I did well in 2018 so I’m inclined to agree :)
My takeaway from Vegas: a) both specialist and Bo3 are terrible formats for proving an edge b) the 2019 qualification system for GM is not reliable and even GMs would be insanely unlikely to qualify c) fix (a) and (b) d) The 2018 system was better at identifying the best players.pic.twitter.com/X5jDMsjT9w
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- End of conversation
-
-
-
The left column is last year's HCT points?
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Pretty much this
-
I don't get what was wrong with conquest. Would conquest with side-boards fix what ever was wrong with conquest?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Problems with 2018 were : - too hard to compete for players without teams / amateurs - ladder as it was is dangerous for players health. It's good to have a ladder but dangerous to have only that. I just don't get why Blizzard doesn't just use a clone of ATP/WTA system.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'm waiting for somebody to put forth a solution that solves the apparent issues with Specialist and GM because the amount of defining what isn't working without what potentially would by a lot of the community is getting sort of exhausting.
-
I mean we need to run experiments IMO, I don't like the idea of just "designing" a system without proper testing. I don't feel like specialist was properly tested, but think we've moved in the wrong direction. I would rather it be 100% ladder qualifiers than the current system.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.