On February 19 2022 10:29 QOGQOG wrote: I don't really see what everyone's freaking out over. It's an in-person event and due to (perfectly reasonable) local laws, people who are infected can't participate in-person. That's that.
I mean, if anyone does get sick, that really sucks. But randomly switching online or breaking Polish law don't seem like especially useful ways of dealing with that (at this point purely hypothetical) situation.
You ignored the 3rd option where there are no laws being broken and it's not switched to online. Anyone that makes it to Poland can play from their hotel room. Unless you are counting that as online but by that logic all SC2 tournaments are online because there is no LAN.
LAN tournaments are played in a LAN environment. I think Wax or another TL staff confirmed it last time I asked. Only tournament organizers get access to the LAN set up of SC2.
ESL's argument is that if someone plays in a hotel room, the pressure, audience, and stress factor of playing on stage is not there, thus possibly giving them a competitive advantage. I can understand where they're coming from but I think having that sort of criticism and asterisk if the COVID player wins is better than having the COVID player being disqualified. The ping from a hotel to the arena within the same city is probably 10ms or less. To straight up DQ someone just doesn't make sense to me. What's the point of grinding for a year if I get DQed like that?
If a player chooses not to attend, like Armani for example, that's a different story.
On February 19 2022 10:29 QOGQOG wrote: I don't really see what everyone's freaking out over. It's an in-person event and due to (perfectly reasonable) local laws, people who are infected can't participate in-person. That's that.
I mean, if anyone does get sick, that really sucks. But randomly switching online or breaking Polish law don't seem like especially useful ways of dealing with that (at this point purely hypothetical) situation.
You ignored the 3rd option where there are no laws being broken and it's not switched to online. Anyone that makes it to Poland can play from their hotel room. Unless you are counting that as online but by that logic all SC2 tournaments are online because there is no LAN.
LAN tournaments are played in a LAN environment. I think Wax or another TL staff confirmed it last time I asked. Only tournament organizers get access to the LAN set up of SC2.
ESL's argument is that if someone plays in a hotel room, the pressure, audience, and stress factor of playing on stage is not there, thus possibly giving them a competitive advantage. I can understand where they're coming from but I think having that sort of criticism and asterisk if the COVID player wins is better than having the COVID player being disqualified. The ping from a hotel to the arena within the same city is probably 10ms or less. To straight up DQ someone just doesn't make sense to me. What's the point of grinding for a year if I get DQed like that?
If a player chooses not to attend, like Armani for example, that's a different story.
Oh really? That's news to me. Its been so long since the last in person event that I might be misremembering but I could still swear that even from 2017-2019 lag issues were still fairly common in big events. Unless I'm just completely misremembering about lag at offline events how's that possible on LAN? Obviously the stream can always have issues regardless of LAN or not but the games themselves should be flawless on LAN besides hardware problems.
Still not worth it to DQ them over it like you're saying. That hurts competitive integrity way more than any stage nerves advantage.
On February 19 2022 10:29 QOGQOG wrote: I don't really see what everyone's freaking out over. It's an in-person event and due to (perfectly reasonable) local laws, people who are infected can't participate in-person. That's that.
I mean, if anyone does get sick, that really sucks. But randomly switching online or breaking Polish law don't seem like especially useful ways of dealing with that (at this point purely hypothetical) situation.
You missing the boat here, it wasnt about players who get sick BEFORE the traveling and gotta stay home, its about players who travel thousand of km, and then found positive upon arrival or during the stay in the country. It is hypothetical but the probability of it is still within the realm of real possibility, more so than Serral or some player breaking their hand and cant play. My whole issue with ESL on this, is that, they know the kind of risk players would have been exposed to during the traveling and the stay, and the severe consequence of that, but has showed no plan to reduce that risk whatsoever. Somebody already post a couple of solution for that, and you telling me ESL hosting a multi-million dollar events (prize pool + organization cost + production cost) cant even do any of that? The goal of having an offline Global Final is that viewer (at the stage and online) can see the highest level of SC2 competition, and all the resource should be focused to make that happen. ESL as organizer should make that their first priority, its not about rulebook, or LAN set-up, or fan accessibility inside the facility, its player AVAILABILITY first.
On February 19 2022 10:29 QOGQOG wrote: I don't really see what everyone's freaking out over. It's an in-person event and due to (perfectly reasonable) local laws, people who are infected can't participate in-person. That's that.
I mean, if anyone does get sick, that really sucks. But randomly switching online or breaking Polish law don't seem like especially useful ways of dealing with that (at this point purely hypothetical) situation.
You missing the boat here, it wasnt about players who get sick BEFORE the traveling and gotta stay home, its about players who travel thousand of km, and then found positive upon arrival or during the stay in the country. It is hypothetical but the probability of it is still within the realm of real possibility, more so than Serral or some player breaking their hand and cant play. My whole issue with ESL on this, is that, they know the kind of risk players would have been exposed to during the traveling and the stay, and the severe consequence of that, but has showed no plan to reduce that risk whatsoever. Somebody already post a couple of solution for that, and you telling me ESL hosting a multi-million dollar events (prize pool + organization cost + production cost) cant even do any of that? The goal of having an offline Global Final is that viewer (at the stage and online) can see the highest level of SC2 competition, and all the resource should be focused to make that happen. ESL as organizer should make that their first priority, its not about rulebook, or LAN set-up, or fan accessibility inside the facility, its player AVAILABILITY first.
I know that's what it's about. Where was I talking about pre-trip infection?
If you have specific ideas about reducing the risk of players being exposed during travel feel free to share. I haven't seen any of these solutions you're talking about. I'm not sure what ESL could do to reduce risk short of chartering private planes. And I'm pretty sure that would indeed be out of their budget.
While player AVAILABILITY certainly determines whether or not an offline event is possible, at a certain point, you just have to decide what sort of event you're doing. The highest level of SC2 competition is offline, and that's what ESL wants. Having some players off-site would compromise that. So I continue to just not really understand what people are complaining about, I guess.
Dubov tested positive and was DQ-ed halfway during the last Tata Steel (a high-roller prestigious annual chess tournament with only 14 players)* despite being vaxxed and tight restrictions in place (Netherlands). So it's not speculative and alarmist to foresee a potential positive test fiasco happening.
* The only key difference is that Tata Steel went on longer for half a month (and if you want to count the junior section running concurrently, a total of 28 players)
On February 19 2022 20:34 RKC wrote: Dubov tested positive and was DQ-ed halfway during the last Tata Steel (a high-roller prestigious annual chess tournament with only 14 players)* despite being vaxxed and tight restrictions in place (Netherlands). So it's not speculative and alarmist to foresee a potential positive test fiasco happening.
* The only key difference is that Tata Steel went on longer for half a month (and if you want to count the junior section running concurrently, a total of 28 players)
And then he did another test that showed he wasn't positive at all.. afaik. So basically he could have easily finished the tournament and all this neurotic testing is a farce, at least in my book..
hopefully this IEM will somehow be able to dodge all the controversies with DQs and all that unwanted stuff..
On February 19 2022 10:29 QOGQOG wrote: I don't really see what everyone's freaking out over. It's an in-person event and due to (perfectly reasonable) local laws, people who are infected can't participate in-person. That's that.
I mean, if anyone does get sick, that really sucks. But randomly switching online or breaking Polish law don't seem like especially useful ways of dealing with that (at this point purely hypothetical) situation.
You missing the boat here, it wasnt about players who get sick BEFORE the traveling and gotta stay home, its about players who travel thousand of km, and then found positive upon arrival or during the stay in the country. It is hypothetical but the probability of it is still within the realm of real possibility, more so than Serral or some player breaking their hand and cant play. My whole issue with ESL on this, is that, they know the kind of risk players would have been exposed to during the traveling and the stay, and the severe consequence of that, but has showed no plan to reduce that risk whatsoever. Somebody already post a couple of solution for that, and you telling me ESL hosting a multi-million dollar events (prize pool + organization cost + production cost) cant even do any of that? The goal of having an offline Global Final is that viewer (at the stage and online) can see the highest level of SC2 competition, and all the resource should be focused to make that happen. ESL as organizer should make that their first priority, its not about rulebook, or LAN set-up, or fan accessibility inside the facility, its player AVAILABILITY first.
I know that's what it's about. Where was I talking about pre-trip infection?
If you have specific ideas about reducing the risk of players being exposed during travel feel free to share. I haven't seen any of these solutions you're talking about. I'm not sure what ESL could do to reduce risk short of chartering private planes. And I'm pretty sure that would indeed be out of their budget.
While player AVAILABILITY certainly determines whether or not an offline event is possible, at a certain point, you just have to decide what sort of event you're doing. The highest level of SC2 competition is offline, and that's what ESL wants. Having some players off-site would compromise that. So I continue to just not really understand what people are complaining about, I guess.
I already mentioned in my previous post about how players should be asked to travel 1 week in advance so that they can still play even if they test positive upon arrival. Private plane is also a good idea, and I have no idea how much that would cost in relative to the total cost of the event, which is in the range of millions of dollars. Those are clearly viable solution, and ESL should have addressed them before deciding if the cost was worth it. The highest level of SC2 competition is offline WITH all the top players available. There was no rush for having an offline tournament for this IEM, not from me at least, so I rather them putting together a better plan than just plunging toward it without considering all the issues. I am not sure what "certain point" you are talking about, why should ESL choose IEM to be offline if they know in advance that the local regulation might screw up the whole thing?
On February 19 2022 10:29 QOGQOG wrote: I don't really see what everyone's freaking out over. It's an in-person event and due to (perfectly reasonable) local laws, people who are infected can't participate in-person. That's that.
I mean, if anyone does get sick, that really sucks. But randomly switching online or breaking Polish law don't seem like especially useful ways of dealing with that (at this point purely hypothetical) situation.
You missing the boat here, it wasnt about players who get sick BEFORE the traveling and gotta stay home, its about players who travel thousand of km, and then found positive upon arrival or during the stay in the country. It is hypothetical but the probability of it is still within the realm of real possibility, more so than Serral or some player breaking their hand and cant play. My whole issue with ESL on this, is that, they know the kind of risk players would have been exposed to during the traveling and the stay, and the severe consequence of that, but has showed no plan to reduce that risk whatsoever. Somebody already post a couple of solution for that, and you telling me ESL hosting a multi-million dollar events (prize pool + organization cost + production cost) cant even do any of that? The goal of having an offline Global Final is that viewer (at the stage and online) can see the highest level of SC2 competition, and all the resource should be focused to make that happen. ESL as organizer should make that their first priority, its not about rulebook, or LAN set-up, or fan accessibility inside the facility, its player AVAILABILITY first.
I know that's what it's about. Where was I talking about pre-trip infection?
If you have specific ideas about reducing the risk of players being exposed during travel feel free to share. I haven't seen any of these solutions you're talking about. I'm not sure what ESL could do to reduce risk short of chartering private planes. And I'm pretty sure that would indeed be out of their budget.
While player AVAILABILITY certainly determines whether or not an offline event is possible, at a certain point, you just have to decide what sort of event you're doing. The highest level of SC2 competition is offline, and that's what ESL wants. Having some players off-site would compromise that. So I continue to just not really understand what people are complaining about, I guess.
I already mentioned in my previous post about how players should be asked to travel 1 week in advance so that they can still play even if they test positive upon arrival. Private plane is also a good idea, and I have no idea how much that would cost in relative to the total cost of the event, which is in the range of millions of dollars. Those are clearly viable solution, and ESL should have addressed them before deciding if the cost was worth it. The highest level of SC2 competition is offline WITH all the top players available. There was no rush for having an offline tournament for this IEM, not from me at least, so I rather them putting together a better plan than just plunging toward it without considering all the issues. I am not sure what "certain point" you are talking about, why should ESL choose IEM to be offline if they know in advance that the local regulation might screw up the whole thing?
I bolded a part that I want to adress. I agree with your sentiment, but I have the impression that a vast majority of vocal viewers have been pressing ESL to make IEM Katowice offline. You and I are in the minority when we don't want ESL to rush out an offline event. It is mostly here on TL.net that we are more common. Other sites and forums have way more pro offline people (unless I've found some kind big, isolated bubble were I am opposing the majority).
On February 19 2022 10:29 QOGQOG wrote: I don't really see what everyone's freaking out over. It's an in-person event and due to (perfectly reasonable) local laws, people who are infected can't participate in-person. That's that.
I mean, if anyone does get sick, that really sucks. But randomly switching online or breaking Polish law don't seem like especially useful ways of dealing with that (at this point purely hypothetical) situation.
You missing the boat here, it wasnt about players who get sick BEFORE the traveling and gotta stay home, its about players who travel thousand of km, and then found positive upon arrival or during the stay in the country. It is hypothetical but the probability of it is still within the realm of real possibility, more so than Serral or some player breaking their hand and cant play. My whole issue with ESL on this, is that, they know the kind of risk players would have been exposed to during the traveling and the stay, and the severe consequence of that, but has showed no plan to reduce that risk whatsoever. Somebody already post a couple of solution for that, and you telling me ESL hosting a multi-million dollar events (prize pool + organization cost + production cost) cant even do any of that? The goal of having an offline Global Final is that viewer (at the stage and online) can see the highest level of SC2 competition, and all the resource should be focused to make that happen. ESL as organizer should make that their first priority, its not about rulebook, or LAN set-up, or fan accessibility inside the facility, its player AVAILABILITY first.
I know that's what it's about. Where was I talking about pre-trip infection?
If you have specific ideas about reducing the risk of players being exposed during travel feel free to share. I haven't seen any of these solutions you're talking about. I'm not sure what ESL could do to reduce risk short of chartering private planes. And I'm pretty sure that would indeed be out of their budget.
While player AVAILABILITY certainly determines whether or not an offline event is possible, at a certain point, you just have to decide what sort of event you're doing. The highest level of SC2 competition is offline, and that's what ESL wants. Having some players off-site would compromise that. So I continue to just not really understand what people are complaining about, I guess.
I already mentioned in my previous post about how players should be asked to travel 1 week in advance so that they can still play even if they test positive upon arrival. Private plane is also a good idea, and I have no idea how much that would cost in relative to the total cost of the event, which is in the range of millions of dollars. Those are clearly viable solution, and ESL should have addressed them before deciding if the cost was worth it. The highest level of SC2 competition is offline WITH all the top players available. There was no rush for having an offline tournament for this IEM, not from me at least, so I rather them putting together a better plan than just plunging toward it without considering all the issues. I am not sure what "certain point" you are talking about, why should ESL choose IEM to be offline if they know in advance that the local regulation might screw up the whole thing?
I don’t know if asking all players to travel 1 week in advance is a good solution. even if it wasn’t too late at this point…That’s 36 players at an extra week of hotel costs (if you assume $50 USD per night then that’s $12.6k), plus how are they going to practice? I think the week leading up to the event is probably full of mental and physical preparation. Also schedules for their daily life can interfere. Not sure if players should want this but maybe I’m wrong
IEM budget may not be as high as it looks from the outside, esp if you consider that blizz is sponsoring so much of it for StarCraft. I’d guess private planes are totally out of the question cost wise.
I like the effort though, more ideas less whining!
Hm, this whole discussion reminds me in some very funny way of the typical discussion with my kids:
Kids - "We want ice cream, we want ice cream!" Me - "Ok, finally you'll get your damn ice cream! Let's see, there is some chocolate ice cream we have in the fridge. You're happy now?" Kids - "Bah, chocolate ice cream is disgusting, we want vanilla!" Me - "But vanilla ice cream is out of store right now..." Kids (raging) - "Doesn't matter! We want vanilla ice! We want vanilla ice!" Me - "..."
On February 20 2022 04:13 Tommy131313 wrote: Hm, this whole discussion reminds me in some very funny way of the typical discussion with my kids:
Kids - "We want ice cream, we want ice cream!" Me - "Ok, finally you'll get your damn ice cream! Let's see, there is some chocolate ice cream we have in the fridge. You're happy now?" Kids - "Bah, chocolate ice cream is disgusting, we want vanilla!" Me - "But vanilla ice cream is out of store right now..." Kids (raging) - "Doesn't matter! We want vanilla ice! We want vanilla ice!" Me - "..."
Yeah because not wanting players who rely on this game for their livelihood to be DQ'D from an event that pays $500k over something outside of their control is the equivalent to throwing a fit over ice cream. This is their livelihood and it's supposed to be a professional competition.
I reread the protocols page and the fact that they have no plan for someone testing positive after the groups are played out should be concerning to everyone regardless of if you support the DQ decision. They are either going to allow advancement through the bracket without actually playing (can you imagine on the final day someone tests positive for COVID and one player suddenly only has to win a single bo7 to win IEM?) Or they will make up some BS on the spot and choose someone to fill the slot without predefined rules.
People supporting the above over the super simple solution of players playing from their room is mind blowing to me.
On February 20 2022 04:13 Tommy131313 wrote: Hm, this whole discussion reminds me in some very funny way of the typical discussion with my kids:
Kids - "We want ice cream, we want ice cream!" Me - "Ok, finally you'll get your damn ice cream! Let's see, there is some chocolate ice cream we have in the fridge. You're happy now?" Kids - "Bah, chocolate ice cream is disgusting, we want vanilla!" Me - "But vanilla ice cream is out of store right now..." Kids (raging) - "Doesn't matter! We want vanilla ice! We want vanilla ice!" Me - "..."
why are these shitty comparisons so popular these days..?
On February 19 2022 10:29 QOGQOG wrote: I don't really see what everyone's freaking out over. It's an in-person event and due to (perfectly reasonable) local laws, people who are infected can't participate in-person. That's that.
I mean, if anyone does get sick, that really sucks. But randomly switching online or breaking Polish law don't seem like especially useful ways of dealing with that (at this point purely hypothetical) situation.
You missing the boat here, it wasnt about players who get sick BEFORE the traveling and gotta stay home, its about players who travel thousand of km, and then found positive upon arrival or during the stay in the country. It is hypothetical but the probability of it is still within the realm of real possibility, more so than Serral or some player breaking their hand and cant play. My whole issue with ESL on this, is that, they know the kind of risk players would have been exposed to during the traveling and the stay, and the severe consequence of that, but has showed no plan to reduce that risk whatsoever. Somebody already post a couple of solution for that, and you telling me ESL hosting a multi-million dollar events (prize pool + organization cost + production cost) cant even do any of that? The goal of having an offline Global Final is that viewer (at the stage and online) can see the highest level of SC2 competition, and all the resource should be focused to make that happen. ESL as organizer should make that their first priority, its not about rulebook, or LAN set-up, or fan accessibility inside the facility, its player AVAILABILITY first.
I know that's what it's about. Where was I talking about pre-trip infection?
If you have specific ideas about reducing the risk of players being exposed during travel feel free to share. I haven't seen any of these solutions you're talking about. I'm not sure what ESL could do to reduce risk short of chartering private planes. And I'm pretty sure that would indeed be out of their budget.
While player AVAILABILITY certainly determines whether or not an offline event is possible, at a certain point, you just have to decide what sort of event you're doing. The highest level of SC2 competition is offline, and that's what ESL wants. Having some players off-site would compromise that. So I continue to just not really understand what people are complaining about, I guess.
I already mentioned in my previous post about how players should be asked to travel 1 week in advance so that they can still play even if they test positive upon arrival. Private plane is also a good idea, and I have no idea how much that would cost in relative to the total cost of the event, which is in the range of millions of dollars. Those are clearly viable solution, and ESL should have addressed them before deciding if the cost was worth it. The highest level of SC2 competition is offline WITH all the top players available. There was no rush for having an offline tournament for this IEM, not from me at least, so I rather them putting together a better plan than just plunging toward it without considering all the issues. I am not sure what "certain point" you are talking about, why should ESL choose IEM to be offline if they know in advance that the local regulation might screw up the whole thing?
I don’t know if asking all players to travel 1 week in advance is a good solution. even if it wasn’t too late at this point…That’s 36 players at an extra week of hotel costs (if you assume $50 USD per night then that’s $12.6k), plus how are they going to practice? I think the week leading up to the event is probably full of mental and physical preparation. Also schedules for their daily life can interfere. Not sure if players should want this but maybe I’m wrong
IEM budget may not be as high as it looks from the outside, esp if you consider that blizz is sponsoring so much of it for StarCraft. I’d guess private planes are totally out of the question cost wise.
I like the effort though, more ideas less whining!
Maybe making it as an option for players to choose whether they want to arrive early or not. At least they have a choice if playesr want to play it safe, now there is no choice and we all have to cross our finger for the entire next week. Anyway, I do realize all the these are just "food for thought" at the moment, nothing else can be done and not gonna change what going to happen. So do we know when is the first group of players arriving? Would be cool for ESL to post on their twitter when the players have arrived and passed the Covid test at the airport.
Imagine a player gets DQed because playing from a hotel room might give them an advantage.. But what about the advantage his opponent gets by getting a freewin for something outside of the other players control?? isn't that a FAR bigger advantage? I get that it's not good for the atmosphere to have players play from the hotel room, but isn't that by far the lesser evil compared to just DQing players for something outside of their control?
Well I guess we just have to hope Serral will be the first one affected by this, so they will be forced to bend the rules.
Even here: Everybody is only talking about Covid. Imo it is good that they have written down the rules. We have to live with that, story ends. I'm so bored of constantly talking about exactly the same thing now for over 2 years.
More interested in the performance of the players: If you take a look at the whole year and how the players have placed i'm so unsure who will take it. As a Reynor Fan since his first days in the WCL i really hope for him but frankly if you take a look at his recent results, since he has won the last major, i'm a little bit fearful for him (and me ^^).
Zest has played so good, special his performance in the Super Tournament vs. Maru and Dark and he has peaked at IEM several times in the past.
Rouges performance is more then ever an up and down in case of results since IEM 2021. But if he will have a good week he is one of the favorites (as always).
Dark has shown a lot of mediocore results, beside his GSL win in 2021. I wonder, if he will be the first player to take the Title as a Worldmaster a second time, beside SOS.
Serral is hungry and impressed me the last couple of Majors (nearly) the most. Atm i would say his chances are even higher then Reynors (and that from a Fan like myself ^^).
Maru is like Serral improving the last couple of month, beside his recent loss vs. Zest in the Super Tournament.
Most weak one for me, because of results and overall behaviour is Trap but frankly this is maybe better then his position as a favorite at the last IEM. Imo it was to much pressure for him.
The dark horse (for me) is Hero. I'm so hyped of his play, since he has returned. Afterthe last Super Tournament i got the feeling that he will make the life of Trap in the Korean scene much harder. There is something about his playstyle, which is directly Antitrap
Thankfully i am able to take the days off and are able to see everything life. I'm watching Starcraft Esports now for maybe 10 - 15 years (not really sure about that, start watching GSL after the peak of Nestae and before that, one or two years the Brood War foreigner scene; Mondragon winning a TSL is one of my oldest memories)
Wish everyone else a lot of fun with the IEM, too.
On February 20 2022 04:13 Tommy131313 wrote: Hm, this whole discussion reminds me in some very funny way of the typical discussion with my kids:
Kids - "We want ice cream, we want ice cream!" Me - "Ok, finally you'll get your damn ice cream! Let's see, there is some chocolate ice cream we have in the fridge. You're happy now?" Kids - "Bah, chocolate ice cream is disgusting, we want vanilla!" Me - "But vanilla ice cream is out of store right now..." Kids (raging) - "Doesn't matter! We want vanilla ice! We want vanilla ice!" Me - "..."
why are these shitty comparisons so popular these days..?
They are potemkin arguments for mediocre people. I find that comparing people to one's children is a favorite rhetorical tactic of people who are otherwise completely unequipped to make an argument in defense of something that makes no sense, but that they want to defend anyway.
Made a post on reddit about this and Apollo made a response:
Heyhey,
Throwing some insight behind the decision.
Over the last 2 years we've ran online competitions, we are now finally in a position to get back to LIVE events. We all want this, we miss this, which I believe we all can agree on. We do not want to be crowning another online champion.
To expand on this, we think it's important to understand how we define an IEM Champion. We not only value the raw skill of a player but equally the ability to manage the pressure and all other elements that come with an in-person, on-stage performance. This is as a key trait that defines a Champion.
With the decision to take the event in-person and not online, this was the decision point to not allow players to compete from within their hotel rooms, otherwise we would have simply ran an online competition.
We 100% respect your opinion on the matter and it's incredibly important to us that you provide it. As you can likely imagine, it's almost impossible to have the perfect environment in order to have a perfect tournament.
The biggest moments in SC2 have always been in person moments.
EPT
