|
On July 29 2012 12:33 Masvidal wrote:
Most disturbing rule of all:
"6. Mice and keyboards must utilize standard USB interfaces. Players may not use PS2 interface equipment."
So players using a Qsenn/Samsung DT-35 (my keyboard of choice) of any decent mechanical keyboard will have to use a PS/2 to USB adapter, as opposed to the standard USB to PS/2 adapter. Why does this matter? PS/2 interface mechanical keyboards have NKRO (defined in wikipedia: This means that each key is scanned completely independently by the keyboard hardware, so that each keypress is correctly detected regardless of how many other keys are being pressed or held down at the time"), and lose this ability if used through USB. And many popular keyboards (probably popular because of NKRO) use PS/2 exclusively.
Basically, MLG has banned NKRO (n-key rollover) from StarCraft 2. If your keyboard is PS/2, you have to downgrade its performance with a USB adapter.
What next? All mice must use balls instead of optical or laser sensors?
I agree it's a bit weird (especially since most motherboards still offer a PS/2 port as far as I know), but it's not as bad as you make us believe I feel. USB supports what, 4 / 5 keys pressed simultaneously which is more than enough. No real need for true NKRO for SC2 imo. I think you disagree, so please provide a use case for NKRO in SC2, i.e. a situation where pressing 5+ keys simultaneously would be significantly beneficial over pressing them sequentially.
I have a Filco keyboard myself which is actually USB by default but supports NKRO if I connect it using a USB -> PS/2 converter but I'm just using the USB connection. Blasphemy, I know >_>
About the format; I think it's better than before when proper seeds are used to avoid having the two best players in the same bracket (in the Championship Bracket). But I suppose players will be seeded according to their Group Play results so this should be fine.
|
Why is everyone against extended series?
It prevents players from being kicked out eventhough they had a better record against the other player..
(e.g. someone winning 3-0 then loosing 3-2 has a record of 5-3 but is still kicked out by the other player...)
and why is 4 double elim. brackets better than pools? I mean it doesn't really make a big difference, but pool play is the best way to get objective results since you play against everyone in your group. You can get lucky alot easier in a bracket
|
Remember when MLG used to respond fairly quickly to criticism?
Still no changes to the map pool. And the extended series has been hated from the outset, but they still haven't changed it.
|
I wonder if the Halo rules are forbidding the change of map pools. :p
|
On July 29 2012 16:18 Yomi-no-Kuni wrote:
Why is everyone against extended series?
It prevents players from being kicked out eventhough they had a better record against the other player..
(e.g. someone winning 3-0 then loosing 3-2 has a record of 5-3 but is still kicked out by the other player...)
and why is 4 double elim. brackets better than pools? I mean it doesn't really make a big difference, but pool play is the best way to get objective results since you play against everyone in your group. You can get lucky alot easier in a bracket
For extended series, it is a matter of excitement. Matches in which extended series plays a part tend to happen late in the tournament, and it is often frustrating to watch matches at that point in the tournament stacked very heavily towards one or the other player before the match even begins. Though it might be reasonable view a view to a mathematical sense of fairness, both as a spectator (and it seems as a competitor) it is no fun at all.
It is hard to understand why MLG insists on keeping it, and somewhat ridiculous how outlandish they have to make their tournament format in order to overcome the negative aspects of extended series - especially as the changes in tournament structure makes for a tournament where the randomness of seeding has a larger impact, not smaller. I can only agree with you on the multiple and separate bracket-structure. It is a mess and it is completely unnecessary.
|
Taldarim Altar? Are you kidding me? You might as well add X'elnaga Caverns and Steppes of War.
|
On July 29 2012 19:55 m0ck wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 16:18 Yomi-no-Kuni wrote:
Why is everyone against extended series?
It prevents players from being kicked out eventhough they had a better record against the other player..
(e.g. someone winning 3-0 then loosing 3-2 has a record of 5-3 but is still kicked out by the other player...)
and why is 4 double elim. brackets better than pools? I mean it doesn't really make a big difference, but pool play is the best way to get objective results since you play against everyone in your group. You can get lucky alot easier in a bracket For extended series, it is a matter of excitement. Matches in which extended series plays a part tend to happen late in the tournament, and it is often frustrating to watch matches at that point in the tournament stacked very heavily towards one or the other player before the match even begins. Though it might be reasonable view a view to a mathematical sense of fairness, both as a spectator (and it seems as a competitor) it is no fun at all. It is hard to understand why MLG insists on keeping it, and somewhat ridiculous how outlandish they have to make their tournament format in order to overcome the negative aspects of extended series - especially as the changes in tournament structure makes for a tournament where the randomness of seeding has a larger impact, not smaller. I can only agree with you on the multiple and separate bracket-structure. It is a mess and it is completely unnecessary.
The double-elimination 8-player Groups allow for the possibility of fewer games being played than round-robin 6-player Pools (13 series instead of 15, but the last two rounds of the LB may have extended series). However, I suspect that they changed it solely to fit those eight invites into that stage of the tournament without having to choose between having 28 Bo3's in each Pool or going to Bo1's.
BTW, that whole excitement vs. fairness argument is pretty much why the Arena was a split bracket, and why the Championship Bracket will be as well. True double-elimination finals are fair from the standpoint of the whole tournament, but on their own, they're pretty imbalanced and not as fun for some viewers as a single final starting on even terms.
|
On July 29 2012 11:05 WallieP wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 06:16 MLGAnnouncements wrote:
[*]32 players will compete in Group Play, with eight players per Group.
[*]24 players–including the Top 16 from the Summer Arena and eight players that will be announced later–will start in Group Play. They will eventually be joined by the last eight Open Winners Bracket Players. Fan favorite foreigners please!! Would like that so much. Grubby Idra Thorzain Naniwa Ret Demuslim Huk TLO Something like this!
Oh hello no. Don't make me bring out the hickory stick and to the other guy I'm well aware extended can still happen.
MLG loves their clown shoes.
|
I just cry everytime I see MLG map pools. How are they soooo behind?
So sad that they got such a "must-watch/participate" status that they can get away with this.
|
By now I can just sadly shake my head in regards to Map Pool and Extended Series. I've yet to see any valid reason as to why the former one is never up to date and as to why the latter one still exists.
I hope it hasn't anything to do with company pride...
I mean other than that MLG has improved so much. It's a pity that the Map Pool is one of the bigger issues now 
|
On July 29 2012 23:34 Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo wrote:By now I can just sadly shake my head in regards to Map Pool and Extended Series. I've yet to see any valid reason as to why the former one is never up to date and as to why the latter one still exists. I hope it hasn't anything to do with company pride... I mean other than that MLG has improved so much. It's a pity that the Map Pool is one of the bigger issues now
Maybe MLG is hesitant to, say, replace Tal'Darim with GSL whirlwind, because of their problems with GomTV. Just a theory though, but I think they're more likely in the future to use maps KeSPA players have practice on than GSL players.
|
o__O mmm this is pretty intense. is there nicer graphic to simply the changes to the format?
|
On July 29 2012 19:55 m0ck wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 16:18 Yomi-no-Kuni wrote:
Why is everyone against extended series?
It prevents players from being kicked out eventhough they had a better record against the other player..
(e.g. someone winning 3-0 then loosing 3-2 has a record of 5-3 but is still kicked out by the other player...)
and why is 4 double elim. brackets better than pools? I mean it doesn't really make a big difference, but pool play is the best way to get objective results since you play against everyone in your group. You can get lucky alot easier in a bracket For extended series, it is a matter of excitement. Matches in which extended series plays a part tend to happen late in the tournament, and it is often frustrating to watch matches at that point in the tournament stacked very heavily towards one or the other player before the match even begins. Though it might be reasonable view a view to a mathematical sense of fairness, both as a spectator (and it seems as a competitor) it is no fun at all. It is hard to understand why MLG insists on keeping it, and somewhat ridiculous how outlandish they have to make their tournament format in order to overcome the negative aspects of extended series - especially as the changes in tournament structure makes for a tournament where the randomness of seeding has a larger impact, not smaller. I can only agree with you on the multiple and separate bracket-structure. It is a mess and it is completely unnecessary.
I don't think extended series lacks excitement at all. Last year HerO went from down 3-0 to DRG to tying the series up before losing the final match. That's exciting. All TL players were sitting there cheering/analyzing. Excitement can come from overcoming odds as well. I think extended series allows the better player to exert their dominance and making it difficult for the underdog to overcome the deficit.
As for stacking. The easiest way to not have it stacked against you.... don't lose, win. It's that simple.
The only aspect of extended series I'd change is results from group stages. It doesn't make sense as none of the series is an elimination/lower bracket type.
(I didn't read through entire XX pages, did it say anything about how double elimination would work in the stage 3 championship bracket?)
|
On July 30 2012 00:41 Eventine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 19:55 m0ck wrote:On July 29 2012 16:18 Yomi-no-Kuni wrote:
Why is everyone against extended series?
It prevents players from being kicked out eventhough they had a better record against the other player..
(e.g. someone winning 3-0 then loosing 3-2 has a record of 5-3 but is still kicked out by the other player...)
and why is 4 double elim. brackets better than pools? I mean it doesn't really make a big difference, but pool play is the best way to get objective results since you play against everyone in your group. You can get lucky alot easier in a bracket For extended series, it is a matter of excitement. Matches in which extended series plays a part tend to happen late in the tournament, and it is often frustrating to watch matches at that point in the tournament stacked very heavily towards one or the other player before the match even begins. Though it might be reasonable view a view to a mathematical sense of fairness, both as a spectator (and it seems as a competitor) it is no fun at all. It is hard to understand why MLG insists on keeping it, and somewhat ridiculous how outlandish they have to make their tournament format in order to overcome the negative aspects of extended series - especially as the changes in tournament structure makes for a tournament where the randomness of seeding has a larger impact, not smaller. I can only agree with you on the multiple and separate bracket-structure. It is a mess and it is completely unnecessary. I don't think extended series lacks excitement at all. Last year HerO went from down 3-0 to DRG to tying the series up before losing the final match. That's exciting. All TL players were sitting there cheering/analyzing. Excitement can come from overcoming odds as well. I think extended series allows the better player to exert their dominance and making it difficult for the underdog to overcome the deficit. As for stacking. The easiest way to not have it stacked against you.... don't lose, win. It's that simple. The only aspect of extended series I'd change is results from group stages. It doesn't make sense as none of the series is an elimination/lower bracket type. (I didn't read through entire XX pages, did it say anything about how double elimination would work in the stage 3 championship bracket?)
Yeah extended series is exciting... once in five or six event, when the one from the lower bracket start with a disadvantage and still win or get close to. That's it. Al the other time, it just screw the viewing experience up. Yeah, really, that's a good idea. Let's keep it.
|
On July 30 2012 00:41 Eventine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 19:55 m0ck wrote:On July 29 2012 16:18 Yomi-no-Kuni wrote:
Why is everyone against extended series?
It prevents players from being kicked out eventhough they had a better record against the other player..
(e.g. someone winning 3-0 then loosing 3-2 has a record of 5-3 but is still kicked out by the other player...)
and why is 4 double elim. brackets better than pools? I mean it doesn't really make a big difference, but pool play is the best way to get objective results since you play against everyone in your group. You can get lucky alot easier in a bracket For extended series, it is a matter of excitement. Matches in which extended series plays a part tend to happen late in the tournament, and it is often frustrating to watch matches at that point in the tournament stacked very heavily towards one or the other player before the match even begins. Though it might be reasonable view a view to a mathematical sense of fairness, both as a spectator (and it seems as a competitor) it is no fun at all. It is hard to understand why MLG insists on keeping it, and somewhat ridiculous how outlandish they have to make their tournament format in order to overcome the negative aspects of extended series - especially as the changes in tournament structure makes for a tournament where the randomness of seeding has a larger impact, not smaller. I can only agree with you on the multiple and separate bracket-structure. It is a mess and it is completely unnecessary. I don't think extended series lacks excitement at all. Last year HerO went from down 3-0 to DRG to tying the series up before losing the final match. That's exciting. All TL players were sitting there cheering/analyzing. Excitement can come from overcoming odds as well. I think extended series allows the better player to exert their dominance and making it difficult for the underdog to overcome the deficit. As for stacking. The easiest way to not have it stacked against you.... don't lose, win. It's that simple. The only aspect of extended series I'd change is results from group stages. It doesn't make sense as none of the series is an elimination/lower bracket type. (I didn't read through entire XX pages, did it say anything about how double elimination would work in the stage 3 championship bracket?)
Do the 1 result of 4-3 make up for the 9 results of 4-2/4-1?
Of course a player beating the odds is exciting to watch, but it is also very uncommon. The majority of matches will be less exciting as a result of extended series. I don't think that the added security in determining the best player is worth the sacrifice - especially as there are compounding issues that aren't taken into consideration: One important issue is maps. As far as I'm aware (please correct me if I'm wrong) maps are not excluded from being played twice in an extended series. As maps have a large impact on the probability of wins between the players, a player can be 'punished' doubly by having losses on an imbalanced map remembered and having to play the same map again in the extended series.
|
Change the fucking map pool. There are soo many good new maps that you could use.
1st You have many many new standard maps that are proven to be balanced
2nd There are new unorthodox maps you could try to make your tournament unique
Is it soo hard to pick to replace Shakuras and Tal'darim with two ESV/TPW/CRUX maps.
MLG stop slowing down the games map evolution those maps are outdated!
|
Everyone please email, PM MLG to change their map pool.
|
On July 30 2012 00:41 Eventine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 19:55 m0ck wrote:On July 29 2012 16:18 Yomi-no-Kuni wrote:
Why is everyone against extended series?
It prevents players from being kicked out eventhough they had a better record against the other player..
(e.g. someone winning 3-0 then loosing 3-2 has a record of 5-3 but is still kicked out by the other player...)
and why is 4 double elim. brackets better than pools? I mean it doesn't really make a big difference, but pool play is the best way to get objective results since you play against everyone in your group. You can get lucky alot easier in a bracket For extended series, it is a matter of excitement. Matches in which extended series plays a part tend to happen late in the tournament, and it is often frustrating to watch matches at that point in the tournament stacked very heavily towards one or the other player before the match even begins. Though it might be reasonable view a view to a mathematical sense of fairness, both as a spectator (and it seems as a competitor) it is no fun at all. It is hard to understand why MLG insists on keeping it, and somewhat ridiculous how outlandish they have to make their tournament format in order to overcome the negative aspects of extended series - especially as the changes in tournament structure makes for a tournament where the randomness of seeding has a larger impact, not smaller. I can only agree with you on the multiple and separate bracket-structure. It is a mess and it is completely unnecessary. I don't think extended series lacks excitement at all. Last year HerO went from down 3-0 to DRG to tying the series up before losing the final match. That's exciting. All TL players were sitting there cheering/analyzing. Excitement can come from overcoming odds as well. I think extended series allows the better player to exert their dominance and making it difficult for the underdog to overcome the deficit. As for stacking. The easiest way to not have it stacked against you.... don't lose, win. It's that simple. The only aspect of extended series I'd change is results from group stages. It doesn't make sense as none of the series is an elimination/lower bracket type.
(I didn't read through entire XX pages, did it say anything about how double elimination would work in the stage 3 championship bracket?)
The change in the extended series rule (a meeting in the Open Bracket or Groups does not trigger extended series in later stages of the tournament) takes care of that. The way it was set up before, the WB player could have gone into the Championship final with an extended series disadvantage (if the opponent beat him/her in Pool Play).
The pictures linked in the OP have example brackets for Group Play and the Championship Bracket.
|
The Open Bracket is again constructed so it is impossible to play the same player twice. New for Summer is the fact that Open Bracket match history will not be carried over into the latter stages of the Event.
god I hope this is true, last year there were several people who faced the same person twice in open brackets, it happend very frequently.
|
I understand that most people dont like the current map pool due to some maps being imbalanced. Nonetheless, I from my perspective, love to watch MLG just because they have maps like Taldarim in their map pool. Watching Ohana, Daybreak, Cloud Kingdom, Entombed Valley, Antiga Shipyard, Metropolis in foreign events over and over again is really boring... Why just not try a more "aggressive" approach in the future and switch the "bad" maps with some fresh and recognised maps (like whirlwind for example). Whenever I check out the custom games section of TL, there are a lot of maps published... so its kinda a question to me why these maps dont get the chance to prove em in some smaller events or something like that, to be used later for bigger (if they prove themselves)... but well thats another story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
