EPT 2023/24 World Championship/EWC final results

On August 20 2024 01:42 johnnyh123 wrote:
I actually kind of agree that herO should have won the MVP award.
- herO was responsible for 78% of all Protoss series wins in the entire tournament. Of the total 9 series wins for Protoss, herO won 7.
- herO played the most series in the entire tournament at 10.
- He got us believing in Protoss again.
- Showed great games, and really made the tournament interesting. Without herO, it would basically be a weekend of slugfests between T&Z. Literally it wouldn't be SC2 anymore, it would be TZ2.

I definitely was cheering on herO to win the entire thing after his great showing. It would have been an awesome storyline
- Only player to play every day
- Most series played
- Lost to Serral in Upper Bracket 0-3, lost to Serral in Lower Bracket 2-3, then wins against Serral at the grand finals 5-x.

Almost like a classic hero story with our protagonist being herO.

On August 19 2024 23:50 ejozl wrote:
Clem played amazingly, but I am more amazed by herO. He plays the highest lvl pvt, beating his old self. And he reached even old stats pvz lvl. Still this doesn't mean that you can win as protoss. Play the highest peak of skill ever and you still only get a ro4, protoss seriously needs help.

On August 19 2024 08:29 Nakajin wrote:
A strange weekend for me. Having watched pretty much all the big events in the last decade, it was an odd feeling to search for things to do to distract myself from SC2. Although I followed along by checking the TL thread and Liquipedia from time to time (can you imagine not opening TL for 4-5 days? The agony)

Hopefully, there's a path forward for Starcraft 2 that doesn't involve going back to Saudi Arabia so that I'm at ease watching the next world championship, but I doubt it.


Anyhow, well done Clem, better luck next time Serral, and don't worry Ryung, I know you would have won that 400 k$ match.

On August 21 2024 04:00 rwala wrote:


100% agree. Though very happy for Clem, what a champ! In the long run, I don't think SCII esports can survive via a Saudi benefactor model if it doesn't make business sense independently. I totally understand why the players, casters, and fans are desperate enough to accept this in the short term after Blizzard, KeSPA, and GSL pulled the plug, but the reality is that if your game isn't popular enough to have a player base and consistent viewership that can attract corporate sponsors, your game needs to evolve. This is why chess is very quickly evolving towards faster time controls and more interesting game and tournament formats, and why the FIDE world championship circuit will either need to evolve or stubbornly put itself into a stasis ward of irrelevance. Taking Saudi money to prop your game up for a few more years in some ways just delays the inevitable, which in and of itself isn't bad. But when coupled with lending SCII's prestige to promote a bizarre event in Riyadh, and disorienting the players, devs, casters, and viewers as to the reality of the market dynamics...it doesn't feel right. And it doesn't look at and sound right. I tuned in one day briefly and I think the production team was pausing the in-game music when the players' names were being announced at the start of the game, but instead of cheers it was just silence because the playing hall was empty (a camera cut to the "audience" and I saw like 3 people). Seeing what I assume were members of the Saudi royal family up there yucking it up with players and casters just felt so gross. It's one thing for Bilbo to hold on to the ring of power for too long, it's a whole other thing for him to lend it to Sauron for a little while for a bit of extra cash. Too much poison dosed over not enough antidote, if I may butcher Bilbo's butter and bread analogy worse than a Saudi security agent butchers an American journalist.

The thing is while the Saudis are focused on geopolitical goals with these kinds of investments and corporate investors are focused on marketing ROI, in the long run both sets of goals require very significant viewership numbers with key target audiences. If it doesn't make sense to a corporate marketing department, it's eventually not going to make sense to the PR firms that are advising the Saudi government on this. I do think SCII is the "prestige" play here--and you're always going to want a few of those in your portfolio--but with no forthcoming DLC or other content associated with this IP it's only a matter of time before the Saudis also move on. The community will have gotten a couple more years of an esport and the players and casters will have gotten some much deserved financial support for a scene that probably couldn't survive without it. But at what cost?

I just hope esports doesn't become the laughing stock of the entertainment industry by ceding what should be an important event featuring the best players and the best games to an entity that cares neither about the games nor the players, and only cares about itself and how it's viewed in the world.

If you enjoyed the event, please don't get triggered by this post. Not trying to take away anything from the players or games or viewers who had a good time. I watched some myself and enjoyed too. Just hoping there can at least be some conversation about the very bizarre and unfortunate situation SCII and the esports industry more generally has found itself in here.

On August 20 2024 03:45 ZeroByte13 wrote:
I like herO a lot but to think he played at "the highest peak of skill ever" at this tournament is pure copium, IMO. He probably didn't play at his personal peak, let alone any player ever.

herO had won vs Clem 3-0 just recently, so obviously it's possible with this patch / map pool.
Clem was just much better this particular Sunday, just like he played much better than Serral in the finals.
Repeat the same Ro4 this or next Sunday and I'm not sure Clem necessarily wins vs herO or Serral.

Sometimes one player hits the peak form of his life for one day is simply untouchable, that's it.

On August 21 2024 14:55 ejozl wrote:
Clem played this series better, but again herO was sick, had been playing a way rougher road, and even then the 4:0 could've easily been a 2:2, then factor in that T is favoured vs. toss.. herO didn't rly play better than him, but Clem's meddle wasn't really put to the test, he only beat 4 players.

On August 21 2024 17:23 ZeroByte13 wrote:
Is Clem really to blame he never lost a series unlike herO who lost 3 series, two of them in 3-0 and 4-0 sweeps?
Because this is why Clem had to play only 5 series vs 4 opponents.
Because he never lost, easily dominating 4 series out of 5 with 3-0, 3-0, 4-0, 5-0, struggling a bit only vs Reynor.

herO had been playing a way rougher road only because he lost twice, is it a praise-worth achievement really?

Clem's map score was 18-2, 90% winrate - herO's was 20-12, 62% winrate.
Clem's map score vs "Final Boss" Serral was 8-0 - herO's was 2-6.

Throughout the tournament herO's form was very good but not even his best, while Clem's form was god-like. This is why Clem won.

On August 22 2024 01:25 clemserral wrote:
Clem gonna go crazy until his wrists give out. Happens to every top Terran. The best players play Terran until their body gives out. It is what it is.

On August 25 2024 02:04 WickedCestus wrote:
Besides the whole "fairness" question, I just found the tournament format pretty anti-climactic. After the first two days, you know 3 out of the 4 semifinalists, which removes a lot of the excitement out of days 3 & 4 to me. It kind of takes the wind out of the sails to have the tournament suddenly reset with 3 of the best players missing. The pacing just feels so off -- a tournament should ideally get more exciting and high-stakes as it goes on, so going back to what is essentially round 1 again 2 days in just felt kind of stupid.

This might be personal preference, but I also don't like a "group stage" with best-of-5s. To me, the appeal of the first couple days of an IEM is seeing each player play a bunch of bo3s in different matchups versus various opponents and seeing how they all shake out. Each match is less important in itself, but the storylines develop until the final matches are often do-or-die. Then we get into the truly high-stakes playoffs (where the top seeds get to skip one round -- a fair reward for a job well done) and that's when it turns to drawn-out best-of-5s.

I mean, IEM just feels like such an ideal format. It takes around the same time, delivers a lot more matches with more variety, and ramps up the intensity/stakes/series as the tournament goes on. You also get to see the best players throughout the whole tournament. Like, it kind of sucks as a viewer that Clem was playing amazing Starcraft and we only got to see him play 5 series, two of which were against the same player. Sure, they were long series, but I'd rather see an on-form Clem show his skills against many different players instead of facing Serral 8 times.

The format combined with the lack of a crowd made this tournament fall pretty flat for me.

On August 25 2024 02:04 WickedCestus wrote:
Besides the whole "fairness" question, I just found the tournament format pretty anti-climactic. After the first two days, you know 3 out of the 4 semifinalists, which removes a lot of the excitement out of days 3 & 4 to me. It kind of takes the wind out of the sails to have the tournament suddenly reset with 3 of the best players missing. The pacing just feels so off -- a tournament should ideally get more exciting and high-stakes as it goes on, so going back to what is essentially round 1 again 2 days in just felt kind of stupid.

This might be personal preference, but I also don't like a "group stage" with best-of-5s. To me, the appeal of the first couple days of an IEM is seeing each player play a bunch of bo3s in different matchups versus various opponents and seeing how they all shake out. Each match is less important in itself, but the storylines develop until the final matches are often do-or-die. Then we get into the truly high-stakes playoffs (where the top seeds get to skip one round -- a fair reward for a job well done) and that's when it turns to drawn-out best-of-5s.

I mean, IEM just feels like such an ideal format. It takes around the same time, delivers a lot more matches with more variety, and ramps up the intensity/stakes/series as the tournament goes on. You also get to see the best players throughout the whole tournament. Like, it kind of sucks as a viewer that Clem was playing amazing Starcraft and we only got to see him play 5 series, two of which were against the same player. Sure, they were long series, but I'd rather see an on-form Clem show his skills against many different players instead of facing Serral 8 times.

The format combined with the lack of a crowd made this tournament fall pretty flat for me.