Isnt already what they do by putting emphasis on 0-sent comp ?
| Flag: | North Korea |
| Registered: | December 21, 2022 |
| Last post: | October 2, 2025 at 8:05 PM |
| Posts: | 5051 |
Isnt already what they do by putting emphasis on 0-sent comp ?
"weak points"
They are weak at everything that doesnt rely on individual firepower x)
1 point in championnship isnt a lot, winning should grant mush more point to continue to motivate people
Because all our team are in rebuild phase, have a badread of the meta, and bad teamplay and just rely on firepower, so just being decent make you look like a god. In kingdoms of Irons, the platinums are gods
EMEA is in shamble for this master, but we will come stronger in champions
It's true, we can never be sure a region is truly bad while we dont see comparison, we can only assume based on how good the team look. Maybe EMEA team are just amazing to break other team gameplan and make them look like a fool. (BUt I dont think chance ar that high)
My point was VIT was only using firepower to win, but thats not enough in an international event, if you cant beat an "only firepower team" they you are not good. So to me every EMEA team where kinda "bad" (They have a huge room for improvement and I trust EMEA to be strong in Chmapions, but today we are trash)
TL is just the only EMEA team that have a gameplan and are able to use it, every other EMEA team have absolutely no idea of what they do (TH picking Abyss even if they are catastrophic on it is a huge proof of that), so they are ahead averyone else, but I'm not really sure TL could beat a team like MIBR, LOUD or KRU, making 5 AMER team ahead of the top 1 (I'm an AMER hater, and EMEA fan, but let's be honest, this doesn't sound good)
Cause EDG won last event ?
Faria said if he was redoing franchising he would probably add mor slot for Ascention. EG, FUR, LEV out, G2 in, 2 ascention team in.
You need to do top 4 in the group to go to ascention :c
I really really think we should have a rule where the 2 ascended team should be everytime in the same group so thats fair
"but the way i see it the system is structured so that an ascension team quals for next year if they prove themselves better than most other teams in the region, unrelated to the other ascension team."
Thats true only for top 4 teams, but you have also to take in account the difference between ending 9 and ending 8, what you said would be true if it would have no difference, but thats not the case here.
"Imo the problem would be uneven groups. If both ascension teams get into a really hard group, they could get denied playoffs and any chance to qualify next year despite being possibly better than teams from the other group"
True, but it's possible to put them in same group and keep even groups !
Yes and no, they are 3 outcome :
If team A is in an easy group and get qual to PO, and team B got an hard group and end bottom 2, then maybe B > A, so thats unfair
(edit : plus it add more stakes to a game if 2 asc team plays each other)
Is ok, we will bomb this master, but we have a lot of team that have good potential to progress for champions
Probably a reference to one of the best french serie ? :c
To me, the 2 team in Ascention should be in the same group, because they are in direct concurrencies to qualify, and if one got an easy grouop, then, thats bad for the integrity of the competition
Regardless, of who say that I sadly agree with the post, we are not good, we have a lot of potential for the end of the year and with more train KC, FNC, VIT will be really strong, but today, as we speak I don't think any EMEA team is top 10 world.
KC was amazingly bad on Abyss, in atk they systematically get read, never be able to take space and always rush on a site where 4 people was waiting, and even with that Vit didn't manage to win those round. KC endend last on EMEA loosing against GX. We are in a really bad situation currently, I don't think it will last all the year KC, Vit and FNC have potential to win Champ at the end of the year, but today with how they play, none of them are top 12 or maybe even 16 world, only TH is top 12
It's sad for me, but rationally speaking I think EMEA is worst region at today's date,
Meaningwhile we have TH that is still okay, VIT that almost loose against a team that ended last in EMEA (that loose against GX), Fut being still alive despite being a team that rely on really few gameplan and TL (lol). We need T2 russia so mush, we need more academics team (It's really good they are not relegated because thats allow them to focus on long term, trying fresh talent thinking long term without being scared), this is not our master guys.
Thats true since only 2021, for a country 20 times more populated. Inercy and GDP/capita also matter
Their GDP is too low, but it increase it really fast, give them 10 years max before becoming something really strong
It's based on an ELO system, and it didnt has an hard reset based on the prevous year (BME keep their ELO of S1 ans S2)
With a hard reset :
Good point, inercie of last year, it take time to proove you are not a fluke in the ELO system
Number is the ELO,
what is you opinion about this ?
The fact they are a "S" in the name of this topic awaken some weird feelings...
The paradox here is that it's not the number of game you play that bring money to Riot !
"What I can guarantee is that the highest number of skin purchases per viewer in APAC will be from Korean viewers. "
Looking at how Japan T2 is more popular than Korean T2, i'm not fully sure of that T.T.
If they are more KR team, does the KR skin buying will not just dillute into the different team ? Like KR team have more concurrencies and win less ?
This tweet was so far from true T.T It really make no sense, Phillipines was one of the weakest SEA region :/
The current form make so mush sense especially at this time where KR wasn't that good, but now I admit they are a room for more KR team, but the real question here is that, "Are we sure more franchised KR team will bring more fans ?" I'm really not sure of that :/
Allowing is not what that should be do. Saying team have to choose just mean some team will do it, and some team will not, and the latter will have an advantage. Either no one should stream scrim, either everyone should be forced to do it. The first one is the stauts quo, the second one would give us more content but change absolutely everything
To me it should be a decision that take Riot. A team deciding to stream stream would be sucide so none will do it BUT, if Riot says that now everyone need to stream their scrim, then everyone would be on, an equal foot and we would have mush more content to see for not more travail. So even if that would be a gamechanger it might be an absolute win for Riot and team
What do you mean by "The initial plan" ? Riot original plan in 2023
Anyway doing that Thailand, Indonesia and MYSG doesnt have a spot wish is kind weird based how those 3 region where kinda good in 2022, If that's Riot I have absolutely no remember of that @.@
"Even the smallest LCK teams are much bigger than Zeta/DFM" What do you mean by bigger ? Number of fan ? Views ? Japan league have mush view than KR league based on attendance. Money ? Maybe. Lets be honnest, do you think make FearX a franchised 4th team in val, will bring more viewer ? More people that buy bundle ? How thats possible ?
They are only 3 franchised KR team and 2 ascention place, so it's 5 maximum if they are no structural changes x)
I don't like the idea of Korea all alone, it's better to have 1 big region with 2 smaller region, so this regions can improve and secure one spot in Tier 1, have more interregional games is also more hype. If you put APAC without Korea that will just make a T1 region with a lot of country that need a T1 team, but lack of good player (VN and OCE would probably take 2 of their franchised spot).
Another reason why we shouldnt have 12 KR team, is what 2 things Faria says :
So they are 2 problem :
If we consider in 2027 we will go to 8-4 and that we need more spot for non-represented region (VN, OCE), and we need for KR because they are too dominant, then the best choice is to split "Pacific" and "Asia", because we have 10 franchise, and it's impossible to have 8 franchise, but we could reach 16 franchise to make sure everyone is represented. 4 KR team, 4 ascention team (that will probably be KR), 2 JP team, 1 OCE team and on TW or MN team could be the right call, since more representation mean the pie grow. Plus it's consistent scrimwise (JP and KR share the same scrim environnement) and OCE share the timezone (Not sharing any scrim environnement with anyone). My only concern with that system is SEA+SA would be too weak (Even if this 2 region need 6 franchised team minimum to have everyone represented T.T, letting only 2 spot for a bigger region that have no representation like RU for exemple)
6 would mean GE become KR no ?
Looking at the datas of premier stat, I wont be shocked if KR start to dominate the region, but if thats happen we will need to do something if we dont want Val to disapear from the rest of APAC, I'm considering more a region with Pacific with only KR-JP-OCE (And half of team being KR), but i'm afrain SEA-SA would be too small
I made 3min realising it's Ship and not sheep
Sure but this is not supposed to be like that, thats the only case that it's work like that, in every other double elim format, a team in 1-1 will play a team in 1-1 wish make it fair
The team in 0-1 have an advantage over the team in 1-1 because they have more time to prepare their game
+++So after 5 games they are 5 possibilities, and all of them are fair.
But now I think you may say : « What I don’t like in this format is some team that do 1-1 will not play their decider, so it’s not a real BO3 so thats unfair », and I understand this point of view, but the tri-fractured format is compatible with it, it’s possible to play every decider, and thats already the case in most of case, and if you pick the 8 game format then it’s even more true. Let’s see outcome by outcome :
So in conclusion, I think this Tri-fractured format, or at least this precise way to order 3 BO3, is how every round robin with 3 teams, and 6 games should be played. It’s true for BO3, but it’s also the same if you are running 6 BO1. But let’s be honnest, nobody like BO1. I think with this Tri-fractured format, we can really make fair the competition with 12 teams, better than what we have, especially if we play the 8games version of the tri-format, that ensure every meaningfull decider is played, that also avoid tie, and also preserve competitive integrity by maintaining the stakes. What do you think vlr ? Do you saw any flaws in my reasoning. Anyway byye…
script
Hi vlr, in a previous video I was saying that I hate how the doble loose bracket with 12 team is made, and when I say something is bad, it’s not suffisent, and that mean I need to propose an alternative, and this one will be kinda out of the box, and rely on the fact that one way or another we will be in a situation where we will have to sort out 3 teams. The actual format give a bye to the looser of the first game, but I will rely on an equivalent of the round robin with 3 team, but this format have issues, so will propose an alternative that will solve the issues. So i’ve created something that I will call the « Tri-fractionned format » That is basically a round robin with 3 BO3 where the game are played in a specific order to ensure the competitive integrity and hype.
So how does that work ? At start, you make all the 3 map vetos at the start of the day, next, you play the 3 first game of each BO3, and then you play the 2nd game of each BO3 but in a specific order based on their rank after the 3 first games. 1st versus 3rd, 1st versus 2nd and finally 2nd versus 3rd, so now the 6 first game of the 3 BO3 are done. Finally if 2 team are tied then we play the decider that was planned at the start of the BO. In 7 games this is over, versus the actual 9 games we have today, Well we could choose play the 9 games if every team are in 2-2, but this will almost never happen, and even if that happen, we can also make rule in that specific situation to reduce the number of game. If you want to play more deicder and be sure no team are tie, then you can instead book 8 games instead of 7.
Ok so since this idea is sound coming out of nowhere, and you probably think it’s a bad idea, so here is my train of thougt, and why this solution indeed work…
First, why does we need this solution, is they are really a problem with double elimination with twelve team. Hear me out : I like the doble elimination bracket in a lot of situation, I like it for 4 team, for 8 teams, but also for 5 team and all his variation with ten team twelve team and fourty teams, because even if some team receive a bye, every win matter, and a loose doesnt grant any round of bye, so thats good to me. But double elimination bracket doesnt work for three, six or twelve team, because the first team that loose receive a bye and having more time to preparate themself, and potentially receive an unfair advantage, as I kinda show it in 2 of my previous video.
In the current format we also give a round of bye for the 4 best team based on their last result, but what if we decided to keep the double elimination format, but not give a bye to anyone ? In that scenario after the first round we would have 6 team with 1 win, and 6 with 1 lose. After 2 round we would have 3 team eliminated with 2 loose, 6 team in 1win-1lose that we can pair together, and the three winner will stay alive in the looser bracker… And finally, in winner bracket, 3 team 2-0… And thats here the problem start, because we have 3 team with the same reccord and we need to pair them for the next round, so we don’t have any choice and we have to put them together.
In that situation we usually use the classical round robin with 3 BO3 all played the same day, but this have some issues, you can have a full BO3 without any stakes, but even worse, you can have in the last BO, a situation where a team have played their 2 BO, and will watch the last game between a team that could steal their 1st place if they win, and a team that could win on the paper, but that is already eliminated giving them less motivation to win, making the last BO fully biased.
So first, something is important : we need that every places give a different outcome, because if only the first place count, a team that loose 3 games in a raw, will be eliminated no matter what, and may give bias in their last game, and to be honnest, you can even being eliminated after 2 games. So it’s important to make sure every place matter, and the 2nd place give you a better position in the bracket than the 3rd, so you make every games matter, and reduce every bias.
In the tri-fractionned system that I propose they are only 1 case out of 8, that force a team to play, even if they have no more stakes for them, and when it’s happen, it’s not a probleme because it’s not creating any bias, because, if this precise team loose, then, it’s just enable(énèybeul) a decider game between the 2 best teams. And this is only for the tri-fractionned format with 7 games, if you choose to go to 8 games maximum, the stakes come back.
So I need to proove my claim, and to do so we will check every possibilities, so we play the first 3 games with everyteam playing the 2 other team in one game, and then we arrive to the 4th game. It must feature the team that finished 1st on the 3 first game, against the worst team in the 3 first game, because at this point, everything can still happen, and the worst team, can still mathématically hope to finish first if everyone end in 2-2, and this will be broken if we play any game before that. This game have to be played first, because this is the one that have the most chance to have no stakes for one of the 2 teams, if another game is played first.
For the 5th games, it have to be the 2 best team in the first 3 games, because here, the 2nd best team have still their destiny in their hand to finish 1st, if we play the other game first and the 2nd loose against the 3rd, then the best team is already insured to finish first, and they will have to play against a team that need to fight for the 2nd place, and will probably make the win easier for them and a create a huge bia for the 2nd place.
It's like everything, it's a balance, you have to have enough ego to aim to be the best, but not too mush ego may make you loose because you forget this is a teamplay, that you also do mistake, and you always need to learn.
Take a fully baysian down-to-earth player, when he will start a game he will jsut say : "I Have 50% of chance to win that game" he will not climb, he dont have enough ego. But a top player have ego, because without it they wouldn't be that high, he wouldnt manage to hit Radiant and find a team, so we will never ask ourself "Is this guy lack of ego", we know he have enough, the problemwith toplayer will be that "he might have TOO MUSH ego"
Ill say DRX > GEN > T1 > TLN > NS (Wish is really not good for the future of APAC)
Love on you, more post like this and less shitpost please
Well, this is a systamical problem based on T2 having more male, more people hating on them, it would have been the same if it was reverse, it's not a male or female thing, it's a "Being hated and receiving more pressure because you are a GC player". Generality exist, and every human being suffer from hate and pressure in a hostile environment and this will have impact on their result regardless you want it or not. x)
heard >.>
I head an hypothesis where it seems female put them more pressure when they play male than female, and play less good, could that be the reason of this partial choke (in map one) ?
Discord