On April 26 2016 05:36 iamcaustic wrote: I'm pretty happy if these C9 roster changes are true. I've always wondered why eSports orgs don't try to emulate the traditional sports model of "main team + farm team". Judging by these changes with the Challenger team and what-not, it seems like that's the general approach C9 is starting to take.
Next step I'd like to see is for the LCS format itself to start moving in that direction, instead of the constantly revolving door of bottom LCS/top Challenger. Makes it hard for the orgs in that skill range to keep a solid brand identity.
I think Riot themselves need to decide what they want Challenger to be. As it currently stands an LCS team can buy a challenger spot, fill it with players they want to, then if that team qualifies for LCS they MUST sell that spot. I think Riot either needs to say LCS teams can't have challenger teams in the same region and encourage B-level players to exist in Challenger and A level players to be big teams (read 10 man roster) in the LCS, or allow sister teams and keep everything that exists as it is.
I would rather see the second option personally but I'm just not a fan of what challenger currently is.
So you would like to see sister teams in LCS but you dont like sister teams when they are in LCS and challenger? I dont get this.
I don't like that teams can basically hold a challenger spot and an LCS spot and then just randomly shuffle them at the last minute for their own benefits (ala TDK/Renegades). I like the concept of challenger team being used for challenger level teams (like TLA to TL), not random LCS pros looking to make their organization more money by going through challenger to LCS and then selling the spot and repeating. I think allowing sister teams in the LCS would discourage this as once you get the team in the LCS if you're allowed to keep it, you're less likely to be buying another challenger spot.
If Riot wants to enforce big teams (10 man) with no sister teams then they should get rid of sister teams in challenger as putting a squad in challenger who are LCS tier and stand a great chance of winning and then not being able to play in the LCS (what C9 is currently doing) is counterproductive to that goal. If they don't care and want challenger to be LCS sub teams then they should allow said sub teams to also play in the LCS for their organization so a new team can take their place in challenger.
I like sister teams either way and find the fact that they're not allowed rather stupid, but I think Riot needs to address what they want CS to be and to make rules accordingly.
It's the mixing of two purposes in one league that I think is too troublesome; 'farm league' and 'league that's the legal gate to the big show' are kind of contrarian. Doesn't the LPL have a better system, what with the LPL as the main league, the LSPL as the entrance to the LPL, and the LPPL as the league for LPL teams' secondary members to do something beyond twiddling their thumbs?
On April 26 2016 05:36 iamcaustic wrote: I'm pretty happy if these C9 roster changes are true. I've always wondered why eSports orgs don't try to emulate the traditional sports model of "main team + farm team". Judging by these changes with the Challenger team and what-not, it seems like that's the general approach C9 is starting to take.
Next step I'd like to see is for the LCS format itself to start moving in that direction, instead of the constantly revolving door of bottom LCS/top Challenger. Makes it hard for the orgs in that skill range to keep a solid brand identity.
I think Riot themselves need to decide what they want Challenger to be. As it currently stands an LCS team can buy a challenger spot, fill it with players they want to, then if that team qualifies for LCS they MUST sell that spot. I think Riot either needs to say LCS teams can't have challenger teams in the same region and encourage B-level players to exist in Challenger and A level players to be big teams (read 10 man roster) in the LCS, or allow sister teams and keep everything that exists as it is.
I would rather see the second option personally but I'm just not a fan of what challenger currently is.
So you would like to see sister teams in LCS but you dont like sister teams when they are in LCS and challenger? I dont get this.
I don't like that teams can basically hold a challenger spot and an LCS spot and then just randomly shuffle them at the last minute for their own benefits (ala TDK/Renegades). I like the concept of challenger team being used for challenger level teams (like TLA to TL), not random LCS pros looking to make their organization more money by going through challenger to LCS and then selling the spot and repeating. I think allowing sister teams in the LCS would discourage this as once you get the team in the LCS if you're allowed to keep it, you're less likely to be buying another challenger spot.
If Riot wants to enforce big teams (10 man) with no sister teams then they should get rid of sister teams in challenger as putting a squad in challenger who are LCS tier and stand a great chance of winning and then not being able to play in the LCS (what C9 is currently doing) is counterproductive to that goal. If they don't care and want challenger to be LCS sub teams then they should allow said sub teams to also play in the LCS for their organization so a new team can take their place in challenger.
I like sister teams either way and find the fact that they're not allowed rather stupid, but I think Riot needs to address what they want CS to be and to make rules accordingly.
Well if they were allowed to keep 2 LCS teams then they could just sell the 3rd team that they bring through challenger. If you wanted to stop selling spots then you would have to forbid selling spots. Which also means you would have to disallow LCS teams owning challenger teams in the first place.
Also I dont really get what is so important or benificial about having a sister team in LCS when you are not allowed to exchange players between them. Just so you have a practise partner? For that to be useful both teams have to be equally stong, else the better team would always prefer another better LCS team to scrim with. As for example TL mostly did even though they could have scrimmed with TLA. LCS teams simply build partnerships with other LCS teams to have reliable practise partners, the training effect is essentially the same. In any case the benefit should be way smaller than having a farm team you can exchange players with as is currently the case.
On April 26 2016 05:36 iamcaustic wrote: I'm pretty happy if these C9 roster changes are true. I've always wondered why eSports orgs don't try to emulate the traditional sports model of "main team + farm team". Judging by these changes with the Challenger team and what-not, it seems like that's the general approach C9 is starting to take.
Next step I'd like to see is for the LCS format itself to start moving in that direction, instead of the constantly revolving door of bottom LCS/top Challenger. Makes it hard for the orgs in that skill range to keep a solid brand identity.
I think Riot themselves need to decide what they want Challenger to be. As it currently stands an LCS team can buy a challenger spot, fill it with players they want to, then if that team qualifies for LCS they MUST sell that spot. I think Riot either needs to say LCS teams can't have challenger teams in the same region and encourage B-level players to exist in Challenger and A level players to be big teams (read 10 man roster) in the LCS, or allow sister teams and keep everything that exists as it is.
I would rather see the second option personally but I'm just not a fan of what challenger currently is.
So you would like to see sister teams in LCS but you dont like sister teams when they are in LCS and challenger? I dont get this.
I don't like that teams can basically hold a challenger spot and an LCS spot and then just randomly shuffle them at the last minute for their own benefits (ala TDK/Renegades). I like the concept of challenger team being used for challenger level teams (like TLA to TL), not random LCS pros looking to make their organization more money by going through challenger to LCS and then selling the spot and repeating. I think allowing sister teams in the LCS would discourage this as once you get the team in the LCS if you're allowed to keep it, you're less likely to be buying another challenger spot.
If Riot wants to enforce big teams (10 man) with no sister teams then they should get rid of sister teams in challenger as putting a squad in challenger who are LCS tier and stand a great chance of winning and then not being able to play in the LCS (what C9 is currently doing) is counterproductive to that goal. If they don't care and want challenger to be LCS sub teams then they should allow said sub teams to also play in the LCS for their organization so a new team can take their place in challenger.
I like sister teams either way and find the fact that they're not allowed rather stupid, but I think Riot needs to address what they want CS to be and to make rules accordingly.
Well if they were allowed to keep 2 LCS teams then they could just sell the 3rd team that they bring through challenger. If you wanted to stop selling spots then you would have to forbid selling spots. Which also means you would have to disallow LCS teams owning challenger teams in the first place.
Also I dont really get what is so important or benificial about having a sister team in LCS when you are not allowed to exchange players between them. Just so you have a practise partner? For that to be useful both teams have to be equally stong, else the better team would always prefer another better LCS team to scrim with. As for example TL mostly did even though they could have scrimmed with TLA. LCS teams simply build partnerships with other LCS teams to have reliable practise partners, the training effect is essentially the same. In any case the benefit should be way smaller than having a farm team you can exchange players with as is currently the case.
I guess my point is that allowing sister teams would reduce it because eventually you'll reach a point where its not worth investing in another squad, whether that's two teams in the LCS and one in challenger or whatever. My main point was said with many fewer words earlier, CS currently feels like it has two separate conflicting purposes.
On April 26 2016 07:54 Saradin wrote: It's the mixing of two purposes in one league that I think is too troublesome; 'farm league' and 'league that's the legal gate to the big show' are kind of contrarian. Doesn't the LPL have a better system, what with the LPL as the main league, the LSPL as the entrance to the LPL, and the LPPL as the league for LPL teams' secondary members to do something beyond twiddling their thumbs?
On April 26 2016 05:36 iamcaustic wrote: I'm pretty happy if these C9 roster changes are true. I've always wondered why eSports orgs don't try to emulate the traditional sports model of "main team + farm team". Judging by these changes with the Challenger team and what-not, it seems like that's the general approach C9 is starting to take.
Next step I'd like to see is for the LCS format itself to start moving in that direction, instead of the constantly revolving door of bottom LCS/top Challenger. Makes it hard for the orgs in that skill range to keep a solid brand identity.
I think Riot themselves need to decide what they want Challenger to be. As it currently stands an LCS team can buy a challenger spot, fill it with players they want to, then if that team qualifies for LCS they MUST sell that spot. I think Riot either needs to say LCS teams can't have challenger teams in the same region and encourage B-level players to exist in Challenger and A level players to be big teams (read 10 man roster) in the LCS, or allow sister teams and keep everything that exists as it is.
I would rather see the second option personally but I'm just not a fan of what challenger currently is.
So you would like to see sister teams in LCS but you dont like sister teams when they are in LCS and challenger? I dont get this.
For example, in Summer 2015 Korea the challenger scene is broken up into 2 divisions, one for amateur teams and the other for farm teams. They largely played within their own pods with 6 intergroup games and the farm teams didn't participate in playoffs.
IMO I don't mind the "no sister teams in LCS rule" but I think they should tolerate it for up to one year upon a team entering the LCS. The chaos that the system creates with team sales that are rushed out in a few weeks, or a few months is dumb. Particularly because we know you are barely even selling a team, you are selling a "slot" (as if Hai and Lemon would play for a different org in LCS if C9Challenger gets promoted).
SO I suppose I have a bit of a problem with the economics and practical effects of the system. As clearly rushed sales are sales done without due diligence as well.
Dade was speaking on his stream and he's mentioned that he's not going to play in LCK. He claims it's because he doesn't want to but given the Spirit fiesta it's more likely that LCK doesn't want him.
What in that clip hints at Santorin returning to TSM? and why would they dump Sven for Santorin makes no sense, I guess they never wanted Santorin to quit the team in the first place.
At least we get to see Meteos play again. No clue as to his current form, but he's still one of the best native NA players to ever touch the game, so the potential is clearly there.
Hope Diamond gets a solid team. He will be one of the best junglers there. People are saying he will go to NRG but I don't know why they would drop moon.
NRG eSports have acquired Diego "Quas" Ruiz, Lucas "Santorin" Tao Kilmer Larsen and Alan "KiWiKiD" Nguyen, according to a report from ESPN's Jacob Wolf Tuesday.
NRG CEO Andrew Pruett also told ESPN that Johnny "Altec" Ru, Kevin "KonKwon" Kwon and Galen "Moon" Holgate will leave the team, while Lee "GBM" Chang-seok will stay on. They have yet to find a new AD Carry.
Why would he be an upgrade over Xmithie? Diamond was bad the whole of last year and only played a few weeks where he looked pretty decent in UoL this year. Xmithie is CLGs best performer and looked solid since Worlds last year.
EPT
