EPTWCS 2013 Format, Players, Prizes and Point Details - Page 15
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Canucklehead
Canada5074 Posts
| ||
|
TestSubject893
United States774 Posts
On April 17 2013 13:50 ES_JohnClark wrote: read the graphic again.. notice the KEY at the bottom? in the WCS graphic.. and ill go through it some more tomorrow.. headed to bed.... you notice that they have several 'STAGES" for each.. and each are either a Premier or Challenger Stage.. and unless otherwise noted.. EACH Stage.. is a seperate event with seperate points awarded. If that is not the case..then yes.. my graphic is wrong.. but my point is not still  I think you guys are missing the issue here. They are not separate events. You are jumping to conclusions about a system you haven't even taken the time to understand. Tell me.. a guy that finishes 5th at DH, 9th at MLG and 6th at an IEM event.. is that player a better player that finished 4th at DH, 5th at MLG and was not able to attend the IEM Event? Maybe. I don't see anything wrong with awarding points for it though. Its not like the points determine who wins, just who qualifies for top 16 at Blizzcon. You've got to award points somehow. + Show Spoiler + This may be a better example for you guys. Answer that and we can then go to step 2 with the example. I think maybe may graphic was a bit overdone honestly.. but i wanted to avoid a lot of text. Oh.. and I very well could be wrong that each 'stage' of the series of events is a different event. Ill look into that more tomorrow. | ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
On April 17 2013 13:50 ES_JohnClark wrote: read the graphic again.. notice the KEY at the bottom? in the WCS graphic.. and ill go through it some more tomorrow.. headed to bed.... you notice that they have several 'STAGES" for each.. and each are either a Premier or Challenger Stage.. and unless otherwise noted.. EACH Stage.. is a seperate event with seperate points awarded. If that is not the case..then yes.. my graphic is wrong.. but my point is not still I think you guys are missing the issue here. Tell me.. a guy that finishes 5th at DH, 9th at MLG and 6th at an IEM event.. is that player a better player that finished 4th at DH, 5th at MLG and was not able to attend the IEM Event? This may be a better example for you guys. Answer that and we can then go to step 2 with the example. I think maybe may graphic was a bit overdone honestly.. but i wanted to avoid a lot of text. Oh.. and I very well could be wrong that each 'stage' of the series of events is a different event. Ill look into that more tomorrow. it always depends on the bracket. what if the guy who got 5th at DH lost to the winner of the tournament 3-2, while the guy who got 4th lost 0-3 to the 3rd place player who was 3-0'd by the winner? its an impossible question to answer. and its not even what your graphic presents really. there is no perfect format. but why should the player who is putting more effort into going to more tournaments be punished because a different player can't go to all the same tournaments? | ||
|
ES_JohnClark
United States1121 Posts
this is about the math.. and i think i lay out it that PURPLE attends 3 events, ardi attends a few more and Destined attends even more. | ||
|
TestSubject893
United States774 Posts
On April 17 2013 13:52 ES_JohnClark wrote: To rename.. even if they get into top 10's (constantly, as you put it..which is an assumption you are asking me NOT to make).. the idea that you are rewarded points as 'raw' number.. meaning its just an arbitrary number thrown out there.. STILL does not mean that if you attend 2 less events then another player you wont be ranked LESS then that person (who finished 12th through 16th). I only used examples of 'finishes'.. not real players.. not real tournaments (minus what WCS laid out as possible events).. to show the MATH and how it can work against a player that can only attend 4 of 10 events.. while it helps a player that finishes worse (on average) .. but attends 7 of 10 events. its math guys Its not easy to get top 16 at MLG. You don't get points just for attending. You get points for preforming well; as you should. | ||
|
ES_JohnClark
United States1121 Posts
On April 17 2013 13:56 jmbthirteen wrote: it always depends on the bracket. what if the guy who got 5th at DH lost to the winner of the tournament 3-2, while the guy who got 4th lost 0-3 to the 3rd place player who was 3-0'd by the winner? its an impossible question to answer. and its not even what your graphic presents really. there is no perfect format. but why should the player who is putting more effort into going to more tournaments be punished because a different player can't go to all the same tournaments? okay .. now you are getting into player vs. player rankings.. this is not at all what we are talking about. I agree with you.. again.. pointing out that I agree that each tournament should be weighted by a specific critera..but im not discussing that.. WCS is.. but we dont know yet what those are.. and im trying to show you that based on THEIR system or rewarding points.. it can skew results. I dont think player sshould be punished.. eitherway.. and unless we have all players play all other players.. an ELO system will NEVER be a good solution for esports.. period.. but discussion for another day. however.. a combo player vs. player ranking system that I helped create.. here http://www.esportranks.com uses an ELO + weighted + time appreciation method to give player vs. player results! So.. a player that can only attend 4 events should NOT be punished for not being able to attend only 4 .. but finishing better at each event. Right now guys.. the only ranking system that can work with the WCS system of 'regions'.. (which are not really regions).. is a NON ELO ... Tournament PLACEMENT system. Meaning.. we cant compare player vs. player because of regions and then again.. if we do that..it defeauts the entire purpose of their points system based on FINISH. Hope the caps helped highlight where your mistakes were in your argument | ||
|
Canucklehead
Canada5074 Posts
On April 17 2013 13:56 jmbthirteen wrote: but why should the player who is putting more effort into going to more tournaments be punished because a different player can't go to all the same tournaments? That's not a player putting in more effort though. That's a player being on a richer team and being able to afford to go to more tournaments. | ||
|
TestSubject893
United States774 Posts
On April 17 2013 14:03 ES_JohnClark wrote: okay .. now you are getting into player vs. player rankings.. this is not at all what we are talking about. I agree with you.. again.. pointing out that I agree that each tournament should be weighted by a specific critera..but im not discussing that.. WCS is.. but we dont know yet what those are.. and im trying to show you that based on THEIR system or rewarding points.. it can skew results. I dont think player sshould be punished.. eitherway.. and unless we have all players play all other players.. an ELO system will NEVER be a good solution for esports.. period.. but discussion for another day. however.. a combo player vs. player ranking system that I helped create.. here http://www.esportranks.com uses an ELO + weighted + time appreciation method to give player vs. player results! So.. a player that can only attend 4 events should NOT be punished for not being able to attend only 4 .. but finishing better at each event. Right now guys.. the only ranking system that can work with the WCS system of 'regions'.. (which are not really regions).. is a NON ELO ... Tournament PLACEMENT system. Meaning.. we cant compare player vs. player because of regions and then again.. if we do that..it defeauts the entire purpose of their points system based on FINISH. Hope the caps helped highlight where your mistakes were in your argument Its clear you don't understand this system. The only thing points matter for is in determining who qualifies for Blizzcon. The season finals award so many points that if you don't attend and do well in 1 of the 3 you probably won't stand a chance at getting into Blizzcon. Now you wanna argue about the a few hundred points here and there that people get by finishing in the top ten of a DH or MLG and pretend that any old player could just go out and do that as long as their team flies them there? Its gonna take a minimum of 5000 points to qualify and you wanna argue the guy who gets 3rd at Assembly doesn't deserve another 100 points? How can you possibly be so certain of that right now? How is that your biggest problem with this system? | ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
On April 17 2013 14:03 ES_JohnClark wrote: okay .. now you are getting into player vs. player rankings.. this is not at all what we are talking about. I agree with you.. again.. pointing out that I agree that each tournament should be weighted by a specific critera..but im not discussing that.. WCS is.. but we dont know yet what those are.. and im trying to show you that based on THEIR system or rewarding points.. it can skew results. I dont think player sshould be punished.. eitherway.. and unless we have all players play all other players.. an ELO system will NEVER be a good solution for esports.. period.. but discussion for another day. however.. a combo player vs. player ranking system that I helped create.. here http://www.esportranks.com uses an ELO + weighted + time appreciation method to give player vs. player results! So.. a player that can only attend 4 events should NOT be punished for not being able to attend only 4 .. but finishing better at each event. Right now guys.. the only ranking system that can work with the WCS system of 'regions'.. (which are not really regions).. is a NON ELO ... Tournament PLACEMENT system. Meaning.. we cant compare player vs. player because of regions and then again.. if we do that..it defeauts the entire purpose of their points system based on FINISH. Hope the caps helped highlight where your mistakes were in your argument well actually you started the player vs player rankings when you asked which player was better.... Right now the only system that would be "fair" would be one that only judges the WCS and doesn't include non WCS events. It will be the only event where the players are the same and have the same opportunity. | ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
On April 17 2013 14:07 Canucklehead wrote: That's not a player putting in more effort though. That's a player being on a richer team and being able to afford to go to more tournaments. traveling around the world to compete is more effort imo. | ||
|
rename
Estonia329 Posts
On April 17 2013 13:50 ES_JohnClark wrote: Tell me.. a guy that finishes 5th at DH, 9th at MLG and 6th at an IEM event.. is that player a better player that finished 4th at DH, 5th at MLG and was not able to attend the IEM Event? This may be a better example for you guys. Who knows - maybe the player who missed the IEM would have placed 32th there. The raw points pased system is good enough, you really need a valid example where it really misses the mark. (My personal beef is how weekend tournaments give way too much points compared to regular season - but that is a weighing problem not system issue) | ||
|
skideff
Korea (South)6 Posts
| ||
|
Canucklehead
Canada5074 Posts
On April 17 2013 14:16 jmbthirteen wrote: traveling around the world to compete is more effort imo. No it's not. Unless you believe puma put in more effort than every other korean besides mc in the early days. There were tons of krs who could have done what puma did, but were never given the opportunity to travel and beat up on foreigners. It's what gave puma the false perception that he was better than he actually was. Eventually EG wised up to the fact puma was overrated once more krs joined foreign tourneys and cut him. | ||
|
jmbthirteen
United States10734 Posts
On April 17 2013 14:28 Canucklehead wrote: No it's not. Unless you believe puma put in more effort than every other korean besides mc in the early days. There were tons of krs who could have done what puma did, but were never given the opportunity to travel and beat up on foreigners. It's what gave puma the false perception that he was better than he actually was. Eventually EG wised up to the fact puma was overrated once more krs joined foreign tourneys and cut him. The level Puma played at in 2011 vs 2012 is a completely different subject. He was an incredible player in 2011 (not cause he won foreign events, but because he would beat top koreans at all those events). And in the case of Puma, he would most likely be in the NA division. And he was putting in more effort than most players in the NA division. Korea is in an interesting position since several Korean players travel MUCH more than others. But most of those traveling Koreans aren't even playing in the KR region so it mitigates that problem quite a bit. And since majority of Koreans only travel to tournaments that pay their way there, which usually has a qualifier that most koreans play in, its not as big of a problem. | ||
|
Shinta)
United States1716 Posts
On April 17 2013 06:57 LighT. wrote: I like watching EU/NA games. Ive been following the EU qualifiers for the past two days passively because guys like Sterlok and Bunny have produced some entertaining games. However, I am going to be angry if I see a far more inferior player make it to the season finals over one of the 10s of better Korean betters that could have taken his place. Blizzard, I feel, has stunted the growth of Korean E-sports for NA/EU to basically catch up. The problem is....Korea has still A LOT of work to do in terms of esports growth. HoTS + Kespa players switching over did pull a few people in but not enough..or relevant enough to gain that full bw crowd into the SPL/GSTL stands. Not a lot of people care about sc2 in Korea than people think, staying away because its not "original" and "easy"..at least speaking to my relatives/cousins etc. Another point to make is that..I was excited at the prospect of OSL/GSL because of the fact that it brings back the duo tournaments (and I'm speaking as also a bw fan here) when it was OSL/MSL running at the same time. The GSL becoming the new MSL. But nope, they took that away. On top of that...they combined the two and made the winner of the combined "OSL/GSL" tournament..which should be prestrigious as EVER, some entry ticket to some season finale...while throw a bit of money at the winner and giving a paper that says "Good Job". lol. They didn't stunt anything. They're taking menu away from people who made too much for their own good anyways. They aren't stopping anyone's careers from developing like you're trying to ensinuate. Your relatives I bet get stomped on the ladder and complain that it's too easy. Korea is stuck on BW because of stubbornness, and just need time for that generation of people to pass for more fans to come in. Any grumpy old man will stand by their beliefs even when told by everyone that they're wrong, so the growth of SC2 in Korea isn't being hindered by this at all. Teams and money are still stable in Korea, and the biggest way to improve eSports and make SC2 more popular in Korea is to make it self sustainable and progressive, rather than giving 1 person a lot of money and making everyone else's financial status a joke. As for OSL/MSL, they got OGN on board the GSL, making the tournament a lot more widespread. Stop being so selfish and just realize that this is an awesome thing to happen!! In fact, they might even add an OSL later on after this has so much success come its way! The system is good, the players are good, the money is good (I do hope that the lower ends get a bit more money in the near future). This is a great thing that's happening. Korea is even making significantly more money than NA/EU (being that its going to the people who make the least money, I do consider it very significant even though its not thousands upon thousands of dollars). Hold your horses and watch this good thing bloom into a great thing. Blizzard still has a lot to learn, but they are putting a great machine to work here. | ||
|
MasterOfPuppets
Romania6942 Posts
On April 17 2013 15:29 Shinta) wrote: Korea is stuck on BW because of stubbornness, and just need time for that generation of people to pass for more fans to come in. Any grumpy old man will stand by their beliefs even when told by everyone that they're wrong, so the growth of SC2 in Korea isn't being hindered by this at all. Oh wow... way to aggressively generalize a massive amount of people on the basis of your own personal, unfounded and misguided assumptions. People did move on from BW, at least many of them did. Do you know where they went? To League of Legends and World of Tanks and other free to play games. I'm sorry, but StarCraft 2 has never been popular in Korea, not as popular as BW nor as popular as LoL. It's true, the scene has been fairly stable despite some teams disbanding etc, but if you think Blizzard is helping this stability by fucking over the tournaments in that region... then lol. | ||
|
Clefairy
1570 Posts
| ||
egernya
Canada352 Posts
On April 17 2013 14:20 skideff wrote: I hope all Korean players boycott WCS and GOMTV operates another league such as HOTSIX CUP with more prize money than WCS. Let's see how fun WCS will be without Korean players. That will never happen. Reasons: 1. Kespa players have no reason to do that. PL is more important than anything for Kespa. They wouldn't dare Blizzard 2. ESF players cannot afford it. If ESF players don't part in WCS, their income will decrease so far so much, and teams like NSH or Prime will be next Zenex. 3. Gomtv cannot operate another league boycotting WCS.KR. Blizzard will never allow it. 4. HOTSIX will not investigate that much money. All the prize money from the previous GSL was from Blizz. not from the sponsors. Sponsors will not think the league worths that much money( more prize money + running cost) 5. Even if Kespa and ESF boycotts, there are still many Korean Players in WCS, including AXIOM players, Liquid, EG, etc. Even though not all of them are the greatest, Blizz. still can run WCS without too much problems. | ||
|
bgx
Poland6595 Posts
| ||
|
grs
Germany2339 Posts
| ||
| ||
