At the end of last night's WCS Season One Finals broadcast, OnGameNet revealed that WCS Korea Season II will begin on June 18th with the internet auction website Auction.co.kr as the title sponsor.
The initial announcement of WCS revealed that GomTV and OnGameNet would take alternating turns running WCS Korea, and now it is OnGameNet's turn to operate the league before GomTV returns to produce Season III. Just as GomTV kept the "GSL Code S" brand name for the previous season of WCS Korea, the "Starleague" brand name will be attached to the upcoming OnGameNet season.
OnGameNet will run the equivalent to the "Premier division" in America and Europe, while GomTV will continue to run the "Challenger League" or Code A equivalent.
Auction had already sponsored the previous OnGameNet Starleague in 2012, before the league had been tied in with the WCS system.
So is GSTL the only SC2 tournament that Gom will be running during the WCS season 2 timeframe? I know the agreement prohibits them from broadcasting a competing event at the same time, but that seems like a long time for Gom to have so little going on.
On June 10 2013 08:36 GulpyBlinkeyes wrote: So is GSTL the only SC2 tournament that Gom will be running during the WCS season 2 timeframe? I know the agreement prohibits them from broadcasting a competing event at the same time, but that seems like a long time for Gom to have so little going on.
Won't Tastosis still be casting the games from the empty studio as they did for the WCS finals?
On June 10 2013 08:36 GulpyBlinkeyes wrote: So is GSTL the only SC2 tournament that Gom will be running during the WCS season 2 timeframe? I know the agreement prohibits them from broadcasting a competing event at the same time, but that seems like a long time for Gom to have so little going on.
Won't Tastosis still be casting the games from the empty studio as they did for the WCS finals?
On June 10 2013 08:36 GulpyBlinkeyes wrote: So is GSTL the only SC2 tournament that Gom will be running during the WCS season 2 timeframe? I know the agreement prohibits them from broadcasting a competing event at the same time, but that seems like a long time for Gom to have so little going on.
GOM will be running Code A and GSTL, as well as broadcasting the Starleague not on location like OGN was doing during this past season.
On June 10 2013 08:36 GulpyBlinkeyes wrote: So is GSTL the only SC2 tournament that Gom will be running during the WCS season 2 timeframe? I know the agreement prohibits them from broadcasting a competing event at the same time, but that seems like a long time for Gom to have so little going on.
Won't Tastosis still be casting the games from the empty studio as they did for the WCS finals?
And I believe GOM is still running the Challenger League/Up&Down/Qualifiers. OGN only runs the Premier League.
On June 10 2013 08:36 GulpyBlinkeyes wrote: So is GSTL the only SC2 tournament that Gom will be running during the WCS season 2 timeframe? I know the agreement prohibits them from broadcasting a competing event at the same time, but that seems like a long time for Gom to have so little going on.
wish they would give a little longer break. =/ feels like there are too many champions in one year. This is the viewers perspective of course, to the players it still seems impossible i would imagine
On June 10 2013 08:47 asdfOu wrote: wish they would give a little longer break. =/ feels like there are too many champions in one year. This is the viewers perspective of course, to the players it still seems impossible i would imagine
Actually 3 this year doesn't seem to be that much at all. At most we'll get 4next year and beyond.
On June 10 2013 08:36 GulpyBlinkeyes wrote: So is GSTL the only SC2 tournament that Gom will be running during the WCS season 2 timeframe? I know the agreement prohibits them from broadcasting a competing event at the same time, but that seems like a long time for Gom to have so little going on.
Won't Tastosis still be casting the games from the empty studio as they did for the WCS finals?
That was my understanding.
I feel bad for them seeing how they were sitting alone in the front of the gsl studio throughout the entirety of the world finals. Wouldn't it be almost demoralizing for them to be in that same situation for the next 3 months?
Does this arrangement mean that we will never have GSL and Starleague going at the same time, and now they are basically one event with an alternating name?
On June 10 2013 08:51 ZackAttack wrote: Does this arrangement mean that we will never have GSL and Starleague going at the same time, and now they are basically one event with an alternating name?
Yes. This is one of the reasons I don't like the WCS setup that much. Its great for EU and AM but it limits the top end Korean tournaments we could potential have which is a shame.
On June 10 2013 08:51 ZackAttack wrote: Does this arrangement mean that we will never have GSL and Starleague going at the same time, and now they are basically one event with an alternating name?
Yes. This is one of the reasons I don't like the WCS setup that much. Its great for EU and AM but it limits the top end Korean tournaments we could potential have which is a shame.
That sucks a lot more than people are giving it credit for.
On June 10 2013 08:51 ZackAttack wrote: Does this arrangement mean that we will never have GSL and Starleague going at the same time, and now they are basically one event with an alternating name?
Yes. This is one of the reasons I don't like the WCS setup that much. Its great for EU and AM but it limits the top end Korean tournaments we could potential have which is a shame.
That sucks a lot more than people are giving it credit for.
Yeah I'll always miss the possibility of the dual starleague winner.
On June 10 2013 08:36 GulpyBlinkeyes wrote: So is GSTL the only SC2 tournament that Gom will be running during the WCS season 2 timeframe? I know the agreement prohibits them from broadcasting a competing event at the same time, but that seems like a long time for Gom to have so little going on.
On June 10 2013 08:51 ZackAttack wrote: Does this arrangement mean that we will never have GSL and Starleague going at the same time, and now they are basically one event with an alternating name?
Yes. This is one of the reasons I don't like the WCS setup that much. Its great for EU and AM but it limits the top end Korean tournaments we could potential have which is a shame.
That sucks a lot more than people are giving it credit for.
Yeah I'll always miss the possibility of the dual starleague winner.
WCS Korea + WCS Season Finals is the new dual starleague winner.
On June 10 2013 08:51 ZackAttack wrote: Does this arrangement mean that we will never have GSL and Starleague going at the same time, and now they are basically one event with an alternating name?
Yes. This is one of the reasons I don't like the WCS setup that much. Its great for EU and AM but it limits the top end Korean tournaments we could potential have which is a shame.
That sucks a lot more than people are giving it credit for.
Yeah I'll always miss the possibility of the dual starleague winner.
WCS Korea + WCS Season Finals is the new dual starleague winner.
Eh, but you don't need to qualify separately for them and WCS Season Finals is faaar easier than an OSL would be.
if I read it correctly, OSL will retain their own format ie. ODT ro32 and round robin ro16. Not sure if it's bo1 (which is likely considering tighter timeframe on the channel)
On June 10 2013 08:43 iyasq8 wrote: ohh god this is really confusing just call them 1 name T.T
I agree with this. I'm already fuckin' confused....
WCS Korea will alternate between gomtv's GSL Code S and OnGameNet's OSL (this time hosted by auction and named auction all kill). It's not that complicated -_-
On June 10 2013 08:43 iyasq8 wrote: ohh god this is really confusing just call them 1 name T.T
I agree with this. I'm already fuckin' confused....
WCS Korea will alternate between gomtv's GSL Code S and OnGameNet's OSL (this time hosted by auction and named auction all kill). It's not that complicated -_-
On June 10 2013 08:51 ZackAttack wrote: Does this arrangement mean that we will never have GSL and Starleague going at the same time, and now they are basically one event with an alternating name?
Yes. This is one of the reasons I don't like the WCS setup that much. Its great for EU and AM but it limits the top end Korean tournaments we could potential have which is a shame.
That sucks a lot more than people are giving it credit for.
The OSL was on the verge of collapse. Part of this reason this "merger" happened was to save it/OGN.
On June 10 2013 09:31 GolemMadness wrote: I wish that instead of all this WCS stuff we just had GSL and OSL running at the same time like OSL and MSL.
Unless they ran side by side which would be a competition for ratings how would you match them up enough to where you can run a WCS world finals after each season. Also then people in Korea would be able to get two times the WCS points, potentially making the WCS world finals all Korea contestants. Unless they decrease or make one of them invalid sources of WCS points, in which case why would players play in them when it's already harder competition.
On June 10 2013 09:31 GolemMadness wrote: I wish that instead of all this WCS stuff we just had GSL and OSL running at the same time like OSL and MSL.
Unless they ran side by side which would be a competition for ratings how would you match them up enough to where you can run a WCS world finals after each season. Also then people in Korea would be able to get two times the WCS points, potentially making the WCS world finals all Korea contestants. Unless they decrease or make one of them invalid sources of WCS points, in which case why would players play in them when it's already harder competition.
Which is why I said instead of all this WCS stuff. I'd much prefer WCS to be something completely separate like it was last year.
On June 10 2013 09:31 GolemMadness wrote: I wish that instead of all this WCS stuff we just had GSL and OSL running at the same time like OSL and MSL.
Unless they ran side by side which would be a competition for ratings how would you match them up enough to where you can run a WCS world finals after each season. Also then people in Korea would be able to get two times the WCS points, potentially making the WCS world finals all Korea contestants. Unless they decrease or make one of them invalid sources of WCS points, in which case why would players play in them when it's already harder competition.
Which is why I said instead of all this WCS stuff. I'd much prefer WCS to be something completely separate like it was last year.
I'm glad they have WCS stuff going on in other regions. Just wish they would get China and Oceania going.
Of course OGN is only going to run the OSL/Premier League - they only have Tuesday and Thursday's free on the schedule these days - days where GSL played their Code S games. Situation is much like ESL and that other company where the other company does Challenger League only and ESL does Premier League.
On June 10 2013 09:56 probeater wrote: wait...is auction all-kill run by the same people as proleague?
Sort of but not really, some of the Proleague games are held at the OGN studio but Kespa and IEG are the main people behind Proleague. For OSL It's entirely OGN.
As far as I understand it (for those who are confused I guess)...
Who is running/producing Premiere League (Code S) this season? OGN, under the name of the Auction All-Kill OnGameNet StarLeague 2013.
Who is running/producing Challenger League (Code A) this season? GOM. Source
Why? Because OGN has a packed schedule already, so they can't afford to manage and broadcast all of Code S and Code A this season.
Who is casting Code S this season? Primarily DoA and Montecristo, with an alternative GOM stream featuring Tasteless and Artosis.
Who is casting Code A this season? Primarily Wolf and Khaldor, probably with an alternative OGN stream featuring DoA and Montecristo.
What is the format of Code S? I read somewhere a few weeks back that the OSL would be the same format as the GSL from now on, and not the traditional OSL format with DT Ro32 and RR Ro16 all bo1s, but now I don't know. One or the other.
What is the format of Code A? Same as always.
Why? Because that's what was agreed upon by Blizzard, GOM and OGN regarding how WCS KR would be run.
Who handles the Qualifiers (Code B)? GOM, with an english casual cast on-site like there was last season, again provided by Wolf and Khaldor. Source
What about the season after this? It goes back to 100% GOM run and is back under the GSL name, just like it was this most recent season.
What about GSTL, SPL and the other leagues like OGN The Champions and World of Tanks Asia Open? They are all completely unaffected.
Will there be a 4th GSL this year? They promised four! No, one of the promised GSLs has been replaced by this OSL, as part of the agreement made with Blizzard and OGN regarding the running of WCS Korea. GOM's plans to do 4 GSLs was before the details/arrangements for WCS were made.
Why do the Koreans kinda act like they are two completely different leagues? Well presumably it's because of the long history of the OSL/GSL being different things. That's why this OSL specifically is the only thing that counts toward OGN's Golden Mouse awards, and why this season does not count toward GOM's NesTea award.
I don't know if anybody knows the answer to this but is GomTV still going to be running 4 GSL this year like promised at the beginning? I mean I paid for all the GSL this year I hope this new agreement doesn't mean I paid for one less GSL in the end.
On June 10 2013 10:10 ColtraneL wrote: I don't know if anybody knows the answer to this but is GomTV still going to be running 4 GSL this year like promised at the beginning? I mean I paid for all the GSL this year I hope this new agreement doesn't mean I paid for one less GSL in the end.
There will only be 3 GSLs this year. The 3rd GSL has been replaced in part but the OSL; I've edited my post above.
On June 10 2013 09:31 GolemMadness wrote: I wish that instead of all this WCS stuff we just had GSL and OSL running at the same time like OSL and MSL.
Unless they ran side by side which would be a competition for ratings how would you match them up enough to where you can run a WCS world finals after each season. Also then people in Korea would be able to get two times the WCS points, potentially making the WCS world finals all Korea contestants. Unless they decrease or make one of them invalid sources of WCS points, in which case why would players play in them when it's already harder competition.
Each event could take turn to be counted for WCS. So if OSL Summer is in the circuit, GSL Summer may just be a non-ranking Starleague, vice-versa for the fall season. Provided that they dont have trouble finding sponsor on their own, that would be the best case scenario imo
On June 10 2013 09:31 GolemMadness wrote: I wish that instead of all this WCS stuff we just had GSL and OSL running at the same time like OSL and MSL.
Unless they ran side by side which would be a competition for ratings how would you match them up enough to where you can run a WCS world finals after each season. Also then people in Korea would be able to get two times the WCS points, potentially making the WCS world finals all Korea contestants. Unless they decrease or make one of them invalid sources of WCS points, in which case why would players play in them when it's already harder competition.
Each event could take turn to be counted for WCS. So if OSL Summer is in the circuit, GSL Summer may just be a non-ranking Starleague, vice-versa for the fall season. Provided that they dont have trouble finding sponsor on their own, that would be the best case scenario imo
There's also the other issue of no other tournaments during WCS broadcasts. Gom and OGN probably already have a hard enough time trying to schedule everything with their other programs (i.e. GSTL, WoT, LoL. etc.). Adding another tournament into the mix won't make things any better.
On June 10 2013 09:54 GTR wrote: Of course OGN is only going to run the OSL/Premier League - they only have Tuesday and Thursday's free on the schedule these days - days where GSL played their Code S games. Situation is much like ESL and that other company where the other company does Challenger League only and ESL does Premier League.
On June 10 2013 10:10 ColtraneL wrote: I don't know if anybody knows the answer to this but is GomTV still going to be running 4 GSL this year like promised at the beginning? I mean I paid for all the GSL this year I hope this new agreement doesn't mean I paid for one less GSL in the end.
There will only be 3 GSLs this year. The 3rd GSL has been replaced in part but the OSL; I've edited my post above.
Well played Gom, you made me pay more than 20 dollars a GSL this year ... It is kinda strange that you can do whatever you want in Esports despite having made people pay already.
On June 10 2013 10:01 MCXD wrote: Why do the Koreans act like they are two completely different leagues then!? No idea, but they do. Presumably it's because of tensions between GOM and OGN (which still exist to a very significant degree, according to DoA) and a history of the OSL/MSL being different things. That's why this OSL specifically is the only thing that counts toward OGN's Golden Mouse awards, and why this season does not count toward GOM's NesTea award.
Any questions?
I wouldn't interpret it that way, creating extra tension between GomTV and OGN.
The actual explanation is that Blizzard is throwing GomTV and OGN a bone by allowing them to keep their Code S/Starleague branding even though they have forced them to work within the WCS framework when running individual leagues.
Koreans don't act like it's two completely different leagues - it's two leagues with long histories continuing their legacies within the WCS system.
On June 10 2013 10:10 ColtraneL wrote: I don't know if anybody knows the answer to this but is GomTV still going to be running 4 GSL this year like promised at the beginning? I mean I paid for all the GSL this year I hope this new agreement doesn't mean I paid for one less GSL in the end.
There will only be 3 GSLs this year. The 3rd GSL has been replaced in part but the OSL; I've edited my post above.
Well played Gom, you made me pay more than 20 dollars a GSL this year ... It is kinda strange that you can do whatever you want in Esports despite having made people pay already.
That wasn't GomTV's decision; they woulda held 4 GSLs this year if not for WCS
On June 10 2013 10:10 ColtraneL wrote: I don't know if anybody knows the answer to this but is GomTV still going to be running 4 GSL this year like promised at the beginning? I mean I paid for all the GSL this year I hope this new agreement doesn't mean I paid for one less GSL in the end.
There will only be 3 GSLs this year. The 3rd GSL has been replaced in part but the OSL; I've edited my post above.
Well played Gom, you made me pay more than 20 dollars a GSL this year ... It is kinda strange that you can do whatever you want in Esports despite having made people pay already.
That wasn't GomTV's decision; they woulda held 4 GSLs this year if not for WCS
I know, I'm aware of this, that's why I'm trying not to be as bitter as I would like to. Still, they could give us something in return. I don't know, maybe at least free VODs for WCS finals. But I guess it's completely useless to discuss this over here.
On June 10 2013 08:43 iyasq8 wrote: ohh god this is really confusing just call them 1 name T.T
I agree with this. I'm already fuckin' confused....
WCS Korea will alternate between gomtv's GSL Code S and OnGameNet's OSL (this time hosted by auction and named auction all kill). It's not that complicated -_-
Is OGN running Challenger League/Code A?
Pretty big lack of details IMO.
If you read the thread, you would see that OGN is not running code A.
On June 10 2013 10:10 ColtraneL wrote: I don't know if anybody knows the answer to this but is GomTV still going to be running 4 GSL this year like promised at the beginning? I mean I paid for all the GSL this year I hope this new agreement doesn't mean I paid for one less GSL in the end.
There will only be 3 GSLs this year. The 3rd GSL has been replaced in part but the OSL; I've edited my post above.
there's also a hot6ix cup at the end of the year afaik
On June 10 2013 08:43 iyasq8 wrote: ohh god this is really confusing just call them 1 name T.T
I agree with this. I'm already fuckin' confused....
WCS Korea will alternate between gomtv's GSL Code S and OnGameNet's OSL (this time hosted by auction and named auction all kill). It's not that complicated -_-
Is OGN running Challenger League/Code A?
Pretty big lack of details IMO.
If you read the thread, you would see that OGN is not running code A.
On June 10 2013 10:01 MCXD wrote: Why do the Koreans act like they are two completely different leagues then!? No idea, but they do. Presumably it's because of tensions between GOM and OGN (which still exist to a very significant degree, according to DoA) and a history of the OSL/MSL being different things. That's why this OSL specifically is the only thing that counts toward OGN's Golden Mouse awards, and why this season does not count toward GOM's NesTea award.
Any questions?
I wouldn't interpret it that way, creating extra tension between GomTV and OGN.
The actual explanation is that Blizzard is throwing GomTV and OGN a bone by allowing them to keep their Code S/Starleague branding even though they have forced them to work within the WCS framework when running individual leagues.
Koreans don't act like it's two completely different leagues - it's two leagues with long histories continuing their legacies within the WCS system.
The OSL, and now even the GSL, have such long championship histories and traditions like the royal road sword, golden mouse, Nestea award, that neither GOM or OGN want to throw away their band by conforming to becoming simply WCS Korea Premiere.
I hope the OSL will bring back the popularity for SCII in korea to BW days. OnGameNet is unlike GomTV, and is actually a TV station, and would have much larger target audience than GomTV.
Man thats weird with OSL only being the Premier Div and leaving GOM to handle Challenger. Really interested what timeslot SC2 will have on OGN, if it will push LoL or it's going to be earlier.
On June 10 2013 14:11 Straxis wrote: Wait.. OGN is going to run WCS AM and europe? O.o
On June 10 2013 08:29 TeamLiquid ESPORTS wrote: OnGameNet will run the equivalent to the "Premier division" in America and Europe, while GomTV will continue to run the "Challenger League" or Code A equivalent.
On June 10 2013 10:10 ColtraneL wrote: I don't know if anybody knows the answer to this but is GomTV still going to be running 4 GSL this year like promised at the beginning? I mean I paid for all the GSL this year I hope this new agreement doesn't mean I paid for one less GSL in the end.
There will only be 3 GSLs this year. The 3rd GSL has been replaced in part but the OSL; I've edited my post above.
Well played Gom, you made me pay more than 20 dollars a GSL this year ... It is kinda strange that you can do whatever you want in Esports despite having made people pay already.
what are you talking about? we will have 3 gsl this year, and they will cast also the 4th tournument witch is the osl that is running now, and it will be with the same format. after the WCS was announced they offered a refund for all of those who bought yearly subscription.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
It won't be easy choosing between the OGN stream with DoA and crowd shots and great player-face zoom-ins, or the GOMTV stream with Tastosis and nothing else.
This choice was much easier for the WCS S1 finals with Apollo & Day9 and the lounge etc.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
at least all maps are preset. loser will have only himself to blame with max 3 known maps to prepare
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Oh man Bo1's I look forward to the LR raging (including myself)
I really don't like this. Im not a big fan of OGN so far in SC2, think they did an extremely disapointing job with the WCS finals...
Also if its really true that they make it Bo1 in Ro32, that would be extremely sad - and would be a huuuge turnoff for me. Im actualy looking way more forward to WCS europe season 2 this time around then the WCS Korea.
What? If you can´t handle Bo3 ro32, then give it back to Gom, please. I´d also find it really strange if the WCS competitions would deviate that strongly, while should provide the same format. I mean, that´s the idea behind it. You don´t play 80 minutes football in Korea.
On June 10 2013 15:11 Noam wrote: It won't be easy choosing between the OGN stream with DoA and crowd shots and great player-face zoom-ins, or the GOMTV stream with Tastosis and nothing else.
This choice was much easier for the WCS S1 finals with Apollo & Day9 and the lounge etc.
On June 10 2013 08:36 GulpyBlinkeyes wrote: So is GSTL the only SC2 tournament that Gom will be running during the WCS season 2 timeframe? I know the agreement prohibits them from broadcasting a competing event at the same time, but that seems like a long time for Gom to have so little going on.
GOM will be running Code A and GSTL, as well as broadcasting the Starleague not on location like OGN was doing during this past season.
I forgot about Code A, aka "Challenge League". That's pretty cool that GomTV will still be the on-site broadcasters for Code A during Season 2 (while remote casting Premier league).
Bo1 would be horrific. They can't be serious about that, imo :-/ It's ok in Team leagues, because one loss isn't that big of a deal there, but in an individual league... it's just too punishing and will result in a huge cheese fest.
On June 10 2013 16:20 DasHawk wrote: I really don't like this. Im not a big fan of OGN so far in SC2, think they did an extremely disapointing job with the WCS finals...
Also if its really true that they make it Bo1 in Ro32, that would be extremely sad - and would be a huuuge turnoff for me. Im actualy looking way more forward to WCS europe season 2 this time around then the WCS Korea.
I'd say that the only ways that Gom has better production are English casting and sometimes observing. OGN has better stream quality, camera production, intros and venues.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
It's more about consistency within WCS, it doesn't make sense for me to have KR be the most competitive region and the most unforgiving region, when the other regions give the same amount of money. If this was just OSL I would be fine with it.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
Nicely said.
On a side note, that video at the end gave me chills. Seeing Boxer, Yellow, Nada, Xellos... damn times have passed.
edit - Plus I think the Bo1 is also due to time constraints because its on national TV unlike Gom (correct me if Im wrong).
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
It's more about consistency within WCS, it doesn't make sense for me to have KR be the most competitive region and the most unforgiving region, when the other regions give the same amount of money. If this was just OSL I would be fine with it.
I've never valued the prestige of WCS so much. Why dont you just simply enjoy the OSL. Them Koreans will be compensated for the prize cut in a weekend tourney called season finals later
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
It's more about consistency within WCS, it doesn't make sense for me to have KR be the most competitive region and the most unforgiving region, when the other regions give the same amount of money. If this was just OSL I would be fine with it.
I've never valued the prestige of WCS so much. Why dont you just simply enjoy the OSL. Them Koreans will be compensated for the prize cut in a weekend tourney called season finals later
Sure I can enjoy the tournament as it doesn't affect me directly, I'll watch it regardless.
The issue I have is the Korean pros that aren't Kespa A-teamers with good salaries potentially being knocked out in the ro32 because of bo1 instead of bo3. It just seems unfair to me that WCS EU & AM players get second chances while the KR players don't. There are financial problems in a lot of eSF teams right now and making the results less consistent can only make their situations worse.
This isn't just the OSL anymore, this is the only individual league in Korea and what a lot of players rely on to make their money.
OSL and GSL. Id love to see dual league winners! We could finally start seeing those players who are flat out dominant since the leagues are becoming standardized although it would have been more interesting if the leagues were more separate in a sense that both require different paths to climb i.e. being in Code S in GSL doesn't necessary mean your in for the OSL vice versa.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
It's more about consistency within WCS, it doesn't make sense for me to have KR be the most competitive region and the most unforgiving region, when the other regions give the same amount of money. If this was just OSL I would be fine with it.
I've never valued the prestige of WCS so much. Why dont you just simply enjoy the OSL. Them Koreans will be compensated for the prize cut in a weekend tourney called season finals later
Sure I can enjoy the tournament as it doesn't affect me directly, I'll watch it regardless.
The issue I have is the Korean pros that aren't Kespa A-teamers with good salaries potentially being knocked out in the ro32 because of bo1 instead of bo3. It just seems unfair to me that WCS EU & AM players get second chances while the KR players don't. There are financial problems in a lot of eSF teams right now and making the results less consistent can only make their situations worse.
This isn't just the OSL anymore, this is the only individual league in Korea and what a lot of players rely on to make their money.
Playing Bo1's is a different skill set than playing Bo3 or Bo5 or Bo7, that's also a different skill set than playing in team league proleague or winners league format. I don't see how we should validate one skill set over the other over some non-descriptive idea about fairness. Why Bo3? Why not Bo5? Or Bo7? Why 4 player groups and not 8 or 16 or 32 player group round robin if it really was to maximize sample size? Why have group picks which will skew the group instead of just matching by ELO? The idea that a larger sample size between players gives more accurate representation fails to take into account things like game sense, playing under pressure, and the length / stamina of the players. Longer formats favor some play styles over others too. A player that thrives in Bo5+ format with a super standard macro style might get knocked out in Bo1's by creative unpredictable play, and that player might lose to someone with extremely good game sense and defensive style, and that player might lose in a Bo3 against someone who plans the maps out.
The idea that players rely on it to make money is a different idea from the legitimacy of the competition. If you really wanted a format where you can maximize the money gained, that's dependent on how the prize money is distributed much more so than how the rounds are played out.
On June 10 2013 18:29 YyapSsap wrote: OSL and GSL. Id love to see dual league winners! We could finally start seeing those players who are flat out dominant since the leagues are becoming standardized although it would have been more interesting if the leagues were more separate in a sense that both require different paths to climb i.e. being in Code S in GSL doesn't necessary mean your in for the OSL vice versa.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
It's more about consistency within WCS, it doesn't make sense for me to have KR be the most competitive region and the most unforgiving region, when the other regions give the same amount of money. If this was just OSL I would be fine with it.
I've never valued the prestige of WCS so much. Why dont you just simply enjoy the OSL. Them Koreans will be compensated for the prize cut in a weekend tourney called season finals later
Sure I can enjoy the tournament as it doesn't affect me directly, I'll watch it regardless.
The issue I have is the Korean pros that aren't Kespa A-teamers with good salaries potentially being knocked out in the ro32 because of bo1 instead of bo3. It just seems unfair to me that WCS EU & AM players get second chances while the KR players don't. There are financial problems in a lot of eSF teams right now and making the results less consistent can only make their situations worse.
This isn't just the OSL anymore, this is the only individual league in Korea and what a lot of players rely on to make their money.
Playing Bo1's is a different skill set than playing Bo3 or Bo5 or Bo7, that's also a different skill set than playing in team league proleague or winners league format. I don't see how we should validate one skill set over the other over some non-descriptive idea about fairness. Why Bo3? Why not Bo5? Or Bo7? The idea that a larger sample size between players gives more accurate representation fails to take into account things like game sense, playing under pressure, and the length / stamina of the players. Longer formats favor some play styles over others too. A player that thrives in Bo5+ format with a super standard macro style might get knocked out in Bo1's by creative unpredictable play, and that player might lose to someone with extremely good game sense and defensive style, and that player might lose in a Bo3 against someone who plans the maps out.
The idea that players rely on it to make money is a different idea from the legitimacy of the competition. If you really wanted a format where you can maximize the money gained, that's dependent on how the prize money is distributed much more so than how the rounds are played out.
More sets means the better player has a higher chance to win, we have plenty of evidence to back this theory up. We do bo3 instead of bo5/bo7 in early rounds and Dual Tournament groups because of time constraints. I think skill in a bo3+ series is the kind of skill that you should reward for an individual league and you can keep the bo1's for team leagues.
I want the best players to have the highest chance to advance, so we can build the next generation of stars.
Consistency over a long period of time = fanbase, popular players = better storylines and a more interesting spectator experience. By creating a tournament that makes it more likely for the better player to advance further into the tournament we can more easily create star players that consistently go deep into a starleague/gsl and win.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
It's more about consistency within WCS, it doesn't make sense for me to have KR be the most competitive region and the most unforgiving region, when the other regions give the same amount of money. If this was just OSL I would be fine with it.
I've never valued the prestige of WCS so much. Why dont you just simply enjoy the OSL. Them Koreans will be compensated for the prize cut in a weekend tourney called season finals later
Sure I can enjoy the tournament as it doesn't affect me directly, I'll watch it regardless.
The issue I have is the Korean pros that aren't Kespa A-teamers with good salaries potentially being knocked out in the ro32 because of bo1 instead of bo3. It just seems unfair to me that WCS EU & AM players get second chances while the KR players don't. There are financial problems in a lot of eSF teams right now and making the results less consistent can only make their situations worse.
This isn't just the OSL anymore, this is the only individual league in Korea and what a lot of players rely on to make their money.
Playing Bo1's is a different skill set than playing Bo3 or Bo5 or Bo7, that's also a different skill set than playing in team league proleague or winners league format. I don't see how we should validate one skill set over the other over some non-descriptive idea about fairness. Why Bo3? Why not Bo5? Or Bo7? The idea that a larger sample size between players gives more accurate representation fails to take into account things like game sense, playing under pressure, and the length / stamina of the players. Longer formats favor some play styles over others too. A player that thrives in Bo5+ format with a super standard macro style might get knocked out in Bo1's by creative unpredictable play, and that player might lose to someone with extremely good game sense and defensive style, and that player might lose in a Bo3 against someone who plans the maps out.
The idea that players rely on it to make money is a different idea from the legitimacy of the competition. If you really wanted a format where you can maximize the money gained, that's dependent on how the prize money is distributed much more so than how the rounds are played out.
More sets means the better player has a higher chance to win, we have plenty of evidence to back this theory up. We do bo3 instead of bo5/bo7 in early rounds and Dual Tournament groups because of time constraints. I think skill in a bo3+ series is the kind of skill that you should reward for an individual league and you can keep the bo1's for team leagues.
I want the best players to have the highest chance to advance, so we can build the next generation of stars.
Consistency over a long period of time = fanbase, popular players = better storylines and a more interesting spectator experience. By creating a tournament that makes it more likely for the better player to advance further into the tournament we can more easily create star players that consistently go deep into a starleague/gsl and win.
Better in terms of what. Did you even read my post? "Over-all" ability? Late game macro? You are ignoring all the other qualities of a player. A Bo3 is also vastly different than a Bo7. The whole point of a tournament is to test a player's skill in every possible format, which is partially the reason why the Ro32 isn't the same number of sets as the Finals. Shorter sets or bo1's produce the best mind games and one off builds and I would argue the most memorable Starcraft has come out of those settings and not an elongated series.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
It's more about consistency within WCS, it doesn't make sense for me to have KR be the most competitive region and the most unforgiving region, when the other regions give the same amount of money. If this was just OSL I would be fine with it.
I've never valued the prestige of WCS so much. Why dont you just simply enjoy the OSL. Them Koreans will be compensated for the prize cut in a weekend tourney called season finals later
Sure I can enjoy the tournament as it doesn't affect me directly, I'll watch it regardless.
The issue I have is the Korean pros that aren't Kespa A-teamers with good salaries potentially being knocked out in the ro32 because of bo1 instead of bo3. It just seems unfair to me that WCS EU & AM players get second chances while the KR players don't. There are financial problems in a lot of eSF teams right now and making the results less consistent can only make their situations worse.
This isn't just the OSL anymore, this is the only individual league in Korea and what a lot of players rely on to make their money.
Playing Bo1's is a different skill set than playing Bo3 or Bo5 or Bo7, that's also a different skill set than playing in team league proleague or winners league format. I don't see how we should validate one skill set over the other over some non-descriptive idea about fairness. Why Bo3? Why not Bo5? Or Bo7? The idea that a larger sample size between players gives more accurate representation fails to take into account things like game sense, playing under pressure, and the length / stamina of the players. Longer formats favor some play styles over others too. A player that thrives in Bo5+ format with a super standard macro style might get knocked out in Bo1's by creative unpredictable play, and that player might lose to someone with extremely good game sense and defensive style, and that player might lose in a Bo3 against someone who plans the maps out.
The idea that players rely on it to make money is a different idea from the legitimacy of the competition. If you really wanted a format where you can maximize the money gained, that's dependent on how the prize money is distributed much more so than how the rounds are played out.
More sets means the better player has a higher chance to win, we have plenty of evidence to back this theory up. We do bo3 instead of bo5/bo7 in early rounds and Dual Tournament groups because of time constraints. I think skill in a bo3+ series is the kind of skill that you should reward for an individual league and you can keep the bo1's for team leagues.
I want the best players to have the highest chance to advance, so we can build the next generation of stars.
Consistency over a long period of time = fanbase, popular players = better storylines and a more interesting spectator experience. By creating a tournament that makes it more likely for the better player to advance further into the tournament we can more easily create star players that consistently go deep into a starleague/gsl and win.
Better in terms of what. Did you even read my post? "Over-all" ability? Late game macro? You are ignoring all the other qualities of a player. A Bo3 is also vastly different than a Bo7. The whole point of a tournament is to test a player's skill in every possible format, which is partially the reason why the Ro32 isn't the same number of sets as the Finals. Shorter sets or bo1's produce the best mind games and one off builds and I would argue the most memorable Starcraft has come out of those settings and not an elongated series.
No the point of the tournament is not to test a player's skill in every possible format, that's just what you think it should be. The reason there are less sets at the start of the tournament is because there are far more games in the group stages and time constraints exist. Shorter sets or bo1's do not produce the best mind games and one off builds, where is the evidence of this? It doesn't exist. If I were to go into the history of this game and build a list of top 50 games I imagine less than 15% of them would come from bo1 sets.
And no we're not including Brood War, Brood War is a different game and of course in Brood War some of the best games would come from bo1 sets because there were far more bo1 sets played in that professional scene, since the largest and most important tournament was entirely bo1.
If you have an above 50% chance to win a game vs a lesser opponent the chances of you winning the series increases with the number of games in the series, I shouldn't even have to point out why more games are better because It's obvious. You can test any ability of a player in a single game, the thing about Starcraft 2 is that it's volatile and you can lose games to lesser players. Making a series longer is a way to reduce variance and allow the better players to win more overall.
I already posted about why the better players winning more often overall is better for the spectators. If you want to come up with a counter argument please argue that point instead of inserting your subjective bias of what format produces better games. Even if you were correct, the core of my argument is not about what format produces better games but instead what format allows for the best players to advance deep into the tournament more often, rewarding them monetarily for their skill.
Even if winning bo1 was a "skill" on its own, it would not make sense to start a tournament in one format (single game) and then continue it in another one (series of games). I can only hope the right people have the luck necessary to advance in such a volatile format, or else we could end up with a significantly less interesting ro16 onwards. I´m already cringing at the thought of how many upsets are made possible by this decision...
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
It's more about consistency within WCS, it doesn't make sense for me to have KR be the most competitive region and the most unforgiving region, when the other regions give the same amount of money. If this was just OSL I would be fine with it.
I've never valued the prestige of WCS so much. Why dont you just simply enjoy the OSL. Them Koreans will be compensated for the prize cut in a weekend tourney called season finals later
Sure I can enjoy the tournament as it doesn't affect me directly, I'll watch it regardless.
The issue I have is the Korean pros that aren't Kespa A-teamers with good salaries potentially being knocked out in the ro32 because of bo1 instead of bo3. It just seems unfair to me that WCS EU & AM players get second chances while the KR players don't. There are financial problems in a lot of eSF teams right now and making the results less consistent can only make their situations worse.
This isn't just the OSL anymore, this is the only individual league in Korea and what a lot of players rely on to make their money.
Playing Bo1's is a different skill set than playing Bo3 or Bo5 or Bo7, that's also a different skill set than playing in team league proleague or winners league format. I don't see how we should validate one skill set over the other over some non-descriptive idea about fairness. Why Bo3? Why not Bo5? Or Bo7? The idea that a larger sample size between players gives more accurate representation fails to take into account things like game sense, playing under pressure, and the length / stamina of the players. Longer formats favor some play styles over others too. A player that thrives in Bo5+ format with a super standard macro style might get knocked out in Bo1's by creative unpredictable play, and that player might lose to someone with extremely good game sense and defensive style, and that player might lose in a Bo3 against someone who plans the maps out.
The idea that players rely on it to make money is a different idea from the legitimacy of the competition. If you really wanted a format where you can maximize the money gained, that's dependent on how the prize money is distributed much more so than how the rounds are played out.
More sets means the better player has a higher chance to win, we have plenty of evidence to back this theory up. We do bo3 instead of bo5/bo7 in early rounds and Dual Tournament groups because of time constraints. I think skill in a bo3+ series is the kind of skill that you should reward for an individual league and you can keep the bo1's for team leagues.
I want the best players to have the highest chance to advance, so we can build the next generation of stars.
Consistency over a long period of time = fanbase, popular players = better storylines and a more interesting spectator experience. By creating a tournament that makes it more likely for the better player to advance further into the tournament we can more easily create star players that consistently go deep into a starleague/gsl and win.
Better in terms of what. Did you even read my post? "Over-all" ability? Late game macro? You are ignoring all the other qualities of a player. A Bo3 is also vastly different than a Bo7. The whole point of a tournament is to test a player's skill in every possible format, which is partially the reason why the Ro32 isn't the same number of sets as the Finals. Shorter sets or bo1's produce the best mind games and one off builds and I would argue the most memorable Starcraft has come out of those settings and not an elongated series.
No the point of the tournament is not to test a player's skill in every possible format, that's just what you think it should be. The reason there are less sets at the start of the tournament is because there are far more games in the group stages and time constraints exist. Shorter sets or bo1's do not produce the best mind games and one off builds, where is the evidence of this? It doesn't exist. If I were to go into the history of this game and build a list of top 50 games I imagine less than 15% of them would come from bo1 sets.
And no we're not including Brood War, Brood War is a different game and of course in Brood War some of the best games would come from bo1 sets because there were far more bo1 sets played in that professional scene, since the largest and most important tournament was entirely bo1.
If you have an above 50% chance to win a game vs a lesser opponent the chances of you winning the series increases with the number of games in the series, I shouldn't even have to point out why more games are better because It's obvious. You can test any ability of a player in a single game, the thing about Starcraft 2 is that it's volatile and you can lose games to lesser players. Making a series longer is a way to reduce variance and allow the better players to win more overall.
I already posted about why the better players winning more often overall is better for the spectators. If you want to come up with a counter argument please argue that point instead of inserting your subjective bias of what format produces better games. Even if you were correct, the core of my argument is not about what format produces better games but instead what format allows for the best players to advance deep into the tournament more often, rewarding them monetarily for their skill.
You just changed your argument completely around from "There are financial problems in a lot of eSF teams right now and making the results less consistent can only make their situations worse." to "allows for the best players to advance deep into the tournament more often," When I've already said "The idea that players rely on it to make money is a different idea from the legitimacy of the competition."
We aren't arguing on the same grounds. Preferring one thing over the other is subjective bias. But that's what fans are. Don't pretend there is a unified fan base that all want one specific viewing experience for SC2, it simply does not exist.
On June 10 2013 15:02 larse wrote: Korean websites are all saying Ro32 in OSL premier league will be the traditional BO1 !!
BO1!
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
It's more about consistency within WCS, it doesn't make sense for me to have KR be the most competitive region and the most unforgiving region, when the other regions give the same amount of money. If this was just OSL I would be fine with it.
I've never valued the prestige of WCS so much. Why dont you just simply enjoy the OSL. Them Koreans will be compensated for the prize cut in a weekend tourney called season finals later
Sure I can enjoy the tournament as it doesn't affect me directly, I'll watch it regardless.
The issue I have is the Korean pros that aren't Kespa A-teamers with good salaries potentially being knocked out in the ro32 because of bo1 instead of bo3. It just seems unfair to me that WCS EU & AM players get second chances while the KR players don't. There are financial problems in a lot of eSF teams right now and making the results less consistent can only make their situations worse.
This isn't just the OSL anymore, this is the only individual league in Korea and what a lot of players rely on to make their money.
Playing Bo1's is a different skill set than playing Bo3 or Bo5 or Bo7, that's also a different skill set than playing in team league proleague or winners league format. I don't see how we should validate one skill set over the other over some non-descriptive idea about fairness. Why Bo3? Why not Bo5? Or Bo7? The idea that a larger sample size between players gives more accurate representation fails to take into account things like game sense, playing under pressure, and the length / stamina of the players. Longer formats favor some play styles over others too. A player that thrives in Bo5+ format with a super standard macro style might get knocked out in Bo1's by creative unpredictable play, and that player might lose to someone with extremely good game sense and defensive style, and that player might lose in a Bo3 against someone who plans the maps out.
The idea that players rely on it to make money is a different idea from the legitimacy of the competition. If you really wanted a format where you can maximize the money gained, that's dependent on how the prize money is distributed much more so than how the rounds are played out.
More sets means the better player has a higher chance to win, we have plenty of evidence to back this theory up. We do bo3 instead of bo5/bo7 in early rounds and Dual Tournament groups because of time constraints. I think skill in a bo3+ series is the kind of skill that you should reward for an individual league and you can keep the bo1's for team leagues.
I want the best players to have the highest chance to advance, so we can build the next generation of stars.
Consistency over a long period of time = fanbase, popular players = better storylines and a more interesting spectator experience. By creating a tournament that makes it more likely for the better player to advance further into the tournament we can more easily create star players that consistently go deep into a starleague/gsl and win.
Better in terms of what. Did you even read my post? "Over-all" ability? Late game macro? You are ignoring all the other qualities of a player. A Bo3 is also vastly different than a Bo7. The whole point of a tournament is to test a player's skill in every possible format, which is partially the reason why the Ro32 isn't the same number of sets as the Finals. Shorter sets or bo1's produce the best mind games and one off builds and I would argue the most memorable Starcraft has come out of those settings and not an elongated series.
Better simply means better, no need to play semantics. We know which players are the best because they win more games than everyone else. It's a fact that the more games played, the higher chance will be of the better player coming up. That's why we don't play bo1 finals.
Not sure how much I like this, tradition is important but bo1 has the potential to make upsets in the ro32 happen that shouldn't otherwise happen. WCS KR is already the most difficult region to play in, we don't need to make it more punishing.
Pretty much my thoughts. Forgo tradition for the sake of making the first round competition not completely stupid, please. This isn't BW.
I've never understood this at all. BW was just as unforgiving for cheese as HoTS is so what's the big deal? The better player should always and mostly will always win the first game in a Bo3, in which case it just means they go through rather than the other guy having a chance to bring it back.
Being the best means you have to be the best in all situations, not just "Best of" matches. It's about knowing when to prepare cheese and when to play it safe in a Bo1, if anything I'd say Bo1 leads to more interesting games as both players know everything is on the line and will fight harder for the game.
It's more about consistency within WCS, it doesn't make sense for me to have KR be the most competitive region and the most unforgiving region, when the other regions give the same amount of money. If this was just OSL I would be fine with it.
I've never valued the prestige of WCS so much. Why dont you just simply enjoy the OSL. Them Koreans will be compensated for the prize cut in a weekend tourney called season finals later
Sure I can enjoy the tournament as it doesn't affect me directly, I'll watch it regardless.
The issue I have is the Korean pros that aren't Kespa A-teamers with good salaries potentially being knocked out in the ro32 because of bo1 instead of bo3. It just seems unfair to me that WCS EU & AM players get second chances while the KR players don't. There are financial problems in a lot of eSF teams right now and making the results less consistent can only make their situations worse.
This isn't just the OSL anymore, this is the only individual league in Korea and what a lot of players rely on to make their money.
Playing Bo1's is a different skill set than playing Bo3 or Bo5 or Bo7, that's also a different skill set than playing in team league proleague or winners league format. I don't see how we should validate one skill set over the other over some non-descriptive idea about fairness. Why Bo3? Why not Bo5? Or Bo7? The idea that a larger sample size between players gives more accurate representation fails to take into account things like game sense, playing under pressure, and the length / stamina of the players. Longer formats favor some play styles over others too. A player that thrives in Bo5+ format with a super standard macro style might get knocked out in Bo1's by creative unpredictable play, and that player might lose to someone with extremely good game sense and defensive style, and that player might lose in a Bo3 against someone who plans the maps out.
The idea that players rely on it to make money is a different idea from the legitimacy of the competition. If you really wanted a format where you can maximize the money gained, that's dependent on how the prize money is distributed much more so than how the rounds are played out.
More sets means the better player has a higher chance to win, we have plenty of evidence to back this theory up. We do bo3 instead of bo5/bo7 in early rounds and Dual Tournament groups because of time constraints. I think skill in a bo3+ series is the kind of skill that you should reward for an individual league and you can keep the bo1's for team leagues.
I want the best players to have the highest chance to advance, so we can build the next generation of stars.
Consistency over a long period of time = fanbase, popular players = better storylines and a more interesting spectator experience. By creating a tournament that makes it more likely for the better player to advance further into the tournament we can more easily create star players that consistently go deep into a starleague/gsl and win.
Better in terms of what. Did you even read my post? "Over-all" ability? Late game macro? You are ignoring all the other qualities of a player. A Bo3 is also vastly different than a Bo7. The whole point of a tournament is to test a player's skill in every possible format, which is partially the reason why the Ro32 isn't the same number of sets as the Finals. Shorter sets or bo1's produce the best mind games and one off builds and I would argue the most memorable Starcraft has come out of those settings and not an elongated series.
Better simply means better, no need to play semantics. We know which players are the best because they win more games than everyone else. It's a fact that the more games played, the higher chance will be of the better player coming up. That's why we don't play bo1 finals.
There is never a "better simply means better" unless by an overwhelming margin across all categories, which is why the term "bonjwa" was even invented in the first place because people realized savior was simply better than other players regardless of the situation for a long period of time. I don't know why this is suddenly an accepted fact when so many things like match ups, map pool, player region, skill set, and even game patch changes come into play. Even if you look at it from a statistical point of view, there is always an error margin. This isn't semantics. Different styles are better suited and benefited from environments that players can't control.
Am I suggesting that you play a Bo1 finals? No. I'm suggesting that there's value in Bo1, Bo3, Bo5, Bo7, round robin, team league, what ever. The idea that simply because it is Bo1 that automatically makes it a less representative format of determining player skill is dumb. If they played a round robin of Bo1 with a full 32 player group it would be a much more representative format than a predetermined 4 player group, and so on.
There are some players who simply function between in different environments, some like the high stress environment of either a come back in a Bo3+ series or a Bo1, some like to plan out each map, some prepare in specific ways for different formats. Playing long Bo5s or Bo7s is definitely a skill that's highly valued in terms of stamina and mind set and over-all fundamentals, but that doesn't mean that winning a Bo1 is less impressive, because you have to think about the player's mindset and preparation. The level of preparation you have for a Bo1 is much higher than having to prepare for several maps.
When an underdog beats an established player by exploiting his playstyle and studying hardcore and preparing to snipe him in a Bo1, do you dismiss that as "low sample size" and "oh the established player is still the better player"? Sounds pretty ridiculous to me because we don't have foresight and we can't tell where those players' careers and performances will be the next time they meet. If two players of equal fundamentals just happen to meet in an lucky or unlucky bracket in a Bo7 where one had the best matchup and the other had the worst match up, even if it's the finals (Inca vs Nestea), would you say that Inca was better than everyone below the Ro4 bracket?
If you just look at head to head, is 5 cumulative Bo1's less representative of a player's skill than 1 Bo5?
BO1 do not work in SC2. The only reason they were legitimate in BW was due to the insane skill ceiling and thus there were less chances for lesser players to take games off the cream of the crop.\
This is not the case for SC2 , a very very volatile game, where a single baneling hit can win/lose the game. Sc2 tourneys to have a minimum of BO3, it is really my belief that any GM-level player could take off ONE game off most pros and there should be a system that ensures the VERY best rise to the next stage of the tournament.
On June 10 2013 21:44 Partha wrote: BO1 do not work in SC2. The only reason they were legitimate in BW was due to the insane skill ceiling and thus there were less chances for lesser players to take games off the cream of the crop.\
This is not the case for SC2 , a very very volatile game, where a single baneling hit can win/lose the game. Sc2 tourneys to have a minimum of BO3, it is really my belief that any GM-level player could take off ONE game off most pros and there should be a system that ensures the VERY best rise to the next stage of the tournament.
BW is also an extremely volatile game even 10 years down the line so I'm really not sure what you are talking about. No one was really using queens even until 2010. Huge gaps in strategies used by players such as Dweb corsair vs Terran mech, Reaver Corsair vs Z, bulldog vs Terran, etc etc. And amateur players could also take games off pros, even a long retired Nal_rA took a game off Flash in his prime, that's the whole point of competition. I don't know why everyone is so scared of their favorite player getting dethroned because that's a huge part of the entertainment value and storylines.
On June 10 2013 21:44 Partha wrote: BO1 do not work in SC2. The only reason they were legitimate in BW was due to the insane skill ceiling and thus there were less chances for lesser players to take games off the cream of the crop.\
This is not the case for SC2 , a very very volatile game, where a single baneling hit can win/lose the game. Sc2 tourneys to have a minimum of BO3, it is really my belief that any GM-level player could take off ONE game off most pros and there should be a system that ensures the VERY best rise to the next stage of the tournament.
When we have a bunch of Korean progamers utterly dominating other top Korean progamers without making it look even close in Starcraft II, I think we're past the point where we can blame volatility for X or Y players losing. But upsets do happen; in Brood War (M18M beating Flash, for example - there are many others) and in Starcraft II, which only serves to make things interesting. Besides, SC2's "skill ceiling" (which is a loose term usually used to call BW the better game) is high enough - the better or smarter player will win in the majority of cases.
I think people are really confusing this idea about fairness and competition. When it comes down to it, what we want isn't simply that "the best player wins", what we actually want is "the most entertaining games produced in what we consider fair and representative of the player's skill". There are so many qualifiers there that I don't think it's fair at all to dismiss Bo1's simply on the basis that the sample size is too small.
If we had a scene where you know instinctively which player was going to win because every match was a BoX lim x-> infinity. Why even watch it? What about that is interesting? People watch competitive events cheering for their own favorites because the rules themselves are a part of the competition, players will always exploit the specific strengths and weaknesses of their own styles with the format given, regardless of if it's a Bo1 or a Bo3 or a Bo7. Many people found the macro style of Flash to be "boring" because it's a safe and reliable style in the Bo3+ environment, while many others found the aggressive, creative, and unpredictable style of Jaedong in the high stress Bo1 or ace environment much more exciting.
If you really wanted esports to grow you shouldn't be afraid of the Bo1 style of tournaments, to put this in perspective, isn't a Bo5 actually a Bo1 of a Bo5? People complain about extended series formats for varying reasons because they believe "that one player has already beaten the other" when they meet again in MLG. Yet the same people will protest multiple Bo1's to determine a winner.
And I still stand by the idea that preparing for exclusively Bo1 games given entire time and resources and also incentive (the BW example, the most prestiguous tournament was Bo1 some might argue, and hence players had the incentive to practice for that format) wil produce memorable games and story-lines. Simply the idea that absolutely everything is on the line in this one game makes every game as exciting as the match point of a Bo3+ series.
On June 10 2013 22:22 Evangelist wrote: So what do we call it now? Starleague? Code S. Code Starleague?
I wish they'd adopt a single nomenclature. The whole "Premier/Challenger" league doesn't really roll off the tongue like Code A and Code S.
The answer is in the OP - they're going to call it OGN Starleague (OSL) like they always have, just as GomTV got to keep Code S/Code A. There won't be a dual tournament any more, though - the qualifiers will be in GomTV's production, known as Code A which is essentially another name for Challenger League.
And I suspect most people will keep referring to these tournaments as GSL and OSL, because that's what they've always been to us.
On June 10 2013 22:22 Evangelist wrote: So what do we call it now? Starleague? Code S. Code Starleague?
I wish they'd adopt a single nomenclature. The whole "Premier/Challenger" league doesn't really roll off the tongue like Code A and Code S.
Opinions man. Just like I think the whole Code A/Code S thing sounds stupid. *eye roll* Whatever you want to call it. This format goes way back and I do mean way back. It's funny because I just made another one of my posts regarding increasing the frequency of meaningful games to create more storylines and continuity between players as well as raising the competitive bar regardless of your nationality.
On June 10 2013 08:32 Zenbrez wrote: May the next 6 month tournament marathon begin!
a season takes 6 months? @_@
No, there are about three months between Season Finals (perhaps a little less). A Premier League Season (OSL in this case) should take between 6 and 8 weeks.
On June 10 2013 08:51 ZackAttack wrote: Does this arrangement mean that we will never have GSL and Starleague going at the same time, and now they are basically one event with an alternating name?
Yes. This is one of the reasons I don't like the WCS setup that much. Its great for EU and AM but it limits the top end Korean tournaments we could potential have which is a shame.
That sucks a lot more than people are giving it credit for.
Yeah I'll always miss the possibility of the dual starleague winner.
WCS Korea + WCS Season Finals is the new dual starleague winner.
That's kind of silly considering they're one week apart from one another and less work. lol If we're talking about the Finals at Blizzcon? Meh, still doesn't really bode well with me. Because if you won either one of them you've pretty much qualified for it to begin with. It's like having half the job done considering it's a Western LAN event. So if you're running hot at the point it would be awfully hard to find someone to stop you in your tracks.
On June 11 2013 00:05 Rabiator wrote: Why can't they call it WCS? Using any other name is confusing and sounds too much like a "personal ego thing".
personal ego is pretty justified in this case
Why? It seems as if "koreans must have their little bit of extra to set themselves apart from the rest of the world" ... and that isnt what the WCS is about. Its supposed to be a unified and truly global tournament. Pnadering to Korean ego is silly for such a tournament.
On June 10 2013 15:11 Noam wrote: It won't be easy choosing between the OGN stream with DoA and crowd shots and great player-face zoom-ins, or the GOMTV stream with Tastosis and nothing else.
This choice was much easier for the WCS S1 finals with Apollo & Day9 and the lounge etc.
On June 11 2013 00:05 Rabiator wrote: Why can't they call it WCS? Using any other name is confusing and sounds too much like a "personal ego thing".
personal ego is pretty justified in this case
Why? It seems as if "koreans must have their little bit of extra to set themselves apart from the rest of the world" ... and that isnt what the WCS is about. Its supposed to be a unified and truly global tournament. Pnadering to Korean ego is silly for such a tournament.
Its not that they "must have their little bit of extra", its that they do have a lot of extra to set themselves apart from WCS AM/EU and global finals. Letting go of GSL/OSL trademarks would be silly.
And not everyone thinks WCS should be "truly global".
On June 11 2013 00:05 Rabiator wrote: Why can't they call it WCS? Using any other name is confusing and sounds too much like a "personal ego thing".
personal ego is pretty justified in this case
Why? It seems as if "koreans must have their little bit of extra to set themselves apart from the rest of the world" ... and that isnt what the WCS is about. Its supposed to be a unified and truly global tournament. Pnadering to Korean ego is silly for such a tournament.
I don't see what is wrong with it. The other region got another tournament created for the WCS. Korea had to "sacrifice" theirs to be a part of the WCS. The least they can do is keep the name.
On June 11 2013 00:05 Rabiator wrote: Why can't they call it WCS? Using any other name is confusing and sounds too much like a "personal ego thing".
personal ego is pretty justified in this case
Why? It seems as if "koreans must have their little bit of extra to set themselves apart from the rest of the world" ... and that isnt what the WCS is about. Its supposed to be a unified and truly global tournament. Pnadering to Korean ego is silly for such a tournament.
If this was the first season OGN put on a tourney and they wanted to that then I understand, but throwing away a 10+ year brand for WCS is just silly.
On June 11 2013 00:05 Rabiator wrote: Why can't they call it WCS? Using any other name is confusing and sounds too much like a "personal ego thing".
Why does Gom get to call it the GSL still? ._. You see where I'm going with this? I would have liked it if both decided to change the name.
In any case, I'm not a big fan of KeSPA for not keeping the stats from PL separate the BW stats. Just like I'm not happy when they use the OSL for SC2 because they're different games and should be kept separate. It's their trademark, but I don't like the overlap. Which leads me to the next question? Will we continue to see the Golden Mouses handed out? Will they decide to bring back the Diamond and Platinum mice for those players who manage to win five/seven OSL titles?
I don't know what to make of it. At this rate I think it would be next to impossible. I don't know whether to be offended or admire those players who manage to rise up and win the OSL for BW and SC2 respectfully. It would be quite the feat. I'm trying to find a pic of the diamond and platinum mouse because I'm almost certain fomos had a picture of all of them on a table but I cannot seem to find it. Quite something else. Now that sir, is what you call a fucking trophy!
On June 11 2013 00:05 Rabiator wrote: Why can't they call it WCS? Using any other name is confusing and sounds too much like a "personal ego thing".
Why does Gom get to call it the GSL still? ._. You see where I'm going with this? I would have liked it if both decided to change the name.
In any case, I'm not a big fan of KeSPA for not keeping the stats from PL separate the BW stats. Just like I'm not happy when they use the OSL for SC2 because they're different games and should be kept separate. It's their trademark, but I don't like the overlap. Which leads me to the next question? Will we continue to see the Golden Mouses handed out? Will they decide to bring back the Diamond and Platinum mice for those players who manage to win five/seven OSL titles?
I don't know what to make of it. At this rate I think it would be next to impossible. I don't know whether to be offended or admire those players who manage to rise up and win the OSL for BW and SC2 respectfully. It would be quite the feat. I'm trying to find a pic of the diamond and platinum mouse because I'm almost certain fomos had a picture of all of them on a table but I cannot seem to find it. Quite something else. Now that sir, is what you call a fucking trophy!
Platinum mouse? OSL is 1/8months. Jaedong is in no position to win OSL. Flash... that would be a surprise. JangBi even more so but at least these two seems possible. Fantasy, Stork, Effort - I don't see it coming.
this means there is not going to be a GSL code S this season? only code A?, this also means no Tastosis casting premier league? Now I understand why GOMtv is looking for other games like World of tanks etc..
On June 11 2013 10:31 Asgardinho wrote: this means there is not going to be a GSL code S this season? only code A?, this also means no Tastosis casting premier league? Now I understand why GOMtv is looking for other games like World of tanks etc..
tastosis will be casting the OSL off-stream don't worry
somehow i think it is a bad news... considering that GSL will no longer happening quite as often. It would be nice if both GSL and OSL happen MORE often regardless of WCS, just like the MSL and OSL during BW season
On June 11 2013 13:17 lfredl wrote: somehow i think it is a bad news... considering that GSL will no longer happening quite as often. It would be nice if both GSL and OSL happen MORE often regardless of WCS, just like the MSL and OSL during BW season
I generally agree. It'd be nice if Gom up'd their team league or held alternative sc2 tournaments as well.
I mean most pro players probably don't even play more than 1 tournament game a week.
On June 11 2013 13:17 lfredl wrote: somehow i think it is a bad news... considering that GSL will no longer happening quite as often. It would be nice if both GSL and OSL happen MORE often regardless of WCS, just like the MSL and OSL during BW season
I generally agree. It'd be nice if Gom up'd their team league or held alternative sc2 tournaments as well.
I mean most pro players probably don't even play more than 1 tournament game a week.
On June 11 2013 13:17 lfredl wrote: somehow i think it is a bad news... considering that GSL will no longer happening quite as often. It would be nice if both GSL and OSL happen MORE often regardless of WCS, just like the MSL and OSL during BW season
I generally agree. It'd be nice if Gom up'd their team league or held alternative sc2 tournaments as well.
I mean most pro players probably don't even play more than 1 tournament game a week.
Gom always runs some extra events, like the world championship, blizzard cup, super tournament..., hopefully they will do a few more now
On June 11 2013 13:17 lfredl wrote: somehow i think it is a bad news... considering that GSL will no longer happening quite as often. It would be nice if both GSL and OSL happen MORE often regardless of WCS, just like the MSL and OSL during BW season
I generally agree. It'd be nice if Gom up'd their team league or held alternative sc2 tournaments as well.
I mean most pro players probably don't even play more than 1 tournament game a week.
That's an ongoing problem.
they just cant because: - no tourney overlap bullshit from Blizzard - most eSF teams in dire situation. hell, without much starcraft to play, I dont think sponsors could stick for long
The best thing they can do is join up (not merge) with KeSPA imo. Dissolve teams like Prime, put themselves on for drafting, stronger teams join SPL. Best of both worlds
Gom always runs some extra events, like the world championship, blizzard cup, super tournament..., hopefully they will do a few more now
I dont see anything happen anytime soon, and it's not a solution in the long run
What im wondering is if they are forced into using GOMs crappy tournament structure?
I really dislike the group stages GOM are running, where you see great players comming in on a day and have to play up to 3 different matchups without knowing who they are going to play on wich maps etc.
In fact watching Proleague is so much better because you see the best players in the World comming in prepared for ONE oponent on ONE map every single time wich makes the quality so much higher.
From what I know players never had to play these crappy group structures in the OSL.
If (wich I strongly suspect.) in fact they are forced to use a certain tournament format, I really hope they can circumvent these things by just scheduling alot better then GOM is. Lets say in round of 16 you have 4 Groups of 4 right? Why not play ONE match out of every group per day and get 4 matches per day instead of playing an entire group at once. This way we can get far higher quality of games then what GOM is offering right now and also this would reward players that are good at preparing alot more.
Bottom line is, quality needs to go up! Im barely watching GSL any more except from when some personal favorite player is playing because I know I get more well prepared games and higher quality by just watching Proleague!
Go OGN! Im confident they will improve alot on GOMs product this upcomming season! <3
On June 11 2013 13:59 Tanngrisnir wrote: What im wondering is if they are forced into using GOMs crappy tournament structure?
I really dislike the group stages GOM are running, where you see great players comming in on a day and have to play up to 3 different matchups without knowing who they are going to play on wich maps etc.
In fact watching Proleague is so much better because you see the best players in the World comming in prepared for ONE oponent on ONE map every single time wich makes the quality so much higher.
From what I know players never had to play these crappy group structures in the OSL.
If (wich I strongly suspect.) in fact they are forced to use a certain tournament format, I really hope they can circumvent these things by just scheduling alot better then GOM is. Lets say in round of 16 you have 4 Groups of 4 right? Why not play ONE match out of every group per day and get 4 matches per day instead of playing an entire group at once. This way we can get far higher quality of games then what GOM is offering right now and also this would reward players that are good at preparing alot more.
Bottom line is, quality needs to go up! Im barely watching GSL any more except from when some personal favorite player is playing because I know I get more well prepared games and higher quality by just watching Proleague!
Go OGN! Im confident they will improve alot on GOMs product this upcomming season! <3
For the OSL, Ro16 has always been you only play one person in a day. A much better format I think.
On June 11 2013 13:59 Tanngrisnir wrote: What im wondering is if they are forced into using GOMs crappy tournament structure?
I really dislike the group stages GOM are running, where you see great players comming in on a day and have to play up to 3 different matchups without knowing who they are going to play on wich maps etc.
In fact watching Proleague is so much better because you see the best players in the World comming in prepared for ONE oponent on ONE map every single time wich makes the quality so much higher.
From what I know players never had to play these crappy group structures in the OSL.
If (wich I strongly suspect.) in fact they are forced to use a certain tournament format, I really hope they can circumvent these things by just scheduling alot better then GOM is. Lets say in round of 16 you have 4 Groups of 4 right? Why not play ONE match out of every group per day and get 4 matches per day instead of playing an entire group at once. This way we can get far higher quality of games then what GOM is offering right now and also this would reward players that are good at preparing alot more.
Bottom line is, quality needs to go up! Im barely watching GSL any more except from when some personal favorite player is playing because I know I get more well prepared games and higher quality by just watching Proleague!
Go OGN! Im confident they will improve alot on GOMs product this upcomming season! <3
For the OSL, Ro16 has always been you only play one person in a day. A much better format I think.
Well the 100m dash always gets more press, but I find the marathon more impressive.
On June 11 2013 13:59 Tanngrisnir wrote: What im wondering is if they are forced into using GOMs crappy tournament structure?
I really dislike the group stages GOM are running, where you see great players comming in on a day and have to play up to 3 different matchups without knowing who they are going to play on wich maps etc.
In fact watching Proleague is so much better because you see the best players in the World comming in prepared for ONE oponent on ONE map every single time wich makes the quality so much higher.
From what I know players never had to play these crappy group structures in the OSL.
If (wich I strongly suspect.) in fact they are forced to use a certain tournament format, I really hope they can circumvent these things by just scheduling alot better then GOM is. Lets say in round of 16 you have 4 Groups of 4 right? Why not play ONE match out of every group per day and get 4 matches per day instead of playing an entire group at once. This way we can get far higher quality of games then what GOM is offering right now and also this would reward players that are good at preparing alot more.
Bottom line is, quality needs to go up! Im barely watching GSL any more except from when some personal favorite player is playing because I know I get more well prepared games and higher quality by just watching Proleague!
Go OGN! Im confident they will improve alot on GOMs product this upcomming season! <3
If i take the WCS Finals as a reference, OGN will not do a better job than GOM, at least for the English streams.
The group format is actually great, because it takes a completly different set of skill to win: you have to adapt quickly.
This has already been discussed to death during every MLG as to what requieres the more skill ? Adapting to a a lot of oponent quickly or having a week to study him ? For me the answer is both. To truly be a good player you HAVE to know how to do both.
GOM's "crappy format" is actually awesome, because it gives the best of both world.
On June 11 2013 13:59 Tanngrisnir wrote: What im wondering is if they are forced into using GOMs crappy tournament structure?
I really dislike the group stages GOM are running, where you see great players comming in on a day and have to play up to 3 different matchups without knowing who they are going to play on wich maps etc.
In fact watching Proleague is so much better because you see the best players in the World comming in prepared for ONE oponent on ONE map every single time wich makes the quality so much higher.
From what I know players never had to play these crappy group structures in the OSL.
If (wich I strongly suspect.) in fact they are forced to use a certain tournament format, I really hope they can circumvent these things by just scheduling alot better then GOM is. Lets say in round of 16 you have 4 Groups of 4 right? Why not play ONE match out of every group per day and get 4 matches per day instead of playing an entire group at once. This way we can get far higher quality of games then what GOM is offering right now and also this would reward players that are good at preparing alot more.
Bottom line is, quality needs to go up! Im barely watching GSL any more except from when some personal favorite player is playing because I know I get more well prepared games and higher quality by just watching Proleague!
Go OGN! Im confident they will improve alot on GOMs product this upcomming season! <3
If i take the WCS Finals as a reference, OGN will not do a better job than GOM, at least for the English streams.
The group format is actually great, because it takes a completly different set of skill to win: you have to adapt quickly.
This has already been discussed to death during every MLG as to what requieres the more skill ? Adapting to a a lot of oponent quickly or having a week to study him ? For me the answer is both. To truly be a good player you HAVE to know how to do both.
GOM's "crappy format" is actually awesome, because it gives the best of both world.
1. OGNs WCS Finals SMOKED anything that GOM has ever produced.
2. If youre actually in to the game and want to have quality games then the group format is terrible, sorry! People just dont play as well when they cant practice specifically what they are going to play wich is why GOM and OGN always give adequate time for players to prepare for games in RO8 and later.
My guess is that the group stage was created to avoid people geting unlucky draws and have top players eliminate eachother early in the tournament, wich is great. What I do not understand is why it would take more "skill" to play multiple opponents/series on a single day and I think you got that backwards. When players havent practiced specifics there is alot more randomness added to the games and alot of the super amazing things that players come up with while practicing and preparing specifics over and over again is taken out of the games Instead you see players "guess" with timings etc and look bad when they are making misstakes that they wouldnt had they had time to practice and prepare.
Simply put, I dont care about a players ability to adjust and come up with things on the fly after beeing forced to play series after series, and I doubt anyone cares enough about that to be willing to accept lower quality play just to get to see who would play better without preparations?
I care about players revealing the amazing things they can do when they are given time and preparation. These amazing solutions they figure out to solve problems that you and me are experiencing in our own games.
Also there is alot more tention to the games when you know both players come well armed with plans and builds that they are going to execute to perfection.
OGN used to separate one bo3 into two sessions of bo1/bo2. That shows how much they value preparation over anything. Stop complaining about format please
On June 10 2013 15:11 Noam wrote: It won't be easy choosing between the OGN stream with DoA and crowd shots and great player-face zoom-ins, or the GOMTV stream with Tastosis and nothing else.
This choice was much easier for the WCS S1 finals with Apollo & Day9 and the lounge etc.
One of the main reasons I don't watch a lot of Proleague are the player-face zooms. Not only they interrupt me in watching the game during intense moments, they are also very, very visually disturbing ...
Generally, the thing that I dislike the most about these tournaments is the "production" - the endelss delays, the awkward interviews, etc... I would like to just watch the games for gods sake! But this is just something that I have to live with, because the coutry with the most insanely childish style of production happens to be the one where good games are being played.
On June 11 2013 13:59 Tanngrisnir wrote: What im wondering is if they are forced into using GOMs crappy tournament structure?
I really dislike the group stages GOM are running, where you see great players comming in on a day and have to play up to 3 different matchups without knowing who they are going to play on wich maps etc.
In fact watching Proleague is so much better because you see the best players in the World comming in prepared for ONE oponent on ONE map every single time wich makes the quality so much higher.
From what I know players never had to play these crappy group structures in the OSL.
If (wich I strongly suspect.) in fact they are forced to use a certain tournament format, I really hope they can circumvent these things by just scheduling alot better then GOM is. Lets say in round of 16 you have 4 Groups of 4 right? Why not play ONE match out of every group per day and get 4 matches per day instead of playing an entire group at once. This way we can get far higher quality of games then what GOM is offering right now and also this would reward players that are good at preparing alot more.
Bottom line is, quality needs to go up! Im barely watching GSL any more except from when some personal favorite player is playing because I know I get more well prepared games and higher quality by just watching Proleague!
Go OGN! Im confident they will improve alot on GOMs product this upcomming season! <3
If i take the WCS Finals as a reference, OGN will not do a better job than GOM, at least for the English streams.
The group format is actually great, because it takes a completly different set of skill to win: you have to adapt quickly.
This has already been discussed to death during every MLG as to what requieres the more skill ? Adapting to a a lot of oponent quickly or having a week to study him ? For me the answer is both. To truly be a good player you HAVE to know how to do both.
GOM's "crappy format" is actually awesome, because it gives the best of both world.
1. OGNs WCS Finals SMOKED anything that GOM has ever produced.
2. If youre actually in to the game and want to have quality games then the group format is terrible, sorry! People just dont play as well when they cant practice specifically what they are going to play wich is why GOM and OGN always give adequate time for players to prepare for games in RO8 and later.
My guess is that the group stage was created to avoid people geting unlucky draws and have top players eliminate eachother early in the tournament, wich is great. What I do not understand is why it would take more "skill" to play multiple opponents/series on a single day and I think you got that backwards. When players havent practiced specifics there is alot more randomness added to the games and alot of the super amazing things that players come up with while practicing and preparing specifics over and over again is taken out of the games Instead you see players "guess" with timings etc and look bad when they are making misstakes that they wouldnt had they had time to practice and prepare.
Simply put, I dont care about a players ability to adjust and come up with things on the fly after beeing forced to play series after series, and I doubt anyone cares enough about that to be willing to accept lower quality play just to get to see who would play better without preparations?
I care about players revealing the amazing things they can do when they are given time and preparation. These amazing solutions they figure out to solve problems that you and me are experiencing in our own games.
Also there is alot more tention to the games when you know both players come well armed with plans and builds that they are going to execute to perfection.
1: Your opinion, not shared by everyone. I admit that some thing were better, but the fact that the english casters had to watch the big screen behind them to get informations like the worker count is a joke. Not to mention no translations of interviews... But hey, if I end up wrong and OGN production kills GomTVs, I'll be the first one happy, because that means a better experience. I just doubt it.
2: It does not take more skill to play multiple opponents on a single day, it takes a different skill, and due to how tourneys works nowadays, a player should have both. The fact that YOU don't like it doesn't make it less true and it sure as hell doesn't make GOM's system crappy, otherwise it wouldn't have been copied for WCS and more or less every other tournament out there...
Anyways I said already, it's a pointless argument happening at each and every MLG. Just don't be too harsh because you only want to see one face of the game.
On June 10 2013 11:54 triforks wrote: this is freaking awesome.
with two organizations in the mix, the competition btwn each other should really raise the quality of production.
From the perspective of GOMTV, it is a little damage for them But IMO, Blizzard seems wanted to OGN does quite of significant roles to increase Interesting of WCS in Korea Since OGN is the TV station they has more advantages to widespread promote However, it would be more variety to watch and it is more benefits from viewers position.
It's just a shame that there are now so few tournaments in Korea each year. I would have preferred GOM and OGN having their own separate events to what we get now.
On June 10 2013 15:11 Noam wrote: It won't be easy choosing between the OGN stream with DoA and crowd shots and great player-face zoom-ins, or the GOMTV stream with Tastosis and nothing else.
This choice was much easier for the WCS S1 finals with Apollo & Day9 and the lounge etc.
One of the main reasons I don't watch a lot of Proleague are the player-face zooms. Not only they interrupt me in watching the game during intense moments, they are also very, very visually disturbing ...
Generally, the thing that I dislike the most about these tournaments is the "production" - the endelss delays, the awkward interviews, etc... I would like to just watch the games for gods sake! But this is just something that I have to live with, because the coutry with the most insanely childish style of production happens to be the one where good games are being played.
You are probably the only person on the planet who doesn't enjoy the face zooms.
On June 10 2013 15:11 Noam wrote: It won't be easy choosing between the OGN stream with DoA and crowd shots and great player-face zoom-ins, or the GOMTV stream with Tastosis and nothing else.
This choice was much easier for the WCS S1 finals with Apollo & Day9 and the lounge etc.
One of the main reasons I don't watch a lot of Proleague are the player-face zooms. Not only they interrupt me in watching the game during intense moments, they are also very, very visually disturbing ...
Generally, the thing that I dislike the most about these tournaments is the "production" - the endelss delays, the awkward interviews, etc... I would like to just watch the games for gods sake! But this is just something that I have to live with, because the coutry with the most insanely childish style of production happens to be the one where good games are being played.
You are probably the only person on the planet who doesn't enjoy the face zooms.
well, i don't enjoy them per se, but they're not very intrusive on my viewing experience.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jlAO3dc.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.gosugamers.net/images/news/goldenmouse.jpg)
