|
On October 30 2013 06:54 Storm71 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2013 06:50 Sissors wrote:
If as some people say it is unfair because now Revivals opponents are more motivated, then I would say it proofs Naniwa's point and shows it was (sadly) required, since otherwise his opponents aren't properly motivated to beat him, and it would be unfair to Naniwa.
500 dollar is significant enough to matter, not significant enough to be a big deal. How is it unfair to Naniwa? Were his opponents motivated to beat him in challenger season 3? LOL
Fine. It's unfair in general. Giving points in otherwise meaningless matches is unfair, because only the people who can still use the points will bother playing even semi-decently. It can be compared to Naniwa probe-rushing Nestea: he had absolutely NO motivation to play that match decently. He knows that he might be prone to probe-rush if he was in Revival's opponent's shoes. Hence some motivation to not probe-rush (or do some other stupid shit) is clearly required. Blizzard is not providing that, and there's absolutely no reason why Naniwa shouldn't be allowed to step in and offer a reward.
This makes it unfair to everybody for who the games do matter. In this case it's just Naniwa (but of course, Naniwa's own matches were just as unfair to revival, dear, soo, vortix, etc. when this might have mattered to them, because they mattered absolutely nothing to elfi, uzer or forgg).
PS. Why did Revival forfeit the knock-out phase? He could have surpassed Naniwa right then and there.
|
On October 30 2013 07:04 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2013 06:54 Storm71 wrote:On October 30 2013 06:50 Sissors wrote:
If as some people say it is unfair because now Revivals opponents are more motivated, then I would say it proofs Naniwa's point and shows it was (sadly) required, since otherwise his opponents aren't properly motivated to beat him, and it would be unfair to Naniwa.
500 dollar is significant enough to matter, not significant enough to be a big deal. How is it unfair to Naniwa? Were his opponents motivated to beat him in challenger season 3? LOL Fine. It's unfair in general. Giving points in otherwise meaningless matches is unfair, because only the people who can still use the points will bother playing even semi-decently. It can be compared to Naniwa probe-rushing Nestea: he had absolutely NO motivation to play that match decently. He knows that he might be prone to probe-rush if he was in Revival's opponent's shoes. Hence some motivation to not probe-rush (or do some other stupid shit) is clearly required. Blizzard is not providing that, and there's absolutely no reason why Naniwa shouldn't be allowed to step in and offer a reward. This makes it unfair to everybody for who the games do matter. In this case it's just Naniwa (but of course, Naniwa's own matches were just as unfair to revival, dear, soo, vortix, etc. when this might have mattered to them, because they mattered absolutely nothing to elfi, uzer or forgg). PS. Why did Revival forfeit the knock-out phase? He could have surpassed Naniwa right then and there.
He got an invite to IEM this missing those matches.. but he got more points in IEM anyways so without that invite he couldnt have even tied.
|
On October 30 2013 07:02 teddyoojo wrote:
i cant believe there are people delusional enough to say its bad naniwa put a bounty on revival
holy flying jesus cheesecake
thank you for your contribution and your opinion that is clearly a well thought out one.
|
On October 30 2013 07:04 Acrofales wrote:
PS. Why did Revival forfeit the knock-out phase? He could have surpassed Naniwa right then and there.
He was on a plane to IEM and Blizzard refused to reschedule the match even though half of the participants couldn't show up that day (Ryung and Revival). Ryung had a family emergency and forfeited before Revival did, so Revival got farther in the bracket... lol
|
The good thing about this that it's out in the open. If this was just said player to player and came out afterwards it would be a scandal. Now it's just a friendly debate on ethics.
|
If I had one topic that I could point to that said that the Starcraft community could argue about the most inane topics, this would be it. How is this even 36+ pages? It was a fun jab at Revival, why is this still going on
|
On October 30 2013 07:13 Chaggi wrote:
If I had one topic that I could point to that said that the Starcraft community could argue about the most inane topics, this would be it. How is this even 36+ pages? It was a fun jab at Revival, why is this still going on
Because it's the one chance for a foreigner to be at BlizzCon and people are obsessed about it... Or they're making comments about how bm NaNiwa is...
My personal favorite part of all of this is how NaNiwa tweeted "Btw why does challenger this season give points even tho blizzard said its useless and only for seeding? I dont understand" when he'd be behind Revival by 75 points right now if it didn't. 
|
I really like this by Naniwa, obviously if it were the opposite and he offered Revival money to lose, then thats an issue, but encouraging players by giving them extra incentive can only benefit fans by increasing the quality of games, it also stops revival from getting lazy and under preparing for his matches.
|
What Naniwa should've done, which everyone would agree it's completely fair, is organize a little one-game tournament between two players. The seeds whould be given to the first and second place finisher in revival's group, and make the prize be $499 for the loser and $500 for the winner.
Oh and revival can't attend because any bullshit reason.
Nothing wrong with seeding players on a tourney based on past results, no?
|
On October 30 2013 07:09 KingFool wrote:
The good thing about this that it's out in the open. If this was just said player to player and came out afterwards it would be a scandal. Now it's just a friendly debate on ethics.
Very true. Also, thankfully Revival doesn't seem to have issue with it.
|
it's dumb for anyone to complain about this they are supposed to be trying to beat revival anyways
|
On October 30 2013 11:58 travis wrote:
it's dumb for anyone to complain about this they are supposed to be trying to beat revival anyways
How dare you use logic and cite their professionalism! This is a debate of ridiculas theories of players throwing to split enough money for a low end tablet or the unfairness of an Ipad being offered to the guy who beats Revival.
|
proxy 2 rax and 6 pool+drones, every single game cmon Select + Jon Snow, cheese at all costs, Revival wont be able to handle or expect mass constant cheese from 2 players in a row
|
514 Posts
Ok this is so nice now that Taeja is gonna forfeit... oh why is whining now Nani? Isn't as fair as what he did?
|
On October 30 2013 12:00 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2013 11:58 travis wrote:
it's dumb for anyone to complain about this they are supposed to be trying to beat revival anyways How dare you use logic and cite their professionalism! This is a debate of ridiculas theories of players throwing to split enough money for a low end tablet or the unfairness of an Ipad being offered to the guy who beats Revival.
To be fair, $500 can buy a pretty nice tablet.
|
On October 30 2013 12:00 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2013 11:58 travis wrote:
it's dumb for anyone to complain about this they are supposed to be trying to beat revival anyways How dare you use logic and cite their professionalism! This is a debate of ridiculas theories of players throwing to split enough money for a low end tablet or the unfairness of an Ipad being offered to the guy who beats Revival.
This is so simplified it's ridicolous. I don't particularily care about this specific situation but there is definitely potential situations where this is completly out of order. If a player has 2 matches and another player cares a great deal how one of them goes, should this player then be allowed to give an extra incentive to have him focus the practice on the specific MU that he cares for? I don't really find that to be a good precedent.
|
He's not saying "I'll pay Revival for him to lose", he's saying "I'm paying someone who wins against him". The first one is really shady and probably match fixing, but I don't see any thing wrong with the latter
|
On October 30 2013 13:45 dyDrawer wrote:
He's not saying "I'll pay Revival for him to lose", he's saying "I'm paying someone who wins against him". The first one is really shady and probably match fixing, but I don't see any thing wrong with the latter
The latter is definitely LESS shady than the former, but I don't like it. You can argue, and it's a pretty good argument, that NaNiwa is just trying to rectify an unfair situation here. In previous Challenger Leagues, players in Revival's group would already have strong incentive to play hard, as they'd be fighting for a Premier League spot. It seems a bit unfair that this is not the case here. But I think there are two strong counterarguments:
1) NaNiwa already GOT his points from playing in his Challenger League bracket. Without those points, he'd be BEHIND Revival right now. What is to say that NaNiwa's opponents weren't not trying their hardest either? Revival wasn't paying them money to beat NaNiwa. NaNiwa is basically leveraging the fact that due to schedules, he's already played all of his Challenger League games but Revival hasn't.
2) "Lack of incentive to win" is just a part of life in sports and e-sports. It happens all the time. It happens all the time that one player/team needs someone else to win, but that player is not that interested in winning. Take 2013's GSTL season 1 for example. Second to last game of the regular season was MVP (the team) vs AZUBU. For FXO and AZUBU this match was crucial--if MVP won, FXO had a very strong chance to make the playoffs, while if AZUBU won, FXO would be out. Problem was that MVP didn't care--they were going to finish first place no matter what happened in the match. So after KeeN, MVP sent out only their "B team"--players like Shine and Bang, and AZUBU managed to narrowly win. Was it fair to FXO that MVP did not "play their hardest" against AZUBU, which would not have been the case if that match was not happening in the last week of the regular season? Probably not, but it's just a fact of life--MVP didn't want to show their best players' builds in a match that was meaningless for THEM, and I bet you if Choya went on Twitter prior to the match and promised to pay MVP a cash prize if they knock AZUBU out of the playoffs, there'd have been a huge scandal.
|
Taeja just played in Red Bull qualifier but is "sick" to play in this one. Taejas forfeit is obviously a lie. Teamliquid does not respect tournament and foreign community enough to have him play. They just dont give a shit.
|
United States23455 Posts
On October 30 2013 21:29 Relaaja wrote:
Taeja just played in Red Bull qualifier but is "sick" to play in this one. Taejas forfeit is obviously a lie. Teamliquid does not respect tournament and foreign community enough to have him play. They just dont give a shit.
Wow okay take a step back buddy. First of all, you're on their site. Second of all, Taeja never said he was too sick to play in these matches. As soon as he lost in premier, Taeja tweeted that he would forfeit challenger league. The reason for this is that there is no benefit for him, considering it does not seed for next year's premier league and his WCS points are at a level that the additional 25 would do nothing. Playing in Challenger would for him pretty much just be revealing strategies before Blizzcon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
