because it was gonna finish 4th or 5th anyway? It won't look suspicious at all, I'm sure.
Sister teams doesn't guarantee matchfixing, but it definitely opens the door to it. I'd rather keep that door closed.
I better have the healthy ecosystem instead of half of the teams searching for the sponsors.
NA LCS is a literal epitome of "suspicious" due to its gameplay but noone has ever questioned it. LPL/LSPL has half of the league as members of the one conglomerate while almost all owners are related to each other.
But yea, let's claim that sister teams will matchfix when they can, 10/10.
I guess, EG and [A]lliance were matchfixing as well. Holy shit, this crossregional gambling. Sadly Winterfox and Elements couldn't outgamble the system.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
I disagree with someone therefore he's an idiot
Hey look, it's every nafta post ever
When your opinion is that fucking stupid it is hard to tell I am sorry.
You realize a lot of teams intentionally lose games at end of season to get better seeds right? How is that any different? This is like riot not adding voice chat because it can be "toxic". Chances are there is match fixing going on right now in most leagues but people just don't know about it and as long as it doesn't go out of control it is normal. What exactly stops especially some of those rich orgs that are throwing money to pay one of the better teams to throw a game at the end of the season? Same shit.
This is like thinking XWX's teammates didn't know he was boosting rofl.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
I disagree with someone therefore he's an idiot
Hey look, it's every nafta post ever
When your opinion is that fucking stupid it is hard to tell I am sorry.
You realize a lot of teams intentionally lose games at end of season to get better seeds right? How is that any different? This is like riot not adding voice chat because it can be "toxic". Chances are there is match fixing going on right now in most leagues but people just don't know about it and as long as it doesn't go out of control it is normal. What exactly stops especially some of those rich orgs that are throwing money to pay one of the better teams to throw a game at the end of the season? Same shit.
This is like thinking XWX's teammates didn't know he was boosting rofl.
Pretty sure if this happened and RIOT was aware there would be some big suspensions and and bans. Not sure why so many people make assumptions and treat them as fact.
In more positive news. HYPE HYPE HYPE go team liquid!!!!
That is a pretty big if. Realistically unless you have actual spies on every team there is no fucking way to know. Riot isn't an actual all-seeing divine being.
You could also schedule matches in a way where teams would put themselves at risk by throwing games or have a better format but hey that is too logical.
Let's be real: we knew Loco couldn't stay away for long. Glad to see he's back.
The 10 man roster is very important because I've come to the opinion (based on observation but not statistics) that solo queue is actively detrimental to improving skill at competitive LoL because it's a completely different skillset and requires completely different gamesense. By having 10 on the roster, you have the potential for endless scrims, mixing and matching strategies (i.e. one support doesn't like Thresh, the other mains him, can swap out if you want a Thresh comp), and don't have to rely on solo queue play to learn new heroes and practice mechanics. If TL doesn't use this to become the unquestioned #1 in NA by the Summer Split (this split might be rocky because of the transition), then they're doing something very, very wrong.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
I disagree with someone therefore he's an idiot
Hey look, it's every nafta post ever
When your opinion is that fucking stupid it is hard to tell I am sorry.
Yep, my opinions are pretty stupid. In fact, everyone's opinions are stupid, especially when they disagree with you.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
I disagree with someone therefore he's an idiot
Hey look, it's every nafta post ever
When your opinion is that fucking stupid it is hard to tell I am sorry.
Yep, my opinions are pretty stupid. In fact, everyone's opinions are stupid, especially when they disagree with you.
Clearly that is why I call everyone stupid not just a select few xD
On January 01 2016 00:21 deth2munkies wrote: Let's be real: we knew Loco couldn't stay away for long. Glad to see he's back.
The 10 man roster is very important because I've come to the opinion (based on observation but not statistics) that solo queue is actively detrimental to improving skill at competitive LoL because it's a completely different skillset and requires completely different gamesense. By having 10 on the roster, you have the potential for endless scrims, mixing and matching strategies (i.e. one support doesn't like Thresh, the other mains him, can swap out if you want a Thresh comp), and don't have to rely on solo queue play to learn new heroes and practice mechanics. If TL doesn't use this to become the unquestioned #1 in NA by the Summer Split (this split might be rocky because of the transition), then they're doing something very, very wrong.
My personal view is that it's unlikely that a 10-man roster will allow for such strategic diversity within the lineups. At best, it allows for flexibility between top and sup or as a way to transition new players into the team/old players out of the team.
What I really think is the advantage is access to scrims. If the rumors of TLA being on-par with LCS teams is true (or at least, lower half LCS teams) we have incredible potential to train. Strategies can actually be tested without revealing information to other teams and if you want to train against a very specific composition or matchup you have the ability to do that. If used right it could very well lead liquid to worlds. We'll just have to trust in Locodoco that he makes the best use of this.
On December 31 2015 19:23 Undead1993 wrote: LOL locodoco really? oh yeah this will be great locofuckingdoco as the headcoach right, what a great decision! + Show Spoiler +
Notreallythoughwtf
In all seriousness, outside of importing Korean coaches. I can't imagine too many people who'd be even remotely qualified to coach (inb4 lastshadow).
On January 01 2016 00:21 deth2munkies wrote: Let's be real: we knew Loco couldn't stay away for long. Glad to see he's back.
The 10 man roster is very important because I've come to the opinion (based on observation but not statistics) that solo queue is actively detrimental to improving skill at competitive LoL because it's a completely different skillset and requires completely different gamesense. By having 10 on the roster, you have the potential for endless scrims, mixing and matching strategies (i.e. one support doesn't like Thresh, the other mains him, can swap out if you want a Thresh comp), and don't have to rely on solo queue play to learn new heroes and practice mechanics. If TL doesn't use this to become the unquestioned #1 in NA by the Summer Split (this split might be rocky because of the transition), then they're doing something very, very wrong.
My personal view is that it's unlikely that a 10-man roster will allow for such strategic diversity within the lineups. At best, it allows for flexibility between top and sup or as a way to transition new players into the team/old players out of the team.
What I really think is the advantage is access to scrims. If the rumors of TLA being on-par with LCS teams is true (or at least, lower half LCS teams) we have incredible potential to train. Strategies can actually be tested without revealing information to other teams and if you want to train against a very specific composition or matchup you have the ability to do that. If used right it could very well lead liquid to worlds. We'll just have to trust in Locodoco that he makes the best use of this.
are we assuming that the 10 man roster is TL + TLA here? because if so I'm a bit confused as to why a 10 man roster would be needed then. couldn't TLA/TL just scrim as normal even without combining the rosters? I feel like this is just to have the option of switching in members since they have to declare subs (most likely because the jg/top/sup are spots that TLA members can seriously fight for).
On January 01 2016 00:21 deth2munkies wrote: Let's be real: we knew Loco couldn't stay away for long. Glad to see he's back.
The 10 man roster is very important because I've come to the opinion (based on observation but not statistics) that solo queue is actively detrimental to improving skill at competitive LoL because it's a completely different skillset and requires completely different gamesense. By having 10 on the roster, you have the potential for endless scrims, mixing and matching strategies (i.e. one support doesn't like Thresh, the other mains him, can swap out if you want a Thresh comp), and don't have to rely on solo queue play to learn new heroes and practice mechanics. If TL doesn't use this to become the unquestioned #1 in NA by the Summer Split (this split might be rocky because of the transition), then they're doing something very, very wrong.
My personal view is that it's unlikely that a 10-man roster will allow for such strategic diversity within the lineups. At best, it allows for flexibility between top and sup or as a way to transition new players into the team/old players out of the team.
What I really think is the advantage is access to scrims. If the rumors of TLA being on-par with LCS teams is true (or at least, lower half LCS teams) we have incredible potential to train. Strategies can actually be tested without revealing information to other teams and if you want to train against a very specific composition or matchup you have the ability to do that. If used right it could very well lead liquid to worlds. We'll just have to trust in Locodoco that he makes the best use of this.
are we assuming that the 10 man roster is TL + TLA here? because if so I'm a bit confused as to why a 10 man roster would be needed then. couldn't TLA/TL just scrim as normal even without combining the rosters? I feel like this is just to have the option of switching in members since they have to declare subs (most likely because the jg/top/sup are spots that TLA members can seriously fight for).
Tfw I was like "fuck, there is like third guy to use the Zilean icon, oh wait, it's the krdandaman's alt." :p
Zig has told me that he wasn't chosen to be a toplaner for TL, because he slumped during the tryout process, so he couldn't make it and Dardoch is simply better than every other NA jungler right now. And honestly, I'd say that Smoothie might be in the air as well, Piglet is playing under no pressure though again, no way anyone is going to start Fabby over him, lol. Fenix/Youngbin situation is same.
I guess, they can just scrim a lot during Spring and then by the time summer comes, Lourlo/IWD/Smoothie all can easily be demoted to the B-team, which is likely to make LCS/be the top-tier CS team by that time.
On December 31 2015 17:37 Numy wrote: While I think 10 man rosters are good for teams I loathe the idea for the scene. Don't want even less players playing games. Just give us sister teams so we get to actually see these guys play. Really dislike how everyone is pushing this whole subs thing.
Also lukewarm about Loco head coach.
Not sure I like 10-man rosters, but I do know that I like sister teams even less. Please don't bring match-fixing into my competitive LoL.
I disagree with someone therefore he's an idiot
Hey look, it's every nafta post ever
When your opinion is that fucking stupid it is hard to tell I am sorry.
You realize a lot of teams intentionally lose games at end of season to get better seeds right? How is that any different? This is like riot not adding voice chat because it can be "toxic". Chances are there is match fixing going on right now in most leagues but people just don't know about it and as long as it doesn't go out of control it is normal. What exactly stops especially some of those rich orgs that are throwing money to pay one of the better teams to throw a game at the end of the season? Same shit.
This is like thinking XWX's teammates didn't know he was boosting rofl.
Pretty sure if this happened and RIOT was aware there would be some big suspensions and and bans. Not sure why so many people make assumptions and treat them as fact.
In more positive news. HYPE HYPE HYPE go team liquid!!!!
That is a pretty big if. Realistically unless you have actual spies on every team there is no fucking way to know. Riot isn't an actual all-seeing divine being.
You could also schedule matches in a way where teams would put themselves at risk by throwing games or have a better format but hey that is too logical.
not nearly as big of a if as your entire statement that I responded to which based purely on assumption, you thinking you're smarter than everyone and 0 facts.
On January 01 2016 00:21 deth2munkies wrote: Let's be real: we knew Loco couldn't stay away for long. Glad to see he's back.
The 10 man roster is very important because I've come to the opinion (based on observation but not statistics) that solo queue is actively detrimental to improving skill at competitive LoL because it's a completely different skillset and requires completely different gamesense. By having 10 on the roster, you have the potential for endless scrims, mixing and matching strategies (i.e. one support doesn't like Thresh, the other mains him, can swap out if you want a Thresh comp), and don't have to rely on solo queue play to learn new heroes and practice mechanics. If TL doesn't use this to become the unquestioned #1 in NA by the Summer Split (this split might be rocky because of the transition), then they're doing something very, very wrong.
My personal view is that it's unlikely that a 10-man roster will allow for such strategic diversity within the lineups. At best, it allows for flexibility between top and sup or as a way to transition new players into the team/old players out of the team.
What I really think is the advantage is access to scrims. If the rumors of TLA being on-par with LCS teams is true (or at least, lower half LCS teams) we have incredible potential to train. Strategies can actually be tested without revealing information to other teams and if you want to train against a very specific composition or matchup you have the ability to do that. If used right it could very well lead liquid to worlds. We'll just have to trust in Locodoco that he makes the best use of this.
are we assuming that the 10 man roster is TL + TLA here? because if so I'm a bit confused as to why a 10 man roster would be needed then. couldn't TLA/TL just scrim as normal even without combining the rosters? I feel like this is just to have the option of switching in members since they have to declare subs (most likely because the jg/top/sup are spots that TLA members can seriously fight for).
Tfw I was like "fuck, there is like third guy to use the Zilean icon, oh wait, it's the krdandaman's alt." :p
Zig has told me that he wasn't chosen to be a toplaner for TL, because he slumped during the tryout process, so he couldn't make it and Dardoch is simply better than every other NA jungler right now. And honestly, I'd say that Smoothie might be in the air as well, Piglet is playing under no pressure though again, no way anyone is going to start Fabby over him, lol. Fenix/Youngbin situation is same.
I guess, they can just scrim a lot during Spring and then by the time summer comes, Lourlo/IWD/Smoothie all can easily be demoted to the B-team, which is likely to make LCS/be the top-tier CS team by that time.
eventually the 1 or 2 other guys will hop off the zilean tho only other one I remember is a guy who gets instabanned every time lel
yeah that was my thought process too- fabby/youngbin can't really compete for those spots but the others are definitely up in the air if that's what TL's going for. im reaally hoping dardoch makes the main roster :x when you actually have na jungle talent you jump on that asap
On December 31 2015 22:27 Zato-1 wrote: You're saying it hasn't happened before, therefore it cannot happen ever? Yeah no. You're putting the incentive there, and expecting orgs to take the high ground and avoid the temptation every single time. And when Sister Team B is fighting for 9th place with another team, trying to avoid auto-relegation, and in one of the last games of the season it gets a win vs. Sister Team A, which didn't need the win because it was gonna finish 4th or 5th anyway? It won't look suspicious at all, I'm sure.
Sister teams doesn't guarantee matchfixing, but it definitely opens the door to it. I'd rather keep that door closed.
I think it's incredibly shortsighted to let the possibility of a mishap that hasn't happened yet outweigh all of the potential good that sister teams can bring and has already provably brought to competitive LoL in the time where it was allowed.
Is the possibility of matchfixing something we should outright ignore when discussing sister teams? Of course not. Is it something that is so worrisome that it trumps all other potential benefits of such a system? Also no. That's equally ridiculous.
On January 01 2016 00:41 Plexa wrote: My personal view is that it's unlikely that a 10-man roster will allow for such strategic diversity within the lineups. At best, it allows for flexibility between top and sup or as a way to transition new players into the team/old players out of the team.
This was the theory when Korea got big on subs a few seasons ago.
In practice, what actually happened was that any "trump card"/diversity gained from having a sub just didn't end up outweighing the better teamplay of having a team that always plays the same 5 players. The teams that regularly used their subs didn't really show better overall performance than those that stuck to consistent lineups, and so that phase kind of died out.
Looking simply at playstyle, I think Youngbin in TL main could work, he's generally played a low priority role on TLA which could fit a team with Piglet and a carry top like Lourlo (and a carry jungler) better than Fenix, who eats a lot of resources. But outside of the games versus Misfits in the Summer Qualifier, I don't think I've ever seen Youngbin play an LCS caliber mid, so I have no idea how he would stand in lane against better competition.
Which isn't to say I think Youngbin is better than Fenix, just that he seems to fit more stylistically to me.
On December 31 2015 22:27 Zato-1 wrote: You're saying it hasn't happened before, therefore it cannot happen ever? Yeah no. You're putting the incentive there, and expecting orgs to take the high ground and avoid the temptation every single time. And when Sister Team B is fighting for 9th place with another team, trying to avoid auto-relegation, and in one of the last games of the season it gets a win vs. Sister Team A, which didn't need the win because it was gonna finish 4th or 5th anyway? It won't look suspicious at all, I'm sure.
Sister teams doesn't guarantee matchfixing, but it definitely opens the door to it. I'd rather keep that door closed.
I think it's incredibly shortsighted to let the possibility of a mishap that hasn't happened yet outweigh all of the potential good that sister teams can bring and has already provably brought to competitive LoL in the time where it was allowed.
Is the possibility of matchfixing something we should outright ignore when discussing sister teams? Of course not. Is it something that is so worrisome that it trumps all other potential benefits of such a system? Also no. That's equally ridiculous.
First: Thank you for posting a polite, well-reasoned answer to my post. They're few and far between on the internet.
Second: I'm fairly ignorant when it comes to the Korean and Chinese scenes, so I can't very well gauge how much good sister teams have really done. I do think a big match-fixing scandal could be pretty disastrous for professional LoL, and even perceived match-fixing where there is none can be pretty harmful, so I put a lot of weight on reducing the likelihood of match-fixing as much as possible, ideally close to zero. As LoL gets bigger and there's more money in the scene and teams are playing for ever-higher stakes, the temptation for match-fixing would grow commensurately.
So yeah. It may be that I'm only seeing the potential costs of sister teams while being blind to the benefits, but I can only make an opinion based on what I do know.
On January 01 2016 05:15 JimmiC wrote: As for riot. They have a huge motivation to stop any of it. Draftkings for one is moving into esports along with a lot of other betting sites. Without integrity you can't have betting and as the $$$ comes so will mass punishments meaning if people match fix the federal government will get involved and prison will happen.
Speaking of sister teams, let's not forget how enthusiastic owners may or may not be about the payroll for 2 full sets of peer teams. It's one thing to pay for a set of second stringers; you're asking less of them and correspondingly offering less. It's another thing to basically double your serious payroll, for however much gain there is between 1 and 2 teams. The question of whether so and so is a sustainable business model gets brought up with the rise of player salaries; it applies to this too.
On January 01 2016 05:39 Saradin wrote: Speaking of sister teams, let's not forget how enthusiastic owners may or may not be about the payroll for 2 full sets of peer teams. It's one thing to pay for a set of second stringers; you're asking less of them and correspondingly offering less. It's another thing to basically double your serious payroll, for however much gain there is between 1 and 2 teams. The question of whether so and so is a sustainable business model gets brought up with the rise of player salaries; it applies to this too.
I don't really see how the enthusiasm of the owners is relevant here, since it's their own decision to pick up a sister team. If sister teams were allowed nobody would be forcing owners to pick them up, it's more a case of if I an owner wants to pick up a second team he would be able to do so, whereas right now he can't.
It is more likely that killing off sister teams was to avoid the near mishap of Samsung vs Samsung at World's, and less so to prevent potential future match fixing.
On January 01 2016 07:01 Zess wrote: It is more likely that killing off sister teams was to avoid the near mishap of Samsung vs Samsung at World's, and less so to prevent potential future match fixing.
Gotta keep pretending that the gap is closing!
There's too few international games to tell whether the gap is closing or not. Especially if people assume that MSI, IEM and Allstars results are flukes / unimportant and the only relevant yardstick is Worlds, one month a year of being able to compare teams across different regions followed by 11 months of being completely in the dark.
Korea is still clearly on top. But has the gap shrunk? Has it grown? How much of Korea's dominance was due to Ssumday, Marin and to a lesser degree Smeb dunking their opposition on the juggernaut patch? I think China would've done better for sure on a different patch, but again, there's just so little data to work with. I guess you can say that the gap, if it has shrunk, probably hasn't done so meaningfully.
On January 01 2016 06:42 Saradin wrote: It hinges on how much an owner wants to keep up. Wasn't that the logic for how the practice of sister teams spread initially in OGN?
I'm sorry, I don't really understand your post. Might also be the alcohol.
The post is that if you allow sister teams, you kind of do 'force' owners to form sister teams. How much it 'forces' basically relates to how badly an owner wants to compete. Basically it's competition forcing one's hand, depending on what your aims are. Kind of like with salaries; if some other team offers a player you want X amount, and you really want the guy, you're gonna have to improve your offer. What I'm hinting at in the larger picture is, the question of how the owners, as a collective group, feel about this, and whether peer pressure comes into play when it comes to lobbying for/against certain policies. Always remember that no owner wants to pay more than they have to in order to attain what they specifically want.
Edit: Another key thing to remember: owners as a whole are also pretty bad at self restraint. A fair amount of sports policy related to money can be traced back to the owners' self-awareness that if they don't ban or cap something, they probably wouldn't be able to control themselves from spending more than they'd like. Just things to keep in the back of the mind regarding politics between Riot and the owners. The owners do have a voice in these matters.
I disagree with your notion that allowing sister teams will 'force' owners to form them. The current scrim system is good enough that you don't necessarily need sister teams to scrim, plus you can also pay teams to do certain things in practice (e.g. scrim after they're already knocked out of playoffs, practice certain strats).
I personally think that it'd just allow companies/people with a lot of money to throw around to invest more in the pro scene, which I think is a pretty good thing.
Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
I'm sorry, I forgot how terrible Samsung White vs Samsung Blue was in 2014. My b.
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
I'm sorry, I forgot how terrible Samsung White vs Samsung Blue was in 2014. My b.
/s
I forgot this page transformed into reddit 2.0 and everyone forgot how to read with charity. Sorry.
But Samsung's were a great history. The basic "can the b-team beat the a-team", the whole thing with team exchanging midlaners and can dade beat his former teammates with this new young squad, wondering whether certain Blue players are better than their White counterparts, the idea that every Samsung player at the time was top3 in his position (which I still believe with maybe 1 or 2 exceptions). Also teams had history of playing against eachother so it was one of the few rivalries we could speak of. The fact that both these teams had same logo and were on same payroll doesn't bother me at all.
For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I disagree. I just think the hype is different, not necessarily more or less.
Ex. Subway Series between NY Yankees and NY Mets. Intra-city rivalry instead of a typical inter-city rivalry. Both types are interesting and can be appreciated by anyone as a casual fan or not.
Except Samsung is actually owned by a single person/group but don't think that matters to a casual fan.
I think you understate the difference between teams situated in the same city and sister-teams. The former have nothing in common except their location, whereas sister teams are actually a single organisation. Moreover, the sister-teams in the history of league could be identified as being part of the same organisation with a single look at their names. Actually, two inter-city teams usually do their best to be distinguished from each other, whereas sister-teams in league did not do that.
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 02 2016 00:15 Prog wrote: For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I agree, I could not care less about Samsung White vs. Samsung Blue in 2014 and all the storylines mentioned just sounded to me like (failed) desperate attempts to keep the matchup interesting.
It can be argued that sister teams create a different kind of hype, like the blue/white rivalry was arguably defined by the fact that they were sister teams. If it was like MVP Blue v Samsung White it could have been less of a big deal. Instead Blue v White was seen as a contest of who is the superior Samsung team. Like remember after winter Dade got moved to blue and everyone was shitting on him because it was seen as a demotion, he was the weak link of Samsung White that got embarrassed at worlds and by Faker. Then he was moved to Blue and when Blue beat White in Spring it was through the roof hype since it was seen as the supposed B-team of Samsung that Dade was demoted to surpassing the A-team.
But inversely it can be argued that's a byproduct of the two Samsungs being the two strongest teams and it is important to remember that perspectives here and on /r/lol are skewed we are the hardcore that appreciate Korean league. Like insult reddit if you want, by virtue of them also following LPL/LCK they also sit on the hardcore side of the viewership. I understand if the people that like, play a few normals with friends then only watch Fnatic and TSM games would probably fail to understand the distinguishing factors between sister teams and they account for the majority of viewership. I understand both sides of the argument but I firmly sit on the side of pro-sister teams on the basis that it provides a better environment for the players (See Anarchy going full orphans for a year when they could have been say, KT Bullets)
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 02 2016 00:15 Prog wrote: For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I agree, I could not care less about Samsung White vs. Samsung Blue in 2014 and all the storylines mentioned just sounded to me like (failed) desperate attempts to keep the matchup interesting.
Do you watch league for quality games or for personalities and storylines? Sounds to me like you like the latter hence why you have such a reaction. I find it hard to believe that anyone that likes watching league gameplay wouldn't have cared about the White vs Blue games.
On January 02 2016 01:03 Prog wrote: I think you understate the difference between teams situated in the same city and sister-teams. The former have nothing in common except their location, whereas sister teams are actually a single organisation. Moreover, the sister-teams in the history of league could be identified as being part of the same organisation with a single look at their names. Actually, two inter-city teams usually do their best to be distinguished from each other, whereas sister-teams in league did not do that.
my point is that to a casual fan, that is meaningless. they aren't going to look up the history of these teams and what they have in common. all they will see is the team names being similar, perhaps ask someone more knowledgeable if they share the same sponsor or whatever, then hope for a good game.
what do you mean by trying their best to be distinguished from each other? as someone who lives in NY with the yankees/mets, giants/jets, islanders/rangers, etc. I never really felt that the organizations 'tried' to distinguish themselves. it just happens. same with how blue/white were very different in playstyle without the organization trying to do so on purpose. different teams, different identity.
the state as a whole usually has a 'fuck the other team' mentality when we're against each other but against anyone else it's 'go new york!'. I imagine its similar for the samsung teams.
also we keep having this imaginary casual fan that hates samsung vs samsung matchups but was such a fan actually anywhere near the majority? I don't think I've seen any such thing even on reddit.
On January 02 2016 01:17 Fusilero wrote: It can be argued that sister teams create a different kind of hype, like the blue/white rivalry was arguably defined by the fact that they were sister teams. If it was like MVP Blue v Samsung White it could have been less of a big deal. Instead Blue v White was seen as a contest of who is the superior Samsung team. Like remember after winter Dade got moved to blue and everyone was shitting on him because it was seen as a demotion, he was the weak link of Samsung White that got embarrassed at worlds and by Faker. Then he was moved to Blue and when Blue beat White in Spring it was through the roof hype since it was seen as the supposed B-team of Samsung that Dade was demoted to surpassing the A-team.
But inversely it can be argued that's a byproduct of the two Samsungs being the two strongest teams and it is important to remember that perspectives here and on /r/lol are skewed we are the hardcore that appreciate Korean league. Like insult reddit if you want, by virtue of them also following LPL/LCK they also sit on the hardcore side of the viewership. I understand if the people that like, play a few normals with friends then only watch Fnatic and TSM games would probably fail to understand the distinguishing factors between sister teams and they account for the majority of viewership. I understand both sides of the argument but I firmly sit on the side of pro-sister teams on the basis that it provides a better environment for the players (See Anarchy going full orphans for a year when they could have been say, KT Bullets)
I think those type of fans wouldn't care for LCK anyways lol. when I got a casual friend into league he loved LCK and the samsung matches. He particularly liked White, I preferred Blue. but he couldn't give a shit about the 'el classico's' like TSM vs CLG and was wondering why the audience was hyped for 2 bad teams. and as a casual fan who probably can't even tell accurately who is bad or not (though he wasn't wrong in this guess) its natural as someone who doesn't watch NALCS as much. same with casual NALCS viewers' reactions towards LCK.
I have yet to see a 'casual fan' who actually watches LCK more than once and dislikes sister teams.
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 02 2016 00:15 Prog wrote: For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I agree, I could not care less about Samsung White vs. Samsung Blue in 2014 and all the storylines mentioned just sounded to me like (failed) desperate attempts to keep the matchup interesting.
Do you watch league for quality games or for personalities and storylines? Sounds to me like you like the latter hence why you have such a reaction. I find it hard to believe that anyone that likes watching league gameplay wouldn't have cared about the White vs Blue games.
To be fair, gameplay wise blue v white wasn't always that great. In Spring white failed an MF prick repeatedly in a Yasuo favoured meta, in Summer Pawn fucking tilted and worlds I don't even know. The hype was interesting but in execution it mostly came down to White stubbornly trying to resist Blue's grasp of the meta until worlds where the roles were reversed. It was interesting from the perspective of seeing how Blue had perfected and understood the meta at the time they weren't brilliant games.
I don't particularly like the 10 man roster thing either because either it's a bunch of shit players that won't start so why even bother or if the players are good then we're deprived of seeing great players all the time. Like while it was dank to meme about easyhoon starting over faker he should have been playing every game on another team. Like if I end up never seeing Dardoch because he sits on the bench behind IWD all the time I'd be pretty sad
To explain inter-city teams distinguishing themselves: I obviously have no idea how it is in New York, but in all the European cities I've lived in the football teams at least use different colour schemes. In comparison: Samsung White and Samsung Blue used the very same jerseys. Even in Worlds semifinals.
Also there are Korean casual viewers, so "I think those type of fans wouldn't care for LCK anyways lol" misses the mark.
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 02 2016 00:15 Prog wrote: For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I agree, I could not care less about Samsung White vs. Samsung Blue in 2014 and all the storylines mentioned just sounded to me like (failed) desperate attempts to keep the matchup interesting.
Do you watch league for quality games or for personalities and storylines? Sounds to me like you like the latter hence why you have such a reaction. I find it hard to believe that anyone that likes watching league gameplay wouldn't have cared about the White vs Blue games.
Implying that you can either watch quality Korean games or shitty NA/EU games with personalities and storylines? As far as I'm concerned, NA and EU LCS are also quality games, just not as high quality as KR but more than making up for it with recognizable brands, personalities and storylines. So yes, as a viewer of NA and sometimes EU, Samsung White and Samsung Blue were basically interchangeable to me.
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 02 2016 00:15 Prog wrote: For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I agree, I could not care less about Samsung White vs. Samsung Blue in 2014 and all the storylines mentioned just sounded to me like (failed) desperate attempts to keep the matchup interesting.
Do you watch league for quality games or for personalities and storylines? Sounds to me like you like the latter hence why you have such a reaction. I find it hard to believe that anyone that likes watching league gameplay wouldn't have cared about the White vs Blue games.
Implying that you can either watch quality Korean games or shitty NA/EU games with personalities and storylines? As far as I'm concerned, NA and EU LCS are also quality games, just not as high quality as KR but more than making up for it with recognizable brands, personalities and storylines. So yes, as a viewer of NA and sometimes EU, Samsung White and Samsung Blue were basically interchangeable to me.
On January 02 2016 01:41 Prog wrote: To explain inter-city teams distinguishing themselves: I obviously have no idea how it is in New York, but in all the European cities I've lived in the football teams at least use different colour schemes. In comparison: Samsung White and Samsung Blue used the very same jerseys. Even in Worlds semifinals.
Also there are Korean casual viewers, so "I think those type of fans wouldn't care for LCK anyways lol" misses the mark.
korean casual viewers don't care about samsung vs samsung except for the fangirls that are sad that watch or flame isn't playing. and you can never satisfy them unless you rig watch to be world champion. not like they aren't used to chaebols dominating everything already. what more is an extra team in some video game? if they cared, korean baseball would be dead already with samsung dominating it for like a decade now? I don't even know.
if you reaaally want to get technical, pretty much every organization branches back up to like a few huge chaebols that are all related l0l so in korea everything is already owned by 'sister teams'
also for jerseys ehh in traditional sports you have to have different jerseys to differentiate them on the field, can't help that. but yeah I do think they should at least get different jerseys it just looks dumb when they share jerseys especially in the same match.
I agree, I do think that it's dumb. But I think that's a separate issue that can be solved with "teams must have different logos/jerseys" than outright banning sister teams.
edit: but then again my body would not be ready for the organizations trolling by just coloring it blue in MS paint or something and dying the original jersey in blue.
On January 01 2016 19:51 Fildun wrote: I disagree with your notion that allowing sister teams will 'force' owners to form them. The current scrim system is good enough that you don't necessarily need sister teams to scrim, plus you can also pay teams to do certain things in practice (e.g. scrim after they're already knocked out of playoffs, practice certain strats).
I personally think that it'd just allow companies/people with a lot of money to throw around to invest more in the pro scene, which I think is a pretty good thing.
Being 'forced' to form sister teams to follow the competition was the answer I got when I asked somewhere else about why/how the practice of sister teams originally spread in OGN. If that reason is not true, then what is the impetus behind the historical case we actually have to examine?
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
Personally I found it very easy to create hype around Samsung 1 and Samsung 2.
On December 31 2015 14:30 bbc23 wrote: Those were separate teams. They can mix and match these 10 players as they want every week. That hasn't been done before.
Some of the Korean teams post-Chinese exodus were very close. I think Najin was at 9? Turned out pretty bad for them when they were actively trying to play everyone.
On December 31 2015 20:40 AsnSensation wrote: Don't think 10 man roster is really viable in LoL because there is always going to be a "best" roster and it's not like you need subs like in sports because of injuries and fatigue. Most players also don't really have a different champion pool, but only learn the top 3-4 optimal meta picks. Hope it works though and now they have a Coach that can communicate properly with Piglet and Fenix.
Actually, I think a 10 (or at least >5) -man roster is exactly the place where teams should be looking to have players that aren't meta-only. Why would you have your bench practice the same champion pool as the starters, who are presumably better at exactly the same picks? The reason everyone plays meta is because it's stable, but your bench players don't need to be stable. Your starters give you that. Your bench players can just ignore meta and practice 3-5 cheese picks without hurting the team at all.
Not sure what kind of team synergy you can develop in that kind of system, though.
Edit:
Regarding sister teams, definitely in favor. As someone who ignores hype factor almost completely, intra-organisation games are among the most interesting. Even when one team is deemed significantly stronger, you often see that the other knows how to play against them stylistically and you see a lot of weird picks and game dynamics that basically don't exist anywhere else.
It's not even just the logos. In the second one "Jets" and "Giants" are clearly bigger and more important than "New York". Not to mention that colors are a boring way to distinguish teams by comparison.
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 02 2016 00:15 Prog wrote: For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I agree, I could not care less about Samsung White vs. Samsung Blue in 2014 and all the storylines mentioned just sounded to me like (failed) desperate attempts to keep the matchup interesting.
Do you watch league for quality games or for personalities and storylines? Sounds to me like you like the latter hence why you have such a reaction. I find it hard to believe that anyone that likes watching league gameplay wouldn't have cared about the White vs Blue games.
Implying that you can either watch quality Korean games or shitty NA/EU games with personalities and storylines? As far as I'm concerned, NA and EU LCS are also quality games, just not as high quality as KR but more than making up for it with recognizable brands, personalities and storylines. So yes, as a viewer of NA and sometimes EU, Samsung White and Samsung Blue were basically interchangeable to me.
So, what you're saying is you 1. Don't watch Korean LOL, and, thus, had no previous experience watching true sister teams in LOL; and 2. Largely only cared for manufactured storylines?
Sorry if I don't quite rate your input on sister teams, quality of games, match-fixing, etc.
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 02 2016 00:15 Prog wrote: For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I agree, I could not care less about Samsung White vs. Samsung Blue in 2014 and all the storylines mentioned just sounded to me like (failed) desperate attempts to keep the matchup interesting.
Do you watch league for quality games or for personalities and storylines? Sounds to me like you like the latter hence why you have such a reaction. I find it hard to believe that anyone that likes watching league gameplay wouldn't have cared about the White vs Blue games.
Implying that you can either watch quality Korean games or shitty NA/EU games with personalities and storylines? As far as I'm concerned, NA and EU LCS are also quality games, just not as high quality as KR but more than making up for it with recognizable brands, personalities and storylines. So yes, as a viewer of NA and sometimes EU, Samsung White and Samsung Blue were basically interchangeable to me.
So, what you're saying is you 1. Don't watch Korean LOL, and, thus, had no previous experience watching true sister teams in LOL; and 2. Largely only cared for manufactured storylines?
Sorry if I don't quite rate your input on sister teams, quality of games, match-fixing, etc.
Congratulations, you just won the most passive-aggressive post of the week award!
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 02 2016 00:15 Prog wrote: For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I agree, I could not care less about Samsung White vs. Samsung Blue in 2014 and all the storylines mentioned just sounded to me like (failed) desperate attempts to keep the matchup interesting.
Do you watch league for quality games or for personalities and storylines? Sounds to me like you like the latter hence why you have such a reaction. I find it hard to believe that anyone that likes watching league gameplay wouldn't have cared about the White vs Blue games.
Implying that you can either watch quality Korean games or shitty NA/EU games with personalities and storylines? As far as I'm concerned, NA and EU LCS are also quality games, just not as high quality as KR but more than making up for it with recognizable brands, personalities and storylines. So yes, as a viewer of NA and sometimes EU, Samsung White and Samsung Blue were basically interchangeable to me.
So, what you're saying is you 1. Don't watch Korean LOL, and, thus, had no previous experience watching true sister teams in LOL; and 2. Largely only cared for manufactured storylines?
Sorry if I don't quite rate your input on sister teams, quality of games, match-fixing, etc.
Congratulations, you just won the most passive-aggressive post of the week award!
Quite ironic, don't you think?
Anyway that wasn't even close to a passive aggressive post plus he's right. If you don't want to educate yourself about the topic at hand, we're not gonna care much for your opinion.
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 02 2016 00:15 Prog wrote: For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I agree, I could not care less about Samsung White vs. Samsung Blue in 2014 and all the storylines mentioned just sounded to me like (failed) desperate attempts to keep the matchup interesting.
Do you watch league for quality games or for personalities and storylines? Sounds to me like you like the latter hence why you have such a reaction. I find it hard to believe that anyone that likes watching league gameplay wouldn't have cared about the White vs Blue games.
Implying that you can either watch quality Korean games or shitty NA/EU games with personalities and storylines? As far as I'm concerned, NA and EU LCS are also quality games, just not as high quality as KR but more than making up for it with recognizable brands, personalities and storylines. So yes, as a viewer of NA and sometimes EU, Samsung White and Samsung Blue were basically interchangeable to me.
So, what you're saying is you 1. Don't watch Korean LOL, and, thus, had no previous experience watching true sister teams in LOL; and 2. Largely only cared for manufactured storylines?
Sorry if I don't quite rate your input on sister teams, quality of games, match-fixing, etc.
Congratulations, you just won the most passive-aggressive post of the week award!
Quite ironic, don't you think?
Anyway that wasn't even close to a passive aggressive post plus he's right. If you don't want to educate yourself about the topic at hand, we're not gonna care much for your opinion.
It's fine if you think my opinion isn't valuable. My problem was with NotMeEver's scornfully dismissive tone. Besides, not watching the Korean scene doesn't make my arguments invalid; even if I'm not seeing the benefits of sister teams, I can still argue as to what their costs are.
On January 01 2016 21:40 Prog wrote: Sister teams are just terrible from a spectator point of view. You can't create hype around Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2. It just does not make for a good story. And esports as a business is first and foremost entertainment, so the story is more important than anything else.
On January 02 2016 00:15 Prog wrote: For bulding a story of two teams playing against each other you generally want to target at least three different audiences: Fans of team 1, fans of team 2 and neutral spectators. Whenever you have two sister teams play each other, you naturally get a lot of overlap between the first 2 target audiences. Moreover, you also create a situation in which neutral specators might think that nothing is on the line, because the team wins anyway. Sure, if you are heavily invested into the league scene you see differences that give you a sense that they are not the same team. However, if you are not that involved, you likely won't be pulled into viewing the event if it is advertised as "Samsung 1 vs Samsung 2". I believe that OGN/Riot thinks about storylines with the casual viewer in mind. Most people on this site would watch the games regardless what the teams are called, because we know the players and we love to watch the game. But there are lots of people for whom it makes a difference if they perceive a game as important. It is OGN's/Riot's job to make the games feel important. And it is easier to do so if both teams are not obvious sister teams.
On a side note: It is not an accident that two sister teams cannot both get into the highest league in traditional sports (you find something very similar to sister teams in football (soccer) everywhere in europe).
I agree, I could not care less about Samsung White vs. Samsung Blue in 2014 and all the storylines mentioned just sounded to me like (failed) desperate attempts to keep the matchup interesting.
Do you watch league for quality games or for personalities and storylines? Sounds to me like you like the latter hence why you have such a reaction. I find it hard to believe that anyone that likes watching league gameplay wouldn't have cared about the White vs Blue games.
Implying that you can either watch quality Korean games or shitty NA/EU games with personalities and storylines? As far as I'm concerned, NA and EU LCS are also quality games, just not as high quality as KR but more than making up for it with recognizable brands, personalities and storylines. So yes, as a viewer of NA and sometimes EU, Samsung White and Samsung Blue were basically interchangeable to me.
So, what you're saying is you 1. Don't watch Korean LOL, and, thus, had no previous experience watching true sister teams in LOL; and 2. Largely only cared for manufactured storylines?
Sorry if I don't quite rate your input on sister teams, quality of games, match-fixing, etc.
Congratulations, you just won the most passive-aggressive post of the week award!
Quite ironic, don't you think?
Anyway that wasn't even close to a passive aggressive post plus he's right. If you don't want to educate yourself about the topic at hand, we're not gonna care much for your opinion.
It's fine if you think my opinion isn't valuable. My problem was with NotMeEver's scornfully dismissive tone. Besides, not watching the Korean scene doesn't make my arguments invalid; even if I'm not seeing the benefits of sister teams, I can still argue as to what their costs are.
I really don't see that tone though.
Also your stance is basically intentionally looking at only one side of the argument, which isn't the greatest way to argue in my opinion.
Locodoco seems out of the blue but I applaud Liquid for going to a 10 man roster. Allows for a lot of private practice recreating situations the team is struggling with. Grants a great deal of positional theorycrafting allowing the starting roster to focus more on honing their game instead of also trying to crack the meta constantly. Provides an easy and built in way to control player behavior(easy enough to take someone off the starting lineup). From personal experience, its a lot easier to maintain discipline and team focus with 10 than with 5(weight of the rule-abiding crowd sort of thing). This makes it easy to get the team focused on productivity and improvement. Not to mention the obvious benefits of having 5 more brains and the ability to cover for injuries and emergencies. This is NA moving in the right direction.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/meUVL/5ab7028d74.png)
![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/meUWU/1ecfda8689.png)
![[image loading]](http://0cb8dd5d2dc142d08f0f-eb3b436d25971e5860b39e72b0600342.r94.cf1.rackcdn.com/images/9P4moAqNzWXE.878x0.Z-Z96KYq.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://sas.suplitodomedia.com/articles_images/GamblersPalace/New-York-Jets-VS-New-York-Giants.jpg)
