EPT[IEM] Guangzhou Discussion - Page 39
| Forum Index > LoL Tournaments |
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21248 Posts
| ||
|
taLbuk
Madagascar1879 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:17 [-Bluewolf-] wrote: 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. You make a VERY good point, IG could have ran something like triple Garrison turtle comp for the sole purpose of dragging the game out knowing that if they lose it would be a 3 way tie decided by time between the 3 tied teams like i said, LoL time and DotA time are two totally different beasts, because of Recall, taking a safe route by recalling and buying/potting up and taking global buffs is much effective strat while in dota if you get a double kill your 100% pushing as far as u can but than again there isn't better ways to avoid these 3 way tiebreaks outside of making the games bo3's in group stage which isnt viable | ||
|
Cixah
United States11285 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:22 Navi wrote: 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 You are a genius, Riot hire this man. | ||
dnastyx
United States2707 Posts
| ||
|
Misder
United States1557 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:21 TheYango wrote: 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. He was ninjaed by a few seconds  | ||
|
tissue
Malaysia441 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:23 taLbuk wrote: You make a VERY good point, IG could have ran something like triple Garrison turtle comp for the sole purpose of dragging the game out knowing that if they lose it would be a 3 way tie decided by time between the 3 tied teams like i said, LoL time and DotA time are two totally different beasts, because of Recall, taking a safe route by recalling and buying/potting up and taking global buffs is much effective strat while in dota if you get a double kill your 100% pushing as far as u can but than again there isn't better ways to avoid these 3 way tiebreaks outside of making the games bo3's in group stage which isnt viable So we're 2-0 in the group stages, you know what time it is... 5 tank revive fortify. | ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
Aren't the rules done by ESL and not Riot though? | ||
|
Shawngood
Germany473 Posts
Next up (after Counter-Strike) is Group B. | ||
|
Navi
5286 Posts
that actually sounds terrifying lategame too lol | ||
|
Misder
United States1557 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:33 Shawngood wrote: All teams were aware of the tiebreaker rule. That rule was used in our tournament at gamescom as well and is also the way that Riot judges games: Fast wins are good and long losses are good, slow wins and fast losses are bad. Next up (after Counter-Strike) is Group B. This might work better if teams don't get D/Ced which change the pace of the game significantly. | ||
JBright
Vancouver14381 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:33 Shawngood wrote: All teams were aware of the tiebreaker rule. That rule was used in our tournament at gamescom as well and is also the way that Riot judges games: Fast wins and long losses are good, slow wins and fast losses are bad. Next up (after Counter-Strike) is Group B. I have no problem with how it's handled since the teams know this beforehand. However, is ESL going to consider other pool play formats (OSL/MSL) for the future? | ||
|
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21248 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:33 Shawngood wrote: All teams were aware of the tiebreaker rule. That rule was used in our tournament at gamescom as well and is also the way that Riot judges games: Fast wins and long losses are good, slow wins and fast losses are bad. Next up (after Counter-Strike) is Group B. Very very dumb rule, easily abused and can make for horrible games. | ||
|
taLbuk
Madagascar1879 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:33 Shawngood wrote: All teams were aware of the tiebreaker rule. That rule was used in our tournament at gamescom as well and is also the way that Riot judges games: Fast wins and long losses are good, slow wins and fast losses are bad. Next up (after Counter-Strike) is Group B. Are you the same Shawn that handled the WoW tourneys in the last few years? I feel bad for you going from one game that lacks so many needed features to another. What a pain for the organizers. Also I have watched almost every IEM for the last 3 years and out of all the tournaments it ALWAYS has 1-2 groups with 3 way ties no matter the game (just because groups are made of 4, and one of the teams is usually a tier below the others and goes 0-3 while the other 3 teams trade games) and it is horribly uneventful and lacks excitement to watch teams leave on the backs of tiebreaks. Please have IEM inquire on looking for other formats for games like SC2 and LoL, I realize your format has worked for years with games like CS, but CS Tiebreaks are much more straightforward and frankely deserving since there is so much emphasis on rounds in that game, that nobody, including the viewer seems cheated when teams leave on tiebreaks. | ||
|
tobi9999
United States1966 Posts
It's all iG's fault because they didn't run the 5 fortify with alistar sona amumu heimerdinger and trundle to stop any attempt getting into base before 50 ish minute mark where everyone has full build. | ||
|
Misder
United States1557 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:33 Shawngood wrote: All teams were aware of the tiebreaker rule. That rule was used in our tournament at gamescom as well and is also the way that Riot judges games: Fast wins and long losses are good, slow wins and fast losses are bad. Next up (after Counter-Strike) is Group B. Also, just because the rule has been used doesn't make it a good one Consider making it a double-elimination format! Yay! | ||
|
ihasaKAROT
Netherlands4730 Posts
| ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
There's this newspost saying that Taburiss got picked up by EHOME, and it seems to make sense given Taburiss' choice of junglers, and the fact that EHOME Max, EHOME PDD, and Taburisswu have similar records in arranged 5s. | ||
|
JBright
Vancouver14381 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:45 ihasaKAROT wrote: Can someone enlighten me when group B games will start? Im very bad at timezones :s Isn't it in the OP? I'm sad no one reads it T_T | ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:33 Shawngood wrote: All teams were aware of the tiebreaker rule. That rule was used in our tournament at gamescom as well and is also the way that Riot judges games: Fast wins and long losses are good, slow wins and fast losses are bad. Next up (after Counter-Strike) is Group B. Just because they all know the rule doesn't make it a good rule. Should be decided by like most total gold earned or smth. This basically gimps all team comps that rely on getting to lategame. | ||
|
ihasaKAROT
Netherlands4730 Posts
On October 03 2011 15:47 JBright wrote: Isn't it in the OP? I'm sad no one reads it T_T Ow doh. My bad  Yesterday it said it in HKT or something like that | ||
| ||
