|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
On July 23 2012 03:48 Dodgin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:47 MCDayC wrote:On July 23 2012 03:43 Dodgin wrote:On July 23 2012 03:38 Robson13 wrote:On July 23 2012 03:36 Dodgin wrote:On July 23 2012 03:35 Robson13 wrote:On July 23 2012 03:33 Yaki wrote:On July 23 2012 03:32 Kurumi wrote:
I was away for like 10 minutes and it's already Game 4? What happened?! extended series This ISN'T extended series. This is normal double elimination rules. Eh? Alicia started up 2-1, It's extended series. Alicia came from the upper bracket, Oz from the lower bracket so Alicia gets an advantage This is actually not as good for Alicia as a normal double elim format would be, Oz would have to win 4 games and Alicia would have to win two, while Oz has to win 3 in this scenario. On July 23 2012 03:41 OtoshimonoU wrote:On July 23 2012 03:39 Shellshock1122 wrote:On July 23 2012 03:38 OtoshimonoU wrote:
How about we get rid of double elimination? People like exciting loser's bracket runs like Squirtle at IPL4 and First is doing a good job gaining fans right now Then they should stop complaining about extended series... You can't have both. Wow I wonder how every other tournament in existence that uses Double Elimination survives without extended series then. Actually I'm pretty sure Oz has to win this Bo7 from behind due to extended series, then win another series (whether Bo3, 5 or 7 I don't know) due to double elim. People shouldn't stop complaining about Extended series imo, mindless whining is of course dumb, but its such a silly, unfun and kinda unfair way to run the tournament that people should still be letting MLG know that they don't want it. Oz has to win the bo7 being down in extended series then win another series? lol
96.5% sure. Otherwise there would be no advantage of winning the winners finals, it would just be like a conventional meeting between two players who have played previously, I think the casters got it wrong.
If its not its actually even more stupid, because then not having an extended series would actually be an advantage going into the double elim bracket grand finals. T_T
|
On July 23 2012 03:49 Dfgj wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:48 -TesteR- wrote:On July 23 2012 03:47 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:46 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:44 yeint wrote:
Fairness is a value judgment, you can't claim that something is "mathematically fair".
Yes, rules need to be mathematically consistent, but consistency alone doesn't constitute fairness. But it's still fair in that it applies to everyone equally. Good to hear that there's no such thing as imbalance, since units apply to everyone evenly. We can finally shut down all balance arguments! Only applies to mirror match ups! Mirror matches prove total balance, duh. Zergs have to deal with Broodlords, so how can T or P complain about broods?
Zergs have broodlords to deal with broodlords, T or P does not.
|
On July 23 2012 03:50 bucckevin wrote:
Alicia went through the upper bracket to get a 1 game advantage ;0 in the final bracket?
while taeja will get 2 .... MLG and their system
|
|
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On July 23 2012 03:49 Dfgj wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:48 -TesteR- wrote:On July 23 2012 03:47 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:46 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:44 yeint wrote:
Fairness is a value judgment, you can't claim that something is "mathematically fair".
Yes, rules need to be mathematically consistent, but consistency alone doesn't constitute fairness. But it's still fair in that it applies to everyone equally. Good to hear that there's no such thing as imbalance, since units apply to everyone evenly. We can finally shut down all balance arguments! Only applies to mirror match ups! Mirror matches prove total balance, duh. Zergs have to deal with Broodlords, so how can T or P complain about broods?
Because of how production works overseers are broken in ZvZ and slightly less broken in ZvT/P so Zergs have a right to QQ about Overseers!
|
On July 23 2012 03:49 Lukeeze[zR] wrote:
wheat talking, woot
Haha I love Wheat, but that analysis pretty much went like this:
Wheat: Axslav is going to make some cogent points now.
Axslav: As you can see, I'm incredibly sexy and know what the hell I'm talking about.
Wheat: Yup. Back to you guys!
|
Why are Artosis and Apollo talking like it's over after this next game if Oz wins? It would seem rather weird if Alica doesn't go down to the losers bracket and get's another shot even if he loses this next game.
|
Heey guys I dont really get the bracket from MLG. Alicia is from the upper bracket, but what if he loses here? Doesnt he have the chance to go to a losers bracket? Seems a bit unfair to me, but maybe I am wrong. Can anybody explain please?
Edit; Please pm btw, these live threads go so fast its hard to check all the comments.
Thanks!!
|
On July 23 2012 03:50 bucckevin wrote:
Alicia went through the upper bracket to get a 1 game advantage ;0 in the final bracket?
A lot of tournaments (eg. the $1m DOTA 2 tournament) use this structure, as it adds more intrigue as opposed to giving the person from the WB a pretty big lead (eg. one series), making the finals less exciting.
|
so taeja has no advantage vs first even tough first has already lost a series and taeja hasn't, that's just retarded. Why can't mlg use dubble elim rules like all other tournaments out there, which works fine..
|
On July 23 2012 03:50 ne4aJIb wrote:
please no pvp finals
We should consider it a good appetizer for the upcoming tournaments.
|
Am I the only one who thinks that Apollo and Artosis should tighten their ties? 
|
On July 23 2012 03:50 -TesteR- wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:49 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:48 -TesteR- wrote:On July 23 2012 03:47 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:46 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:44 yeint wrote:
Fairness is a value judgment, you can't claim that something is "mathematically fair".
Yes, rules need to be mathematically consistent, but consistency alone doesn't constitute fairness. But it's still fair in that it applies to everyone equally. Good to hear that there's no such thing as imbalance, since units apply to everyone evenly. We can finally shut down all balance arguments! Only applies to mirror match ups! Mirror matches prove total balance, duh. Zergs have to deal with Broodlords, so how can T or P complain about broods? Zergs have broodlords to deal with broodlords, T or P does not.
Broodlord vs Broodlord must be an interesting fight.
|
On July 23 2012 03:50 -TesteR- wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:49 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:48 -TesteR- wrote:On July 23 2012 03:47 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:46 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:44 yeint wrote:
Fairness is a value judgment, you can't claim that something is "mathematically fair".
Yes, rules need to be mathematically consistent, but consistency alone doesn't constitute fairness. But it's still fair in that it applies to everyone equally. Good to hear that there's no such thing as imbalance, since units apply to everyone evenly. We can finally shut down all balance arguments! Only applies to mirror match ups! Mirror matches prove total balance, duh. Zergs have to deal with Broodlords, so how can T or P complain about broods? Zergs have broodlords to deal with broodlords, T or P does not.
Who cares about specific circumstances and whether a race is disadvantaged? Apparently that doesn't apply to fairness, only that the units are the same for everyone.
|
i'm not going to be convinced by alicia until he wins another non pvp series against someone good (the only one I can remember being alicia vs mkp)
|
On July 23 2012 03:50 MCDayC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:48 Dodgin wrote:On July 23 2012 03:47 MCDayC wrote:On July 23 2012 03:43 Dodgin wrote:On July 23 2012 03:38 Robson13 wrote:On July 23 2012 03:36 Dodgin wrote:On July 23 2012 03:35 Robson13 wrote:On July 23 2012 03:33 Yaki wrote:On July 23 2012 03:32 Kurumi wrote:
I was away for like 10 minutes and it's already Game 4? What happened?! extended series This ISN'T extended series. This is normal double elimination rules. Eh? Alicia started up 2-1, It's extended series. Alicia came from the upper bracket, Oz from the lower bracket so Alicia gets an advantage This is actually not as good for Alicia as a normal double elim format would be, Oz would have to win 4 games and Alicia would have to win two, while Oz has to win 3 in this scenario. On July 23 2012 03:41 OtoshimonoU wrote:On July 23 2012 03:39 Shellshock1122 wrote:On July 23 2012 03:38 OtoshimonoU wrote:
How about we get rid of double elimination? People like exciting loser's bracket runs like Squirtle at IPL4 and First is doing a good job gaining fans right now Then they should stop complaining about extended series... You can't have both. Wow I wonder how every other tournament in existence that uses Double Elimination survives without extended series then. Actually I'm pretty sure Oz has to win this Bo7 from behind due to extended series, then win another series (whether Bo3, 5 or 7 I don't know) due to double elim. People shouldn't stop complaining about Extended series imo, mindless whining is of course dumb, but its such a silly, unfun and kinda unfair way to run the tournament that people should still be letting MLG know that they don't want it. Oz has to win the bo7 being down in extended series then win another series? lol 96.5% sure. Otherwise there would be no advantage of winning the winners finals, it would just be like a conventional meeting between two players who have played previously, I think the casters got it wrong. If its not its actually even more stupid, because then not having an extended series would actually be an advantage going into the double elim bracket grand finals. T_T
Seriously?
That's just stupid... poor Oz. Then again I like Alicia more so meh.
Hoping Taeja/First will be more exciting though, Oz has rolled Alicia pretty convincingly these first two games.
|
On July 23 2012 03:52 Broodwurst wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:50 -TesteR- wrote:On July 23 2012 03:49 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:48 -TesteR- wrote:On July 23 2012 03:47 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:46 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:44 yeint wrote:
Fairness is a value judgment, you can't claim that something is "mathematically fair".
Yes, rules need to be mathematically consistent, but consistency alone doesn't constitute fairness. But it's still fair in that it applies to everyone equally. Good to hear that there's no such thing as imbalance, since units apply to everyone evenly. We can finally shut down all balance arguments! Only applies to mirror match ups! Mirror matches prove total balance, duh. Zergs have to deal with Broodlords, so how can T or P complain about broods? Zergs have broodlords to deal with broodlords, T or P does not. Broodlord vs Broodlord must be an interesting fight.
It's absolutely hilarious to watch.
|
artosis/apollo... or day9/wheat.
hmm
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On July 23 2012 03:53 Dfgj wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:52 Broodwurst wrote:On July 23 2012 03:50 -TesteR- wrote:On July 23 2012 03:49 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:48 -TesteR- wrote:On July 23 2012 03:47 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:46 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:44 yeint wrote:
Fairness is a value judgment, you can't claim that something is "mathematically fair".
Yes, rules need to be mathematically consistent, but consistency alone doesn't constitute fairness. But it's still fair in that it applies to everyone equally. Good to hear that there's no such thing as imbalance, since units apply to everyone evenly. We can finally shut down all balance arguments! Only applies to mirror match ups! Mirror matches prove total balance, duh. Zergs have to deal with Broodlords, so how can T or P complain about broods? Zergs have broodlords to deal with broodlords, T or P does not. Broodlord vs Broodlord must be an interesting fight. It's absolutely hilarious to watch.
I saw a 400 kill broodlord from that...
|
On July 23 2012 03:53 Dfgj wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2012 03:52 Broodwurst wrote:On July 23 2012 03:50 -TesteR- wrote:On July 23 2012 03:49 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:48 -TesteR- wrote:On July 23 2012 03:47 Dfgj wrote:On July 23 2012 03:46 FairForever wrote:On July 23 2012 03:44 yeint wrote:
Fairness is a value judgment, you can't claim that something is "mathematically fair".
Yes, rules need to be mathematically consistent, but consistency alone doesn't constitute fairness. But it's still fair in that it applies to everyone equally. Good to hear that there's no such thing as imbalance, since units apply to everyone evenly. We can finally shut down all balance arguments! Only applies to mirror match ups! Mirror matches prove total balance, duh. Zergs have to deal with Broodlords, so how can T or P complain about broods? Zergs have broodlords to deal with broodlords, T or P does not. Broodlord vs Broodlord must be an interesting fight. It's absolutely hilarious to watch.
It's up there with Resto Druid vs Resto Druid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
