|
United States7481 Posts
On December 03 2010 02:10 CidO wrote:
It's simple - SC2 isn't Halo. We're not all 14 year old boys wearing backwards baseball caps and calling each other 'bro' and 'bra'. Not having extended series works out in itself. There should be no advantages given to anyone. No 'champions' bracket where straight ripping automatically advances. The better player doesn't need the tournament rigging the tourney. FFS, no poopy added to your pants if you happen to come across the same player a second time, or hell, maybe a 3rd time.
This is different from making sure Nony & Idra don't play each other in Ro64. That was done correctly, the seeding based off of rank.
If they can't get a winners and losers bracket working then switch to group play. Top 2 advance and then you bracket off after that. You can finish group play on day 1 & run the bracket on Day 2/3.
champions bracket is not that much different from osl/msl player seeds.
|
United States22883 Posts
On December 03 2010 00:18 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
noise isolating earphones work great, especially when you have music playing. cant hear anything around you. but probably most people aren't comfortable with them since you kinda insert them into your ears as opposed to earbuds that just hang on your ear.
What about earbuds (any type) + closed air headphones?
I know one issue is SteelSeries Siberias are used everywhere, but they're open air headphones which are terrible for blocking noise. Forcing closed air headphones would probably go a long way.
|
I have to agree with Incontrol on the issue of extended series. I think the psychological traces of having lost the series before are enough of a penalty. It's actually more exiting to have the next series start at 0-0, both for the players and for the viewers.
|
On December 03 2010 02:46 SoftMachine wrote:
I have to agree with Incontrol on the issue of extended series. I think the psychological traces of having lost the series before are enough of a penalty. It's actually more exiting to have the next series start at 0-0, both for the players and for the viewers.
Word. Plus the fact that the player coming from the losers bracket has had to play alot more games.
|
The Malazan books start out very good, but it feels like he's gotten too popular for his own good (much like GRRM), and the past few volumes he's apparently decided he's so awesome he needs no editor, and instead we get to enjoy about 50% garbage text that could be cut out with no loss.
There are better authors out there, but it's hard to recommend an entire series. Try "The Lions of Al-Rassan" by Guy Gavriel Kay, or "Lord of Light" by Roger Zelazny, for some superb stuff. For those in dire need of brilliant action, check out "Heroes Die" by Matthew Woodring Stover.
This episode of SotG was the worst I've listened to yet, mostly because I'm so fucking tired of the extended series discussion (so I had to skip the entire first hour), but also because I couldn't stand the incessant microphone-scratching coming from Incontrol. I know it's a goofy amateur show, but at least try to give some modicum of consideration to us listeners. Mute him faster next time, and stop blaming Skype.
|
On December 03 2010 00:43 HwangjaeTerran wrote:
The debate about extended series was highly interesting and I gave it some thought while I was on a walk.
I came to the conclusion that extended series is not really fair. The idea of double elim is that you have one "life", lose twice and you are out. The further you go in a tournament before losing the less people you have to beat in a row to make it to finals. This is something that only your performance affects.
Extended series brings a random element to your tournament success.
We got two players: Geoff and Tyler - and two groups of players: A & B.
Group A are people who have all lost to Geoff, group B in turn to Tyler. These two players play against each other. If Geoff makes it to the finals undefeated, whole group A's chances of winning the tournament are worse compared to group B while everyone apart from Geoff have one thing in common: they have lost one match. As a group A player your success in the tournament is determined by a random element: how well Geoff and everyone he faces perform.
Funny thing is to note: the further into the brackets you are before losing your first match, the higher the chance you have to face your victor is. If you lose your first match, it's highly unlikely you will have to start from deficit. Shouldn't you be rewarded for making it further undefeated?
In double elim tournament, everyone except for one have used their extra "life" before the grand finals. The undefeated player is the only one who "suffers", if you want to make the tournament compeletely fair he would start the finals in a lead regardless to the opponent.
That is how it works regardless of the extended series.
The extended series rule that MLG uses has nothing to do with what you are talking about.
The player in the Finals that came through the upper bracket without losing a series has to be beaten in 2 Bo3, or more specifically a Bo7 in the finals. The player coming from the lower bracket has already lost one series thus has only one more "life" with the player from the upper bracket only having to win a Bo3, which in practice means the finals will always start 2:0 in a Bo7 in favour of the undefeated player from the upper bracket.
Also your so called "random element" is not a random element, the results of matches are not "random elements" they are the facts, they are the scores, they are a actual record of what happened not by chance but by how each and every player performed in their matches.
Games and thus results are not decided by chance so results of matches other than your own can never be considered "random".
The other "funny thing to note" is also farcical. You are more likely to play the same player again later in the tournament if you both first meet at the later stage...... Well of course that happens. At the start of the tournament there are (for example) 64 players, later on the tournament only when only 16 players(example figure) remain if 2 players meet at that stage the player pool is significantly smaller thus the chances of player the same person is higher since it is 1 out of 16, compared to the 1 out of 64.
The way brackets are divided actually makes this chance much higher as the number of players goes down, this is how it is designed to work and is intrinsic to the double elimination format, regardless of any rules on extended series.
This whole debate is a ridiculous circle of the blind leading the blind. So many people who are just completely wrong, on a purely factual basis, posting their opinions based on incorrect assumptions are just leading more ignorant people to wander helplessly to the same incorrect conclusion.
It's quite pathetic to see.
|
On December 03 2010 00:18 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
noise isolating earphones work great, especially when you have music playing. cant hear anything around you. but probably most people aren't comfortable with them since you kinda insert them into your ears as opposed to earbuds that just hang on your ear.
I'm one of the people that use in-ear earphones. I honestly cannot stand earbuds 'cause I always feel like they're about to fall off my ear 
|
I'm going to avoid the ad nauseum arguing about extended series and simply request: MORE ARTOSIS.
I love when he's on the show, it's pure comedy.
|
Here is the simplest argument against extended series:
Everyone in the tournament gets to lose 2 bo3's before getting kicked out of the tournament.
If you luckbox your way into playing someone you beat previously, you can now lose essentially 3 bo3's.
Why?
|
On December 03 2010 03:20 darkgray wrote:
The Malazan books start out very good, but it feels like he's gotten too popular for his own good (much like GRRM), and the past few volumes he's apparently decided he's so awesome he needs no editor, and instead we get to enjoy about 50% garbage text that could be cut out with no loss.
There are better authors out there, but it's hard to recommend an entire series. Try "The Lions of Al-Rassan" by Guy Gavriel Kay, or "Lord of Light" by Roger Zelazny, for some superb stuff. For those in dire need of brilliant action, check out "Heroes Die" by Matthew Woodring Stover.
Erikson shits all over those authors. Are we reading the same books? The only books I can think of that can hold a candle to malazan are dune and bakker's prince of nothing
|
Just finished listening to the second half of this weeks episode, a hundred times better than the first half lol.
I do agree with Kenniget that Tasteless has lost his magic. He is saying the same things over and over again across all seasons. Hopefully he can make the effort and improve his knowledge of the game.
|
On December 03 2010 02:41 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2010 00:18 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
noise isolating earphones work great, especially when you have music playing. cant hear anything around you. but probably most people aren't comfortable with them since you kinda insert them into your ears as opposed to earbuds that just hang on your ear. What about earbuds (any type) + closed air headphones? I know one issue is SteelSeries Siberias are used everywhere, but they're open air headphones which are terrible for blocking noise. Forcing closed air headphones would probably go a long way.
I have used a setup like this at MLG DC and it works great. I couldn't hear anything except the music (used an MP3 player with earbuds and closed air cans with ingame sound turned up very high)
That's what koreans use too and it works well for them even at huge venues like OSL.
|
On December 03 2010 07:01 yoshi_yoshi wrote:
Here is the simplest argument against extended series:
Everyone in the tournament gets to lose 2 bo3's before getting kicked out of the tournament.
If you luckbox your way into playing someone you beat previously, you can now lose essentially 3 bo3's.
Why?
That's not true at all. If you were to lose 2 bo3's you would also lose the extended series.
Why I'm in favor of the extended series:
If I beat you in the first bo3, and then you beat me in the second, that means we are tied 1-1 in bo3's won. It's not fair to me that you continue on. The fairest way to settle the tie is to play more games.
Let's say a tournament imposed these rules in this situation (1-1 tie in bo3):
If the overall W-L is...
2-2, play an extra bo3 to determine who advances
3-3 then play one match sudden death
3-2/2-3 then play a single bo3 where one player (the one winning overall) starts off with one win.
^This seems reasonable right? But if you work it out/think about it, that's EXACTLY what the extended series accomplishes
The way people are approaching the subject (and to an extent, the way it's presented) is poisoning ppl's opinions about something that really isn't too bad.
It's fine as long as it stays in the loser's bracket (where these problematic 1-1 ties can happen).
|
The only argument being brought to say that extended series are bad is cause it wasn't done before in Starcraft, there is just no way you can argue against extended series, and as a proof : still didn't see any argument making sense against it, it's just blablalbalbla only MLG does this.
Yes, and in the case of double elimination that's the best way to do it, not being done in BW doesn't mean it is bad, people's judgement is just being completely spoiled by some tendancy to religiously wanting to stick to the way things were done in BW.
Being kicked out of a tournament by a player you were 3-2 against makes no fucking sense, can't believe people are trying to argue against that.
|
On December 03 2010 07:44 Thetan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 03 2010 07:01 yoshi_yoshi wrote:
Here is the simplest argument against extended series:
Everyone in the tournament gets to lose 2 bo3's before getting kicked out of the tournament.
If you luckbox your way into playing someone you beat previously, you can now lose essentially 3 bo3's.
Why? That's not true at all. If you were to lose 2 bo3's you would also lose the extended series. Why I'm in favor of the extended series: If I beat you in the first bo3, and then you beat me in the second, that means we are tied 1-1 in bo3's won. It's not fair to me that you continue on. The fairest way to settle the tie is to play more games. Let's say a tournament imposed these rules in this situation (1-1 tie in bo3): If the overall W-L is... 2-2, play an extra bo3 to determine who advances 3-3 then play one match sudden death 3-2/2-3 then play a single bo3 where one player (the one winning overall) starts off with one win. ^This seems reasonable right? But if you work it out/think about it, that's EXACTLY what the extended series accomplishes The way people are approaching the subject (and to an extent, the way it's presented) is poisoning ppl's opinions about something that really isn't too bad. It's fine as long as it stays in the loser's bracket (where these problematic 1-1 ties can happen).
I think you are forgetting that the guy who is getting the advantage had to lose to someone else in the winner's bracket. That is the difference.
|
On December 03 2010 08:02 cArn- wrote:
The only argument being brought to say that extended series are bad is cause it wasn't done before in Starcraft, there is just no way you can argue against extended series, and as a proof : still didn't see any argument making sense against it, it's just blablalbalbla only MLG does this.
Yes, and in the case of double elimination that's the best way to do it, not being done in BW doesn't mean it is bad, people's judgement is just being completely spoiled by some tendancy to religiously wanting to stick to the way things were done in BW.
Being kicked out of a tournament by a player you were 3-2 against makes no fucking sense, can't believe people are trying to argue against that.
Yes, I have very good arguments against extended series. In fact extended series makes sense at a first glance but it really doesnt make any sense at all in reality.
If you want to be enlightend then PM me.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Please stop with the extended series shit.
or post it in the appropriate thread (not this one)
|
Currently in tears listening to this, haven't laughed like this for a while.
Thanks iNcontroL 
|
On December 03 2010 08:12 {88}iNcontroL wrote:
Please stop with the extended series shit.
or post it in the appropriate thread (not this one)
You started it! <--- kidding.
In regards to Kennegit's comments regarding the GSL and the "lost magic" of Tastosis, I actually think they're doing a brilliant job considering the material they're working with. A lot of games thus far have been real groaners.
|
mod edit - post somewhere else for "extended series"
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
