On July 07 2012 06:09 SilentSC2 wrote: If its a three way tie who makes it out? MVP won against Golden, Golden won against monchi, and monchi won against MVP...? And they would all have the same map scores... Do they just play again?
Pretty sure that if Mvp wins 2-0, he and Golden make it out. If he wins 2-1, it's a tie. If he loses, it's Golden and Monchi.
Ya I understand that, what I'm trying to say is that if MVP wins 2-1, what will happen to decide who make it out?
I can't find information on this, but the only reasonable choices are regames or drawing of lots. (Yeah I can hear you all gagging at the latter.)
They'll probably do Bo1's between the 3. This has happened before in hsc if im not mistaken
On July 07 2012 05:58 CosmicSpiral wrote: Maybe people need to start accepting that Mvp is not the best player in the world anymore.
Just like they accepted before GSL October. Or before last GSL.
Win one GSL and suddenly you're the best player in the world. Good logic. I remember when the thread monsters were slobbering all over Jjakji because of one fantastic run. Where did his other championships go?
No, win 4 GSLs and you're the best player. That's the point, just because he doesn't win every single tournament he enters doesn't mean he's suddenly not the best player anymore.
He isn't the best player anykmore because he cannot consistently beat everybody else, which is what the best player does. Honestly it's embarrassing when people just call x or y the best player, do they understand how utterly dominant you must be to be considered for the title? Mvp doesn't possess that dominance anymore.
I don't think this holds. At any one time, someone must be best (by definition), even if we can't clearly tell who. However, it is not given that at any one time someone must necessarily dominate everyone else. Whatever happened to the first-among-equals situation?
That's a false assumption. "Being the best" is a judgment call created by people based on outside evidence, not some intuitive ranking system that naturally exists. If there is no sustainable argument for any single individual (based on subjective criteria, no less) then nobody occupies that position. Right now anyone can trash anyone in the KR scene and they are doing it on a regular basis.
Am I the only one who thinks European tourney group formats are always not clear when there's a 2-way tie, 3-way tie, map score first or head-to-head first, or all these silly things at the end of a group that no one even figures out what's first and what's second? it's also pretty hard to find the written rules.
On July 07 2012 06:10 Toadvine wrote: I used to think buffing Fungal was a good way to make the Zerg midgame more solid back in 2011. In retrospect, I should've predicted it would result in retarded crap like this.
i, for one, preferred when fungal was more of a long ensnare for stalling, but there's no other way to be even remotely cost efficient with your units as zerg if you don't have somewhat of a DPSing fungal. with the way pathing and clumping works, zergs would have to rely solely on banes which can be countered/absorbed a lot easier.
What if it just reduced movement speed by a lot though, instead of freezing? I just find fungal so boring to watch in game, because I know that no matter how skilled at micro the opponent is there's nothing he can do once his units get hit. Spreading pre-emtively is cool I guess, but not nearly as interesting as storm dodging, baneling splitting, lifting units over forcefields, flanking so marauders can't abuse concussive, etc.