Thread has been deleted
Last comment
Legend Status
World causality 
Do u think valve's legend status rule is satisfying? I feel like in every major, half of the legends come from nowhere. A those teams, most of the time, get eliminated at the next major. Also they don't do much after major. On the other hand, some top teams, like G2 and Faze, even NiP, have to play for qualifiers because of poor BO1 performance regardless of how good they were throughout the year. Thorin was suggesting that Valve should invite top teams as in legend status teams. Then challengers come from Minors. I kinda agree with him for better competition. What do you guys think?
2018-01-23 06:18
#1
 | 
India sad_indian_guy 
nt Virtus.BOT
2018-01-23 06:19
yeah, that's what I'm talking about :)
2018-01-23 06:23
#3
 | 
Mexico romoresp 
i like that valve gives opportunities to small teams Have a Mexican day! -VeryMexicanGuy
2018-01-23 06:25
Hi, my Mexican friend Small teams can still come from Minors and qualifiers. I don't mean let's put top16 for the major, but at least quarter finals wouldn't be that ordinary. I just looked at the top8 ranking and 6 of those are legends now. Not that bad actually!
2018-01-23 06:34
#9
 | 
Mexico romoresp 
that is true my friend Have a pleasant Mexican day! -VeryMexicanGuy
2018-01-23 06:36
ahahahahahh
2018-01-23 07:40
Exactly. This is one of the best group of legends we've ever had.
2018-01-23 07:42
#4
 | 
India akashcsgo 
there is no problem in it valve just dont want cs to be restricted to just 8 teams if they dont get experience to play with top teams how will they beat them
2018-01-23 06:27
but those 8 teams can also change depending on their performance in the year.
2018-01-23 06:36
not true in the slightest this major is the first time more than 2 legend spots were changed at any given time excluding disqualifications
2018-01-23 06:27
#6
 | 
United States STERBENVII 
Actually, at most majors, usually around 5 to 6 of the teams retain their legends status. But this time, only 2 did, Fnatic and SK, who are facing each other in quarters.
2018-01-23 06:29
Was cool when Majors were every three or four months. Sucks when Majors are 6-8 months apart. Need to switch to ranking based invite/seeding system because teams get really shitty and then are obligated to keep a dysfunctional core together to retain a Legends spot even if their team is trash and have awful results and an extremely low probability of making it out of groups or the first stages or whatever.
2018-01-23 06:30
yeah that's one of the issues in the current system. They get lazy and lose their passion to play for victory. And those saying, give small teams a chance, minors, qualifiers are there to help them.
2018-01-23 06:41
Maybe with just 4 teams being legends, and 12 qualified. So could be a 24-team qualifier and more oportunity to 'wildcard' regions to show something(like cis did, or more teams from oceania/South america).
2018-01-23 06:37
you sound reasonable. 4 invite makes more sense than 8. That would also give more chance to bottom ranked teams.
2018-01-23 06:43
#14
 | 
Switzerland sovereiign 
I was thinking about this the other day. I think if legends are going to exist it should only be the final four. Eight is too much and closes the opportunity for too many other teams. Let the teams that make the semi's qualify for the next major automatically but everyone else have to qualify. This current major proved that legends including 8 teams is a bad idea because so many unworthy teams got included. I noticed this months ago when I made a thread about how only 2 of the 8 legend teams were still even considered top teams and of those I included Astralis and they flopped in groups. There definitely needs to be a change in the process. Especially since CS is so competitive now with many teams having the chance to make it to the majors.
2018-01-23 07:05
Imagine inviting teams as Legends over others,and then those teams bomb out in groups
2018-01-23 07:33
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.