Serral led Finland to the NationWars 2019 championship, scoring four of five victories in Finland's 5-3 triumph over South Korea in the live finals in O'Gaming's Paris studio. The Finnish ace concluded his brilliant tournament run by taking two wins each off INnoVation and Stats, ending the tournament with a combined 24-2 record. Finland also received a surprise contribution from the ZhuGeLiang, who scored an upset against soO in the finals.
The first three games, or Proleague portion of the best-of-nine finals began with Serral taking out INnoVation by hitting hard at the Terran's weak timing during a BC-to-mech transition, ripping through porous defenses with a swarm of roaches, ravagers, and corruptors. Korea was quick to recover a point, with Stats casually shutting down a cannon-rush from Finland's dedicated cheeser TheMusZero. Many expected ZhuGeLiang to be more easy pickings for the Korean side, but the Finnish Zerg proved he was anything but a glorified cheerleader by out-muscling soO in a Roach-Ravager war.
The 'all-kill' half of the finals began with Korea repaying the favor and surprising the Finns, as Stats overpowered Serral in what was more or less a straight-up macro game. Serral found himself in the unfamiliar position where his roach-ravager-baneling army was NOT dominating the Protoss forces as he made his transition to hive, and Stats able to finish his foe off before an invincible late-game army could be assembled. ZhuGeLiang was sent out next for the Finnish side, but everything went as expected this time around with Stats winning easily after dealing heavy early game damage with oracles and adepts.
With the Koreans up 3-2, Finland opted to bypass TheMusZero and moved directly to using Serral's sole 'revive' (double revives were removed in the revised NW rules). Taking the new format into account, this effectively meant the revived Serral would have to go a perfect 3-0 for Finland to win the championship, with no second chances remaining except a miracle ace match victory by ZhuGeLiang or TheMusZero. Fortunately for Finland, Serral handled the high-pressure situation in his usual manner: by not being fazed at all.
Having learned his lesson from his earlier loss, Serral adjusted his game and smashed Stats when he went for a similar game plan. Facing INnoVation next, Serral completely picked apart his opponent's mech with mass vipers to put Finland up 4-3 and force Korea to send out their ace. That duty ultimately fell upon Stats—one of the few Koreans with relatively sustained success against Serral—but he was unable to repeat his previous upset. Serral outplayed Stats in the mid-game once more, ravaging his economy with runbys and baneling drops en route to a one-sided victory.
In hindsight, it might feel like Finland's victory was a foregone conclusion, one determined the moment the rosters and rules were announced back in August. But that would be giving far too little credit to Reynor and his multiple victories over Serral in high-stakes matches this year. Indeed, Finland's toughest challenge may actually have been its semifinal match against Italy, where Serral just happened to best Reynor this time around (even if this was a rare clash where the games looked largely one-sided). If you ran this bracket back one-hundred times, I feel like we'd seeing Italy advance to the finals at decent amount of the time.
And if Italy did reach the finals, who's to say Reynor couldn't have taken his country all the way to the championship?Sure, there's no ZhuGeLiang (who's had some pro-level success in the past) on Italy to score an upset, meaning Reynor would have to basically go 5-1 or 5-0. But this was hardly the fearsome Korean side we expected back in August, when Stats had just taken out Serral at Assembly Summer, and INnoVation and soO still had some of their championship aura left over from IEM and WESG. No, this Korean side looked much diminished from then, and had barely won 4-3 over Canada in the quarterfinals. A Reynor all-kill—if unlikely—would hardly have been out of the question (if anything, Reynor could have called his old landlord NoRegreT for tips).
The Kids Are Alright
Like HSC XX before it, NW2019 mostly reaffirmed what we already knew. Serral is good. Reynor is good. Korea is still pretty good, even when they suck (somehow). At the same time, NW2019 also gave us a small glimpse of the what the future might bring.
For better or for worse, 2019 was one of the least variable years on the WCS Circuit, with a small group of players regularly placing high at every event. TIME was the only real 'surprise' on the year, edging his way into the top eight in multiple tournaments (I'm counting Reynor as a 2018 breakout).
And while the Serral-Reynor duopoly looked too strong to be toppled, NW2019 hinted at where upheaval might come from in 2020. Clem was one of the stand-out performers of the tournament, leading France to a fourth place finish with a 15-6 record in the tournament. And while he couldn't overcome Reynor in the 3rd/4th place match, he managed to take a game off the Italian ace with stylish, hyper-aggressive bio play, and nearly battle-meched his way to triumph in a rematch (Reynor closed it out for the Italians).
Croatia's Goblin showed he's not just the indie act that only RotterdaM has heard about ("maybe later" we said, as he offered us the mix-tape for the 20th time), joining Stats in being one of only two players to defeat Serral in the entire tournament. He also scored three wins vs Poland in the group stage, but fell one win short of an all-kill to advance Croatia to the playoffs.
And while it was just two up-and-comers who really stood out (shout out to Skillous, I guess), one could say two is a lot in the big picture of things. After all, Neeb, Serral, and Reynor arrived in a slow trickle starting in 2016, but gradually ended up drastically changing the face of foreign StarCraft. And before they had their breakthrough moments, few would have dared predict they've enjoy so much competitive success.
Of course, I have to repeat the same old words of caution about over-hyping anyone over a mostly online tournament. The MarineLorD corollary applies: MarineLord never lived up to the GIGA-hype of all-killing Korea to win Nation Wars III for Korea, despite becoming a very good player and France's #1 for some time.
But, then again, if we were cautious about hype, it would defeat the entire of purpose of hype and fandom in general, wouldn't it? So, until the next major offline event, we might as well go out into the internet and talk up Hellraiser, Goblin, Reynor, Clem, Skillous, NoRegret, ButAlways, and anyone who entertained us for a game.
Fussing Over Formats: NationWars is Fine
Tying into the 'inevitability' of Finland's win, some fans were critical of the NationWars format, which seemed rather individual-centric for what was ostensibly a team tournament. Indeed, even with modified rules that introduced a 'Proleague-style' portion to begin each series, it still left the door open for a super-ace player to all-kill. Serral carrying Finland to the title with a 24-2 really drove that point home.
Personally, I think don't think there was so much a format problem with NationWars as there was a roster problem. Many teams, including two of the best in Italy and Finland, had extremely lop-sided rosters where the non-ace players were so far detached from the competitive sphere that they earned zero WCS Circuit points 2019. When that's the case, the matches are always going to suck in some way, regardless of the format.
Let's think about what Finland vs Italy would have been like in a true, KeSPA Proleague style best-of-five. First off, you'd have to suffer through even more matches between the non-ace players. Remember all those CreatorPrime vs MVP.Super matches everyone skipped over? We'd see even more of those, but with basically amateur players. Even worse, depending on the line-ups, the match could end without Serral vs Reynor happening at all. People look back at Proleague with rose-colored glasses and think about the epic ace-matches, but tend to overlook all the 3-0's and 3-1's where the aces never met (or didn't even play at all in some 3-0's).
On the other hand, any all-kill or hybrid all-kill format cheapens the 'team' aspect of a teamleague, as we saw in NW2019. But despite that drawback, it at least guarantees a clash between the aces, which is a major draw in these kinds of tournaments. O'Gaming can't magically strengthen the Finnish or Italian SC2 scenes overnight (though one could argue hosting NW provides an indirect boost), but at least they can deliver Serral vs Reynor.
Basically, when you say you want Proleague, what you might really mean is that you want all the countries to have a deep pool of evenly matched, pro-level players. But that's something we all want, regardless of format, regardless of tournament, and regardless of game.
I'm certainly hoping for some upheaval in 2020. Some movement within the top 8 would be nice at the very least even if we're stuck with Serral and Reynor winning every foreign event.
Great writeup. Zhugeliangs upset was the best Moment in the tournament for me. I was realy glad, they had the Player cams there, as you could see his excitement in that last right, when HE KNEW he had it
On December 11 2019 15:37 dbRic1203 wrote: Great writeup. Zhugeliangs upset was the best Moment in the tournament for me. I was realy glad, they had the Player cams there, as you could see his excitement in that last right, when HE KNEW he had it
Indeed. Zhuge have had very good year (relatively) overall. He managed to steal map from Serral in Assembly, and is now heavy weight (relatively) favorite to win in ongoing Serralless StarCraft2.fi V9 tournament, The National Championship tournament.
Happy for him and his joy and success. soO's scalp couldn't have been coup'd in better circumstances. Class act also as The Captain of Team Finland.
Cheers to TheMuszero too, brave attempt to snipe Stats, tho the result of the map was already clear for everyone before it was even played, including TheMuszero himself. He just took best chance approach in given circumstances.
Any national team with Serral in its roster would do great, its so painfully obvious that its not even funny. That's probably also the reason why he isn't playing in StarCraft.fi V9 this year. To give other Finns a chance for real competition. GG!
They could also take inspiration from CTC, the NEXON leagues (they had some 2v2 included), or Wardi's Team League for formats. There's some much cooler stuff out there than plain-old all-kill (I know a lot of people like it, which I understand, but personally I'm not one of them).
Anyways, despite the one-man teams prevailing, this was quite the fun tournament. Still a bit sad about the German performance in the end, but hey, at least our beloved French neighbours got a cool win out of it, so it's not bad. Had we lost to the likes of Finland or Italy I would've been muuuuch more salty.
If they remove the all-kill format they can send all the future trophies to Korea, that's the only nation with any serious depth in SC2 though. Allkilling and naming it team league or nation league is funny as well though. Team/Nation league - we have 1 player and that's it and if this player loses twice we're doomed. team effort at its finest
They're really in tough place, don't envy them. (doesn't help that the top players are ignoring the event)
Finland winning wasn't that inevitable, but it was historical for sure(isn't this the first time a team representing South Korea is ultimately defeated offline?).
On December 11 2019 18:53 deacon.frost wrote: If they remove the all-kill format they can send all the future trophies to Korea, that's the only nation with any serious depth in SC2 though. Allkilling and naming it team league or nation league is funny as well though. Team/Nation league - we have 1 player and that's it and if this player loses twice we're doomed. team effort at its finest
They're really in tough place, don't envy them. (doesn't help that the top players are ignoring the event)
You are making it look like every top player ignored Nation Wars, whereas only some of the best korean top player, who generally don't like to travel, did.
I don't have data for audience but it seemed me the tournament has been extensively followed and appreciated, OG is in a safe spot.
Maybe an hybrid format without revive could be better(but the proleague section would need to be tweaked, following the current rules without revive a 3-0 loss in the proleague section would directly spell the end of the confrontation).
On December 11 2019 18:32 UncleBrothers wrote: How about some 2v2's mixed in the next time? Would be kind of refreshing.
I couldn't agree more. When you look at the Davis Cup where tennis players play the same way for their nation, there is 1 2v2 match out of 5 matches that is often decisive. That makes it more a team format than a group-of-individuals format as in 2v2 you need to cooperate to make it work.
Also good players in 1v1 are not always good in 2v2, so I'm not sure Serral or Raynor would easily win their 2v2s.
I think the format is ok but I would prefer the 4 player, no revive variety all-kill or all-kill/proleague mix formats. Aces would still meet in matchups with lopsided teams like Italy or Finland but a deeper talent pool in teams like France or Poland (or Korea obviously) would be more likely to prevail against solo-carry kind of teams. Just a question of personal taste though I suppose.
I think they should just do proleague format Bo5, so four players playing one map each, with an ace match.
I dont buy the argument frow the organisors that too many countries dont have four GM players. What does it matter if one lower level player participates? Yes that player would be carried, but the champions this time were all about getting carried anyway. On the other hand, this would give motivation to a lot of players in smaller SC2 countries to practice hard to make the roster, thus helping grow the player base.
With such a format Reynor and Serral would need just one of their teammates to win a map. One. That would force the ace match presuming the star themselves won their map. If a TEAM can't provide one win outside of their star player they honestly shouldn't win a team competition anyway.
On December 11 2019 22:24 sneakyfox wrote: I think they should just do proleague format Bo5, so four players playing one map each, with an ace match.
I dont buy the argument frow the organisors that too many countries dont have four GM players. What does it matter if one lower level player participates? Yes that player would be carried, but the champions this time were all about getting carried anyway. On the other hand, this would give motivation to a lot of players in smaller SC2 countries to practice hard to make the roster, thus helping grow the player base.
With such a format Reynor and Serral would need just one of their teammates to win a map. One. That would force the ace match presuming the star themselves won their map. If a TEAM can't provide one win outside of their star player they honestly shouldn't win a team competition anyway.
Sounds reasonable to expect 1 map win from the rest of the team to call it team effort. They might need to open the competition to master players then. Should be mostly fine, but I gues that would bring even more clowns like Medeod this year or Avilo last year into the competition... Something along the lines of "only players that contrbuted with at least one map win in the main tournament phase get paid" could probably help with that issue.
On December 11 2019 22:24 sneakyfox wrote: I think they should just do proleague format Bo5, so four players playing one map each, with an ace match.
I dont buy the argument frow the organisors that too many countries dont have four GM players. What does it matter if one lower level player participates? Yes that player would be carried, but the champions this time were all about getting carried anyway. On the other hand, this would give motivation to a lot of players in smaller SC2 countries to practice hard to make the roster, thus helping grow the player base.
With such a format Reynor and Serral would need just one of their teammates to win a map. One. That would force the ace match presuming the star themselves won their map. If a TEAM can't provide one win outside of their star player they honestly shouldn't win a team competition anyway.
The gaps are absolutely huge between various tiers. GM players are not near the level of even low tier pros, and non GM players tend to not be on the level of GMs.
Ireland had 3 eligible players this year so we got to play, was a pretty fun evening for our community.
Even still Russia stomped us. The gap between a GM player and a pro or semi-pro GM player who actively competes is huge. And that’s with the bar set at GM. Our GM players stomp everyone else in the scene when we have our local LAN.
A Proleague format would just see a ton of non-event games between smaller nations and stronger ones that aren’t much fun, plus be harsh to the chances of very top heavy nations.
Personally while not perfect I think the format is pretty good for what we have to work with. A tournament that purely seeks to find the strongest team format wise I think you lose some spectacle and hype.
Results wise we had a top 4 of two hard carry teams and two deeper more balanced teams, and the Italy France match was pretty close so I think the format is working reasonably well in striking a balance.
On December 11 2019 22:24 sneakyfox wrote: I think they should just do proleague format Bo5, so four players playing one map each, with an ace match.
I dont buy the argument frow the organisors that too many countries dont have four GM players. What does it matter if one lower level player participates? Yes that player would be carried, but the champions this time were all about getting carried anyway. On the other hand, this would give motivation to a lot of players in smaller SC2 countries to practice hard to make the roster, thus helping grow the player base.
With such a format Reynor and Serral would need just one of their teammates to win a map. One. That would force the ace match presuming the star themselves won their map. If a TEAM can't provide one win outside of their star player they honestly shouldn't win a team competition anyway.
The gaps are absolutely huge between various tiers. GM players are not near the level of even low tier pros, and non GM players tend to not be on the level of GMs.
Ireland had 3 eligible players this year so we got to play, was a pretty fun evening for our community.
Even still Russia stomped us. The gap between a GM player and a pro or semi-pro GM player who actively competes is huge. And that’s with the bar set at GM. Our GM players stomp everyone else in the scene when we have our local LAN.
A Proleague format would just see a ton of non-event games between smaller nations and stronger ones that aren’t much fun, plus be harsh to the chances of very top heavy nations.
Personally while not perfect I think the format is pretty good for what we have to work with. A tournament that purely seeks to find the strongest team format wise I think you lose some spectacle and hype.
Results wise we had a top 4 of two hard carry teams and two deeper more balanced teams, and the Italy France match was pretty close so I think the format is working reasonably well in striking a balance.
I don't think that there will be "tons" of games like that, the point is that those teams with sub-level skill are eliminated quickly. And in any case, if you want people to improve you've got to give them games against the pros.
The way I see it it's kinda like the FA cup where really small teams get to play the giants every once is a while. It's good fun and a great experience for them, but nobody without a high level of skill make in deep anyway. Especially when seeding is used as in NW. so it's not like the rounds that have a large general audience would hurt anyway.
PS. If the announcement of the tournament was announced early enough that players had a whole season to try to reach GM and become eligible before the vote was held, this could make people highly motivated to practice and reach GM.
Perfectly balanced format, I think people are already forgetting that Canada almost beat South Korea. The United States also had some upsets and hype (USA vs. Netherlands).
The upset in the finals was great too. Letting the Koreans have 1 less shot at Serral is a big deal (Serral did lose 1 game in the finals).
Maybe Reynor, Serral (or zerg) are just too good at the game and that is why their nations went so far.
Great format, please keep it in future iterations! Everything was fine for me, from the online Qualifiers and RO24 to those great playoffs and finally the offline finals.
Only thing, that could be tweaked imho is the way to choose teams. Maybe try some national competition? Could be great motivation for lower tier players to improve. And at least some of the national competitions would likely be streamed by national community casters...
On December 12 2019 06:15 ZugzwangSC wrote: Serral's so good he makes it look like he's losing -- he secretly lets Alpha Star win.
It's part of his long range plan to defer Skynet's Judgment Day.
Yeah. "Better not to teach these strats to Alpha."
How much I'd like to say its not all about Serral, somehow all trajectories end to there... at to the skull pile around and beneath of his divine throne.
I loved his casual Finnish comments in SC2.Fi V9 about games earlier today. He played games in his mind from both sides simultaneously, and his pre-insight was spot on... and when it wasn't there was a plunder by a player.
Mostly Finnish audience in the stream acted just like would've been expected. Serral's Aura transcended through everything...
On December 12 2019 08:21 Xamo wrote: The format is nice right now. A full Proleague format would be always won by Korea, whereas now both Finland and Korea have options.
I feel like France, Germany and China would also have a decent shot. CTC format is the best imo
Thank you for the feedback on NW. Let's us know what did you think about the format etc. W'll look into it !
But for the 2v2 part. We clearly wanted put it in the format. Since it is a real team match. Instead of just having 1v1. But noone plays it at high level. And one of the reason it's beacause it's really imbalanced and often boring. 2v2 in W3 was a lot of fun. But it turn's out it's not really the case in SC2. I watched the 2v2 in Crank TL. And there were only 1 good match in all the season. It's totaly not worth it. We can't just compare "hey look, in tennis there is a 2v2 at some point so let's do the same". We need to look at what's working the best in SC2 first.
On December 12 2019 17:01 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Hello,
Thank you for the feedback on NW. Let's us know what did you think about the format etc. W'll look into it !
But for the 2v2 part. We clearly wanted put it in the format. Since it is a real team match. Instead of just having 1v1. But noone plays it at high level. And one of the reason it's beacause it's really imbalanced and often boring. 2v2 in W3 was a lot of fun. But it turn's out it's not really the case in SC2. I watched the 2v2 in Crank TL. And there were only 1 good match in all the season. It's totaly not worth it. We can't just compare "hey look, in tennis there is a 2v2 at some point so let's do the same". We need to look at what's working the best in SC2 first.
Hey, look, it's a team league and it was won by one player.
Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
Look at my earlier post, I actually aknowledged this. But sorry not sorry, it couldn't be resisted to post this once you posted your thing about 2v2 (and I don't think 2v2 is the solution either)
On December 12 2019 17:18 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Ho ok sry !
Yeah 2v2 is not the solution. Unfortunatly, Archont mode is not either.
Obviously the solution is coop. Brutal6+ and the opposing team will select the map. If you win you can resurrect your ace player, if you lose, you lost :D
I just wish there would be any solution to this but there isn't. At least if you want it serious.
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
Honestly I think the format was really nice, and led to some really cool and competitive matches. Korea vs Finland, Korea vs Canada and Italy vs France could have swung either way and offered up great games.
I don't envy your task of choosing a format for this, but the end result was very good :D
Finland won the proleague portion. But since we are ignoring that... in order for one player to carry his team to victory in the final, he has to go either 5-0 or 5-1. If the three best players of a nation in the finals can not take more than 1 map out of 6 from the other team's ace, do they really deserve to win?
The fact is, the format is still slanted towards the nations with the deeper lineups. It's just not so slanted that it's a guaranteed victory for them. It still allows the possibility of an all-kill by a truly phenomenal player. And that only adds to the excitement and enriches the tournament.
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
When Jaedong basically carried Oz on his shoulders to win Proleagues, the format was bo5 with the 5th match being the Ace match. To win a round, Jaedong would win, 1 of his 3 teammates would win, and he would win the Ace. This format was acceptable, as someone besides the ace would be required to contribute.
The main problem for Nation Wars in regards to this is the 3 player roster vs 4 player for that bo5. And I agree that it's very difficult for many countries to procure 3 competitive players. I think the easiest solution is to cap a single player's number of games in a match to 1 less than the winning score. Bo5, cap the players at 2 games each. Bo7, cap the players at 3 games each etc.
This lets the Ace still shine in a shallow roster, but ensures that it's a team series.
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
When Jaedong basically carried Oz on his shoulders to win Proleagues, the format was bo5 with the 5th match being the Ace match. To win a round, Jaedong would win, 1 of his 3 teammates would win, and he would win the Ace. This format was acceptable, as someone besides the ace would be required to contribute.
The main problem for Nation Wars in regards to this is the 3 player roster vs 4 player for that bo5. And I agree that it's very difficult for many countries to procure 3 competitive players. I think the easiest solution is to cap a single player's number of games in a match to 1 less than the winning score. Bo5, cap the players at 2 games each. Bo7, cap the players at 3 games each etc.
This lets the Ace still shine in a shallow roster, but ensures that it's a team series.
Sounds fine to me. Imagine the hype the Zhuge vs soO match would have had with this format!
I mean it was an awesome match, but we all knew that if Zhuge doesn't win, Serral wipes the floor with soO anyway
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
When Jaedong basically carried Oz on his shoulders to win Proleagues, the format was bo5 with the 5th match being the Ace match. To win a round, Jaedong would win, 1 of his 3 teammates would win, and he would win the Ace. This format was acceptable, as someone besides the ace would be required to contribute.
The main problem for Nation Wars in regards to this is the 3 player roster vs 4 player for that bo5. And I agree that it's very difficult for many countries to procure 3 competitive players. I think the easiest solution is to cap a single player's number of games in a match to 1 less than the winning score. Bo5, cap the players at 2 games each. Bo7, cap the players at 3 games each etc.
This lets the Ace still shine in a shallow roster, but ensures that it's a team series.
That is quite an interesting suggestion. You could even go back to all-kill-only format, where a player, that got capped out is just not allowed to play anymore. I m just brainstorming here btw. I realy like the pro leage phase with predertimined match ups, so we could se some player preparing snipe builds in advance. I also think 2v2 or Archon would be pretty horrible, as SC2 isn t balanced around that. Over all the format was pretty good and a big improvement over all-kill-hard-carry-only.
This is not too surprising. Blizzard nerfed Byun within months after his reaper micro; Helions nerfed the second MarineKing massed them; Ravens right when Maru used them; Liberator for pretty much any Terran; Tanks right when GoOdy used them. BUT WAIT...give them earlier stim and make the maps twice as big! That's the answer!!! I'm enjoying the late night Terran streams...oh wait.
On December 12 2019 17:01 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Hello,
Thank you for the feedback on NW. Let's us know what did you think about the format etc. W'll look into it !
But for the 2v2 part. We clearly wanted put it in the format. Since it is a real team match. Instead of just having 1v1. But noone plays it at high level. And one of the reason it's beacause it's really imbalanced and often boring. 2v2 in W3 was a lot of fun. But it turn's out it's not really the case in SC2. I watched the 2v2 in Crank TL. And there were only 1 good match in all the season. It's totaly not worth it. We can't just compare "hey look, in tennis there is a 2v2 at some point so let's do the same". We need to look at what's working the best in SC2 first.
Agree, I played more 2v2 in WC3 than 1v1, SC2 barely played it. Some racial compositions are just completely imbalanced compared to other ones.
As much as people complain about balance in 1v1, it’s pretty damn balanced. 2v2 not so much. You’d end up with situations where equal skill nations would get free wins in the 2v2 based on what races they play, which would feel pretty dissatisfying too.
Plus as you say, nobody plays 2v2 much if they’re a pro player. Who’s going to practice 2v2 if they have multiple 1v1 matches to prepare for potentially, different races etc.
If it were another game that worked differently you could throw in other modes just fine. Quake’s bread and butter is also 1v1 at the competitive level, but you don’t have the same balance issues in playing various other team modes.
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
When Jaedong basically carried Oz on his shoulders to win Proleagues, the format was bo5 with the 5th match being the Ace match. To win a round, Jaedong would win, 1 of his 3 teammates would win, and he would win the Ace. This format was acceptable, as someone besides the ace would be required to contribute.
The main problem for Nation Wars in regards to this is the 3 player roster vs 4 player for that bo5. And I agree that it's very difficult for many countries to procure 3 competitive players. I think the easiest solution is to cap a single player's number of games in a match to 1 less than the winning score. Bo5, cap the players at 2 games each. Bo7, cap the players at 3 games each etc.
This lets the Ace still shine in a shallow roster, but ensures that it's a team series.
On December 12 2019 14:53 virpi wrote: The Finland victory reminds me of Jaedong carrying Hwaseung Oz back in the day. Moustache zerg would be proud of Serral.
Result wise - yes. But the format really benefits contries with one super star over countries with well rounded three players. Kind of begs the question if that's OK format.
I think that none of the players should play >= 50% of the games.
On December 12 2019 14:53 virpi wrote: The Finland victory reminds me of Jaedong carrying Hwaseung Oz back in the day. Moustache zerg would be proud of Serral.
Result wise - yes. But the format really benefits contries with one super star over countries with well rounded three players. Kind of begs the question if that's OK format.
I think that none of the players should play >= 50% of the games.
What about a purely All Kill format like the previous ones, then? I am not convinced Proleague format would be ideal for Nation Wars, either.
The mixed format currently in use is fine, it just needs to either get rid of revive(somehow) or to cap the number of maps someone can play as it was previously suggested.
On December 12 2019 14:53 virpi wrote: The Finland victory reminds me of Jaedong carrying Hwaseung Oz back in the day. Moustache zerg would be proud of Serral.
Result wise - yes. But the format really benefits contries with one super star over countries with well rounded three players. Kind of begs the question if that's OK format.
I think that none of the players should play >= 50% of the games.
Problem is that most countries would have no chance that way. Korea and Germany are the only ones that would be competitive. Finland, Canada, US, Mexico, China, Italy, Taiwan etc all have a chance in an allkill/multiple revive format.
Truthfully we already know what countries are the best overall at sc2. It goes Korea > Germany > Poland > China > Netherlands > Mexico or something like that. It's better to have a tournament that's competitive and fun to watch.
On December 12 2019 14:53 virpi wrote: The Finland victory reminds me of Jaedong carrying Hwaseung Oz back in the day. Moustache zerg would be proud of Serral.
Result wise - yes. But the format really benefits contries with one super star over countries with well rounded three players. Kind of begs the question if that's OK format.
I think that none of the players should play >= 50% of the games.
Problem is that most countries would have no chance that way. Korea and Germany are the only ones that would be competitive. Finland, Canada, US, Mexico, China, Italy, Taiwan etc all have a chance in an allkill/multiple revive format.
Truthfully we already know what countries are the best overall at sc2. It goes Korea > Germany > Poland > China > Netherlands > Mexico or something like that. It's better to have a tournament that's competitive and fun to watch.
On December 12 2019 17:01 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Hello,
Thank you for the feedback on NW. Let's us know what did you think about the format etc. W'll look into it !
But for the 2v2 part. We clearly wanted put it in the format. Since it is a real team match. Instead of just having 1v1. But noone plays it at high level. And one of the reason it's beacause it's really imbalanced and often boring. 2v2 in W3 was a lot of fun. But it turn's out it's not really the case in SC2. I watched the 2v2 in Crank TL. And there were only 1 good match in all the season. It's totaly not worth it. We can't just compare "hey look, in tennis there is a 2v2 at some point so let's do the same". We need to look at what's working the best in SC2 first.
Hey, I already said it but here i go again since you posted
I think the CTC group stage format is great! Obviously the downside is that you need longer matches, and you have the risk of a 4-0, but it's a very low risk and I think it's overall the best balance. Your B and C playet only need to pick one map out of 4 to force the ace match, but it also put a lot more pressure on the ace players to perform, because he dose not have the back up revive.
So for exemple if you have Finland, then you will always send Serral first or second to avoid getting 4-0, and then Serral has to make sure he dosen't drop a map since that would put a huge pressure on the rest of his team. And going foward the rest of the team has 4 shot at picking up a map to force the ace, but can also just win outright.
Plus side: -All the team has to contribute, but they also have multiple opportunity to do so.
-Every single map is super important, it put more pressure on the ace player and choosing the order of the player is more important, but not to the point and live and die by it.
-Team would almost always send their best player in the first two and their weaker player 3rd, so you should get a good number of ace vs ace and weaker player vs weaker player. (Unless you try to neutralise the other ace with a snipe, but then you get a higher risk of getting 4-0!)
-For the 4-0 situation; if you're ace get 0-2 right now you lose anyway, so it dosen't really matter if it's a 4-0, but now you're team can save the ace ass and get him to the ace match. (For exemple Serral 2-0 Reynor, but Ryu and Riosis manage to go 3-1 to give him another shot)
Potential problem:
-It can make for some very long days since it's more likely to go to 7 maps
-It can be a bit confusing, but then again this year format was also (somehow) confusing for a lot of people so I'm not sure it's a loss.
You could also make it so everyone has to play twice but not back-to-back for more matchup variety, but I think then it would get a bit too confusing.
On December 13 2019 03:22 TheDougler wrote: I actually really liked this format. I thought it struck a good balance between ace strength and roster depth.
I also think it's a decent compromise. I mean, everyone already knows Korea is the king in terms of average skill, but there is something cool about seeing one or two captains carrying their entire nation. The entertainment value of seeing less-skilled players play the majority of the games is quite low. This strikes a pretty good balance imo.
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
When Jaedong basically carried Oz on his shoulders to win Proleagues, the format was bo5 with the 5th match being the Ace match. To win a round, Jaedong would win, 1 of his 3 teammates would win, and he would win the Ace. This format was acceptable, as someone besides the ace would be required to contribute.
The main problem for Nation Wars in regards to this is the 3 player roster vs 4 player for that bo5. And I agree that it's very difficult for many countries to procure 3 competitive players. I think the easiest solution is to cap a single player's number of games in a match to 1 less than the winning score. Bo5, cap the players at 2 games each. Bo7, cap the players at 3 games each etc.
This lets the Ace still shine in a shallow roster, but ensures that it's a team series.
if you are unable to find 3 players that can't compete, in your entire nation, your nation has no business in this tournament called Nation ! wars.
Finland won, good for serral but lets not pretend Finland is the best nation.
Finland was clearly the best nation thanks to Serral.Hell this is nationwar!. But I seriously think that if the korean lineup had been Dark, Maru and Cure with herO as replacement they would have taken the title.
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
When Jaedong basically carried Oz on his shoulders to win Proleagues, the format was bo5 with the 5th match being the Ace match. To win a round, Jaedong would win, 1 of his 3 teammates would win, and he would win the Ace. This format was acceptable, as someone besides the ace would be required to contribute.
The main problem for Nation Wars in regards to this is the 3 player roster vs 4 player for that bo5. And I agree that it's very difficult for many countries to procure 3 competitive players. I think the easiest solution is to cap a single player's number of games in a match to 1 less than the winning score. Bo5, cap the players at 2 games each. Bo7, cap the players at 3 games each etc.
This lets the Ace still shine in a shallow roster, but ensures that it's a team series.
if you are unable to find 3 players that can't compete, in your entire nation, your nation has no business in this tournament called Nation ! wars.
Finland won, good for serral but lets not pretend Finland is the best nation.
It's like in AoE 2, when archers and swordsman fight vs each other and then one player types BIG DADDY and a armored super vehicle with lasers and bazookas appears. That's Serral
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
When Jaedong basically carried Oz on his shoulders to win Proleagues, the format was bo5 with the 5th match being the Ace match. To win a round, Jaedong would win, 1 of his 3 teammates would win, and he would win the Ace. This format was acceptable, as someone besides the ace would be required to contribute.
The main problem for Nation Wars in regards to this is the 3 player roster vs 4 player for that bo5. And I agree that it's very difficult for many countries to procure 3 competitive players. I think the easiest solution is to cap a single player's number of games in a match to 1 less than the winning score. Bo5, cap the players at 2 games each. Bo7, cap the players at 3 games each etc.
This lets the Ace still shine in a shallow roster, but ensures that it's a team series.
if you are unable to find 3 players that can't compete, in your entire nation, your nation has no business in this tournament called Nation ! wars.
Finland won, good for serral but lets not pretend Finland is the best nation.
It's like in AoE 2, when archers and swordsman fight vs each other and then one player types BIG DADDY and a armored super vehicle with lasers and bazookas appears. That's Serral
Yet he didn't win the IEM nor Blizzcon. His Bazooka wasn't big enough? And it's not a racial issue, both events were won by Zerg
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
When Jaedong basically carried Oz on his shoulders to win Proleagues, the format was bo5 with the 5th match being the Ace match. To win a round, Jaedong would win, 1 of his 3 teammates would win, and he would win the Ace. This format was acceptable, as someone besides the ace would be required to contribute.
The main problem for Nation Wars in regards to this is the 3 player roster vs 4 player for that bo5. And I agree that it's very difficult for many countries to procure 3 competitive players. I think the easiest solution is to cap a single player's number of games in a match to 1 less than the winning score. Bo5, cap the players at 2 games each. Bo7, cap the players at 3 games each etc.
This lets the Ace still shine in a shallow roster, but ensures that it's a team series.
if you are unable to find 3 players that can't compete, in your entire nation, your nation has no business in this tournament called Nation ! wars.
Finland won, good for serral but lets not pretend Finland is the best nation.
It's like in AoE 2, when archers and swordsman fight vs each other and then one player types BIG DADDY and a armored super vehicle with lasers and bazookas appears. That's Serral
Everyone knows in AoE 2 you enter howdoyouturnthison to get a Shelby Cobra firing machine guns.
On December 12 2019 17:14 OGamingTV SC2 wrote: Yes, a TL won by one player. But if we just did: A1 vs A2 B1 vs B2 C1 vs C2
90% of matches would have been decided just by the line up. We just can't do this format in 2019. Because most of the country don't have 3 pro players. It just would have been a pointless format. With almost 0 entertainment. It's why we just not only have to think at "what's working in SC2". But "what's working in SC2 in 2019".
When Jaedong basically carried Oz on his shoulders to win Proleagues, the format was bo5 with the 5th match being the Ace match. To win a round, Jaedong would win, 1 of his 3 teammates would win, and he would win the Ace. This format was acceptable, as someone besides the ace would be required to contribute.
The main problem for Nation Wars in regards to this is the 3 player roster vs 4 player for that bo5. And I agree that it's very difficult for many countries to procure 3 competitive players. I think the easiest solution is to cap a single player's number of games in a match to 1 less than the winning score. Bo5, cap the players at 2 games each. Bo7, cap the players at 3 games each etc.
This lets the Ace still shine in a shallow roster, but ensures that it's a team series.
if you are unable to find 3 players that can't compete, in your entire nation, your nation has no business in this tournament called Nation ! wars.
Finland won, good for serral but lets not pretend Finland is the best nation.
It's like in AoE 2, when archers and swordsman fight vs each other and then one player types BIG DADDY and a armored super vehicle with lasers and bazookas appears. That's Serral
Yet he didn't win the IEM nor Blizzcon. His Bazooka wasn't big enough? And it's not a racial issue, both events were won by Zerg
Yes, we all know the list of the tournaments someone didn't win is the most relevant; just accept Serral's greatness at this point, denying it is useless.
I think they need to change up the format again. I am not interested in teams being carried by a single player like that. To me it leads the whole concept of a team tournament ad absurdum.
On December 14 2019 00:34 Aunvilgodess wrote: I think they need to change up the format again. I am not interested in teams being carried by a single player like that. To me it leads the whole concept of a team tournament ad absurdum.
Like Korea, wich got hard carried by Stats in the finals, as their only player to actually take maps of the finnish rooster?
On December 14 2019 00:34 Aunvilgodess wrote: I think they need to change up the format again. I am not interested in teams being carried by a single player like that. To me it leads the whole concept of a team tournament ad absurdum.
Like Korea, wich got hard carried by Stats in the finals, as their only player to actually take maps of the finnish rooster?
Even better than that, Zhuge's win against soO cannot be put on imba.
Koreans where good (by default), but... the tournament format was same for every country and Finland managed to use its available roster the best in given circumstances, Serral being just Serral. Note that TheMusZero took a map vs Italy, an another One-man-army team, thus as a team effort everyone in Team Finland contributed for the team's success.
That "Ad Absurdum" is Serral, but you know that as I do. :D
On December 11 2019 13:48 RandomPlayer wrote: I agree, good format by NW. SC2 teams are not suitable for team leagues, it’s a 1vs1 game. Good event though.
I disagree, while sc2 is popular for its 1on1, 2vs2 is still played by pros occasionally. It's something you can play... So it IS absolutely suitable. It's not like I'm saying every tournament needs to do 2vs2.. but 1 of 100, why not. Indeed the balance is "different" here.
On December 14 2019 00:34 Aunvilgodess wrote: I think they need to change up the format again. I am not interested in teams being carried by a single player like that. To me it leads the whole concept of a team tournament ad absurdum.
Like Korea, wich got hard carried by Stats in the finals, as their only player to actually take maps of the finnish rooster?
Even better than that, Zhuge's win against soO cannot be put on imba.
Koreans where good (by default), but... the tournament format was same for every country and Finland managed to use its available roster the best in given circumstances, Serral being just Serral. Note that TheMusZero took a map vs Italy, an another One-man-army team, thus as a team effort everyone in Team Finland contributed for the team's success.
That "Ad Absurdum" is Serral, but you know that as I do. :D
I'm not happy to say but soO's form after his IEM victory is getting worse and worse. Had Rogue or Dark played its a completely different ball game...
EPT
Reynor this time around (even if this was a rare clash where the games looked largely one-sided). If you ran this bracket back one-hundred times, I feel like we'd seeing Italy advance to the finals at decent amount of the time.
