|
This is definitely a good rule. If they can't force players to sign up for their own regions due to some legal mumbo-jumbo, they should at least give them every incentive to do so.
|
On May 01 2013 22:48 Sated wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 22:37 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:36 Fenrax wrote:On May 01 2013 22:33 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:28 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:25 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:23 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:16 turdburgler wrote:On May 01 2013 22:12 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:09 turdburgler wrote:
[quote]
this line of logic falls to pieces when you realize they actively invited koreans. they didnt (just) hold an open qualifier and koreans crept in unnoticed.
they went out of their way to invite korean players to play, to up the quality of the games. now they force NA server just to spite the people that they invited? Didn't players in the KR region have to play against each other on the NA server during the qualifier? If so, I don't think it is appropriate to change the rule now. the qualifier was an unmitigated shitfest though. if we are going to keep following the systems laid out in the qualifier (and i have no idea what the kr vs kr situation was there either way) we should let cheaters play for an extra 5 hours so that they can eliminate the maximum number of people, because you know... consistency. using consistency to defend terrible practices just leads to things never changing, because things can only become more enshrined in the rule set. now, the during first run through is the only time we could possibly make a change to anything based on your logic, because otherwise we wouldnt want to break with history. If the games are casted live, it won't matter. The observers need to connect to the game as well and that creates latency issues for both the players(see Chill, GET OUT!). With all that being true, playing on NA is sort of a non-issue. Except not. The only reason the players felt that is because Chill was actively being dropped by the server because of his poor connection. Also, I love how it's the only example you can think of, it's even funnier that everyone involved was on NA at that time, including Chill.  It's not the only example, it happens constantly in weekly cups like ZOTAC and Go4SC2. It happened in WCS EU yesterday. Given that ESL have a range of casters so that they can accomodate the many languages of the EU, we have to expect that similar issues could occur. You can argue that these are issues within the same server, but all that means is that these issues will be amplified if you suddenly force a load of casters cross-server just two help two players. This means that it is best to have a set rule that prevents this from ever happening, and that all players understand that this rule exists, so that there are no arguments and no confusion in the future. I agree, which is why I'm trying to look for the particular post where it very clearly states this rule of only playing on that server without exception. Because I'm interested if this detail was revealed before the qualifiers or afterwards, since prior to MajOr's tweet there was no discussion about this issue? On May 01 2013 20:24 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
It isn't really a big deal, but your argument isn't correct as the WCS rules did not exist when people signed up. Believing the rules shouldn't be changed is a different opinion from believing it is a good rule, anyway. Exactly. So all this talk of precedents and what will become of WCS America gets thrown out the window when we realize that Blizzard didn't even make all the details and rules clear to begin with, thereby causing mass misinformation. I agree that if the players didn't know about it beforehand then perhaps this is a problem with the organisation of the tournament. That could've been handled better, for sure. But it doesn't change the validity of the rule, nor does it change the fact that having a firm rule in place is good for the future because it will help prevent further confusion on this issue. Not that it has anything to do with my argument: You're just moving the goalposts because you're wrong about the cross-server lag issue. Nice one! EDIT: I removed the dictionary definition stuff, not central to the argument at all.
And lets be honest about this, the confusion is one player complaining on twitter about the issue. And this player likely knew they had to play on NA, but asked if an exception could be made and was told "no".
|
Isn't alive in korea too? Either way as previously mentioned it is called WCS NA for a reason deal with it.
|
If they want to chase easy money instead of facing the toughest competition in the league they're invested in, they should realize that they have to play on the server where the league and players are based. They're not going to be catered to.
|
On May 01 2013 22:48 Sated wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 22:37 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:36 Fenrax wrote:On May 01 2013 22:33 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:28 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:25 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:23 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:16 turdburgler wrote:On May 01 2013 22:12 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:09 turdburgler wrote:
[quote]
this line of logic falls to pieces when you realize they actively invited koreans. they didnt (just) hold an open qualifier and koreans crept in unnoticed.
they went out of their way to invite korean players to play, to up the quality of the games. now they force NA server just to spite the people that they invited? Didn't players in the KR region have to play against each other on the NA server during the qualifier? If so, I don't think it is appropriate to change the rule now. the qualifier was an unmitigated shitfest though. if we are going to keep following the systems laid out in the qualifier (and i have no idea what the kr vs kr situation was there either way) we should let cheaters play for an extra 5 hours so that they can eliminate the maximum number of people, because you know... consistency. using consistency to defend terrible practices just leads to things never changing, because things can only become more enshrined in the rule set. now, the during first run through is the only time we could possibly make a change to anything based on your logic, because otherwise we wouldnt want to break with history. If the games are casted live, it won't matter. The observers need to connect to the game as well and that creates latency issues for both the players(see Chill, GET OUT!). With all that being true, playing on NA is sort of a non-issue. Except not. The only reason the players felt that is because Chill was actively being dropped by the server because of his poor connection. Also, I love how it's the only example you can think of, it's even funnier that everyone involved was on NA at that time, including Chill. It's not the only example, it happens constantly in weekly cups like ZOTAC and Go4SC2. It happened in WCS EU yesterday. Given that ESL have a range of casters so that they can accomodate the many languages of the EU, we have to expect that similar issues could occur. You can argue that these are issues within the same server, but all that means is that these issues will be amplified if you suddenly force a load of casters cross-server just two help two players. This means that it is best to have a set rule that prevents this from ever happening, and that all players understand that this rule exists, so that there are no arguments and no confusion in the future. I agree, which is why I'm trying to look for the particular post where it very clearly states this rule of only playing on that server without exception. Because I'm interested if this detail was revealed before the qualifiers or afterwards, since prior to MajOr's tweet there was no discussion about this issue? On May 01 2013 20:24 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
It isn't really a big deal, but your argument isn't correct as the WCS rules did not exist when people signed up. Believing the rules shouldn't be changed is a different opinion from believing it is a good rule, anyway. Exactly. So all this talk of precedents and what will become of WCS America gets thrown out the window when we realize that Blizzard didn't even make all the details and rules clear to begin with, thereby causing mass misinformation. I agree that if the players didn't know about it beforehand then perhaps this is a problem with the organisation of the tournament. That could've been handled better, for sure. But it doesn't change the validity of the rule, nor does it change the fact that having a firm rule in place is good for the future because it will help prevent further confusion on this issue.
Not that it has anything to do with my argument: You're just moving the goalposts because you're wrong about the cross-server lag issue. Nice one!EDIT: I removed the dictionary definition stuff, not central to the argument at all.
Lol I'm not trying to win a debate here, I'm just voicing my opinion on this clusterfuck of an event and the general attitude of the people who try to defend MLG. I've said what I had to say.
On May 01 2013 22:58 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 22:48 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:37 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:36 Fenrax wrote:On May 01 2013 22:33 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:28 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:25 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:23 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:16 turdburgler wrote:On May 01 2013 22:12 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Didn't players in the KR region have to play against each other on the NA server during the qualifier? If so, I don't think it is appropriate to change the rule now. the qualifier was an unmitigated shitfest though. if we are going to keep following the systems laid out in the qualifier (and i have no idea what the kr vs kr situation was there either way) we should let cheaters play for an extra 5 hours so that they can eliminate the maximum number of people, because you know... consistency. using consistency to defend terrible practices just leads to things never changing, because things can only become more enshrined in the rule set. now, the during first run through is the only time we could possibly make a change to anything based on your logic, because otherwise we wouldnt want to break with history. If the games are casted live, it won't matter. The observers need to connect to the game as well and that creates latency issues for both the players(see Chill, GET OUT!). With all that being true, playing on NA is sort of a non-issue. Except not. The only reason the players felt that is because Chill was actively being dropped by the server because of his poor connection. Also, I love how it's the only example you can think of, it's even funnier that everyone involved was on NA at that time, including Chill. It's not the only example, it happens constantly in weekly cups like ZOTAC and Go4SC2. It happened in WCS EU yesterday. Given that ESL have a range of casters so that they can accomodate the many languages of the EU, we have to expect that similar issues could occur. You can argue that these are issues within the same server, but all that means is that these issues will be amplified if you suddenly force a load of casters cross-server just two help two players. This means that it is best to have a set rule that prevents this from ever happening, and that all players understand that this rule exists, so that there are no arguments and no confusion in the future. I agree, which is why I'm trying to look for the particular post where it very clearly states this rule of only playing on that server without exception. Because I'm interested if this detail was revealed before the qualifiers or afterwards, since prior to MajOr's tweet there was no discussion about this issue? On May 01 2013 20:24 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
It isn't really a big deal, but your argument isn't correct as the WCS rules did not exist when people signed up. Believing the rules shouldn't be changed is a different opinion from believing it is a good rule, anyway. Exactly. So all this talk of precedents and what will become of WCS America gets thrown out the window when we realize that Blizzard didn't even make all the details and rules clear to begin with, thereby causing mass misinformation. I agree that if the players didn't know about it beforehand then perhaps this is a problem with the organisation of the tournament. That could've been handled better, for sure. But it doesn't change the validity of the rule, nor does it change the fact that having a firm rule in place is good for the future because it will help prevent further confusion on this issue. Not that it has anything to do with my argument: You're just moving the goalposts because you're wrong about the cross-server lag issue. Nice one! EDIT: I removed the dictionary definition stuff, not central to the argument at all. And lets be honest about this, the confusion is one player complaining on twitter about the issue. And this player likely knew they had to play on NA, but asked if an exception could be made and was told "no".
There you go again making baseless assumptions that the players knew this all along and it's not really as big of a mess as it seems. And here I thought getting banned for it taught you a lesson.
Stop trying to paint the players in a bad light. I don't understand why you feel the need to defend MLG to the point of making these wild claims with no knowledge of what actually happened, instead of at least giving the poor players the benefit of the doubt.
I'm done here. This whole thing is one gargantuan, ungodly mess.
|
On May 01 2013 22:23 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 22:05 Pokebunny wrote:On May 01 2013 22:02 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:00 Pokebunny wrote:On May 01 2013 21:54 Fenrax wrote:On May 01 2013 21:49 Pokebunny wrote:
I edited this into my last post, but since people have already quoted me:
I guess to rehash my opinion: in some situations, maybe it would make sense to play on another server, for example if both the participants were American and traveled to Europe for a weekend tournament they could play there.. but where do we stop making allowances for Korean players in what was basically supposed to be the first real region-divided league? What kind of precedent does this set for future scenarios? Should we be okay with WCS America ending up as 90% Korean with all the games played on Korea? so... what has that to do with anything? what would be the advantage of having "WCS America ending up as 90% Korean with all the games played on NA? I think we're all going under the assumption that the current system is shit, and will be changed if that happens. If Blizzard wating to create a tournament that was solely the purpose of the highest level of play, they would have just made it global from the start. But clearly they had some intention with making regions feed into a global finals... completely disregarding that for the "sake of high level competition" is basically saying that there isn't a place for a concept such as WCS. You're right, but you're also completely beside the point. The deed is done, the Ro16 will already mostly consist of Koreans. So why not let them play on the KR server? What is the advantage of forcing Koreans to play on NA server when the only other option is allowing them to play on the KR server; when either way you'll still have 12-14 Koreans in the Ro16? Because it sets a precedent on the future of WCS. Suppose other Koreans see that they're basically just getting an easier tournament on the KR server, why would they not split equally between WCS AM and KR? We need to create some sort of barrier to complete Korean takeover, and then change the system entirely ASAP. Koreans do not get an "easier tournament" because they'd be allowed to play on KR if both players agree but still have to play on NA if either player wants them to. Try again.
I think the argument is that if the Korean players see that they are able to choose the Korean server when they are playing against each other (Koreans), they will be more tempted to switch over to WCS AM, and thus, a further influx of Koreans.
As time goes by > More Korean players in WCS AM > More matches available to be played on Korean server since both are Koreans anyway > Further influx > WCS KR2
This is what I understand of the argument. Still on the fence though.
|
On May 01 2013 22:46 sAsImre wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 22:44 weiliem wrote:
I think its reasonable. Its WCS NA, if they dont like it they should have went for WCS KR instead. lol WCS NA no longer exists, it's WCS Americas. and since MajOr is from Mexico it should be played on SA server with your stupid logic since the imperialism from US and Canadian citizens seems to think that Americas = NA.
It's actually WCS America, thus why there was sooo many US invites and very little of every other country in the Americas. Also, the server name is just "Americas". There is no South American Server. (and as Shellshock mentioned, Mexico = NA)
I feel that should be played on the AM server. Even if the rule was added in after they signed up, it makes no sense to have the ability to play on different servers, because if you can then its just WCS Region #1, #2, #3. The whole America, Europe and Korea thing becomes irrelevant.
|
On May 01 2013 23:02 Doodsmack wrote:
If they want to chase easy money instead of facing the toughest competition in the league they're invested in, they should realize that they have to play on the server where the league and players are based. They're not going to be catered to.
What a terrible mentality. God forbid the better player who actually worked hard to achieve results and skill take the win and the money.
No you're right, better give hand outs to mediocre american players who play like shit.
And Major ? How dare that guy actually go train where the hardest training is available. Who gives him that idea to actually work hard to become better. Tsss. He's from Mexico anyway if you know what I mean. Not really an american.
/sarcasm
|
On May 01 2013 23:07 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 22:48 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:37 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:36 Fenrax wrote:On May 01 2013 22:33 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:28 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:25 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:23 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:16 turdburgler wrote:On May 01 2013 22:12 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Didn't players in the KR region have to play against each other on the NA server during the qualifier? If so, I don't think it is appropriate to change the rule now. the qualifier was an unmitigated shitfest though. if we are going to keep following the systems laid out in the qualifier (and i have no idea what the kr vs kr situation was there either way) we should let cheaters play for an extra 5 hours so that they can eliminate the maximum number of people, because you know... consistency. using consistency to defend terrible practices just leads to things never changing, because things can only become more enshrined in the rule set. now, the during first run through is the only time we could possibly make a change to anything based on your logic, because otherwise we wouldnt want to break with history. If the games are casted live, it won't matter. The observers need to connect to the game as well and that creates latency issues for both the players(see Chill, GET OUT!). With all that being true, playing on NA is sort of a non-issue. Except not. The only reason the players felt that is because Chill was actively being dropped by the server because of his poor connection. Also, I love how it's the only example you can think of, it's even funnier that everyone involved was on NA at that time, including Chill. It's not the only example, it happens constantly in weekly cups like ZOTAC and Go4SC2. It happened in WCS EU yesterday. Given that ESL have a range of casters so that they can accomodate the many languages of the EU, we have to expect that similar issues could occur. You can argue that these are issues within the same server, but all that means is that these issues will be amplified if you suddenly force a load of casters cross-server just two help two players. This means that it is best to have a set rule that prevents this from ever happening, and that all players understand that this rule exists, so that there are no arguments and no confusion in the future. I agree, which is why I'm trying to look for the particular post where it very clearly states this rule of only playing on that server without exception. Because I'm interested if this detail was revealed before the qualifiers or afterwards, since prior to MajOr's tweet there was no discussion about this issue? On May 01 2013 20:24 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
It isn't really a big deal, but your argument isn't correct as the WCS rules did not exist when people signed up. Believing the rules shouldn't be changed is a different opinion from believing it is a good rule, anyway. Exactly. So all this talk of precedents and what will become of WCS America gets thrown out the window when we realize that Blizzard didn't even make all the details and rules clear to begin with, thereby causing mass misinformation. I agree that if the players didn't know about it beforehand then perhaps this is a problem with the organisation of the tournament. That could've been handled better, for sure. But it doesn't change the validity of the rule, nor does it change the fact that having a firm rule in place is good for the future because it will help prevent further confusion on this issue.
Not that it has anything to do with my argument: You're just moving the goalposts because you're wrong about the cross-server lag issue. Nice one!EDIT: I removed the dictionary definition stuff, not central to the argument at all. Lol I'm not trying to win a debate here, I'm just voicing my opinion on this clusterfuck of an event and the general attitude of the people who try to defend MLG. I've said what I had to say. Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 22:58 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:48 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:37 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:36 Fenrax wrote:On May 01 2013 22:33 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:28 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:25 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:23 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:16 turdburgler wrote:
[quote]
the qualifier was an unmitigated shitfest though. if we are going to keep following the systems laid out in the qualifier (and i have no idea what the kr vs kr situation was there either way) we should let cheaters play for an extra 5 hours so that they can eliminate the maximum number of people, because you know... consistency.
using consistency to defend terrible practices just leads to things never changing, because things can only become more enshrined in the rule set. now, the during first run through is the only time we could possibly make a change to anything based on your logic, because otherwise we wouldnt want to break with history. If the games are casted live, it won't matter. The observers need to connect to the game as well and that creates latency issues for both the players(see Chill, GET OUT!). With all that being true, playing on NA is sort of a non-issue. Except not. The only reason the players felt that is because Chill was actively being dropped by the server because of his poor connection. Also, I love how it's the only example you can think of, it's even funnier that everyone involved was on NA at that time, including Chill. It's not the only example, it happens constantly in weekly cups like ZOTAC and Go4SC2. It happened in WCS EU yesterday. Given that ESL have a range of casters so that they can accomodate the many languages of the EU, we have to expect that similar issues could occur. You can argue that these are issues within the same server, but all that means is that these issues will be amplified if you suddenly force a load of casters cross-server just two help two players. This means that it is best to have a set rule that prevents this from ever happening, and that all players understand that this rule exists, so that there are no arguments and no confusion in the future. I agree, which is why I'm trying to look for the particular post where it very clearly states this rule of only playing on that server without exception. Because I'm interested if this detail was revealed before the qualifiers or afterwards, since prior to MajOr's tweet there was no discussion about this issue? On May 01 2013 20:24 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
It isn't really a big deal, but your argument isn't correct as the WCS rules did not exist when people signed up. Believing the rules shouldn't be changed is a different opinion from believing it is a good rule, anyway. Exactly. So all this talk of precedents and what will become of WCS America gets thrown out the window when we realize that Blizzard didn't even make all the details and rules clear to begin with, thereby causing mass misinformation. I agree that if the players didn't know about it beforehand then perhaps this is a problem with the organisation of the tournament. That could've been handled better, for sure. But it doesn't change the validity of the rule, nor does it change the fact that having a firm rule in place is good for the future because it will help prevent further confusion on this issue. Not that it has anything to do with my argument: You're just moving the goalposts because you're wrong about the cross-server lag issue. Nice one! EDIT: I removed the dictionary definition stuff, not central to the argument at all. And lets be honest about this, the confusion is one player complaining on twitter about the issue. And this player likely knew they had to play on NA, but asked if an exception could be made and was told "no". There you go again making baseless assumptions that the players knew this all along and it's not really as big of a mess as it seems. And here I thought getting banned for it taught you a lesson. Stop trying to paint the players in a bad light. I don't understand why you feel the need to defend MLG to the point of making these wild claims with no knowledge of what actually happened, instead of giving the poor players the benefit of the doubt.
That taught me that I should never post early in the morning before breakfast, as my judgment is clearly impaired. Also, don't call players idiots.
And I am not trying to paint Major or players in a bad light. They are concerned with playing the game and normally do not care about production issues. It seems totally reasonable that a player would want to play the server with the least lag between him and his opponent, only to forget that the casters also need to connect as well. Twitter doesn't provide a lot of context, but Major's message does seem to be out of frustration.
|
I have no problems with this. WCS is supposed to be the foreigner equivelant of Code S. Now obviously the logistics of the players competing doesn't allow for a live studio with players without paying a lot of money for commodations over many weeks, but still ESL/MLG are trying their best to give the same feeling. I'm sure managing a tournament is hard enough as it is. Having to swap servers for every other Bo3 certainly doesn't make it easier so I can understand wanting to avoid that, especially when everything is being broadcasted live.
Another thing, the reason for inviting koreans in the first place, was to integrate them into the foreign communities, mvp practicing in and playing from EU is a good example of this. Koreans sitting in home in korea, winning some matches online and then going back to their in-house matches is not only against the purpose of this tournament, but detrimental to the entire foreigner scene. I know some people don't care about that, and just want to see the best koreans and nothing else, but that's a whole other discussion that doesn't need to be had here.
|
I'm so tired of WCS, already. Is this season over yet? And is there a long off season? If not, too bad. We're not wanting to tempt them to come over to NA but we're going to invite them to the NA premier league. Yeah, like Koreans seeing fellow Koreans that are way worse than them winning NA isn't going to be all the temptation they need. Has anyone actually played cross servers? At least to me, playing on KR is a trivial difference. I'd be more tempted to play on a server without star station than to not have any extra delays that I might have on KR.
I'm tired of all this bs. You know how you put a limit on something you fear might happen? You take control and you either say "x amount of Koreans can play in a non KR region per season" or you simply tie it to citizenship. If anyone actually cared, they would do this, because it's not hard. There are professional leagues that do just this. It's not like you have to be an inventor to solve this concern.
Given that no one cares, obviously it's MLG being concerned about commentators convenience and stream quality/lag. Period. If MLG doesn't really care about the players, then you know what I say... fuck them, too. Play where the hell you feel like it and tell them to suck a dick.
|
On May 01 2013 23:16 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 23:07 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:48 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:37 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:36 Fenrax wrote:On May 01 2013 22:33 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:28 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:25 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:23 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:16 turdburgler wrote:
[quote]
the qualifier was an unmitigated shitfest though. if we are going to keep following the systems laid out in the qualifier (and i have no idea what the kr vs kr situation was there either way) we should let cheaters play for an extra 5 hours so that they can eliminate the maximum number of people, because you know... consistency.
using consistency to defend terrible practices just leads to things never changing, because things can only become more enshrined in the rule set. now, the during first run through is the only time we could possibly make a change to anything based on your logic, because otherwise we wouldnt want to break with history. If the games are casted live, it won't matter. The observers need to connect to the game as well and that creates latency issues for both the players(see Chill, GET OUT!). With all that being true, playing on NA is sort of a non-issue. Except not. The only reason the players felt that is because Chill was actively being dropped by the server because of his poor connection. Also, I love how it's the only example you can think of, it's even funnier that everyone involved was on NA at that time, including Chill. It's not the only example, it happens constantly in weekly cups like ZOTAC and Go4SC2. It happened in WCS EU yesterday. Given that ESL have a range of casters so that they can accomodate the many languages of the EU, we have to expect that similar issues could occur. You can argue that these are issues within the same server, but all that means is that these issues will be amplified if you suddenly force a load of casters cross-server just two help two players. This means that it is best to have a set rule that prevents this from ever happening, and that all players understand that this rule exists, so that there are no arguments and no confusion in the future. I agree, which is why I'm trying to look for the particular post where it very clearly states this rule of only playing on that server without exception. Because I'm interested if this detail was revealed before the qualifiers or afterwards, since prior to MajOr's tweet there was no discussion about this issue? On May 01 2013 20:24 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
It isn't really a big deal, but your argument isn't correct as the WCS rules did not exist when people signed up. Believing the rules shouldn't be changed is a different opinion from believing it is a good rule, anyway. Exactly. So all this talk of precedents and what will become of WCS America gets thrown out the window when we realize that Blizzard didn't even make all the details and rules clear to begin with, thereby causing mass misinformation. I agree that if the players didn't know about it beforehand then perhaps this is a problem with the organisation of the tournament. That could've been handled better, for sure. But it doesn't change the validity of the rule, nor does it change the fact that having a firm rule in place is good for the future because it will help prevent further confusion on this issue.
Not that it has anything to do with my argument: You're just moving the goalposts because you're wrong about the cross-server lag issue. Nice one!EDIT: I removed the dictionary definition stuff, not central to the argument at all. Lol I'm not trying to win a debate here, I'm just voicing my opinion on this clusterfuck of an event and the general attitude of the people who try to defend MLG. I've said what I had to say. On May 01 2013 22:58 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:48 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:37 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:36 Fenrax wrote:On May 01 2013 22:33 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:28 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:25 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:23 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
If the games are casted live, it won't matter. The observers need to connect to the game as well and that creates latency issues for both the players(see Chill, GET OUT!). With all that being true, playing on NA is sort of a non-issue. Except not. The only reason the players felt that is because Chill was actively being dropped by the server because of his poor connection. Also, I love how it's the only example you can think of, it's even funnier that everyone involved was on NA at that time, including Chill. It's not the only example, it happens constantly in weekly cups like ZOTAC and Go4SC2. It happened in WCS EU yesterday. Given that ESL have a range of casters so that they can accomodate the many languages of the EU, we have to expect that similar issues could occur. You can argue that these are issues within the same server, but all that means is that these issues will be amplified if you suddenly force a load of casters cross-server just two help two players. This means that it is best to have a set rule that prevents this from ever happening, and that all players understand that this rule exists, so that there are no arguments and no confusion in the future. I agree, which is why I'm trying to look for the particular post where it very clearly states this rule of only playing on that server without exception. Because I'm interested if this detail was revealed before the qualifiers or afterwards, since prior to MajOr's tweet there was no discussion about this issue? On May 01 2013 20:24 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
It isn't really a big deal, but your argument isn't correct as the WCS rules did not exist when people signed up. Believing the rules shouldn't be changed is a different opinion from believing it is a good rule, anyway. Exactly. So all this talk of precedents and what will become of WCS America gets thrown out the window when we realize that Blizzard didn't even make all the details and rules clear to begin with, thereby causing mass misinformation. I agree that if the players didn't know about it beforehand then perhaps this is a problem with the organisation of the tournament. That could've been handled better, for sure. But it doesn't change the validity of the rule, nor does it change the fact that having a firm rule in place is good for the future because it will help prevent further confusion on this issue. Not that it has anything to do with my argument: You're just moving the goalposts because you're wrong about the cross-server lag issue. Nice one! EDIT: I removed the dictionary definition stuff, not central to the argument at all. And lets be honest about this, the confusion is one player complaining on twitter about the issue. And this player likely knew they had to play on NA, but asked if an exception could be made and was told "no". There you go again making baseless assumptions that the players knew this all along and it's not really as big of a mess as it seems. And here I thought getting banned for it taught you a lesson. Stop trying to paint the players in a bad light. I don't understand why you feel the need to defend MLG to the point of making these wild claims with no knowledge of what actually happened, instead of giving the poor players the benefit of the doubt. That taught me that I should never post early in the morning before breakfast, as my judgment is clearly impaired. Also, don't call players idiots. And I am not trying to paint Major or players in a bad light. They are concerned with playing the game and normally do not care about production issues. It seems totally reasonable that a player would want to play the server with the least lag between him and his opponent, only to forget that the casters also need to connect as well. Twitter doesn't provide a lot of context, but Major's message does seem to be out of frustration.
I haven't made a single post in this thread calling players idiots so lolwut.
Out of frustration or not, you're implying that MajOr was already fully aware of all the rules and details, even though the timing of his tweet clearly suggests otherwise.
|
I usually not agree with MLG but in this case they are the one who are right.
You want to play WCS NA ? Then at least play on NA.
Even if both live in korea it shouldn't matter.
|
On May 01 2013 23:22 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 23:16 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 23:07 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:48 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:37 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:36 Fenrax wrote:On May 01 2013 22:33 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:28 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:25 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:23 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
If the games are casted live, it won't matter. The observers need to connect to the game as well and that creates latency issues for both the players(see Chill, GET OUT!). With all that being true, playing on NA is sort of a non-issue. Except not. The only reason the players felt that is because Chill was actively being dropped by the server because of his poor connection. Also, I love how it's the only example you can think of, it's even funnier that everyone involved was on NA at that time, including Chill. It's not the only example, it happens constantly in weekly cups like ZOTAC and Go4SC2. It happened in WCS EU yesterday. Given that ESL have a range of casters so that they can accomodate the many languages of the EU, we have to expect that similar issues could occur. You can argue that these are issues within the same server, but all that means is that these issues will be amplified if you suddenly force a load of casters cross-server just two help two players. This means that it is best to have a set rule that prevents this from ever happening, and that all players understand that this rule exists, so that there are no arguments and no confusion in the future. I agree, which is why I'm trying to look for the particular post where it very clearly states this rule of only playing on that server without exception. Because I'm interested if this detail was revealed before the qualifiers or afterwards, since prior to MajOr's tweet there was no discussion about this issue? On May 01 2013 20:24 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
It isn't really a big deal, but your argument isn't correct as the WCS rules did not exist when people signed up. Believing the rules shouldn't be changed is a different opinion from believing it is a good rule, anyway. Exactly. So all this talk of precedents and what will become of WCS America gets thrown out the window when we realize that Blizzard didn't even make all the details and rules clear to begin with, thereby causing mass misinformation. I agree that if the players didn't know about it beforehand then perhaps this is a problem with the organisation of the tournament. That could've been handled better, for sure. But it doesn't change the validity of the rule, nor does it change the fact that having a firm rule in place is good for the future because it will help prevent further confusion on this issue.
Not that it has anything to do with my argument: You're just moving the goalposts because you're wrong about the cross-server lag issue. Nice one!EDIT: I removed the dictionary definition stuff, not central to the argument at all. Lol I'm not trying to win a debate here, I'm just voicing my opinion on this clusterfuck of an event and the general attitude of the people who try to defend MLG. I've said what I had to say. On May 01 2013 22:58 Plansix wrote:On May 01 2013 22:48 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:37 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:36 Fenrax wrote:On May 01 2013 22:33 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On May 01 2013 22:28 Sated wrote:On May 01 2013 22:25 MasterOfPuppets wrote:[quote] Except not. The only reason the players felt that is because Chill was actively being dropped by the server because of his poor connection. Also, I love how it's the only example you can think of, it's even funnier that everyone involved was on NA at that time, including Chill. It's not the only example, it happens constantly in weekly cups like ZOTAC and Go4SC2. It happened in WCS EU yesterday. Given that ESL have a range of casters so that they can accomodate the many languages of the EU, we have to expect that similar issues could occur. You can argue that these are issues within the same server, but all that means is that these issues will be amplified if you suddenly force a load of casters cross-server just two help two players. This means that it is best to have a set rule that prevents this from ever happening, and that all players understand that this rule exists, so that there are no arguments and no confusion in the future. I agree, which is why I'm trying to look for the particular post where it very clearly states this rule of only playing on that server without exception. Because I'm interested if this detail was revealed before the qualifiers or afterwards, since prior to MajOr's tweet there was no discussion about this issue? On May 01 2013 20:24 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
It isn't really a big deal, but your argument isn't correct as the WCS rules did not exist when people signed up. Believing the rules shouldn't be changed is a different opinion from believing it is a good rule, anyway. Exactly. So all this talk of precedents and what will become of WCS America gets thrown out the window when we realize that Blizzard didn't even make all the details and rules clear to begin with, thereby causing mass misinformation. I agree that if the players didn't know about it beforehand then perhaps this is a problem with the organisation of the tournament. That could've been handled better, for sure. But it doesn't change the validity of the rule, nor does it change the fact that having a firm rule in place is good for the future because it will help prevent further confusion on this issue. Not that it has anything to do with my argument: You're just moving the goalposts because you're wrong about the cross-server lag issue. Nice one! EDIT: I removed the dictionary definition stuff, not central to the argument at all. And lets be honest about this, the confusion is one player complaining on twitter about the issue. And this player likely knew they had to play on NA, but asked if an exception could be made and was told "no". There you go again making baseless assumptions that the players knew this all along and it's not really as big of a mess as it seems. And here I thought getting banned for it taught you a lesson. Stop trying to paint the players in a bad light. I don't understand why you feel the need to defend MLG to the point of making these wild claims with no knowledge of what actually happened, instead of giving the poor players the benefit of the doubt. That taught me that I should never post early in the morning before breakfast, as my judgment is clearly impaired. Also, don't call players idiots. And I am not trying to paint Major or players in a bad light. They are concerned with playing the game and normally do not care about production issues. It seems totally reasonable that a player would want to play the server with the least lag between him and his opponent, only to forget that the casters also need to connect as well. Twitter doesn't provide a lot of context, but Major's message does seem to be out of frustration. I haven't made a single post in this thread calling players idiots so lolwut. Out of frustration or not, you're implying that MajOr was already fully aware of all the rules and details, even though the timing of his tweet clearly suggests otherwise.
I was talking about me, not you. You referenced when I went full dumb ass and got myself banned for a couple of days.
We can never be sure of what rules the players are aware of or not. I was really just pointing out that the entire genesis of this thread is a single twitter post by a single player, who has a history of being a little hot tempered about things he disagrees with. There are good reasons why all the matches should be played on NA, including that the production crew is in the AR region and they need to connect to the game.
|
This hurts both the players and the viewers. I don't see how this benefits anyone. I'm surprised that anyone thinks this is a good rule being enforced.
|
On May 01 2013 23:02 Doodsmack wrote:
If they want to chase easy money instead of facing the toughest competition in the league they're invested in, they should realize that they have to play on the server where the league and players are based. They're not going to be catered to.
We are speaking of a match between two players in korea.
All talks about advantages or incentives are irrelevant: the question is only asked when both players are outside of the US! Of course, they agree to play on NA when one player is in NA. But here, it only lowers the quality of the match.
|
I love the rhetoric of this topic and all the MLG backing fans. Because we only have Europeans playing in the Champions League right......
|
On May 01 2013 23:22 shid0x wrote:
I usually not agree with MLG but in this case they are the one who are right.
You want to play WCS NA ? Then at least play on NA.
Even if both live in korea it shouldn't matter.
What if they both recited the Pledge of Allegiance before playing the game instead?
Or played on Kor server from a US military base in Korea?
Surely there is some compromise to be made here
|
Well this is MLG's first mistake with WCS no problem guys...
On May 01 2013 22:52 numberThirtyOne wrote:
This is definitely a good rule. If they can't force players to sign up for their own regions due to some legal mumbo-jumbo, they should at least give them every incentive to do so.
Legal mumbo-jumbo? They gave them seeds in other regions, lol.
|
United States97276 Posts
On May 01 2013 23:39 floor exercise wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2013 23:22 shid0x wrote:
I usually not agree with MLG but in this case they are the one who are right.
You want to play WCS NA ? Then at least play on NA.
Even if both live in korea it shouldn't matter. What if they both recited the Pledge of Allegiance before playing the game instead? Or played on Kor server from a US military base in Korea? Surely there is some compromise to be made here
the computers have to be blessed by the embassy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
