|
On October 03 2011 15:06 Aurdon wrote: "Let's back off, buy, get baron, and do the final push to win!" "Fuck that! We gotta win now there might be a tie! GoGoGo!" Thats exactly what I am worried about.
Forced to play aggressive when its not even necessary.
|
The fact that the time was a tie breaker for last couple of events in moba games shouldnt rly supprise anybody. The same tie breaker was set for dota2 tournament last time aswell. Everytime a team was loosing they wanted to buy those extra seconds before loosing.
Its a normal tie breaker. Since you cant go by rounds or whatever like in fps games
|
On October 03 2011 15:09 KaveDizzle wrote: What day are we on right now for IEM?
Day 1 got canned due to client errors, they are cramming days 1 and 2 into right now.
|
Vancouver14381 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:08 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 15:07 Aurdon wrote:On October 03 2011 15:05 tissue wrote: That decision is reeeeeeeeeeeally questionable. Can't they rig up a 1v1 tiebreaker or something? It would have to be a 1v1v1 tiebreaker. No way that happening. What did DotA or HoN do when faced with events like this?
I'm pretty sure that the 1 million DotA 2 tournament also used game times.
On October 03 2011 15:07 tobi9999 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 15:06 JBright wrote:On October 03 2011 15:04 NoobieOne wrote: wow time is the tiebreakers? thats kinda crazy. It doesn't seem like a fair tiebreak. I think they use the game times like a bo3 format. Taking longer in a bo1 LoL match is like winning 2-1 in a bo3. That's a ding against you. Lets compare to SC Cheesing and winning with 4pool is obviously better than playing macro game np
Obviously SC tournaments don't tend to have bo1 but that's why I drew up the comparison. Technically this method is better than the coin flip they had a DH a few months back
|
On October 03 2011 15:10 Lunko wrote: The fact that the time was a tie breaker for last couple of events in moba games shouldnt rly supprise anybody. The same tie breaker was set for dota2 tournament last time aswell. Everytime a team was loosing they wanted to buy those extra seconds before loosing.
Its a normal tie breaker. Since you cant go by rounds or whatever like in fps games
LoL and DotA and the meaning of "time" are not applicable to eachother IMO.
|
I don't like that system. Somewhat unfair and i feel really bad for IG Shoulda done an offline tiebreaker but kinda understand why they did it because they're so behind schedule thanks to fail server/client.
|
United States47024 Posts
There's also the fact that 2 DCs were involved.
You can argue that the DCs might not have affected the final outcomes of the games, but when game-times are being used as tie-breakers? They'll DEFINITELY have an effect on that.
|
On October 03 2011 15:12 DarkRise wrote: I don't like that system. Shoulda done an offline tiebreaker but kinda understand why they did it because they're so behind schedule thanks to fail server/client.
IEM rules are in place far before the event, it's not like they just decided that is how they will decide a 3 way-tie.
|
What im trying to say people here raging, there is not a better way to decide a tie breaker in LoL there really isnt. Thats why time is allways gonna be a tie breaker in moba games. unless its bo3 or bo5 where rounds can be a factor.
|
Yeah in dota/dota 2 they also used the time rating. I think it's ok as long as the teams are well informed about the rule beforehand. Pretty hard to decide on a fair tiebreaker anywayother than replaying the games between the tied teams
I remember Navi was winning handily against scythe in group stage and when scythe said GG and about to leave, Navi kindly told them " stay, don't leave till throne is dead" because apparently they are cool with each other and stuff and navi reminded them that time rating counts for tiebreakers.
|
How bout they can use game times as a tiebreaker only if there are no D/Cs.
|
Remember the usual way to resolve a 3 way tie like this is for 2 teams to play and then loser plays the 3e team untill a team loses 2 games in a row.
That is a minimum of 3 games which right now took them about 4 hours to do. If they need more then 3 it becomes a total nightmare. They cant fix this like they do in sc2 just because of the time needed to play even a single game.
|
So - iG really should have been playing to simply last rather than to win the game. Should have picked a team composition around extending the game for as long as possible and play super passive to ensure their advancement. Attempting to make aggressive moves to win that game was simply not a smart move over just turtling.
Even that last stand was pretty stupid. Why fight at 1 inhibitor instead of the two towers at their nexus as they probably could have dragged it out longer there?
This time rule can be abused so badly in future events.
|
LoL by its very nature does not easily allow 3 way tie-breakers due to the extended amount of time it can take to play a single game.
This is not a good solution. But I can see why it was chosen.
I do not like it but I understand it.
|
No rum, but I have some whiskey. Incoming whiskey shots for every d/c here on out. Let's hope I survive the night.
|
I'm slightly confused as to how the timetable shifted now... Does anyone know when the group B games are going to start?
|
Are the next round of games not gonna start until the top of the hour like the schedule says? I want to watch CLG play WE so bad but I also need to sleep at some point tonight
|
United States47024 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:13 Lunko wrote: What im trying to say people here raging, there is not a better way to decide a tie breaker in LoL there really isnt. Thats why time is allways gonna be a tie breaker in moba games. unless its bo3 or bo5 where rounds can be a factor. There's a simple solution to this. If you can't afford to actually play tiebreakers in a round-robin format (OSL style groups), then you should just use a double-elimination group stage (MSL style groups).
The advantage of round-robin groups is that it's supposed to be more "fair" because in double-elim, the winner of the winner's game never plays the loser of the loser's game, but honestly the fairness argument goes out the window if you are using arbitrary statistics for tiebreakers.
Incidentally this actually SAVES time because the group-stage involves 5 games instead of 6.
|
I don't really know how to better solve 3 way ties in LoL. The nature of a weekend lan that is already a day behind also makes it very difficult.
A side note: I miss de_nuke
|
they should play it like msl double elim winners play each other winner of winners game advances losers duke it out winner of losers game plays loser of winner's game winner of said match advances no chance for tiebreakers, good for these time slated events that LoL is played in
|
|
|
|