|
On July 23 2012 03:21 FairForever wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:20 yeint wrote:On July 23 2012 03:17 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:15 Darpa wrote:On July 23 2012 03:14 tree.hugger wrote:On July 23 2012 03:12 Yaki wrote:
Is MLG going to remove extended series some day ? I mean are they just keeping it to annoy everyone ? I see no valid point in keeping it and it is really unfair. Ironically, the only positive of extended series is actually that it is fair. Pretty much this, its gives the person who won an advantage and the person who lost a disadvantage, how is that no fair. You don't understand what fair means. It's fair but it's stupid. Saying that the person who lost the match starts with a 2-0 advantage in the extended series (instead of the winner) is also fair. But it's also stupid. What? No, that's NOT fair. It's fair to give an advantage to the player who already beat the guy once, it's not fair to do the opposite. If player A and player B meet in round 7, and player B loses, it's decidedly unfair to let player B get a clean slate in round 3 if they meet again. The only problem with extended series is that it makes for terribad finals. You don't understand what fair means. It's still fair. I hate Extended Series and hope they get rid of it. Just tree.hugger based his post on semantics (the word "fair"), and none of you understand. Trust me, my name has the word "fair" in it, I know what it means.
If 2 players meet in the winners bracket and player A beats player B, then play B loses against player C in the winners bracket, player A and player B meet again in the losers bracket and they should start at 0-0 because they both lost once in the winners bracket and their first match should be irrevelant. That's how I see it but I might be wrong.
|
Oz is on full beast mode right now.
|
No death animations is really starting to annoy me 
|
|
|
On July 23 2012 03:23 nojok wrote:
I don't think the extended series rule is fair, double elimination bracket means to me that if you lose twice you're out but a player getting the advantage because of this rule can lose twice and still be in. How is this fair?
Starcraft is a game of limited information. If two players have met once, they've played their hand, and the winner has shown his best, winning strategy. The loser now knows what that strategy is, and can counter it specifically. Thereby, if the same players meet again, the loser needs to win more games, to remove that advantage.
|
this is the first game I've noticed missing death animations, has that been going on the whole arena?
|
I think the extended series is fine since the loser bracket is more of a chance at redemption rather than "penalty." Not too many tournaments (in any sports really) out there allow you to still compete for the first place while having lost a series already.
|
On July 23 2012 03:23 figq wrote:
One of the silly aspects of extended series (when it comes to Starcraft particularly - which this system wasn't designed for) is that it awards the gimmicky player who wins the first games in a long series, and punishes the intelligent player who figures his opponent's style, adapts and starts winning in the later games of a long series.
We have seen amazing comebacks under the extended series rule. If a loss truly was a fluke, a player can always make it back. The problem with players meeting twice in the same tournament is that the result is likely to be the same the second time they meet, because the better player usually wins and circumstances are unlikely to change overnight.
|
On July 23 2012 03:26 parazice wrote:
PvP
mind game or coin flip
or
>.>
<.<
CARRIERS
|
On July 23 2012 03:22 yeint wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:21 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:20 yeint wrote:On July 23 2012 03:17 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:15 Darpa wrote:On July 23 2012 03:14 tree.hugger wrote:On July 23 2012 03:12 Yaki wrote:
Is MLG going to remove extended series some day ? I mean are they just keeping it to annoy everyone ? I see no valid point in keeping it and it is really unfair. Ironically, the only positive of extended series is actually that it is fair. Pretty much this, its gives the person who won an advantage and the person who lost a disadvantage, how is that no fair. You don't understand what fair means. It's fair but it's stupid. Saying that the person who lost the match starts with a 2-0 advantage in the extended series (instead of the winner) is also fair. But it's also stupid. What? No, that's NOT fair. It's fair to give an advantage to the player who already beat the guy once, it's not fair to do the opposite. If player A and player B meet in round 7, and player B loses, it's decidedly unfair to let player B get a clean slate in round 3 if they meet again. The only problem with extended series is that it makes for terribad finals. You don't understand what fair means. It's still fair. I hate Extended Series and hope they get rid of it. Just tree.hugger based his post on semantics (the word "fair"), and none of you understand. Trust me, my name has the word "fair" in it, I know what it means. I wish my name had "facedesk" in it, because it's what I'm doing right now.
Fair in that it applies to everyone.
|
On July 23 2012 03:26 Yaki wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:21 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:20 yeint wrote:On July 23 2012 03:17 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:15 Darpa wrote:On July 23 2012 03:14 tree.hugger wrote:On July 23 2012 03:12 Yaki wrote:
Is MLG going to remove extended series some day ? I mean are they just keeping it to annoy everyone ? I see no valid point in keeping it and it is really unfair. Ironically, the only positive of extended series is actually that it is fair. Pretty much this, its gives the person who won an advantage and the person who lost a disadvantage, how is that no fair. You don't understand what fair means. It's fair but it's stupid. Saying that the person who lost the match starts with a 2-0 advantage in the extended series (instead of the winner) is also fair. But it's also stupid. What? No, that's NOT fair. It's fair to give an advantage to the player who already beat the guy once, it's not fair to do the opposite. If player A and player B meet in round 7, and player B loses, it's decidedly unfair to let player B get a clean slate in round 3 if they meet again. The only problem with extended series is that it makes for terribad finals. You don't understand what fair means. It's still fair. I hate Extended Series and hope they get rid of it. Just tree.hugger based his post on semantics (the word "fair"), and none of you understand. Trust me, my name has the word "fair" in it, I know what it means. If 2 players meet in the winners bracket and player A beats player B, then play B loses against player C in the winners bracket, player A and player B meet again in the losers bracket and they should start at 0-0 because they both lost once in the winners bracket and their first match should be irrevelant. That's how I see it but I might be wrong.
I'm going to assume you meant Player A lost against Player C, since that would make logical sense.
Let's say all the games were 2-0, for simplicity's sake.
Player A now has a 2-0 lead on Player B. This is stupid.
BUT: Equally as likely, Player B could've beaten Player A and had a 2-0 lead on Player A.
So it goes both ways - the rule is fair.
Again, I hate extended series and want it gone, but as tree.hugger said, the one thing about the rule that is okay is it is applied equally to all players, hence fair.
|
|
|
On July 23 2012 03:26 yeint wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:23 nojok wrote:
I don't think the extended series rule is fair, double elimination bracket means to me that if you lose twice you're out but a player getting the advantage because of this rule can lose twice and still be in. How is this fair? Starcraft is a game of limited information. If two players have met once, they've played their hand, and the winner has shown his best, winning strategy. The loser now knows what that strategy is, and can counter it specifically. Thereby, if the same players meet again, the loser needs to win more games, to remove that advantage.
Didn't they say that it's specifically about not being able to get knocked out by one player even though you didn't have a worse head to head score?
|
On July 23 2012 03:25 FairForever wrote:
But extended series is technically, as tree.hugger said, fair. .
No it's not, a player starts with a advantage in a new match. Advantage = not fair, simple as that.
|
On July 23 2012 03:27 Kirbtacular wrote:
oh djwheat
i know right. :D
Axslav let him speak please!
|
On July 23 2012 03:26 yeint wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:23 nojok wrote:
I don't think the extended series rule is fair, double elimination bracket means to me that if you lose twice you're out but a player getting the advantage because of this rule can lose twice and still be in. How is this fair? Starcraft is a game of limited information. If two players have met once, they've played their hand, and the winner has shown his best, winning strategy. The loser now knows what that strategy is, and can counter it specifically. Thereby, if the same players meet again, the loser needs to win more games, to remove that advantage.
yep, it's fairly common at high levels to actually lose the first games/series in order to squeeze out more info
|
wheat wants to say something so bad :D
|
On July 23 2012 03:26 yeint wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:23 nojok wrote:
I don't think the extended series rule is fair, double elimination bracket means to me that if you lose twice you're out but a player getting the advantage because of this rule can lose twice and still be in. How is this fair? Starcraft is a game of limited information. If two players have met once, they've played their hand, and the winner has shown his best, winning strategy. The loser now knows what that strategy is, and can counter it specifically. Thereby, if the same players meet again, the loser needs to win more games, to remove that advantage.
This would be true if pro players were dumb and had only one build. Because this is not the case i don't really know what you're trying to say here.
|
On July 23 2012 03:27 -TesteR- wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:22 yeint wrote:On July 23 2012 03:21 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:20 yeint wrote:On July 23 2012 03:17 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:15 Darpa wrote:On July 23 2012 03:14 tree.hugger wrote:On July 23 2012 03:12 Yaki wrote:
Is MLG going to remove extended series some day ? I mean are they just keeping it to annoy everyone ? I see no valid point in keeping it and it is really unfair. Ironically, the only positive of extended series is actually that it is fair. Pretty much this, its gives the person who won an advantage and the person who lost a disadvantage, how is that no fair. You don't understand what fair means. It's fair but it's stupid. Saying that the person who lost the match starts with a 2-0 advantage in the extended series (instead of the winner) is also fair. But it's also stupid. What? No, that's NOT fair. It's fair to give an advantage to the player who already beat the guy once, it's not fair to do the opposite. If player A and player B meet in round 7, and player B loses, it's decidedly unfair to let player B get a clean slate in round 3 if they meet again. The only problem with extended series is that it makes for terribad finals. You don't understand what fair means. It's still fair. I hate Extended Series and hope they get rid of it. Just tree.hugger based his post on semantics (the word "fair"), and none of you understand. Trust me, my name has the word "fair" in it, I know what it means. I wish my name had "facedesk" in it, because it's what I'm doing right now. Fair in that it applies to everyone.
Pretty much this. Just add "equally" at the end and that would essentially be why it is fair.
|
On July 23 2012 03:27 -TesteR- wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:22 yeint wrote:On July 23 2012 03:21 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:20 yeint wrote:On July 23 2012 03:17 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:15 Darpa wrote:On July 23 2012 03:14 tree.hugger wrote:On July 23 2012 03:12 Yaki wrote:
Is MLG going to remove extended series some day ? I mean are they just keeping it to annoy everyone ? I see no valid point in keeping it and it is really unfair. Ironically, the only positive of extended series is actually that it is fair. Pretty much this, its gives the person who won an advantage and the person who lost a disadvantage, how is that no fair. You don't understand what fair means. It's fair but it's stupid. Saying that the person who lost the match starts with a 2-0 advantage in the extended series (instead of the winner) is also fair. But it's also stupid. What? No, that's NOT fair. It's fair to give an advantage to the player who already beat the guy once, it's not fair to do the opposite. If player A and player B meet in round 7, and player B loses, it's decidedly unfair to let player B get a clean slate in round 3 if they meet again. The only problem with extended series is that it makes for terribad finals. You don't understand what fair means. It's still fair. I hate Extended Series and hope they get rid of it. Just tree.hugger based his post on semantics (the word "fair"), and none of you understand. Trust me, my name has the word "fair" in it, I know what it means. I wish my name had "facedesk" in it, because it's what I'm doing right now. Fair in that it applies to everyone.
Something applying to everyone isn't automatically fair. Let's say a company decides to promote 10 people. Is it fair to ignore seniority or prior performance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
