i51 gives Miniraser loss for playing for stalemate - Page 9
Forum Index > SC2 General |
Azelja
Japan762 Posts
| ||
GuitarBizarre
United Kingdom332 Posts
On April 20 2014 02:48 Fearest wrote: Playing for a draw is a valid strategy in other sports. Like Soccer. I don't see why it should be ban. A person who draws constantly can never get 1st place anyway. In soccer, the draw is a recorded result and the game ends in the same or only slightly longer period of time. The game ends and both players receive 1 point and the league continues as normal. In starcraft, a draw destroys the way the tournament brackets work and necessitates tie breakers which take an equal or longer amount of time to complete. In a live setting, allocating that level of time for a series to conclude is simply not possible. | ||
illidanx
United States973 Posts
| ||
Lorch
Germany3657 Posts
On April 20 2014 02:48 Azelja wrote: Playing for stalemates in a tightly scheduled lan event is stupid. Yes, it's a legitimate strategy but if you have to start scheduling 3 hours for a best of 3 series, that's just not gonna work, so the ruling makes sense in the environment it's being applied in. The competition should always stand first so rules should be made to ensure optimal competition, not the smoothest schedule possible. Pretty dumb ruling and I understand why Miniraser is upset. On the upside, we used to barely ever have draws anyway before swarmhost got figured out so I hope that this is a wake up call for Blizzard so they finally start patching swarm hosts (though the 2+ hour games seem to mainly be a EU issue atm, in top level Korean play we don't see games go that long anymore). | ||
Destructicon
4713 Posts
On April 20 2014 02:48 Fearest wrote: Playing for a draw is a valid strategy in other sports. Like Soccer. I don't see why it should be ban. A person who draws constantly can never get 1st place anyway. What works in other sports doesn't need to work in SC2, the fact that its acceptable to draw in other games doesn't mean it should be acceptable in SC2. I also disagree in general with the principle of drawing being acceptable anywhere in any way shape or form as its unsportsmanlike to prolongue or stall the game out any longer when you reach a inability to win. Stalling for the sake forcing out mistakes from the opponent is fine, stalling and forcing a draw to prevent a loss is lame and goes against everything that competition stands for, if you've failed to win the game and failed in all aspects of continuing to fight to win the game then bow out gracefully and not dick around with everyone else's time. Lastly SC2 in its current form isn't a game where the superior player can always close out a game even if he is far ahead, rules like these should exist to protect the viewers and the rest of the tournament from people trying to use inferior game design just for the purpose of staying in it. The more I think of it,t he more I'm agreeing with the i51 admins here and the more I approve of it. | ||
Waise
3165 Posts
| ||
GuitarBizarre
United Kingdom332 Posts
On April 20 2014 02:55 Lorch wrote: The competition should always stand first so rules should be made to ensure optimal competition, not the smoothest schedule possible. Pretty dumb ruling and I understand why Miniraser is upset. On the upside, we used to barely ever have draws anyway before swarmhost got figured out so I hope that this is a wake up call for Blizzard so they finally start patching swarm hosts (though the 2+ hour games seem to mainly be a EU issue atm, in top level Korean play we don't see games go that long anymore). I think everyone understands why Miniraiser is upset, but the fact is what he's talking about is complete shit. Swarmhosts were not banned. The rule that was applied here was not made up or "Changed between games" - It was enforced from the official rules laid out on Multiplay's website since long before the event even started. Not to mention he's attacking Mez on twitter for making this rule up when the rule was enforced by someone completely different who already responded to this thread. If after 2 games you end up playing for a stalemate both times, with your opponent mining and you are not, I think it's entirely reasonable to say that said opponent is the better player and that the issue lies with the design of the swarmhost and not the ability of that opponent. | ||
Waise
3165 Posts
On April 20 2014 02:59 Destructicon wrote: What works in other sports doesn't need to work in SC2, the fact that its acceptable to draw in other games doesn't mean it should be acceptable in SC2. I also disagree in general with the principle of drawing being acceptable anywhere in any way shape or form as its unsportsmanlike to prolongue or stall the game out any longer when you reach a inability to win. Stalling for the sake forcing out mistakes from the opponent is fine, stalling and forcing a draw to prevent a loss is lame and goes against everything that competition stands for, if you've failed to win the game and failed to in all aspects of continuing to fight to win the game then bow out gracefully and don't dick around with everyone else's time. Lastly SC2 in its current form isn't a game where the superior player can always close out a game even if he is far ahead, rules like these should exist to protect the viewers and the rest of the tournament from people trying to use inferior game design just for the purpose of staying in it. The more I think of it,t he more I'm agreeing with the i51 admins here and the more I approve of it. so to summarize your post: -trying not to lose so you can play another game and win "goes against competition" (???) -it's not okay to use "inferior game design" to win, which i suppose makes you the arbiter of what constitutes "inferior game design." if i think building cannons behind my mineral line is abusing inferior game design to win, can i get free wins when i'm cannon rushed in a tournament? i think what goes against competitive spirit is you trying to define something you don't like from a balance perspective as an unacceptable way to play the game. what most people here aren't admitting to, but are saying, is "i don't like swarm hosts and i'm laughing that someone got punished for using them." assuming this tournament has a prize pool, i would be fucking pissed too if i were miniraser | ||
TheBloodyDwarf
Finland7519 Posts
| ||
Detri
United Kingdom683 Posts
On April 20 2014 02:48 Azelja wrote: Playing for stalemates in a tightly scheduled lan event is stupid. Yes, it's a legitimate strategy but if you have to start scheduling 3 hours for a best of 3 series, that's just not gonna work, so the ruling makes sense in the environment it's being applied in. Can't agree more, they run the tournament they can decide what is reasonable. | ||
Blargh
United States2074 Posts
On April 20 2014 02:59 Destructicon wrote: Stalling for the sake forcing out mistakes from the opponent is fine, stalling and forcing a draw to prevent a loss is lame and goes against everything that competition stands for, if you've failed to win the game and failed to in all aspects of continuing to fight to win the game then bow out gracefully and don't dick around with everyone else's time. Then why are you in favor of i51's decision? He still had the potential to take the win assuming the opponent made mistakes. The same cannot be said for when a Terran floats a building off and the Zerg has no way of ever possibly killing those buildings. I do agree that there should never be a situation where it is impossible to win for a player, like with Terrans floating buildings off. I think if a building is floating, it should no longer count towards "existing buildings" aka, give the opponent still on ground the victory. | ||
GuitarBizarre
United Kingdom332 Posts
On April 20 2014 03:04 Waise wrote: so to summarize your post: -trying not to lose so you can play another game and win "goes against competition" (???) -it's not okay to use "inferior game design" to win, which i suppose makes you the arbiter of what constitutes "inferior game design." if i think building cannons behind my mineral line is abusing inferior game design to win, can i get free wins when i'm cannon rushed in a tournament? i think what goes against competitive spirit is you trying to define something you don't like from a balance perspective as an unacceptable way to play the game. what most people here aren't admitting to, but are saying, is "i don't like swarm hosts and i'm laughing that someone got punished for using them." assuming this tournament has a prize pool, i would be fucking pissed too if i were miniraser One of the dumber posts so far in this thread. I can't believe you're actually arguing that people are complaining about balance for a mirror matchup stalemate. | ||
Waise
3165 Posts
| ||
Waise
3165 Posts
On April 20 2014 03:07 GuitarBizarre wrote: One of the dumber posts so far in this thread. I can't believe you're actually arguing that people are complaining about balance for a mirror matchup stalemate. please read my post fully and understand what i'm saying before posting unnecessary insults. thanks! | ||
Faust852
Luxembourg4004 Posts
On April 20 2014 03:07 Waise wrote: btw, not a single person would be against this if it were a terran lifting buildings. everyone would be saying "lifting buildings has been a part of starcraft since SC1" and that would be the end of it. this is 100% anti-swarm host bias coming out, which is stupid because it's being directed at a player here, not the people who designed the game. faulting players for playing the game effectively (i.e. abusing anything and everything) is a dumb and wrong attitude Won't last over 2h tho. At best 5min. | ||
Waise
3165 Posts
like i said, if the only issue is time constraints, the admins can call a regame at any point they like. if miniraser's opponent can't see the swarm host turtle coming and beat it after it happens TWO GAMES IN A ROW, then he is the one who deserves to be called bad and not a winner. he can just fucking 9pool or something if he wants | ||
TheBloodyDwarf
Finland7519 Posts
On April 20 2014 03:07 Waise wrote: btw, not a single person would be against this if it were a terran lifting buildings. everyone would be saying "lifting buildings has been a part of starcraft since SC1" and that would be the end of it. this is 100% anti-swarm host bias coming out, which is stupid because it's being directed at a player here, not the people who designed the game. faulting players for playing the game effectively (i.e. abusing anything and everything) is a dumb and wrong attitude I would be agaisnt it | ||
LongShot27
United States2084 Posts
| ||
riyanme
Philippines940 Posts
On April 20 2014 02:48 Azelja wrote: Playing for stalemates in a tightly scheduled lan event is stupid. Yes, it's a legitimate strategy but if you have to start scheduling 3 hours for a best of 3 series, that's just not gonna work, so the ruling makes sense in the environment it's being applied in. its very simple.... if your fighting against a player who pre-meditatedly seeks a stalemate and he gots that, then you must be incompetent to defeat him, therefore he is better than you in a way but if he was seeking it out after alot of battles and not planned, then you are both evenly matched wont complain if they award a win on a certain player if it is in their rules the issue about the hosts is for bliz to address and for netizens to complain On April 20 2014 02:59 Destructicon wrote: What works in other sports doesn't need to work in SC2, the fact that its acceptable to draw in other games doesn't mean it should be acceptable in SC2. I also disagree in general with the principle of drawing being acceptable anywhere in any way shape or form as its unsportsmanlike to prolongue or stall the game out any longer when you reach a inability to win. Stalling for the sake forcing out mistakes from the opponent is fine, stalling and forcing a draw to prevent a loss is lame and goes against everything that competition stands for, if you've failed to win the game and failed in all aspects of continuing to fight to win the game then bow out gracefully and not dick around with everyone else's time. Lastly SC2 in its current form isn't a game where the superior player can always close out a game even if he is far ahead, rules like these should exist to protect the viewers and the rest of the tournament from people trying to use inferior game design just for the purpose of staying in it. The more I think of it,t he more I'm agreeing with the i51 admins here and the more I approve of it. the same applies to the other, how can you possible say he wins when he can't even defeat that player therefore leading to a stalemate? nobody wants to lose, we hate to lose. accepting defeat when you know the other can't win is either stupidity or 'humility'. | ||
gillon
Sweden1578 Posts
| ||
| ||