NASL: Koreans? Top Koreans? - Page 79

Redox

Germany24794 Posts

March 16 2011 23:43 GMT

#1561

On March 17 2011 08:39 Kazeyonoma wrote:

WRONG, i asked this directly in the TSL thread, games will be played on the home players server based on seeding, then alternate back and forth.

I think that is true for the NA vs EU or NA vs KOR games. Playing from EU to KOR would make the competition a joke.

baoluvboa

743 Posts

March 16 2011 23:43 GMT

#1562

On March 17 2011 08:42 nymeria wrote:
anyone know what the korean fansites are saying about this topic?

You can try translated playxp

nvs.

Canada3609 Posts

March 16 2011 23:43 GMT

#1563

So many fringe NA players arguing against the inclusion of Koreans. -.-

Gofarman

Canada646 Posts

March 16 2011 23:44 GMT

#1564

I wish I had a year on TL with this account so that I could report this drivel;

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=201568&currentpage=78#1548

My view on the topic is that we need top caliber players SPEAKING and INTERACTING with other english/german/swedish/french players for our international community to actually progress. Yes, the Koreans are especially dedicated to practice and preparation but don't forget they have access to a wealth of knowledge that semi-pros and pros that don't speak Korean have no way to get, even going to korea.

I stand by any action that will develop Western and European esports if that means a little segregation so be it. (It's not like we are saying they suck and are unworthy to play with us, but some protectionism won the Allies WW2 who says it wont again?)

+ Show Spoiler +

No nukes this time though plzanthx

Redox

Germany24794 Posts

March 16 2011 23:44 GMT

#1565

On March 17 2011 08:43 nvs. wrote:
So many fringe NA players arguing against the inclusion of Koreans. -.-

Yeah 1. Soooo many.

baoluvboa

743 Posts

March 16 2011 23:46 GMT

#1566

On March 17 2011 08:44 Redox wrote:

Show nested quote +

Yeah 1. Soooo many.

Blur/Vt/Cloud/Strelok so far are the ones I can recalled.

dkim

United States255 Posts

March 16 2011 23:48 GMT

#1567

On March 17 2011 08:44 Gofarman wrote:
I wish I had a year on TL with this account so that I could report this drivel;

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=201568&currentpage=78#1548

My view on the topic is that we need top caliber players SPEAKING and INTERACTING with other english/german/swedish/french players for our international community to actually progress. Yes, the Koreans are especially dedicated to practice and preparation but don't forget they have access to a wealth of knowledge that semi-pros and pros that don't speak Korean have no way to get, even going to korea.

I stand by any action that will develop Western and European esports if that means a little segregation so be it. (It's not like we are saying they suck and are unworthy to play with us, but some protectionism won the Allies WW2 who says it wont again?)

+ Show Spoiler +

No nukes this time though plzanthx

it really does fit word for word on what cloud was saying. he complains that foreigners will never get to be at the same level as koreans, then he goes off to say that foreigner and korean sc2 scenes have to be segregated. really the same thing if you were following up on cloud's posts.

nvs.

Canada3609 Posts

March 16 2011 23:48 GMT

#1568

On March 17 2011 08:46 baoluvboa wrote:

Show nested quote +

Blur/Vt/Cloud/Strelok so far are the ones I can recalled.

And Pokebunny

JustPassingBy

10776 Posts

March 16 2011 23:49 GMT

#1569

On March 17 2011 08:46 baoluvboa wrote:

Show nested quote +

Blur/Vt/Cloud/Strelok so far are the ones I can recalled.

1. Strelok was talking about the TSL
2. He only complained about the amount of invites. He explicitely stated that he had no problems with:
(a) there being a Korean qualifier to determine the Korean participants
(b) invites for Korean players only
one thing he had a problem with was
- invites going to previous TSL2 champions of SC:BW
- invites going to the teamliquid members in Korea
- invites going to top players in Korea

papaz

Sweden4149 Posts

March 16 2011 23:49 GMT

#1570

On March 17 2011 08:38 T0fuuu wrote:

Show nested quote +

We should invite mvp hes code A.

HAHA, so true and funny :D

Redox

Germany24794 Posts

March 16 2011 23:50 GMT

#1571

On March 17 2011 08:46 baoluvboa wrote:

Show nested quote +

Blur/Vt/Cloud/Strelok so far are the ones I can recalled.

Only 2 are NA and Strelok complained more about people being invited at all and especially about the non-Koreans (the TL players) being invited just because they are in Korea. A very valid point imo.

Also no mentions here of the many players that specifically wished for Koreans playing in NASL.

nvs.

Canada3609 Posts

March 16 2011 23:51 GMT

#1572

Quote from ClouD from a recent interview.

ClouD: I am a progamer, that’s my only job in Germany

Of course he wants to make his job easier.

Gentso

United States2218 Posts

March 16 2011 23:51 GMT

#1573

On March 17 2011 08:42 nymeria wrote:
anyone know what the korean fansites are saying about this topic?

Interested too. Frankly, I'm embarrassed at the thought of Koreans reading through this thread. : (

jmbthirteen

United States10734 Posts

March 16 2011 23:51 GMT

#1574

Yeah cloud is being a hypocrite here because he is complaining on how Koreans aren't involved in our scene, but then says we should continue to segregate the scenes. How about we give them a chance to get into the western scene a bit?

Gatsbi

United States1134 Posts

March 16 2011 23:52 GMT

#1575

This problem would be so easily resolved if they just did top 100 (or 150) players instead of top 50.

Or if they didn't use an invite system at all.

edit: I mean solved as in we could have as many koreans as we wanted if there was 100-150 players.

EchelonTee

United States5259 Posts

March 16 2011 23:52 GMT

#1576

You can't exclude all koreans. Simply unfair; foreign players should step up to take the big cakes otherwise they don't deserve it. As much as entertaining drama and storylines may come more freely from western nations, if those players are not motivated to play better by the threat of more dominant players, skill levels won't rise. How do you guys think Jinro got better? He had to play against the best and win. And besides, many, many koreans have showed openness in dealing with foreigners, as evidenced by the many oGs players and some of the ST ones. I think they would be an entertaning addition, and with the invite system, we could get a balance of top EU, NA, and KR players to duke it out.

Kazang

578 Posts

March 16 2011 23:53 GMT

#1577

On March 17 2011 08:26 infinity2k9 wrote:

Show nested quote +

On March 17 2011 08:24 Kazang wrote:

On March 17 2011 08:14 infinity2k9 wrote:

On March 17 2011 08:07 Kazang wrote:

On March 17 2011 07:10 Liquid`Tyler wrote:

On March 17 2011 06:46 Kazang wrote:

On March 17 2011 04:43 Liquid`Tyler wrote:

On March 17 2011 04:13 Kazang wrote:

On March 17 2011 03:19 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
As long as the KR ladder remains strong, Americans have this opportunity (though Blizzard needs to make it easier for an American to connect to the KR server and get latency like in SC:BW).

Never going to happen.*

The reason for the apparent low latency in BW was because of where the servers were located, or not in the case of direct peer to peer games. You can't specifically choose what server, know where it is or dictate how you play SC2 so you can never get the lowest possible latency. Then of course there is a physical limitation in how fast information can travel over the pacific and back again.

The BW engine is also so terrible that it actually makes high latency less noticeable, it's simplicity Vs stability in netcode. SC2 has much more robust netcode that tries to insure equality and a consistent connection, but increases latency due to the number of loopbacks to the server. SC2 is extremely unlikely to have desync errors and problems of that type, actions not registering etc, but that stability comes at the cost of more noticeable lag when the latency does increase.

*if it ever does it will be at the same time they implement LAN play.

This sucks because SC2 seems to be worse in every way compared to SC1. For example, if I'm playing on KR server, and if my opponent and I give a command simultaneously, his command happens first. In this way, our games are out of sync. We do things at different times depending on our latency to the server. This isn't the case with SC1. Commands given simultaneously in the real world happen simultaneously in the game. Also in SC2, it's possible for the game to momentarily freeze and then skip ahead for one player, but for the other player to have a smooth experience the whole time.

It's just really disappointing because SC:BW was designed mainly for dial-up modems. As connections improved, Blizzard did nothing, but fans were able to make adjustments to take advantage of our internet connections. And then SC2 comes out and I'm thinking it'll be nice to not have to use third party programs anymore. But then they totally sacrificed the quality of long distance connections, which kinda blew my mind with how much PR they had about building SC2 for esports. NA to NA and EU to EU and KR to KR all provide excellent online experiences but they must have known that SC2 as an esport would require good connections cross continent =[[[

Well here is the rub.

SC1/BW used a different type of netcode. Basically when you issue a command, the unit does it on your client then it sends what that unit did to the server, server then sends it to the other player.
Yes your actions have instant effect on your screen, but your opponent doesn't see your action until the 200+ ms later. This is better in a perfect environment, with 0 latency, and can even appear fine in high latency, but the reality is there is a difference in sync.
You have the illusion of zero latency, but behind the scenes that is not the case.

This is just factually wrong. Did you even play SC1 online? I don't know why I should read the rest of your post after you've written this.

Maybe I should clarify about what I mean by "Commands given simultaneously in the real world happen simultaneously in the game"
I give a command simultaneously with my opponent in the real world
there is a delay
The commands happen simultaneously in the game

Our commands are simultaneous with each other. The giving of the command doesn't happen simultaneously with the game performing the command.

There is a forced delay in SC1 to make up for differences in latency, that is separate to how it relates to actual latency, that is not exactly a good solution either. It just forces a delay on the player with the better latency, to give the approximate effect of doing things at the same moment. The player with the lower latency still has the reaction advantage, although less pronounced, that just physically how it works, there is a latency in the signal going a long way, you cannot get around that only try to compensate for it.

That's worse than it is with how it works in SC2. If someone on a server is lagging it still effects all the players on the server in SC2. That's most evident in games with lot's of spectators, one person lagging causes the whole game to slow down and/or stutter.

If your complaint is that the lag isn't equal then you are over estimating how much of a disadvantage one player is at if they play at a higher latency.
It's bad for both, slightly worse for one. It attempts to meet in the middle, which as I explained before works best when both players are playing on normal latency.

It doesn't change the fact that there is lag when playing long distance, it's just how it is. Asking blizzard to somehow change the laws of physics to make distance irrelevant just because it's supposed to be an esport is totally unreasonable.

I dunno why you're still posting about this, but you are completely wrong. In BW lag affects all players as well, thats why if a spectator is lagging you kick them out. You have not even played it have you? There is NO reaction advantage.

BW
Player -> Player

SC2
Player -> Server -> Player

Everyones experience points to the first as working fine and better, especially when we have control over the latency with ICCUP. SC2's method is not better other than it stops people pirating the game which is not better for us it's better for Blizzard. I don't have any idea where you got your ideas about the BW netcode from.

Did you even read my post?

Because you clearly did not understand any of it.

Its you making up shit about BW that isn't true. I understood it perfectly but what you are saying is completely wrong. Again just so you try to get it: BW has no reaction advantage, and every player in the game suffers lag if one player does, ok?

Try going back and reading exactly what I wrote, it's unedited.

Here I will paste it for you:
"There is a forced delay in SC1 to make up for differences in latency, that is separate to how it relates to actual latency, that is not exactly a good solution either. It just forces a delay on the player with the better latency, to give the approximate effect of doing things at the same moment."

The effect in SC2 is roughly the same, if one player lags all the players will lag to some extent. The way it handles this is better, and more complex, than putting a huge delay on the player with the better latency.

The fact is still the same, long distances mean high latency and lag.
BW or SC2, playing across long distances results in Lag it's a fact of the damn universe.
SC2 really does do a better job of minimizing the effects of lag when it's played as intended, within the same region. It's gets worse when the latency gets above "normal" levels, they cannot make it better at long distance. It's as good as it's going to get.

We have to make the best of what the game is. If you want to run an online tournament across multiple regions, it's going to have lag.
If NASL has players from NA/EU/Korea playing each other, it's going to be laggy for all of them. It's physically impossible to not have lag.

aTnClouD

Italy2428 Posts

March 16 2011 23:53 GMT

#1578

On March 17 2011 08:48 dkim wrote:

Show nested quote +

First I don't complain, I am stating a truth that got just proven by the last big event where we had the very top european/american players and some korean low level pros. I also didn't say they have to be segregated, I am just saying korean esport has always been an elitist community with no real possibility to interact since a decade ago. I don't know what's good or what's better but the moment you allow all top koreans then it's just them, and I don't think western progamers are willing to move to korea and play months there just to get invited to NASL.

sheaRZerg

United States613 Posts

March 16 2011 23:54 GMT

#1579

1v1 MOTW NO KR!!!1!

But seriously. I think completely opening big tournaments to Koreans would do a lot of good. It would certainly draw a lot of interest to tournaments. Especially having the big names like Boxer, Nada etc, might help in drawing enough attention to keep a strong foreign scene going. Otherwise I feel it will quickly devolve into the BW system, where korea holds all the big tournaments with a handful of the top foreigners trying to break in. I think it will also draw much more attention from viewers korea, which honestly can't be a bad thing for creating a sustainable eSports scene.

KoshkaTV

United States430 Posts

March 16 2011 23:56 GMT

#1580

On March 17 2011 08:24 adeezy wrote:

Show nested quote +

This isn't stopping the TSL, and there's no doubt in my mind the TSL will be the best non GSL tournament ever.

For sure... because they got all the best players. Whoever wins the TSL, can claim to be the best player in the world (for that moment).... well unless July wins the GSL.

But ya.. if you beat the best in a LAN tourney.. you're the best! The winner of NASL should be the best player in the world!

Prev 1 77 78 79 80 81 106 Next

Please or register to reply.

NASL: Koreans? Top Koreans? - Page 79

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming