|
On January 04 2011 01:14 SubtleArt wrote:
CAn someone explain what the last game was for? I understand this is like the MSL format except theres an extra game to determine first and second place rather than just who advances, but won't the last game always be between two people who are knocked out regardless? Seems silly.
Also, FRUITDEALER D:
They are knocked down to playing the code S qualifiers and whoever is seeded 3rd as opposed to fourth is going to be in a better position for those qualifiers. The way that Tastosis explained it during the game made it seem like Fruitdealer would have two opportunities to stay in Code S whereas Jookto is only going to have one.
I'm sure there are a lot of obsing complaints in the thread but I just wanted to chime in that I really hope it improves pretty soon. It seems like the observer isn't listening to Tastosis and working with what they're saying and that's completely ridiculous. There were several instances today where Tastosis was talking about an overlord getting sniped or something happening elsewhere and we just never saw it. That aside, the observing is just pretty bad. There were multiple times where some harass was going on (muta/banshee/whatever) and the camera was stuck on that while a major fight was going on elsewhere, just really poor.
|
Happy oGszenio made it out of his group. MVP is a beast and FD continues to look worse as time goes on.
|
Is it just me or does TSL look like they're struggling recently?
Fruitdealer and Tester look patchy at best. Cliide has always seemed to not do that well.
OGS started off patchy, but it looks like they're insane working conditions are starting to pay off.
|
Hehe. maximum liquibet points for me today
|
I missed fruitdealers game, but i watched the VOD and fruitdealer made waaaay too many mistakes.
1. Spine crawlers in the wrong side of the hatch.
2. Made a 14 hatch in close positions.
3. Didn't block his ramp with drones in order to move the spine.
4. Spine crawler on wrong side of the hatch.
5. Made waaaaay too many drones.
|
Anyone watched Code A? I don't think I have ever been so amazed by banelings like that. Burrowed banelings are awesome.
And FD was really an upset, wtf was he doing with that nydus thing. If it was me, once I saw the infestors I'd be running like a chick while expanding and teching up aswell. Just terrible decision there IMO.
|
On January 04 2011 04:13 darmousseh wrote:
I missed fruitdealers game, but i watched the VOD and fruitdealer made waaaay too many mistakes.
1. Spine crawlers in the wrong side of the hatch.
2. Made a 14 hatch in close positions.
3. Didn't block his ramp with drones in order to move the spine.
4. Spine crawler on wrong side of the hatch.
5. Made waaaaay too many drones.
14 hatch is fine close positions.
|
The new format sucks. Way too few games to really determine the best players. When the best players in the world have a 55%-60% win ratio on the ladder, whats the point in making them play 2 games against 2 different players to determine if they stay in the tournement.
Its FAR too few games to determine the best players.
Say what you want about FD, but he played MVP in close positions on Lost Temple. That was his 1 game....
New GSL format is horrible... no continuity.... old format 100x better.
If they made the 1v1 matchup's best of 3 vs best of 1 it would reduce the random and map variables from being so influential.
Best of 1 is just stupid... i was a huge fan of the GSL... but idk now.
|
I'd really like the new format . . . if it were Bo3s. But I guess that would take forever to air.
It's sad to see Fruitdealer get knocked out in the first round, but he just didn't play well. Maka's bottom placement is a bit more tragic, I guess. He played well against NesTea, even if he wasn't able to win it.
|
On January 04 2011 04:44 dsousa wrote:
The new format sucks. Way too few games to really determine the best players. When the best players in the world have a 55%-60% win ratio on the ladder, whats the point in making them play 2 games against 2 different players to determine if they stay in the tournement.
Its FAR too few games to determine the best players.
Say what you want about FD, but he played MVP in close positions on Lost Temple. That was his 1 game....
New GSL format is horrible... no continuity.... old format 100x better.
If they made the 1v1 matchup's best of 3 vs best of 1 it would reduce the random and map variables from being so influential.
Best of 1 is just stupid... i was a huge fan of the GSL... but idk now.
The format is pretty similar to OSL and MSL group stages, and still some players there are consistently qualifying.
This format works and gets rid of bad seeds and getting placed in the wrong half of the bracket. There's still hard groups of course.
|
On January 04 2011 05:06 MaYuu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 04:44 dsousa wrote:
The new format sucks. Way too few games to really determine the best players. When the best players in the world have a 55%-60% win ratio on the ladder, whats the point in making them play 2 games against 2 different players to determine if they stay in the tournement.
Its FAR too few games to determine the best players.
Say what you want about FD, but he played MVP in close positions on Lost Temple. That was his 1 game....
New GSL format is horrible... no continuity.... old format 100x better.
If they made the 1v1 matchup's best of 3 vs best of 1 it would reduce the random and map variables from being so influential.
Best of 1 is just stupid... i was a huge fan of the GSL... but idk now.
The format is pretty similar to OSL and MSL group stages, and still some players there are consistently qualifying. This format works and gets rid of bad seeds and getting placed in the wrong half of the bracket. There's still hard groups of course.
BW is not SC2. It would be silly to assume they should use the same exact formats.
|
On January 04 2011 05:22 robertdinh wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 05:06 MaYuu wrote:On January 04 2011 04:44 dsousa wrote:
The new format sucks. Way too few games to really determine the best players. When the best players in the world have a 55%-60% win ratio on the ladder, whats the point in making them play 2 games against 2 different players to determine if they stay in the tournement.
Its FAR too few games to determine the best players.
Say what you want about FD, but he played MVP in close positions on Lost Temple. That was his 1 game....
New GSL format is horrible... no continuity.... old format 100x better.
If they made the 1v1 matchup's best of 3 vs best of 1 it would reduce the random and map variables from being so influential.
Best of 1 is just stupid... i was a huge fan of the GSL... but idk now.
The format is pretty similar to OSL and MSL group stages, and still some players there are consistently qualifying. This format works and gets rid of bad seeds and getting placed in the wrong half of the bracket. There's still hard groups of course. BW is not SC2. It would be silly to assume they should use the same exact formats.
...It's pretty darn close...
|
On January 04 2011 05:22 robertdinh wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 05:06 MaYuu wrote:On January 04 2011 04:44 dsousa wrote:
The new format sucks. Way too few games to really determine the best players. When the best players in the world have a 55%-60% win ratio on the ladder, whats the point in making them play 2 games against 2 different players to determine if they stay in the tournement.
Its FAR too few games to determine the best players.
Say what you want about FD, but he played MVP in close positions on Lost Temple. That was his 1 game....
New GSL format is horrible... no continuity.... old format 100x better.
If they made the 1v1 matchup's best of 3 vs best of 1 it would reduce the random and map variables from being so influential.
Best of 1 is just stupid... i was a huge fan of the GSL... but idk now.
The format is pretty similar to OSL and MSL group stages, and still some players there are consistently qualifying. This format works and gets rid of bad seeds and getting placed in the wrong half of the bracket. There's still hard groups of course. BW is not SC2. It would be silly to assume they should use the same exact formats.
Oh, I'm sorry if I stepped on any foots. Would you like me to do a list of everything that's similar. It would only take me about a day or two.
|
On January 04 2011 05:37 MaYuu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2011 05:22 robertdinh wrote:On January 04 2011 05:06 MaYuu wrote:On January 04 2011 04:44 dsousa wrote:
The new format sucks. Way too few games to really determine the best players. When the best players in the world have a 55%-60% win ratio on the ladder, whats the point in making them play 2 games against 2 different players to determine if they stay in the tournement.
Its FAR too few games to determine the best players.
Say what you want about FD, but he played MVP in close positions on Lost Temple. That was his 1 game....
New GSL format is horrible... no continuity.... old format 100x better.
If they made the 1v1 matchup's best of 3 vs best of 1 it would reduce the random and map variables from being so influential.
Best of 1 is just stupid... i was a huge fan of the GSL... but idk now.
The format is pretty similar to OSL and MSL group stages, and still some players there are consistently qualifying. This format works and gets rid of bad seeds and getting placed in the wrong half of the bracket. There's still hard groups of course. BW is not SC2. It would be silly to assume they should use the same exact formats. Oh, I'm sorry if I stepped on any foots. Would you like me to do a list of everything that's similar. It would only take me about a day or two.
Let me break it down for you...
SC2 is much more RPS, one slight build order mistake is far more condemning far more frequently than in a game like BW, where build order is important, but the players also have the room to adapt (partially because of map size a lot of the time and the general meta game)
Using BO1s for a game like SC2 which is still in it's infancy and has cramped maps and is so build order dependent, is much more inaccurate than using it in the much more stable and developed BW.
They should have at least done Bo3s, and also, while BW is a more stable and developed rts, doesn't mean BO1 is great for it either.
Just cause BW may or may not use a bad format, doesn't mean GSL has to copy it just for the sake of copying it.
I just think if you want a competitive tourney, it shouldn't be BO1 group stages, and furthermore it should let all the matches play out where they might matter.
It isn't fair that if you get matched vs a monster in the later set of matches in group stage you may or may not actually have to play him, while others had to.
|
Yeah, I'd prefer a best of three, too, and making it just a regular round robin. It seem, though, that the format they are using is designed to minimize the number of matches as much as possible. Maybe there is a reason for that. Money, probably.
Also, I made Artosis say "balls" on TV and he doesn't know it. Rad.
|
On January 04 2011 06:00 bahl sofs tiil wrote:
Yeah, I'd prefer a best of three, too, and making it just a regular round robin. It seem, though, that the format they are using is designed to minimize the number of matches as much as possible. Maybe there is a reason for that. Money, probably.
Also, I made Artosis say "balls" on TV and he doesn't know it. Rad.
Yea and that's another issue, how much should a competitive game sacrifice in the legitimacy of it's tournaments, for the sake of marketing.
I think they can find good balance between efficient marketing + competitive integrity.
I currently think that this not completely round-robin bo1 format is not good.
|
maka and FD are out
WTF!!!
|
I meant money in the sense of they don't have it. As in, they can't afford to broadcast that many games; so, they cut it down to less because they have to.
I don't know if that's true, though, obviously, but it certainly sounds reasonable.
|
On January 04 2011 06:11 bahl sofs tiil wrote:
I meant money in the sense of they don't have it. They can't afford to broadcast that many games; so, they cut it down to less because they have to.
Oh I highly doubt that is the issue, they are putting up large prize pools and have a pretty aggressive schedule for broadcasting lots of games this year.
But regardless, quality > all. Their main priority should be making a tournament with a format that is fair to the players and strives to determine the most consistent and skillful player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
