|
The following is a list of behaviors that will get immediate bans:
1. Whining about stream
2. Bashing other games
3. Flaming other users
4. Bashing players
5. Complaining about imbalance
Basically just be respectful. Aside from that, enjoy the games, make sure you bring an umbrella and have some delicious waffles! (#) |
On August 28 2011 12:53 KingPaddy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:50 jmbthirteen wrote:On August 28 2011 12:46 KingPaddy wrote:On August 28 2011 12:44 wats0n wrote:On August 28 2011 12:41 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:37 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote:
Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system... How the hell doesn't it make sense? DRG beat Select. It's as simple as that. Why can't people grasp the concept of head to head victories? It would make perfect sense if both players records' were exactly the same. If Select lost one individual match less than DRG, he should be ahead. But I already know that it's the way MLG works. I think it is wrong, but it's the way it is. The first tiebreaker is head to head. Considering you can lose a single map easily to the worst player in the pool it would be silly to make the first tiebreaker map results. It's correct the way it is. DRG beat Select so he won the tiebreaker. But you can easily be the overall better player, but have one bad matchup.. So in my opinion the overall performance should count more than the score of one single match. You really think the one more loss drg had is more weighted, even though he won the series, than a head to head match up? Exactly, because in group play it's not about the single matchup, but about the overall performance. The player who performed best in all the games they played should be first
Except matches are more important and they were tied in matches therefore the head to head between two tied players is more important.
|
On August 28 2011 12:51 darkest44 wrote:
Damn, poor hero, same record as slush in pool and he beat slush 2-0 and slush got placed 2 rounds further into the bracket than him, not really mlgs fault i guess, 3 way tiebreakers just suck no matter what :-/
its good to be french canadian
|
On August 28 2011 12:53 holy_war wrote:
Naniwa/ MMA/ MVP all won MLG in their first MLG appearance. Looks like the same will happen this time around with Coca,PuMa, Bobmer being first timers. Should be interesting though.
You can also add Huk, Select and Idra to that list. I believe every MLG has been one by a first timer.
|
On August 28 2011 12:52 Kamikazess wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:48 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:45 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:42 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:41 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:37 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote:
Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system... How the hell doesn't it make sense? DRG beat Select. It's as simple as that. Why can't people grasp the concept of head to head victories? It would make perfect sense if both players records' were exactly the same. If Select lost one individual match less than DRG, he should be ahead. But I already know that it's the way MLG works. I think it is wrong, but it's the way it is. He didn't lose one less individual match. He lost one less game. One game does not equal one match. Alright. Change the word "match" for the world "game", and my post will still have the same sense. Select lost one less game, so he should be ahead. That's the point to keep track of matches and games, in the player record. So you're placing more emphasis on games where the whole point of a tournament is how many matches you win. I don't understand your logic and you obviously disagree with MLG's so I'm just gonna stop here. Actually, no, I'm not doing it. The most important record should always be matches. But in a direct sense, to win a Bo3 match, I have to win 2 games. So, I'm only saying that it makes more sense to games count to anything. But it's only a kind of philosophical discussion, not a "right or wrong" one. =)
Actually there is an answer and you're just wrong. SC2 is a game with a lot of variance. Even in Brood War the best players only win 60% of the time. Placing the first tiebreaker on maps instead of head to head would be moronic. There's too much randomness with spawns, people are playing on different maps (no constant map pool), and there is random cheesy all in play that can always steal a single game but not a match.
|
On August 28 2011 12:50 tylermakesmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:47 Toxi78 wrote:On August 28 2011 12:44 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:42 icarly wrote:On August 28 2011 12:40 tylermakesmusic wrote:
EG with 6 players in the Top 24. o_0 idra huk incontrol machine were given their spots from pool play. Actually no. Idra, Huk and Machine earned top 24 with how they played in pool play. Incontrol and Demuslim both had to win extra games to get top 24. I understand you're trying to bitch about MLG's pool play system, but honestly shut up. not only did you not follow the tournament at all, but you also do not understand how the system works, and you even insult someone that states the truth? does it get worse. Actually I followed the whole tournament and I fully understand how the system works. My point was if you get 6th in pool play, you are not guaranteed top 24. Kinda like what happened to Incontrol. Yes, Idra, Huk and Machine got top 24 easier than most because they are in pool play, but they are in pool play for a reason. They have past results. I think you are the one that doesn't understand the system. Does it get any worse?
Because the seeds were first based on 1 single MLG that gave them a spot that is pretty hard to lose. Even the pro players themselves have stated this and said it should change. iNcontroL for example has had 1 good MLG. His last 3 have been awful. Going 1-20 during the last 2 alone in the groups. But the Pool play makes it practically impossible for him to lose his spot. He's even said this himself.
|
On August 28 2011 12:54 tylermakesmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:53 holy_war wrote:
Naniwa/ MMA/ MVP all won MLG in their first MLG appearance. Looks like the same will happen this time around with Coca,PuMa, Bobmer being first timers. Should be interesting though. You can also add Huk, Select and Idra to that list. I believe every MLG has been one by a first timer.
I think you mean HuK, IdrA, and Jinro. SeleCT hasn't won one yet.
|
Did kiwikaki beat puma?? op did not update..
|
On August 28 2011 12:51 Kentakky wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:45 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:42 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:41 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:37 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote:
Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system... How the hell doesn't it make sense? DRG beat Select. It's as simple as that. Why can't people grasp the concept of head to head victories? It would make perfect sense if both players records' were exactly the same. If Select lost one individual match less than DRG, he should be ahead. But I already know that it's the way MLG works. I think it is wrong, but it's the way it is. He didn't lose one less individual match. He lost one less game. One game does not equal one match. Alright. Change the word "match" for the world "game", and my post will still have the same sense. Select lost one less game, so he should be ahead. That's the point to keep track of matches and games, in the player record. You're from Brazil so you must know something about football so look at it like this Look at the 8-2 vs 8-3 as goal differential in group stages of any football tourney. So if both teams are equal on points which team do you give the win too? You go by results from their match/es against eachother. If they're equal there it goes to goal differential and there you have it.
Well, usually, football competitions have goals difference and goals scored as tie-breakers, before head-to-head. It varies from country to country, of course, but usually works this way. And it only makes more sense to me, especially in the Starcraft world, as I need to win games, in order to win matches.
|
On August 28 2011 12:52 Kamikazess wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:48 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:45 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:42 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:41 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:37 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote:
Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system... How the hell doesn't it make sense? DRG beat Select. It's as simple as that. Why can't people grasp the concept of head to head victories? It would make perfect sense if both players records' were exactly the same. If Select lost one individual match less than DRG, he should be ahead. But I already know that it's the way MLG works. I think it is wrong, but it's the way it is. He didn't lose one less individual match. He lost one less game. One game does not equal one match. Alright. Change the word "match" for the world "game", and my post will still have the same sense. Select lost one less game, so he should be ahead. That's the point to keep track of matches and games, in the player record. So you're placing more emphasis on games where the whole point of a tournament is how many matches you win. I don't understand your logic and you obviously disagree with MLG's so I'm just gonna stop here. Actually, no, I'm not doing it. The most important record should always be matches. But in a direct sense, to win a Bo3 match, I have to win 2 games. So, I'm only saying that it makes more sense to games count to anything. But it's only a kind of philosophical discussion, not a "right or wrong" one. =)
The most important record should be series because you have to win series to move on. Winning 2-0 or 2-1 isn't that different because its all about winning series. They both were 4-1 and drg won the head to head. It makes perfect sense
|
On August 28 2011 12:53 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:53 KingPaddy wrote:On August 28 2011 12:50 jmbthirteen wrote:On August 28 2011 12:46 KingPaddy wrote:On August 28 2011 12:44 wats0n wrote:On August 28 2011 12:41 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:37 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote:
Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system... How the hell doesn't it make sense? DRG beat Select. It's as simple as that. Why can't people grasp the concept of head to head victories? It would make perfect sense if both players records' were exactly the same. If Select lost one individual match less than DRG, he should be ahead. But I already know that it's the way MLG works. I think it is wrong, but it's the way it is. The first tiebreaker is head to head. Considering you can lose a single map easily to the worst player in the pool it would be silly to make the first tiebreaker map results. It's correct the way it is. DRG beat Select so he won the tiebreaker. But you can easily be the overall better player, but have one bad matchup.. So in my opinion the overall performance should count more than the score of one single match. You really think the one more loss drg had is more weighted, even though he won the series, than a head to head match up? Exactly, because in group play it's not about the single matchup, but about the overall performance. The player who performed best in all the games they played should be first Except matches are more important and they were tied in matches therefore the head to head between two tied players is more important.
I guess this discussion is pointless, and no one involved will switch his mind.. 
|
On August 28 2011 12:55 TheHova wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:50 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:47 Toxi78 wrote:On August 28 2011 12:44 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:42 icarly wrote:On August 28 2011 12:40 tylermakesmusic wrote:
EG with 6 players in the Top 24. o_0 idra huk incontrol machine were given their spots from pool play. Actually no. Idra, Huk and Machine earned top 24 with how they played in pool play. Incontrol and Demuslim both had to win extra games to get top 24. I understand you're trying to bitch about MLG's pool play system, but honestly shut up. not only did you not follow the tournament at all, but you also do not understand how the system works, and you even insult someone that states the truth? does it get worse. Actually I followed the whole tournament and I fully understand how the system works. My point was if you get 6th in pool play, you are not guaranteed top 24. Kinda like what happened to Incontrol. Yes, Idra, Huk and Machine got top 24 easier than most because they are in pool play, but they are in pool play for a reason. They have past results. I think you are the one that doesn't understand the system. Does it get any worse? Because the seeds were first based on 1 single MLG that gave them a spot that is pretty hard to lose. Even the pro players themselves have stated this and said it should change. iNcontroL for example has had 1 good MLG. His last 3 have been awful. Going 1-20 during the last 2 alone in the groups. But the Pool play makes it practically impossible for him to lose his spot. He's even said this himself.
I agree to an extent. I think the players on the lower end of the pool play should be recycled with the top placing open bracket players every tourney but hey, MLG wants to have star power and this is the way they go about that.
|
Anna Prosser:
Sorry @Leahbjackson, I love you, but @EGiNcontroL is def gonna take this series against @coLdrewbie. <3
Leah Jackson:
@AnnaProsser well he had to win atleast one game this mlg
AnnaProsser Anna Prosser
@Leahbjackson wowowow... And I was just going to tell everyone how u would smoke me in the showmatch they called for.  touché my friend!
|
On August 28 2011 12:55 backtoback wrote:
Did kiwikaki beat puma?? op did not update..
Lost 1-2
|
On August 28 2011 12:55 MrSexington wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:54 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:53 holy_war wrote:
Naniwa/ MMA/ MVP all won MLG in their first MLG appearance. Looks like the same will happen this time around with Coca,PuMa, Bobmer being first timers. Should be interesting though. You can also add Huk, Select and Idra to that list. I believe every MLG has been one by a first timer. I think you mean HuK, IdrA, and Jinro. SeleCT hasn't won one yet.
Yup, my mistake.
|
On August 28 2011 12:57 Grantiere wrote:Anna Prosser: Sorry @Leahbjackson, I love you, but @EGiNcontroL is def gonna take this series against @coLdrewbie. <3 Leah Jackson: @AnnaProsser well he had to win atleast one game this mlg AnnaProsser Anna Prosser @Leahbjackson wowowow... And I was just going to tell everyone how u would smoke me in the showmatch they called for. touché my friend!
LOL catfight showmatch plz
|
On August 28 2011 12:54 wats0n wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:52 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:48 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:45 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:42 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:41 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:37 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote:
Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system... How the hell doesn't it make sense? DRG beat Select. It's as simple as that. Why can't people grasp the concept of head to head victories? It would make perfect sense if both players records' were exactly the same. If Select lost one individual match less than DRG, he should be ahead. But I already know that it's the way MLG works. I think it is wrong, but it's the way it is. He didn't lose one less individual match. He lost one less game. One game does not equal one match. Alright. Change the word "match" for the world "game", and my post will still have the same sense. Select lost one less game, so he should be ahead. That's the point to keep track of matches and games, in the player record. So you're placing more emphasis on games where the whole point of a tournament is how many matches you win. I don't understand your logic and you obviously disagree with MLG's so I'm just gonna stop here. Actually, no, I'm not doing it. The most important record should always be matches. But in a direct sense, to win a Bo3 match, I have to win 2 games. So, I'm only saying that it makes more sense to games count to anything. But it's only a kind of philosophical discussion, not a "right or wrong" one. =) Actually there is an answer and you're just wrong. SC2 is a game with a lot of variance. Even in Brood War the best players only win 60% of the time. Placing the first tiebreaker on maps instead of head to head would be moronic. There's too much randomness with spawns, people are playing on different maps (no constant map pool), and there is random cheesy all in play that can always steal a single game but not a match.
All the factors you talked about are part of the game. One player can cannon rush every single game, on every single map, against every single player. But, if one player can defend it better than the other, he should have the advantage, in the future.
|
On August 28 2011 12:57 tylermakesmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:55 TheHova wrote:On August 28 2011 12:50 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:47 Toxi78 wrote:On August 28 2011 12:44 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:42 icarly wrote:On August 28 2011 12:40 tylermakesmusic wrote:
EG with 6 players in the Top 24. o_0 idra huk incontrol machine were given their spots from pool play. Actually no. Idra, Huk and Machine earned top 24 with how they played in pool play. Incontrol and Demuslim both had to win extra games to get top 24. I understand you're trying to bitch about MLG's pool play system, but honestly shut up. not only did you not follow the tournament at all, but you also do not understand how the system works, and you even insult someone that states the truth? does it get worse. Actually I followed the whole tournament and I fully understand how the system works. My point was if you get 6th in pool play, you are not guaranteed top 24. Kinda like what happened to Incontrol. Yes, Idra, Huk and Machine got top 24 easier than most because they are in pool play, but they are in pool play for a reason. They have past results. I think you are the one that doesn't understand the system. Does it get any worse? Because the seeds were first based on 1 single MLG that gave them a spot that is pretty hard to lose. Even the pro players themselves have stated this and said it should change. iNcontroL for example has had 1 good MLG. His last 3 have been awful. Going 1-20 during the last 2 alone in the groups. But the Pool play makes it practically impossible for him to lose his spot. He's even said this himself. I agree to an extent. I think the players on the lower end of the pool play should be recycled with the top placing open bracket players every tourney but hey, MLG wants to have star power and this is the way they go about that.
It's fine long term i guess because MLG have already said they will change the system for next season. So they obviously recognise it's kinda stupid atm. But for the right now it's alittle sad to see and i do feel sorry for some of the open bracket players who must be exhausted when it comes to playing their pool play opponents at the end of a very long day for themselves.
|
Hope EG can make it far tomorrow, on a side note it's intesting to see what teams the remaining players are from.
6 EG
4 Liquid
3 Dignitas
2 Reign, Startale and MVP
1 Slayers, oGs (or is it SK?), Fnatic, FXO and coL
|
On August 28 2011 13:00 Kamikazess wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 12:54 wats0n wrote:On August 28 2011 12:52 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:48 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:45 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:42 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:41 Kamikazess wrote:On August 28 2011 12:37 tylermakesmusic wrote:On August 28 2011 12:29 Kamikazess wrote:
Well, it really doesn't make sense. They're both at 4-1, but Select with 8-2 and DRG with 8-3. So it couldn't be a tie. I think it's pretty silly the fact that individual matches doesn't make a difference. But it's the system... How the hell doesn't it make sense? DRG beat Select. It's as simple as that. Why can't people grasp the concept of head to head victories? It would make perfect sense if both players records' were exactly the same. If Select lost one individual match less than DRG, he should be ahead. But I already know that it's the way MLG works. I think it is wrong, but it's the way it is. He didn't lose one less individual match. He lost one less game. One game does not equal one match. Alright. Change the word "match" for the world "game", and my post will still have the same sense. Select lost one less game, so he should be ahead. That's the point to keep track of matches and games, in the player record. So you're placing more emphasis on games where the whole point of a tournament is how many matches you win. I don't understand your logic and you obviously disagree with MLG's so I'm just gonna stop here. Actually, no, I'm not doing it. The most important record should always be matches. But in a direct sense, to win a Bo3 match, I have to win 2 games. So, I'm only saying that it makes more sense to games count to anything. But it's only a kind of philosophical discussion, not a "right or wrong" one. =) Actually there is an answer and you're just wrong. SC2 is a game with a lot of variance. Even in Brood War the best players only win 60% of the time. Placing the first tiebreaker on maps instead of head to head would be moronic. There's too much randomness with spawns, people are playing on different maps (no constant map pool), and there is random cheesy all in play that can always steal a single game but not a match. All the factors you talked about are part of the game. One player can cannon rush every single game, on every single map, against every single player. But, if one player can defend it better than the other, he should have the advantage, in the future.
Maps are important. They are the 2nd tiebreaker. They are not more important than winning a head to head match which is 1st tiebreaker. I've already explained why.
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
Gogogo DeMuslim! Get in that Champion pool!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
