Slayers to disband - Page 127

On October 19 2012 01:27 Salazarz wrote:


While in other circumstances, I would've been inclined to agree with you, the whole 'no practicing' thing wasn't the only issue, and Slayers did cooperate with eSF in many other ways. Also, that very same "federation" claimed they "just want what is best for the players, both eSF and those who aren't a part of it" just a month ago during their fight with KeSPA. Kind of ironic.

On October 19 2012 00:29 ImNightmare wrote:
If slasher is saying the truth, then Jessica is just trying to white knight herself and is bullshitting about the MMA issue.

On October 19 2012 01:31 canikizu wrote:

Or she just didn't want to give up MMA, so she gave the impossible price so that the demand can't be met? Happened all the time in every kind of business.

On October 19 2012 00:58 Diabulus wrote:


i HAAAAAAAAAAAATE to say this, i really do, i LOVE games that require skill to play, many people dont, but im gonna say it regardless. Starcraft 2 is dying as a game and as a sport. Soon LoL will be the new dominating e-sport because its so ez to play and people sadly nowadays DONT like challenges -.-; If you see the crowd from the previous dreamhacks and then from this year, you can see the population slowly diminishing. Then go look at LoL previous tournaments, small, but then in the end ENORMOUS crowds. Sadly the BLizzard CEO is too preocupied on money to realize whats going on. This is my take on things. LoL a new game came out and announced it was like DOTA, people needed a change from dota so they tried it out, best part? FREE and that was a BOLD and RISKY move but it paid out because since people will see its free they dont have to fear spending money on a game they dont like. Second, after only a couple months of the game, LoL announced 1million$ prize for this LoL SUPER tournament, another BOLD move, since LoL is F2P(free to play), they ahve no guarantee that they can make back that money, but they bet on it anyways. They knew they had competition from SC2 at the time, holding the biggest esports tournaments with the biggest prize pool. They had to take dominance in the scene, and sadly Blizzard wasnt up to the challenge. People might ask; but its not blizz's fault because of the prize pool! You are correct untill a certain degree, LoL didnt ahve very many sponsors and all the LoL teams were home made group of friends that decided to make a team, it was up to the company itself to help it grow, and the company did, it made this HUGE announcement that even sc2 PROs had too see what was going on. Front page of ANY internet related news, they made BIG bucks from ads and gained very many sponsors on the way. Thats why when i tuned in the other day (btw I HATE LOL, full of kids typing furiously at their keyboards asking whats your ELO noob and stuff like that) i was sad to see over 200,000 viewers online, if you add all the current streams and viewers of sc2, you wouldnt even get to 10,000. Only when idra and stephano are online, sadly nowadays noone watches even idra anymore, his max before was at around 25k and stephanos at 30k, now its barely at 5k for each. Whats more, when the camera panned around to the crowd, the stadium actually FILLED up! There wasnt ONE empty seat there, not ONE. When i remember sc2 Eu finals at the erricson globe, it was pretty pathertic, only the front row seats were occupied and the rest was deserted. Im sad to conclude, that UNLESS Blizzards CEO CFO ect ect grow some BIG cojones and say, we will risk it for the biscuit! announce a HUGE prize for fFIRST PLACE not pool, something that could top LoL, THEN i KNOW people will regain interest.

RIP Starcraft2, you died too young,
RIP Starcraft, and Starcraft: Brood War, you need not have died, for you are now sorely missed

"BTW mods PLEASE dont ban this post, im trying to help starcraft2, not spam, raise awareness and not feed hate. ♥

On October 19 2012 01:32 ImNightmare wrote:

If so she wouldn't have adjusted the fee to be free.

On October 19 2012 01:35 zefreak wrote:


So whats your point again? Coach Won says she is greedy, because she initially wanted a large transfer fee for her star player and eventually reduced it to 0?

If she was greedy why would she ever reduce it to 0. It makes no sense.

On October 19 2012 01:38 -Kyo- wrote:


Not that we know if he's even telling the truth, but assuming she did just adjust the fee why would it matter? Perhaps she was emotional about his charged comments towards boxer when he first left the house she put a fee on it, or something to that affect. Later, she reflected and decided that if he wanted to leave he could, as that's how it's been going. Wouldn't that make logical sense with the order of events in regards to MMA? o.o...

In other news, I can't stand slasher. He's one of those people that will say anything just to stay afloat in the "reporting world"/grow his own brand. It's like TMZ starcraft without substance or sources.
+ Show Spoiler +

On October 19 2012 01:34 farnham wrote:
So jessica actively tried to find places for mma.. She asked liquid, fnatic and dignitas too. People raelly need to stop the mma, alicia, esf are great guys and jessica is a crazy woman theory...

On October 19 2012 01:46 -Kyo- wrote:


No. You assume something happened during that time period that made the price drop, and that it may be an important clue. It's entirely possible she just changed her mind about how to trade MMA; say if he truly did not want to play for the team. >.>
I'm not discounting what you're saying by any means, but you have to give her the possibility of just having reflected on putting a price on a player. (again assuming here that she did)

On October 19 2012 01:41 Ansinjunger wrote:


Where are you getting this? News broke out that MMA wanted a new team, and she asked prices that were too high, as if to say, "fat chance." Then for whatever reason, she lowered it to nothing for TL. That doesn't add up. Why not nothing for the other teams.

And I thought I debunked the Alicia being a liar thing, if you actually look at the twitter dates and Alicia's actual words, but let's go with hearsay instead.

On October 19 2012 01:47 renaissanceMAN wrote:


Has it been confirmed that it was only two weeks? I've read conflicting reports on the actual time that elapsed.

On October 19 2012 01:51 farnham wrote:




http://www.inven.co.kr/webzine/news/?news=48819

You commented on a few tweets not on the whole thing