EPT[DreamHack] Winter 2014 - Day 1 - Page 115
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
Olli
Austria24420 Posts
| ||
|
XTerm
Norway3 Posts
 | ||
|
SC2Toastie
Netherlands5725 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:15 DarkLordOlli wrote: HerO vs Taeja teamkill -____________________________________________- -_____________________________________________________________- indeed T_T | ||
|
Lorning
Belgica34432 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:15 DarkLordOlli wrote: HerO vs Taeja teamkill -____________________________________________- Perrrrrrrrfect | ||
|
sigm
192 Posts
| ||
|
henkalv
Norway4 Posts
| ||
|
BlackCompany
Germany8388 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:21 henkalv wrote: While I do not think the current solution is bad I just wish that they would have done a Bo1 tiebreaker round for a situation like this. Less salt and more entertainment, everybody wins This is probably the ideal scenario, but i guess they dont want to or cant invest the extra time. Plus the players gotta play tomorrow aswell and need some sleep | ||
|
Makro
France16890 Posts
| ||
|
KtJ
United States3514 Posts
| ||
|
Supersamu
Germany296 Posts
There are different Tournament systems for different things. The question is what Probability do you want to have that the best Player wins 1st place? What Probability do you want to have that the 2nd best Player wins 2nd Place? What Probability do you want to have that the 2nd best Player wins 1st Place? All these questions need to be answered before deciding on a Tournament Format. I am not sure what Dreamhack's goals are with the Tournament, but they can use whatever system they like and you agreed to that by paying for Impact's flight. There is no need to whine now when it didn't go as planned. | ||
|
Xoronius
Germany6362 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:21 henkalv wrote: While I do not think the current solution is bad I just wish that they would have done a Bo1 tiebreaker round for a situation like this. Less salt and more entertainment, everybody wins The problem is, that that isn't fair either. Giving someone, who went 6-4 and someone, who went 5-6 the same conditions to advance is unfair for the 6-4-guy. In each format there will be someone salty at the end, one can't please everyone. | ||
|
SC2Toastie
Netherlands5725 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:25 Xoronius wrote: The problem is, that that isn't fair either. Giving someone, who went 6-4 and someone, who went 5-6 the same conditions to advance is unfair for the 6-4-guy. In each format there will be someone salty at the end, one can't please everyone. A round robin of best of 15s theoretically has a lower chance of tieing :-)? | ||
|
Xoronius
Germany6362 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:26 SC2Toastie wrote: A round robin of best of 15s theoretically has a lower chance of tieing :-)? Hmm, I'm not sure, if that is an ideal solution, but in the end of the day that means more Round Robin, so count me in. On November 28 2014 07:25 Supersamu wrote: After seeing all these posts from Totalbiscuit, I am starting to wonder about his professionalism. There are different Tournament systems for different things. The question is what Probability do you want to have that the best Player wins 1st place? What Probability do you want to have that the 2nd best Player wins 2nd Place? What Probability do you want to have that the 2nd best Player wins 1st Place? All these questions need to be answered before deciding on a Tournament Format. I am not sure what Dreamhack's goals are with the Tournament, but they can use whatever system they like and you agreed to that by paying for Impact's flight. There is no need to whine now when it didn't go as planned. We shouldn't completely silence important figures of the community, just because of sponsors looking at them. TB has every right to complain (although he is wrong here), just as every other TL user has. At the end of the day, a forum is there to have a discussion as well. | ||
|
henkalv
Norway4 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:25 Xoronius wrote: The problem is, that that isn't fair either. Giving someone, who went 6-4 and someone, who went 5-6 the same conditions to advance is unfair for the 6-4-guy. In each format there will be someone salty at the end, one can't please everyone. A problem with this is that one of them has played fewer games then the other though. If you are gonna decide this by map score then having some players play fewer maps then the others just because the maps they won came in succsesion makes no sense EDIT: Also yes, I happen to be salty as the sea because Snute was eliminated | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:25 Xoronius wrote: The problem is, that that isn't fair either. Giving someone, who went 6-4 and someone, who went 5-6 the same conditions to advance is unfair for the 6-4-guy. In each format there will be someone salty at the end, one can't please everyone. They should just play all 3 games no matter the score, so we have rather easy comparable map scores at the end of a group stage | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:32 Xoronius wrote: Hmm, I'm not sure, if that is an ideal solution, but in the end of the day that means more Round Robin, so count me in. We shouldn't completely silence important figures of the community, just because of sponsors looking at them. TB has every right to complain (although he is wrong here), just as every other TL user has. At the end of the day, a forum is there to have a discussion as well. It reminds me my cousin who whenever he lost started to change the rules of the game. In the end we played the game, which could be called "I win"(I = the cousin). He was 5 years old back then, I had a vacation, for the sakes of my nerves I left it be. TL teamkill, evergreen :-) | ||
|
KingofdaHipHop
United States25602 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:32 Xoronius wrote: We shouldn't completely silence important figures of the community, just because of sponsors looking at them. TB has every right to complain (although he is wrong here), just as every other TL user has. At the end of the day, a forum is there to have a discussion as well. You just discredited your argument by saying something like that so hard. | ||
|
Xoronius
Germany6362 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:32 henkalv wrote: A problem with this is that one of them has played fewer games then the other though. If you are gonna decide this by map score then having some players play fewer maps then the others just because the maps they won came in succsesion makes no sense I don't see the problem here to be honest. You can just view the series as +2/+1 instead of 2:0/2:1 and you have a clear view at who performed better. Your point would come in if the players would play a lot more maps, so that a +2-mapscore could mean a lower winrate than a +3 for example, but I don't think, that that comes into play here. Edit: On November 28 2014 07:37 KingofdaHipHop wrote: You just discredited your argument by saying something like that so hard. Add an IMHO, if you like it better in that case. I wanted to make sure, that this post can't be misinterpreted as me switching sides. That being said, I think, that wrong opinions have a right to be stated, since something positive might come out of the dialogue provoked by them. | ||
|
Die4Ever
United States17680 Posts
On November 28 2014 07:37 Xoronius wrote: I don't see the problem here to be honest. You can just view the series as +2/+1 instead of 2:0/2:1 and you have a clear view at who performed better. Your point would come in if the players would play a lot more maps, so that a +2-mapscore could mean a lower winrate than a +3 for example, but I don't think, that that comes into play here. if you're that concerned about the order of map wins, maybe you should look at the win % instead, Snute and Impact were the only sub-50% map win players in the group, and they were the only 2 to be eliminated, makes sense to me | ||
|
Deleted User 261926
960 Posts
| ||
| ||
