EPTGSTL May Teams - no IM - Page 22
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Laurence
Ireland119 Posts
| ||
|
War Horse
United States247 Posts
| ||
|
brentsen
1252 Posts
Apart from that the beach map looks cool, want to see that in action. | ||
|
Lord_J
Kenya1085 Posts
| ||
|
absalom86
Iceland1770 Posts
| ||
|
I)etox
1240 Posts
The small elevated portion in each main is rather interesting. It seems ideal for a place to hide hidden tech or even proxies. Can't wait to see BoxeR try to drop marines/scvs there and start a lategame bunker rush xD Because the choke for the natural is so huge I don't think this map will encourage as big of a macro game as a map such as Tal'darim does but that in of itself isn't a terrible thing considering GSTL already has plenty large maps. | ||
|
alch
Canada17 Posts
| ||
|
brentsen
1252 Posts
On May 11 2011 01:09 Lord_J wrote: It's really disappointing that IM won't be in the GSTL May, but I don't think that GOM should change the format just to accommodate them. Hopefully IM's players will perform during the next qualifiers so their place in the GSTL will be secure... Of course they can't change it for this season, that would be ridiculous. But they definitely need to change it for the next season, it's kind of stupid that fOu is rated higher even though all their Code A players lost in the first round. | ||
|
Asca
Brazil14 Posts
Gogogogo SlayerS. Hope some day Liquid get more players to bash those koreans <3 | ||
|
BaLoO-
France318 Posts
The only change i could agree on, and definitely not for this season for obvious reason of fairness, would be to limit the number of players giving points to a team to a number like 6. 6 good players for a team league seems better than 10 barely code A. This would be useless at the moment though, and would only be really justified if the players taking part in the league were the players giving points to their team in the qualification process. They should nevertheless think about it before a really bad team gets in over a good one only because they had 12 players in code A against 4 code S and 4 code A (this is definitely not the situation at the moment, IM has just enough qualifying players to make a full line-up, their bad). P.S. : once again, i know such a situation is very unliekly, but that would be really stupid. EDIT : also for next year changing the moment when the points are counted to make it after up/down matches would make more sense, that is true. | ||
|
FILM
United States663 Posts
| ||
|
Kznn
Brazil9072 Posts
| ||
|
taishiro
51 Posts
IM please get more people in the gsl, I am not impressed with the MVP code a players. | ||
|
Kaonis
United States243 Posts
Wish I could live somewhere like that, expos and all. | ||
|
Kimaker
United States2131 Posts
| ||
StatX
Canada343 Posts
On May 10 2011 14:06 Boblhead wrote: whats the point in not letting IM join? isnt this supposed to support esports and have the "TOP" teams play? I think TOP is fine but leaving this adjective aside from the important part TEAM is an error. 3-4 players does not make a team better than one who places 5-9 players in the same code A and S. | ||
|
sambo400
United States378 Posts
| ||
|
Lobo2me
Norway1213 Posts
On May 11 2011 01:29 sambo400 wrote: seems like MVP just snatched up players who had qualified for code A. I'm probably wrong though. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=205417 It seems MVP had 4 people qualifying that carried the MVP tag before. One of the few clanless people were snatched up by... IM. That's Nuts. | ||
|
tooPrime
United States245 Posts
On May 10 2011 22:57 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: This is just a horrible suggestion. It would mean any previously great team not being currently relevant anymore stays in GSTL forever. It also means that 1 code S player can be worth more points than 5 code S players. So a team with 1 good player would make it into GSTL opposed to a team with 5 good players. I saw the suggestion that as a minor adjustment to the rule they can invite the two finalists as a default and then pick the 6 next highest teams. I think that's the best way to go about it in the future. That would be easy enough to fix. You would just use the points from the last 2 or 3 tournaments, or have points deteriorate over time. There are a lot of better systems, I was just disputing your claim that the system was good enough and would be viable 99% of the time. Regardless, Team MVP's 3 Ro32 Code A players should not be worth 3 points, while Nestea and MVP are worth 2.6. Anyway, I appreciate everything you do Nazgul! | ||
|
Zaffy
United Kingdom128 Posts
| ||
| ||
