EPTNow it will be an actual qualifier and we might see some new faces making some upsets hopefully. Ofc if they have the luck to dodge the koreans that is :D.
MLG - WCS NA Season 1 - Page 16
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
stfouri
Finland272 Posts
Now it will be an actual qualifier and we might see some new faces making some upsets hopefully. Ofc if they have the luck to dodge the koreans that is :D. | ||
|
Xorphene
United Kingdom492 Posts
"It's all about the money, money, money". MLG = money grabbers who only care about profit and NOTHING about evolvement of grassroots SC2. How old were Leenock and Life when they made their breakthrough? You limit by a rank, and I'd say Masters - there will be several uncut diamonds who may display good skill and wind up on a team - remember Scarlett, unknown> wins Playhem IPL tournament > causes a stir > on Acer. Or the rise and rise of Snute? We HAVE to evolve grassroots in all regions, otherwise there is no point in huge tournaments like a WCS as eventually the scene will die with no new players coming through. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46722 Posts
On April 11 2013 02:35 Plansix wrote: It would be worst if they let everyone sign up, free of charge. This keeps it to players who are willing to put down $20 to try, rather than any ass-hole who can figure out how to sign up to play with their gold league account. I agree with this. It's less likely for not-so-serious gamers to take the place of those who *need* a spot, yet at the same time it's still open to anyone who wants to make a contribution to a top tier player  EDIT: Fee gone? Meh. | ||
|
DeathProfessor
United States1052 Posts
I actually agree with the guy who said all tournaments should have entry fees so people win other peoples money like Poker muahaha. | ||
|
arie3000
153 Posts
- Not very professional MLG, I only follow SC2 sideways and I knew that DeMuslim is mostly in the US. | ||
|
HTOMario
United States439 Posts
I'm so lost. | ||
|
Starp
Canada199 Posts
But imo, I don't think MLG is making money off the entry fee but is more to prevent lesser talent from taking up spots. Spectators generally want to see highest (as possible) talent in a tourney. It doesn't seem that unreasonable for serious, dedicated players to see how they fare against others in a tourney. There are other hobbies with entry fees as much or higher and without much monetary prize (like radio control car racing). edit: someone mention having a cut-off in ranking which is very good. This would do very nicely. | ||
|
Prplppleatr
United States1518 Posts
On April 14 2013 08:14 HTOMario wrote: Has anyone had trouble entering this? It keeps asking me to enter a team to join for it but.. I'm so lost. First, you create an account for the site, then you need to input your char. code and what not. Next, join the tournament by creating a 'team' name - ie. for me I did prplppleatr HOTS WCS....it is just a random name that means nothing. Check out the rules page if you can't find out how to do these things. http://gamebattles.majorleaguegaming.com/pc/starcraft-ii-wings-of-liberty/tournament/wcs-america-season-1-qualifyin/rules Don't feel bad either, it is not an easy site to use and you are not alone in having troubles with it. On par with ESL site, EU folks know what that means. | ||
Yhamm
France7248 Posts
| ||
|
Prplppleatr
United States1518 Posts
For example, today they had brackets starting at 1024 and only top 2 players got in. While this is a way to do things, but people who go out in ro4 and still won 8 matches in a row get nothing. Similar to how MLG is doing things, however it is a bit easier since it is all one qualifier where 8 people go through. Although these are both quite different from how GSL does things with several smaller brackets. Ie. In the MLG and ESL qualifiers you could win 6+ matches and still get knocked out, but in GSL you would be in a match before. Furthermore, you wouldn't have to wait on as many people to be able to play the next match. In other words, I think MLG and ESL should really consider how GSL does their qualifiers as well. MLG format - One qualifier, Bo3 double elim, 512 players with 8 advancing. ESL format - Four qualifiers, Bo1 to ro128 then Bo3 single elim, 1024 players each with 2 advancing. GSL format - One qualifier, Bo3 with multiple single elim group brackets, 16 players each group, as many groups as needed, top player in each group advances. As jmbthirteen points out, the code A (challenger division) qualifiers could still be different, so just assume they might do the same format for the sake of this question/poll. They have not released how the challenger division qualifiers will be done! Poll: Which qualifer format do you like the most? GSL (33) ESL (22) MLG (18) 73 total votes Your vote: Which qualifer format do you like the most? PS. I am NOT asking you to come up with your own format..these are the formats they have used. Of these, which would you prefer for code A qualifiers in NA/EU. | ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
On April 15 2013 09:06 Prplppleatr wrote: One thing I don't like about how MLG and ESL are doing these qualifiers is the all or nothing parts, particularly with ESL. For example, today they had brackets starting at 1024 and only top 2 players got in. While this is a way to do things, but people who go out in ro4 and still won 8 matches in a row get nothing. Similar to how MLG is doing things, however it is a bit easier since it is all one qualifier where 8 people go through. Although these are both quite different from how GSL does things with several smaller brackets. Ie. In the MLG and ESL qualifiers you could win 6+ matches and still get knocked out, but in GSL you would be in a match before. Furthermore, you wouldn't have to wait on as many people to be able to play the next match. In other words, I think MLG and ESL should really consider how GSL does their qualifiers as well. thing is though, with GSL, you only qualify for Code A, while with the IEM and MLG ones, you qualify right to Code S. It should be more difficult. | ||
|
Prplppleatr
United States1518 Posts
On April 15 2013 09:11 jmbthirteen wrote: thing is though, with GSL, you only qualify for Code A, while with the IEM and MLG ones, you qualify right to Code S. It should be more difficult. True, this is under the assumption they do the Code A qualifers the same as these Code S qualifiers! So could be a worthless question, but at this point they haven't released any information on those qualifiers, so just voice your opinion assuming that it would be the same! | ||
|
DifuntO
Greece2376 Posts
| ||
|
Prplppleatr
United States1518 Posts
On April 15 2013 09:18 DifuntO wrote: It's a one time thing guys.We just have to deal with it.Next season is going to be similar to Code A qualifiers. That's what i'm asking about, how would you like the NA/EU qualifiers for code A be done...we don't know how they are going to do the code A qualifiers yet. So, assuming they might do the same format premier division qualifers, which of the 3 types of qualifier formats would you prefer to have them use. | ||
|
L3gendary
Canada1470 Posts
On April 15 2013 09:06 Prplppleatr wrote: One thing I don't like about how MLG and ESL are doing these qualifiers is the all or nothing parts, particularly with ESL. For example, today they had brackets starting at 1024 and only top 2 players got in. While this is a way to do things, but people who go out in ro4 and still won 8 matches in a row get nothing. Similar to how MLG is doing things, however it is a bit easier since it is all one qualifier where 8 people go through. Although these are both quite different from how GSL does things with several smaller brackets. Ie. In the MLG and ESL qualifiers you could win 6+ matches and still get knocked out, but in GSL you would be in a match before. Furthermore, you wouldn't have to wait on as many people to be able to play the next match. In other words, I think MLG and ESL should really consider how GSL does their qualifiers as well. MLG format - One qualifier, Bo3 double elim, 512 players with 8 advancing. ESL format - Four qualifiers, Bo1 to ro128 then Bo3 single elim, 1024 players each with 2 advancing. GSL format - One qualifier, Bo3 with multiple single elim group brackets, 16 players each group, as many groups as needed, top player in each group advances. As jmbthirteen points out, the code A (challenger division) qualifiers could still be different, so just assume they are the same, for the sake of this question/poll. They have not released how the challenger division qualifiers will be done! The ESL format is actually more fair. If you are a top 8 player it's possible to get knocked out early to another top 8 or 16 player if u happen to meet them early in the qualifier. This way you get 4 tries so it's unlikely that you would get so unlucky. With the MLG format if 1 side of the bracket has most of the best players they can screwed out of a position. That being said I most prefer the formats used in TSL and TLS, where there are multiple qualifiers with the top 2 advancing from each but the top 3-32 get some points. Then after the 6th qualifer, the top 12 in points get in along with the 12 that finished top 2. This means 24 qualified players which is obviously not the same as in this case but you get the idea (and that's a whole other topic because I think only 8 qualified vs 24 invites is ridiculous). | ||
|
SinCitta
Germany2127 Posts
ESL and MLG aren't too different imho. MLG is double elimination, ESL is something like quadruple elimination (except you have to start from the beginning and get only improved seeds). The difference is just having to start over and having four lives vs. bracket luck, two lives, daily form. Something really different would be the TSL qualifier system with points. ESL/MLG system gets you winners (+runner/ups), TSL system gets you consistent top finishers. It depends on which players you want. | ||
|
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On April 14 2013 05:46 Xorphene wrote: Entrance fee waived, lol. "It's all about the money, money, money". MLG = money grabbers who only care about profit and NOTHING about evolvement of grassroots SC2. How old were Leenock and Life when they made their breakthrough? You limit by a rank, and I'd say Masters - there will be several uncut diamonds who may display good skill and wind up on a team - remember Scarlett, unknown> wins Playhem IPL tournament > causes a stir > on Acer. Or the rise and rise of Snute? We HAVE to evolve grassroots in all regions, otherwise there is no point in huge tournaments like a WCS as eventually the scene will die with no new players coming through. How about you actually look at MLG's history before you start spouting such idiocy? They've operated at a loss for close to a decade, they've supported dozens of games since inception (most that you probably never cared about "evolving"), they've hosted tournaments when 10k viewers was a pipe dream, let alone 100k or 1M. But no, they mention entry fees once (and then get rid of them), and suddenly they only care about profit. MLG has done more for growing Esports than almost every other organization out there. And if you looked outside your tiny hate bubble, that should be blatantly obvious. | ||
|
onPHYRE
Bulgaria925 Posts
| ||
|
Prplppleatr
United States1518 Posts
On April 15 2013 09:24 L3gendary wrote: The ESL format is actually more fair. If you are a top 8 player it's possible to get knocked out early to another top 8 or 16 player if u happen to meet them early in the qualifier. This way you get 4 tries so it's unlikely that you would get so unlucky. With the MLG format if 1 side of the bracket has most of the best players they can screwed out of a position. That being said I most prefer the formats used in TSL and TLS, where there are multiple qualifiers with the top 2 advancing from each but the top 3-32 get some points. Then after the 6th qualifer, the top 12 in points get in along with the 12 that finished top 2. This means 24 qualified players which is obviously not the same as in this case but you get the idea (and that's a whole other topic because I think only 8 qualified vs 24 invites is ridiculous). Each qualifiers has it's good and bad...multiple chances with the ESL format is nice. And I agree with the points portion, which is what I was getting at when saying players like bling, who won 8 or so matches, get nothing for their effort. (I wish this is more of how it was, but none of the 3 organization have taken this approach) For these premier division qualifiers, these are the formats. Now, assuming that MLG and ESL have the potential or possibility to use the same format for the challenger division, which of the 3 formats would you prefer?? (question i am asking everyone, for you I assume ESL) | ||
|
centergoliath4
37 Posts
make it so on the first match its you vs someone else and each paid 20 dollars meaning theres a 40 dollar pot if you win the match you get half of the pot for yourself and put the next 20 for the next matches pot so next match each player has won 20 and spent 20 making them even and theres a 40 dollar pot. winner takes half of the pot for himself and puts the other 20 for the next rounds pot what does this mean. simply put it means if you win your first match you are even on money and every single match after that you win an extra 20 dollars so if you win 5 matches that would mean you would EARN 80 dollars from the tournament if you win 10 matches you would earn 180 dollars from the tournament with this system in place it would mean ONLY people who lose their first match actually lose money and everyone else either wins money or is even on money damn that sounds like a great idea for a tournament. 20 dollars for enter and many noobs would play for fun while the pros actually earn money from it. and its easy to keep track everyone simply wins 20dollars X matches-1 won | ||
| ||
