Moi
-
Posts
129 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Moi
-
-
4 hours ago, pachima said:
Why is it so relevant to have good matchups? You can't win if you have a bad matchup? You cant actually put skill into the game itself to win a game with bad matchup? Because sadly this is what everyone thinks, and as a result we have a very poor community mentality where everyone thinks copying teams >>>>, ignoring the fact they are completely clueless how to play said teams.
Yes, it's nice to have good matchups, but a solid team never has awful matchups (that are common) and that are 6-0d by literally everything, and thus allow their players to actually turn their odds in their favor by actually playing their game skillfully.
If you don't want to actually play your game, outplaying the enemy, but rather winning the game turn 1 on teampreview with a cool matchup, then this shouldn't be the game for you.
You have to play your best, no matter if you have a good or bad matchup, that "just get good" argument is irrelevant. I didn't mean that its completely necessary to have a perfect matchup to win but XelaKebert said that I can make a good counterteam team thinking in 6 different opp that cover most part of them, and thats just dumb.
I've already given my reasons why I don't like blind brackets so stop saying that I want it gone because I'm not good at playing.
- CristiDOX, Quinn010, redbluegreen and 1 other
-
4
-
2 hours ago, XelaKebert said:
You are reading way too far into what I am saying. PSL has no means of controlling scouting. That doesn't make it bad or any less exciting.
You've been saying scout is lame and should be prevented. Then for you events like psl where its impossible to prevent scout aren't as good as playing ladder or current automated tournaments, right?
2 hours ago, XelaKebert said:But scouting is still allowed, but it's harder to do. Which makes counter teaming more skill based.
What? How does it?
2 hours ago, XelaKebert said:It absolutely does not. It means you know how to deal with that team specifically. That's literally all it means. There isn't creativity in counter teaming someone unless you do so with something completely off the wall, which nobody does in a tournament in the first place.
nobody does that? lol. If you can predict what your opp is gonna use it makes it easier to use less used mons or unconventional sets, that's my entire point...
2 hours ago, XelaKebert said:No, it's to reduce the impact of scouting and emphasize skill over access to direct information. Instead of getting direct info on your next opponent you may have info on your next 5-6 possible opponents, which means building a robust team to deal with them and leaving very few gaps in coverage.
Unless those 6 opponents use something really similar there's no way you can have a good matchup against all of them lmao.
Do you even play competitive? its a genuine question
-
54 minutes ago, XelaKebert said:
No it's not and no removing it doesn't cheapen anything. Full stop. Scouting is an external factor that should be controlled.
I guess psl and pretty much every other big competitive event suck then cuz they all have scout.
54 minutes ago, XelaKebert said:If a player who only has one team can beat a player who has multiple, not only are they better than said player, but they show more skill in being able to adapt a single team. This is objective fact.
This would be true with scout allowed, if someone is able to win a tour with only one team even tho they could counterteam it then yes, it would be a very skilled player, but it doesn't mean much with blind brackets.
54 minutes ago, XelaKebert said:It was like that even before this change and it was like that before automated tournaments were a thing. That's not something that is going to go away. Everyone is going to play the builds they know to be safe while experimenting elsewhere with other builds.
Its not about testing a team what I'm saying, knowing what your opponent may use leaves room for creativity, use things that are not as good overall but against that person could do well. If you don't know what you're going to play against then best option is using more "standart" stuff.
54 minutes ago, XelaKebert said:Besides, it's not like you /can't/ scout. They made it harder for players to scout ahead.
This isn't good, only purpose of this system is preventing scout and it can't even do it properly.
54 minutes ago, XelaKebert said:The information that could be gleaned from that would yield the sensible solution for you to simply build a well rounded team that is capable of responding to most threats. If you can't do that without scouting then that is a you problem. Scouts are, and always will be, external forces that have the ability to shift the course of the tournament.
The fuck you know about what I can do?
-
7 hours ago, XelaKebert said:
Of course newer comp players will struggle, but the amount of time they struggle can be helped by keeping everyone blind as to who their opponent is. There is science in being able to win in a tournament as though it was the ladder system. While there is skill in counter-teaming, as pointed out, building a solid team that you can run for the whole tournament takes considerably more skill.
Yes, it makes it easier for them. thats the problem. Scouting is another layer of difficulty and if you take that it makes tournaments cheaper.
7 hours ago, XelaKebert said:Your access to scouts and extra teams should not be a factor in tournaments, ever.
Huh?
7 hours ago, XelaKebert said:The skill comes in knowing how to run the team in different situations. Not every match is going to be cookie cutter. A skilled player with a single, solidly built team should not feel like their work gets cheapened because they got scouted and counter-teamed. There is less emphasis on skill when you know what your opponent is going run.
A real skilled player is able to have a variety of solid builds. If he's only capable of playing well with one team then he's not that good.
7 hours ago, XelaKebert said:The random system doesn't take away from that. You can still use a different team each round as long as it was in your battle box before the tourny, iirc. The point I've made is that not everyone can do that or prefers to do that. Their effort shouldn't be cheapened by an external factor that can be controlled. Remember that with this system, no player has an inherent advantage over the other in terms of prior knowledge. You know just as much about your opponent's team as they know about your team. The random system is a far cry better than the alternative to controlling scouting, which would be disabling spectating during tournaments.
I know but like I said, no one has idea of what they're gonna face so people tend to run more commons builds that cover most threats, and seing those kind of teams every round is boring imo. If scout was allowed we could see more creative strats that are not as consistent against certain threats but since you could scout your opponent teams you have an idea of what he may use or not. Scouting is not a external factor at all, it has always been part of most events and will always be, regardless it is psl or live tournaments, etc.
- Quinn010, redbluegreen, NikhilR and 1 other
-
4
-
6 hours ago, pachima said:
Or maybe, just maybe, the guy who spammed said team actually built a good team and deserves to be rewarded.
It's not boring at all. I'd rather face an opponent with the same advantages and win the game based on skill than fishing for good matchup and get 6-0d or 6-0 back just because I got the matchup. And trust me, most teambuildings in the past fished for this type of matchup and because of that, they were inherently bad. I really can't tell how many times I saw semifinals or finals finishing in a couple of turns just because the matchup fish was so real that one of teams got completely vaporized by the other. Was the finalist winner the better player overall? No, he simply was the guy who got lucky the most with the matchup fishing.
As Xela pointed out, there is some skill regarding counterteaming, but its little compared to actually build a solid team overall and actually playing it effectively.
Most teams I see in tours nowadays are replicas from other builds. Do people who can't build for themselves deserve to be rewarded? Because thats what this type of brackets does. You can just copy one team and be able to win. I don't find entertaining playing in a system that feels pretty much the same than ladder.
There will always be uneven matchups, thing is, you get a say in that if you know what your opponent may use, and for that you need to predict, there's no luck in that. If the winner knew exactly what was his opponent going to use and he brought a good build to beat it, then yeah, he was the better player, because that takes skills. Nevertheless, there isn't much you can do about it in a blind bracket but pray that you don't get a bad MU.
- NikhilR, redbluegreen, Quinn010 and 1 other
-
4
-
1 hour ago, XelaKebert said:
Having two different standards on automated tournaments is not good design. A newer player could cut their teeth in CC but then be completely thrown off by the change in bracketing dipping into the standard tournaments.
I don't think it would be that hard for a new player. I mean, current system is pretty much winning games like if it was ladder till semifinals lol, there's no much science in that. They may struggle a bit in officials at the beginning yes, but if they want to improve I believe they would get better in a short period of time.
1 hour ago, XelaKebert said:The reason why seats are randomized between rounds is to lessen the impact of scouting. Scouting leads to players being able to strictly counter-team a player, which lessens the impact of skill.
I disaggre. There is more skill in bringing the best team for the occasion rather than just blindly spaming one. You can't strictly counter-team a player because your opponent can scout what you've been using and they're able to change teams.
3 hours ago, XelaKebert said:Tournaments are tests of skill, not a display of who has the most resources. Having a system which gives an inherent advantage to players with more resources diminishes the impact of skill based plays. If you know your opponent only has a single team and have built a team to strictly counter them, it really doesn't take much skill at that point. Don't get me wrong, it still does take some skill, but it's diminished by the fact that your prior knowledge and access to more resources has given you more advantage.
Again I don't agree with the skill part but I do understand that people with less resources are at disavantage. However, I prefer that and having the posibility of using differents teams and cool techs instead of playing same boring stuff every single round because your team has to be as consistent as posible against the whole tier
- Huargensy, redbluegreen, LeJovi and 3 others
-
6
-
I don't know if this is possible but I wouldn't mind community combats keep this kind of bracket so that newer players/ players who don't have much time to grind have a better chance of winning, and therefore they'd be more prepared for officials. But please, officials are boring af now, at least for me and I'm sure a lot of people feel the same. Just bring old system back, you had no need to change it in the first place.
-
zdfire vs zacmorales now
- KiiritoX and ZacMorales
-
2
-
-
-
-
@MknsZblex owes me 500k
@Coge owes me 200k
@Kaitha still owes me 100k from week 2
IGN: tMoi
Also, 500k on myself vs Umbramol
-
playing vs Madara after mat and lunarck
-
-
3 minutes ago, nicollassiittoo said:
Devil Bats (0) vs (0) Empoleon Bonapartists
M-Dubs: KokenoCastro vs badbaarsito
100k 200k 500k 1 take per bet. Void if sub/tie/activity/etc.take
-
3 hours ago, MknsZblex said:
UU: tmoi vs MadaraSixSix
500k each
me
-
The Trashtalking Taillows (0) vs (0) Just Blaziken It
OU1: Bluebreath vs Zokuru
The Ruthless Rotoms (0) vs (0) Nincadas with Attitude
NU: Kanicula vs Zymogen
Vermilion Villains (0) vs (0) Sailor Lunatones
OU2: Kiwikidd vs Senjutsuka @Coge
UU: Zhiko vs TohnR 200k
Devil Bats (0) vs (0) Empoleon Bonapartists
OU1: CristhianArce vs Schuchty @Coge
UU: tMoi vs MadaraSixSix 300k I took @MknsZblex bet
NU: MexiDany vs Cristi
Dubs: Santii vs Superman 200k @Kamowanthere
M-OU: Frags vs Getovaherez 200k100k each unless specified, void if sub/activity/disconnect
@TohnR owes me 200k (paid)
@Kaitha owes me 100k
-
-
-
Just now, Kaitha said:
The Ruthless Rotoms vs Devil Bats
OU1: Huargensy vs CristhianArce
Dubs: AkaruKokuyo vs Santiii
The Trashtalking Taillows vs Sailor Lunatones
OU1: BlueBreath vs Senjutsuka
OU2: Pablobacas vs DoubleJ
100k each bold
Take
-
The Ruthless Rotoms vs Devil Bats
Dubs: AkaruKokuyo vs Santiii
M-OU: Darker vs Frags
The Trashtalking Taillows vs Sailor Lunatones
OU1: BlueBreath vs Senjutsuka
UU: QuinnW vs Kaarnaa
M-NU: JunioPT vs SweeTforU
200k each.
-
-
-
Why not go back to the old tournament keys? (Not randomly)
in Suggestion Box
Posted · Edited by Moi
If scouting is a relevant skill then having it every round would make tournaments more interesting, no?
True, but like Nik said, thats not really a competitive argument. Best solution would be having more metods of getting those resources imo.
I agree hardcore fishing for matchup can be lame but I don't think we should have this system just because some people don't know how to exploit weaknesses and still having a decent team overall. Besides, counterteaming isn't even necessary. You can have a few prebuilts teams and do fine.
And for the copying teams thing Pachima and Tohnr mentioned, yes, it has always been a thing ,but if scout was allowed in earlier rounds you''d be able to punish players who do it because they don't know much of a tier or aren't good teambuilders overall.