EPTOn June 17 2014 19:23 Ace Frehley wrote:
I guess violet takes this if polt did not improve his tvz by a lot
I guess violet takes this if polt did not improve his tvz by a lot
i disagree
[Red Bull BG] North America Day 1 - Page 59
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
Cluster__
United States328 Posts
i disagree | ||
|
Blargh
United States2103 Posts
On June 18 2014 10:07 Waise wrote: 3-3 is not better than 0-1, it's an incomplete sample. i agree that money for winning nothing is odd, but you can't say that someone who played 6 matches did "better" than someone who played only 1 and lost, it's not a scientific way to measure performance not sure what it has to do with anything that you didn't know the format beforehand as obviously the players must have known it In regards to the first part, of course, you cannot "fairly" compare a person who went 3-3 to someone who went 0-1, but it's also worth considering that those are players who lost to Puck, too. I'm too lazy to do the math and I'm not smart enough to know it via mental math, but if you were to calculate the remaining matches, I think by default, at least one person must get less than a 3-3 score, making them worse than Puck (if going by score... there are obviously repeat matches so the comparison is not entirely fair again). As for the second part, I was only using that as an example for why it would not be "sympathy money" because Puck played awesome. I consider it "fair money"! I'm sure the players knew the format ahead of time, but there would still be zero reason to decline participation because of it, as stated at the end of my post. It's a paid trip and he got a bit of money from the qualification tournament. I just think it'd be better if Puck got as much as everyone else. I had similar complaints about IEM's 100k 1st place all-or-none format as well. @Cheren's format suggestion: That still does not solve the initial issue that the beginning players are at a disadvantage, and as seen, can come out with no prize money despite playing really well and going 3-3. But that'd definitely be better! Currently, there is no reward for wins. I'd have much preferred each win being rewarded by $500 (similar to a king of the hill format from somewhere?). Since each player gets a chance to choose their opponent and to play once, it's a lot more fair, and I think it'd be a lot more interesting, too. Puck would come out of today with $1,500!!! | ||
|
Superbanana
2369 Posts
This tornament format favours the favourite, and bullies the underdog. Also the top seeds plays less games. Its fun, its different, but i think its a one time thing and should be avoided from now on. Edit: Its 100% fair if the players know the rules, and the prize distribution works for everyone since you get some to qualify, and some more to survive each day. | ||
|
BoBiNoU
France181 Posts
Seems fair | ||
Shellshock
United States97276 Posts
| ||
|
Xinzoe
Korea (South)2373 Posts
On June 18 2014 10:24 Shellshock wrote: Who will be the victim tomorrow? huk, the protoss hope | ||
|
SetGuitarsToKill
Canada28396 Posts
On June 18 2014 10:24 Shellshock wrote: Who will be the victim tomorrow? Depends on the pick order tomorrow. Scarlett goes first I guess? So whoever loses the first match. | ||
|
moskonia
Israel1448 Posts
| ||
|
zev318
Canada4306 Posts
| ||
|
Popkiller
3415 Posts
| ||
Yhamm
France7248 Posts
On June 18 2014 10:26 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: Depends on the pick order tomorrow. Scarlett goes first I guess? So whoever loses the first match. from what I understood in the Format article, Polt, who landed the KO will have the possibility to chose which player will be the next challenger. In scenarios where a player issues the knock-out blow to their opposition, the victor will then be able to choose which competitor issues the next challenge. | ||
|
geokilla
Canada8244 Posts
And how do you guys know that behind the scenes, they aren't splitting the money evenly? Or that there aren't any alliances like the format article stated? You're all guessing and reaching. They could be doing this to puCK on screen but behind the screen, everyone is just celebrating and having fun. Plus even if they aren't, puCK doesn't seem to mind so why do you? | ||
|
SetGuitarsToKill
Canada28396 Posts
On June 18 2014 10:32 Yhamm wrote: from what I understood in the Format article, Polt, who landed the KO will have the possibility to chose which player will be the next challenger. I wonder if that caries over to the next day. So if Polt picks, whoever loses to Polt is the next pinata for the rest of the players | ||
|
SidianTheBard
United States2474 Posts
Think about like, P: Parting, Rain, Zest, Classic, Stork T: Maru, Flash, Innovation, Bbyong, TY Z: Soulkey, Roro, Life, soO, JD Be interesting to have a last man standing with 3 (or 5!) lives. Or, maybe the Life thing is just "part 1" and whoever gets knocked out is seeded 16th place, etc etc all the way to whoever is the last one standing is seeded 1st and then it goes into a double elim based on those seeds or something. Or just make it so the same player can't be picked immediately after they had a game, so you can't all just gang up on 1 peron (although at that point you'd just gang up on the 2 people lol) Either way, the whole life thing is fairly interesting. | ||
|
Superbanana
2369 Posts
On June 18 2014 10:37 SetGuitarsToKill wrote: I wonder if that caries over to the next day. So if Polt picks, whoever loses to Polt is the next pinata for the rest of the players I understand that after the knock-out pick it follows the previous order again (Scarlett makes the challenge after whoever Polt chooses). That means if Polt picks himself he may play twice on day 2, not what he wants. If someone else dies before his game, and the winner does not choose him to play, then he can advance not playing at all. Every time somebody kills somebody, the favourite (read Polt) should be picked to play, putting his lives on the line. That is assuming no alliances. With that in mind Polt should challenge whoever picks him to play to discourage this behaviour. On day 3 everything changes, since its a "only first place matters" situation. They might just challenge the ones with more lives. | ||
|
Ace Frehley
2030 Posts
On June 18 2014 10:36 geokilla wrote: And how do you guys know that behind the scenes, they aren't splitting the money evenly? Or that there aren't any alliances like the format article stated? You're all guessing and reaching. They could be doing this to puCK on screen but behind the screen, everyone is just celebrating and having fun. Plus even if they aren't, puCK doesn't seem to mind so why do you? If we start to go this 'splitting money behind the scenes' route, it doesn't make sense to believe and watch any tournament. We have to assume from the start everybody (players and organizers) is being honest, until something proves otherwise. I think people just think odd some people winning matches and not getting anything (which is fine), and some others only losing and being rewarded. | ||
|
sick_transit
United States195 Posts
I think he had a great day and has a lot to be happy about. He made a great impression on a big audience many of whom probably weren't too familiar with him at the outset. He showed great attitude and sportsmanship. | ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19300 Posts
| ||
|
Zenbrez
Canada5973 Posts
| ||
|
bxc
35 Posts
Player A challenges Player B If Player A wins the best of 3, Player A wins $100. If Player B wins the best of 3, Player B wins $150. After 3 losses, the Player is out. Keep the format going until only one Player is left. This still promotes the same atmosphere of bullying that currently occurs in today's format (players trying to give themselves the highest probability of winning), but gives penalty to those that make poor challenges (doesn't win the prize money) while rewarding the underdog. The current format is just awful. | ||
| ||
