EPTMLG extended Series Poll - Page 68
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
skatblast
United States784 Posts
| ||
|
Hrrrrm
United States2081 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + because it's garbage. | ||
|
Redmark
Canada2129 Posts
On November 04 2012 11:53 RaiZ wrote: How the fuk is that unfair ? The loser already lost against the winner and you want to give the loser a 2nd chance ? This one is unfair. THERE must be at least some kind of disadvantage. If the loser is playing the winner again either the winner lost a set or it's grand finals, in which case the loser has to win two sets. How is it that after all this time people still do not understand normal double elimination? | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
On November 04 2012 11:47 NOOBALOPSE wrote: Create a poll for what should replace it. I think if it's 2:1, perhaps something with the map choice could be the advantage that the player gets. If it's 2:0 I think the winner should get a 1 point lead. MLG already had to creat the most convoluted bracket system ever just to keep their baby while not pissing off the players and fans of sc2 too much. Now you can only have an extended series in group play and the semi-finals of the champ bracket. They did this by completely changing the bracket system so that there are two completely separate brackets of both winners and losers that only ever allow people to play again in the event they both make the semi finals. Instead of doing the simple thing and just removing extended series and having the usual double elim rules (the player from losers has to win 2 bo3's to win the finals) they just made shit more complicated and stupid. Basically, MLG knows that they players and fans don't like the extended series, but its a hallmark of MLG so they won't get rid of it completely so instead they create a more complex system so as to avoid the situation as much as possible. | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
On November 04 2012 12:08 Redmark wrote: If the loser is playing the winner again either the winner lost a set or it's grand finals, in which case the loser has to win two sets. How is it that after all this time people still do not understand normal double elimination? because most SC2 fans have only ever encountered double elim via MLG. Pretty simple. | ||
|
FliedLice
Germany7494 Posts
On November 04 2012 11:55 skatblast wrote: Umm... well if you come from the losers bracket thats what you get... i dont understand the hate. Because if you come from the losers bracket you come from the losers bracket. You already get enough. At least that's what people arguing against the extended series say. Seriously, every possible argument has been given dozens of times on this and probably 50 LR threads already. | ||
|
Bobster
Germany3075 Posts
On November 04 2012 12:14 emythrel wrote: because most SC2 fans have only ever encountered double elim via MLG. Pretty simple. Ignorance of some fans might be excused, but there's no reason for MLG not to know better. What a vile system this is. | ||
|
Najda
United States3765 Posts
On November 04 2012 12:08 Redmark wrote: If the loser is playing the winner again either the winner lost a set or it's grand finals, in which case the loser has to win two sets. How is it that after all this time people still do not understand normal double elimination? The difference is when they meet in the losers bracket together and the previous series score still comes over. I think that clause of the rule it stupid and should be changed, but when meeting in the upper bracket like Nani vs Flash right now, it's as it should be. | ||
|
jobber123rd
United States501 Posts
On November 04 2012 12:10 emythrel wrote: MLG already had to creat the most convoluted bracket system ever just to keep their baby while not pissing off the players and fans of sc2 too much. Now you can only have an extended series in group play and the semi-finals of the champ bracket. They did this by completely changing the bracket system so that there are two completely separate brackets of both winners and losers that only ever allow people to play again in the event they both make the semi finals. Instead of doing the simple thing and just removing extended series and having the usual double elim rules (the player from losers has to win 2 bo3's to win the finals) they just made shit more complicated and stupid. Basically, MLG knows that they players and fans don't like the extended series, but its a hallmark of MLG so they won't get rid of it completely so instead they create a more complex system so as to avoid the situation as much as possible. The splitting of the Championship bracket wasn't to protect extended series. It was done in order to make the Grand Final a straight Bo7 always, which arguably makes for a better spectacle than either true DE Grand Final or extended series Grand Final. The NCAA made a similar move for their Division I baseball tournament (College World Series) in 1988, in order to have a final that was more predictable (in terms of length) for spectators and television networks. | ||
|
dcemuser
United States3248 Posts
On November 04 2012 12:27 jobber123rd wrote: The splitting of the Championship bracket wasn't to protect extended series. It was done in order to make the Grand Finals a straight Bo7 always, which arguably makes for a better spectacle than either true DE Grand Finals or extended series Grand Finals. The NCAA made a similar move for their Division I baseball tournament (College World Series) in 1988, in order to have a final that was more predictable (in terms of length) for spectators and television networks. Finally somebody understands. Extended series or no extended series doesn't matter - the old MLG finals were NEVER fun to watch because double elimination finals feel very gimmicky. | ||
|
Wingblade
United States1806 Posts
On November 04 2012 12:17 Najda wrote: The difference is when they meet in the losers bracket together and the previous series score still comes over. I think that clause of the rule it stupid and should be changed, but when meeting in the upper bracket like Nani vs Flash right now, it's as it should be. That's why they should yank it except in cases where a Losers bracket player plays against a winners player. Which means yank it from Open Bracket altogether | ||
|
n3f
Canada46 Posts
| ||
|
Fuchsteufelswild
Australia2028 Posts
It's just tiring for the (originally) losing player to be forced to win so many games against when the opponent doesn't have to win anywhere near as many, it's very dull to watch, except on the occasions that the losing player wins enough games to bring it even again...until they then lose the final few and the exciting momentum turns to sad realisation that the rule only increases the number of games in which at least one player is mentally fatigued. Brood War series often went to five games in the later stages of the tournaments, I think (unless that was only the team games) but some would have a Best of 7 in the final and it was considered a good test of endurance, mental fortitude, mind games, depth and breadth of strategy, but then they did enter on equal grounds. Unequal grounds at the start of a series just takes away from that and makes the potential length of the series more like a marathon than a battle. + Show Spoiler + I hate those occasions when I unintentionally ignore the otherwise obvious "OLD POST" in Pac-Man font and get sucked into typing a reply. Ah well, it's still relevant! | ||
|
Parcelleus
Australia1662 Posts
GSL understand this. OSL understand this. MLG dont - go figure. | ||
|
Hrrrrm
United States2081 Posts
On November 04 2012 12:27 jobber123rd wrote: The splitting of the Championship bracket wasn't to protect extended series. It was done in order to make the Grand Final a straight Bo7 always, which arguably makes for a better spectacle than either true DE Grand Final or extended series Grand Final. The NCAA made a similar move for their Division I baseball tournament (College World Series) in 1988, in order to have a final that was more predictable (in terms of length) for spectators and television networks. The reason why the Grand Final couldn't be a straight up Bo7 was because of Extended Series. I'm sorry man, when you as an organization continue to stand up for your "unique" rule but then do everything in your power to change the format of your tournament so that your "unique" rule doesn't have an affect in the most important game in the tournament, it's quite frankly bullshit. If the Grand Finals isn't worthy of an Extended Series match then NOTHING is. | ||
|
TechNoTrance
Canada1007 Posts
| ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5217 Posts
On November 04 2012 13:06 TechNoTrance wrote: I never understood why they hold on to extended series so tightly either despite overwhelming community opposition. It is the same reason that Blizzard doesn't listen to the community regarding maps (remember Slag Pits?) and took so long to put something on maps to prevent the ramp from being blocked by Pylons or Bunkers. Some companies just think they know better than their fans... they forgot the customer is always right. | ||
|
CajunMan
United States823 Posts
| ||
|
silent_owl
Philippines3098 Posts
On November 04 2012 11:53 RaiZ wrote: How the fuk is that unfair ? The loser already lost against the winner and you want to give the loser a 2nd chance ? This one is unfair. THERE must be at least some kind of disadvantage. Yes and that disadvantage is the fact that the loser already had to play ADDITIONAL MATCHES! | ||
|
Sikly
United States413 Posts
On November 04 2012 13:21 CajunMan wrote: I don't understand why people hate it so much. If you don't wanna be down don't lose your matches simple as that no one to blame but yourself for being in that position. If that is the case than make it single elim. I don't want to watch an extended series. Fuck the fairness. Fuck if it is right or wrong. I want to watch entertaining games, and extended series take almost all excitement out of it. Very rarely does an extended series actually end well. Even double elim grand finals tend to be lame, the prime example being Alive vs Squirtle. | ||
| ||
