Caseking0KILLERFISH2CSGL0Epsilon2Vega Squadron1Epsilon2EventMaps / statscache (16:8)inferno (14:16)overpass (7:16)OtherNo demo - MatchpageJSG1Born Of Fire2EventMaps / statsmirage (16:10)dust2 (8:16)cache (14:16)OtherNo demo - MatchpageGoalie0YOUR OWN MIRACLE2Born Of Fire0TyLoo2TamuluS16sensational.kr4
Second episode of [POD]Cast featuring fnatic's CGO Patrik "cArn" Sättermon, our writer Tomi "lurppis" Kovanen and Duncan "Thorin" Shields has now been released as VOD.
A night since originally airing live on Monday evening, the VOD has now been uploaded on fnatic TV's YouTube channel. Following last week's format, they once again spent over an hour talking about all things Counter-Strike.
[POD]Cast #2 started with a talk about fnatic's roster changes, VeryGames' departure from SLTV StarSeries V and the possible real reasons behind it, before moving to talk about the qualifier formats for tournaments.
After suggesting new ways to organize the online qualification system, Shields suggested implementing certain optimizations from QuakeWorld being brought over to CS to make online games as even as possible.
To end this week's [POD]Cast, motivated by a thread on our site regarding Nicolaj "Nico" Jensen's MVP award from Cadred at Mad Catz, the trio talked about the flaws of the MVP-award system in eSports and how to make it better.
It's never mine or anyone's intention to interrupt another, it's just something that happens in Podcasts due to the reason mentioned above.
Post edited 2013-03-05 16:01:54
crAn > you
Afterwards you are saying it is a joke, don't really see where this is funny whatsoever.
regarding the problem of ESC: they are now in a German organisation and afaik ESC got a bootcamp-base in Germany (or had one and is building a new one now?). they should play the important internet matches from Germany.
Post edited 2013-03-05 15:48:42
Look at vitrus.Pro they do well online , ESEA, fnatic frag out league you name it. You can play with 60-70 i ping, against 20-40 with out it really is such a big factor that it become a huge problem :D
Post edited 2013-03-05 15:55:09
so the problem of ESC is probably more a psychological problem...
worse communication and less passion when playing online...
or they just think linke "we always failed online, so we probably gonna lose this online match as well" and then their confidence is gone.
the fact that they failed 7 times to qualify online for a offline tournament but then (after they found an other way to qualify) they actualy won 4 of those 7 offline tournaments is just stunning. :D
I mean normally there are these "online only" teams who only win online tournaments (thanks to cheats and unfair tools) but fail at every offline tournament....ESC is the exact opposite :D
Post edited 2013-03-05 16:01:47
i mean at this stage all orgas are having enough high bills for travelings of teams on lans.... i mean there arent that much spectators to spend cash foolishly.
It's embarrassing to see them losing against teams like Alternate.
If they don't improve themself in online matches, there will come a time where they simply won't attend big tournaments anymore. Carmac can't save their asses any longer.
Or were you thinking about offline events which are independent from the actual big tournament?! Let me explain it to you Scandinavians why this isn't possible:
Outside Scandinavia there are almost no small offline tournaments left! For example in Germany we only have like 5-10% of the LANS we had in 2004. There are simply not enough open offline tournaments anymore - and almost none that would bring you any credibility.
How should a unknown but very good team of young talented players find their way into the big tournaments? They NEED online qualifiers.
I'm for the hybrid-system: A certain number of invited teams (which get invited according to some always-up-to-date global ranking) and a certain number of team that qualified in online qualifier + maybe an BYOC tournament(of course not every tournament organisation is able to hold a BYOC; only an BYOC wouldn't be a fair solution either because it only supports amateur teams from the local area - amateur teams from far away simply can't afford it).
Post edited 2013-03-05 16:37:03
but ye, MVP awards were always a joke. that will never change. having only a jury wouldn't be a good solution either since the members of that jury would most likely be friends of some of the nominated players and therefore not fair-minded.
And I don't think the MVP awards have ever been a joke around here, even with the fan votes (of course I was the one doing all that, so maybe I'm not the most objective).
I stand behind every one of them, even the karrigan one which is obviously the most disputable and for good reasons. But I can still make a solid case for it, and it was also one of our closest votes ever.
If the tournament someone decides to sponsor directly invites all the best teams, it leaves the online qualifiers to semi-known and unknown teams. That means they will get far less exposure throughout the season and during the qualification process, which is in comparison much longer than the 3-day LAN event that follows it. In addition to that, the qualifications often hype up the upcoming LAN, create stories with upsets and rivalries, and give chances to less known teams to become known. With the expansion of streams in the past 2-3 years this has become particularly important.
So it makes much more sense to have NiP compete in various online leagues all the time than to have them automatically qualified for every LAN event, as a lot more people will watch NiP play online than the other teams, which automatically means the brand gets more exposure.
With ESL's past IEM events when the Poles got in through the back door, they got the best of both worlds, everyone played online in the most prestigious league/qualification process, and later all the best teams were on LAN. I can't really blame them for anything, they always did it by the rules, even in that UMX case mentioned in the podcast :)
I guess that might be a too global way of looking at it, but the ones who give the money have the right to expect the exposure. Ofc there are tournaments who don't really depend on that so much, as their sponsors focus more on the main event itself and not so much on CS in particular, like DreamHack, ESWC, GameGune, Cph Games. But the ones we've got going in the next few months like EMS, SLTV StarSeries, ESEA all have online leagues for those purposes.
And besides, isn't it better for the fans to watch all the best teams play few times a week than just once a month at a major LAN?
i would rather watch nip, vg, esc and na`vi at lan than all of them online and three of them at lan.
is there any who would rather watch n!faculty at esea finals than esc?
Post edited 2013-03-05 18:08:41
I would rather watch them all regularly online and then on LAN, and I would also add 2-4 more teams like n!faculty who could challenge them. But that's not what the format allows and we're not the ones paying for brand exposure.
What if ESEA just invited those four to LAN without the online season? We wouldn't see ESC vs Virtus.pro triple overtime match, we wouldn't see n!faculty beating VG twice, we wouldn't see many other interesting matches in the past few months and CS:GO itself would have 50% less exposure on a daily basis.
Besides, we will see them all at Cph Games, DH and the rest of the sign-up-and-you're-invited events which don't have online leagues and qualifiers.
germans are patriotic people, they cheer for their landsmen, even if its in curling there are people still going to it.
as soon as n!faculty plays, all german players watches. you flame and talk so much bullshit
ESC, NiP, verygames lost to n!faculty, infact its a solid team. they do deserve this slot and is a better team than mousesports
u are still locked in the 1.6 mentality because u havent fully switched to this new game but claiming that esc should get the slot is very stupid
nfaculty is the only team besides epsilon who have beaten the world top in csgo.
ur favoritism disgustes me and its a new game where ESC is just another top10 team in the world. n!faculty beated esc and has better vs stats.
its 2-1 to n!faculty in matches so its deserved.
Post edited 2013-03-06 11:31:18
Winning online and preforming well at LAN are two very different things. Everybody regardless of LAN experience will play different online(more aggressive etc), if they cant do it on LAN it dosnt mean anything.
Post edited 2013-03-06 14:57:39
8-16 vs fm.toxic (inferno)
4-16 vs verygames (dust2)
16-11 vs esc (inferno)
16-10 vs anexis (inferno)
0-2 vs nip
1-2 vs area51 (won on inferno)
they were pretty good on inferno at the time and made playoffs over esc due to head-to-head tiebreaker with same number of points but make no mistake, getting two wins in the group stage is not a good performance, just lucky that they somehow advanced with it
their other very unmemorable placings include:
2nd eps germany
17-24th at dreamhack winter
13-16th at mad catz cs:so invitational
very good online, hardly average on lan.
Post edited 2013-03-07 15:25:36
That gotten out of the way i'll speak about my opinion about invite based tournaments, which i think are great but should not be the sole tournaments in the scene. It is great to be able to see lans where teams like Esports Serbia in Vienna that nobody knows off goes, and beats some teams that are considered way better than them, the same way in which the champions league has unknown quantities coming in and doing really well, as Rubin Kazan for example a couple of years ago, or the Porto - Monaco Final. (since we like doing football comparisons). Also the online / world cup qualifier comparison doesn't work. AS the world cup is played on a couple different fields in one country, with a certain weather, football field, and temperature while the qualifiers are played in various different fields around the world making it two different ways of qualifying and then playing the tournaments just like in CS.
Finally about the MVP situation, i think this is very situational and subjective, yet in this case the vote had nothing more than face value, so it didn't really matter, but in my opinion if for example, in football terms again, Faroe Islands (no disrespect for anyone from Faroe Islands) qualify for the world cup and get 3rd place, with a great goalkeeper, then yes he will probably win MVP, as nobody would expect them to get 3rd place.
Im sorry if my english isn't great. Anyways those are my two cents
Another thing is saying you are shit, you will never be good shut up unknown
Post edited 2013-03-05 18:54:59
felt like they were mocking the rejuvenated fnatic, but the problem is that they are all 3 still in the 1.6 mentality.
jokern did good job, was fnatics best player as u said, should be credited for event.
i think reason why fnatic failed was too much pressure and a little too less experience.
overall it was a team with growing potentials, but an organization like fnatic should have based the pickup with an indepth analysis of the players individually and then come with the conclusion.
felt that friis n the rest just picked up players without knowing what they were doing because of the fact that they wanted success so they took players out there as if they were candy
You're talking about the best teams and how it would get you more viewers.
Biggest nonesense. Without a German team representing their country the views would drop dramatically, same goes for other countries too. In fact it would actually help the community the most if there is a top 5 German, American & Russian team.
Also agree with Gugli, it was pretty disrespectful of Thorin toward Rytter considering he's one of the most well-liked and respected players in the Danish scene and has been for a number of years, I'd imagine he does have a fair amount of fans. That's also without mentioning the fact that both him and JOKERN performed well with the team (JOKERN was excellent at HKLAN).
I understand the whole 1.6-bubble but, as cArn said, you have to respect that CS:GO is a new game that features both 1.6 and CS:S players and contrary to what a lot of people (generally morons) think, they're pretty equal in terms of ability.
Post edited 2013-03-05 19:37:38
With all due respect, a person like carn shouldnt consider doing podcasts with outstanding internetjerk like trollpis
what u said about him not being a part of scene is absolutely right. rytter was infact trying to create a team with visions in fnatic but failed since the guys were too unexperienced.
css players in this game does have an advantage, if u look at statistics in the top10, most teams are source-based teams. a few has 1.6 players but its because they managed to adapt to the game with good resources and fps-abilities.
carn should have done a more indepth analysis in regards of what he believes will come instead of just spewing out what he thinks
What I really dislike is that the tournaments in general just offer too few spots for everyone who wants to attend. I'm sure that this often happens.
Also the ESEA system sucks I totally agree and n!faculty won't do any damage at the finals. Even the american teams have a decent chance to win versus them. I wouldn't underestimate them anyways. I'm sure that ESC would've done a great show on the finals. Even that they haven't beaten the best yet they always play close on lan. 15:15 versus Navi, 11:4 lead versus NiP and lost 1:2 to VeryGames.
I'm not that long in the competitive CS scene as others but if I know it right some years back there were even lan qualifiers for every country to attend this one lan tournament. Like Kode5, WCG and others. I'd love to see this again.
The admins of the ESL are garbage. It doesn't matter what kind of admin it is. If it's just a community admin and whatnot. I remember the last online qualifiers for IEM in 1.6 and in the first round there got like 16 of 32 disqualified because they were using net_graph. Hilarious since it's allowed like everywhere except there and I'm not sure if anyone is using that for cheating. haha
Since it's CS:GO now I don't really see a big problem anymore with having a ping of 50 or something.
Post edited 2013-03-05 19:52:19
On the topic of the difference between the Quake community and the CS community:
The mods made for Quake to grant equal ping would be very good for CS online competition wise. The problem with the CS community is finding someone willing to code it, or tournaments picking it up.
A big example of this is maps. There have been no real new maps for ages. The big tournaments simply do not pick them up. I think a lot more effort should be put on designing and picking up new maps for tournament play.
The old maps have been played over a million times. Obviously also because they are very good maps, but refreshment is much needed.
For example de_train in CS 1.6 was in my opinion the best/diffucult map. Both from a player as a spectator point of view. Where in CS:GO it seems more forced upon because we used to play this map in 1.6, even though the GO version is not that good. In 1.6 train matches were by far my favourite to spectate.
We are hanging on to the old maps because of their legacy, even though they might not have translated their 'features' which made them so loved from 1.6 -> CS:GO.
The community and big tournaments should be more accepting on throwing in a different version of a map (like fixing Inferno Banana) or adding completely new ones.
Obviously having a new map being played requires the big teams to make new tactics on them, I think it is more so the players stopping the new maps from showing up in the map pool rather then the modding community itself.
Maybe an interesting topic to discuss on your next Podcast?
Is CS growing boring with the same maps over and over. I'm still watching after 13 years so probably not BUT, why is there no much needed refreshment.
I agreed on most things except the MVP thingy, I posted on the other topic why I voted for Nico. But I agree that if it was named "player, fan appreciated the most" would be more correct. Which in reality isn't a big deal.
Hoping you will invite players to the show in the future that gets to answer questions from the three of you and from the public aswell.
K/d > Mvp.
Most amount of frags (not including overtimes) > Mvp.
My conclusion of this is either have the mvp vote but only ask the players because fanboys dont care who really was mvp.
Most amount of frags (not including overtimes) in my opnion is the best way of saying who did best at the tournament.