|
On June 18 2013 11:09 Inimic wrote: Who cares if it affects the final match? We don't want extended series at all...
Speak for yourself. Extended series is great for the game IMO.
|
|
On June 18 2013 11:20 c0ldfusion wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 11:09 Inimic wrote: Who cares if it affects the final match? We don't want extended series at all... Speak for yourself. Extended series is great for the game IMO. ewwww, why do people think this? Every match is its own entity, carrying things over just confuses and poisons that idea. If I were to create a machine that sucked hype out of a building, it would be called extended series.
|
sigh so annoying that they want to make sure the final doesn't end anticlimactic. I like double elimination with all its faults. Still an interesting approach, they should just cut the extended series out of it though and it would work just as fine. In the end nothing guarantees an epic final, especially when most players excel at one or two matchups only. I am quiet sure though they will handpick the 2 brackets nicely though, so the favorites will be well spread and not be on only one side heh.
|
extended series are always fair. if you lose in the upper brackets you should pay for it.
|
On June 18 2013 02:05 onedayclose wrote: Best of 5 Grand Finals? Who does that anymore?!?!?!? Dreamhack. But Dreamhack has the production to stop all the haters.
|
On June 18 2013 12:06 geokilla wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 02:05 onedayclose wrote: Best of 5 Grand Finals? Who does that anymore?!?!?!? Dreamhack. But Dreamhack has the production to stop all the haters. When they aren't eliminating players with a coin flip.
|
So rule 4, normal extended series, if you meet a second time anywhere you pick up from where you left off to a Bo7. I can live with this one, doesn't seem too bad.
But Rule 5...wtf. So instead of just using two separate Bo3, or just make it a Bo5 like the finals, you give the winner's bracket player an advantage in the first bo3 by saying they only need to win 2 games to advance, but then turning around and say 'but if you lose the first 2/3, you have to then win 3/4 or 4/5', leaving them at a disadvantage.
Semifinal looks like this assuming both players haven't met previously "Series 1": Winner (from WB)- win 2/3 or 66% to advance Loser (from LB)- win 2/3 or 66% to continue "Extended Series" - Winner (from WB)- win 3/4 or 75% to advance (if 2-1) OR win 4/5 or 80% to advance (if 2-0) Loser (from LB)- win 2/4 (if 2-1) or 50% to advance OR win 2/5 or 40% to advance (if 2-0)
With 2 bo3 "Series 1": Winner (from WB)- win 2/3 or 66% to advance Loser (from LB)- win 2/3 or 66% to continue "Series 2": Winner (from WB)- win 2/3 or 66% to advance Loser (from LB)- win 2/3 or 66% to advance
With a bo5 "Series 1": Winner (from WB)- win 3/5 or 60% to advance Loser (from LB)- win 3/5 or 60% to continue
I can see why b05 doesn't work for the semi, as you're giving the WB player 1 less loss to be knocked out while giving the LB player 1 extra loss. But between 2 bo3 and what they currently have cooked up...just some strange eggs working at MLG.
|
Northern Ireland25816 Posts
I'd be interested to see the numbers for and against this in poll format.
People are throwing out 'nobody likes this', which is patently not the case but I would wager that the majority will fall on the side of 'nay' on this one.
|
On June 18 2013 11:26 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 11:20 c0ldfusion wrote:On June 18 2013 11:09 Inimic wrote: Who cares if it affects the final match? We don't want extended series at all... Speak for yourself. Extended series is great for the game IMO. ewwww, why do people think this? Every match is its own entity, carrying things over just confuses and poisons that idea. If I were to create a machine that sucked hype out of a building, it would be called extended series.
Extended series generates hype if anything. The losing player comes back and evens the series out? Hype. The losing player comes back and wins the series? Hype. The losing player comes back but loses the series? Hatred? See the next point. The losing player loses before evening out the series? They're obviously the worse player between the two, being no different to hype regardless.
Extended series is a FAIR advantage for the winning player, it's not impossible to comeback against. In the end you either watch MLG and support them or you don't, and we'll see if it's the minority complaining about this or the majority.
On June 18 2013 12:40 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 12:06 geokilla wrote:On June 18 2013 02:05 onedayclose wrote: Best of 5 Grand Finals? Who does that anymore?!?!?!? Dreamhack. But Dreamhack has the production to stop all the haters. When they aren't eliminating players with a coin flip.
Dreamhack is plagued with issues but because they're not an NA corporation they don't get shit on? I can name countless things that Dreamhack could have done better. Leave extended series as it is, it's tried and tested and works. Why don't people complain about finals being a bo5 then a bo3 if the loser-bracket wins the bo5?
|
Hey IEM when you come to New York this summer would you be okay with staying here? We've got really good cheeseburgers
|
I don't understand why people create threads on this in the year 2013. We realized in flipping 2011 that the community was split 50/50 on this and that any further discussion was pointless. We debated this for like two full months of nothing but extended series. There are two ENTIRE State of the Game episodes on extended series, both featuring MLG employees.
People raised good points on both sides. The most notable I recall was Nony arguing that "if the goal of the tournament is to have the highest chance possible to award victory to the best player, then extended series must be implemented."
However, people raised the counterpoints that it was bad for spectators, and the majority of the people against extended series were against it because of how it could ruin the Grand Finals for spectators.
Since that problem doesn't exist here, the whine is irrelevant.
|
On June 18 2013 12:54 Wombat_NI wrote: I'd be interested to see the numbers for and against this in poll format.
People are throwing out 'nobody likes this', which is patently not the case but I would wager that the majority will fall on the side of 'nay' on this one.
We've done this a number of times man and the poll results are always the same on this website/reddit/etc. Ask the players themselves and most of them argue against it vehemently. It's nice to see Mr. Nelson has brainwashed quite a number of folks and we're starting to see that in the comments section. In either case you won't get the Commissioner to budge because of his thick skull. At least they cannot pull this crap on the WCS so we'll just have to let them eat their cake until they come up with the next bogus ideal to be innovative when it comes to time constraints. What kind of stories will they come up next! Only time will tell! Stay tuned in. Same time; same Bat channel friend! In either case, I'm tired of giving these guys free publicity. No more!
Some people don't get how it creates anti-hype and they never will. No point arguing with them because you'll just keep going in circles like good ol' Daytona 500. BOOGITY BOOGITY BOOGITY, Let's Go Racin', boys! I like to go LEFT!
On June 18 2013 13:16 dcemuser wrote: I don't understand why people create threads on this in the year 2013. We realized in flipping 2011 that the community was split 50/50 on this and that any further discussion was pointless. We debated this for like two full months of nothing but extended series. There are two ENTIRE State of the Game episodes on extended series, both featuring MLG employees.
People raised good points on both sides. The most notable I recall was Nony arguing that "if the goal of the tournament is to have the highest chance possible to award victory to the best player, then extended series must be implemented."
However, people raised the counterpoints that it was bad for spectators, and the majority of the people against extended series were against it because of how it could ruin the Grand Finals for spectators.
Since that problem doesn't exist here, the whine is irrelevant.
... and cue the liars. It was 75% against it from this community and that was back in 2010. Regardless the polls don't matter, right Mr. Nelson? Just a tiny sample size. Let's go around the event asking everyone whether or not they like it. Let's ask all the players and the verdict is always the same.
|
Guys, its ok. MLG gets it. They are just following Xbox's business model of "my way or the highway".
MLG doesn't like straight-forward, easy to understand tournament formats.
|
On June 18 2013 13:02 MonkSEA wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 11:26 Serpico wrote:On June 18 2013 11:20 c0ldfusion wrote:On June 18 2013 11:09 Inimic wrote: Who cares if it affects the final match? We don't want extended series at all... Speak for yourself. Extended series is great for the game IMO. ewwww, why do people think this? Every match is its own entity, carrying things over just confuses and poisons that idea. If I were to create a machine that sucked hype out of a building, it would be called extended series. Extended series generates hype if anything. The losing player comes back and evens the series out? Hype. The losing player comes back and wins the series? Hype. The losing player comes back but loses the series? Hatred? See the next point. The losing player loses before evening out the series? They're obviously the worse player between the two, being no different to hype regardless. Extended series is a FAIR advantage for the winning player, it's not impossible to comeback against. In the end you either watch MLG and support them or you don't, and we'll see if it's the minority complaining about this or the majority. Show nested quote +On June 18 2013 12:40 Plansix wrote:On June 18 2013 12:06 geokilla wrote:On June 18 2013 02:05 onedayclose wrote: Best of 5 Grand Finals? Who does that anymore?!?!?!? Dreamhack. But Dreamhack has the production to stop all the haters. When they aren't eliminating players with a coin flip. Dreamhack is plagued with issues but because they're not an NA corporation they don't get shit on? I can name countless things that Dreamhack could have done better. Leave extended series as it is, it's tried and tested and works. Why don't people complain about finals being a bo5 then a bo3 if the loser-bracket wins the bo5? No it is not fair for the winning player. He already got an advantage, why does he need two?
|
Eh, I'm pretty ok with having extended series everywhere but the finals.
|
MLG continuing its tradition of being shit.
|
Northern Ireland25816 Posts
I don't know what the figure is Starstruck, from my travels definitely higher than 75% opposed, but that's not representative of the scene's followers as whole.
|
I just think the extended format that MLG does is needlessly complicated. If you want to give players more than 1 chance, go with a simple group stage format or double elimination, I think MLG's format of giving the undefeated player some sort of game advantage is trying to make it too fair.
edit: I think that something like first map choice would already be adequate; you could choose your best maps or maps where you have something special planned, which is already a big enough advantage.
|
Northern Ireland25816 Posts
I kind of get that too gobbledydook.
100% 'fairness' is not really achievable. I mean, brackets are not always created equal either, a player can get an easier run than an opponent who dropped into Loser's, if the bracket is really stacked in one half for example.
|
|
|
|