synchrork/angry rant I repeat every seasonWhat a professionally worded response!
The ESEA way of course.
ESEA s13 Open Preview
posted in
TF2 General Discussion
[quote=synchro][quote=rk]/angry rant I repeat every season[/quote]
What a professionally worded response![/quote]
The ESEA way of course.
What a professionally worded response![/quote]
The ESEA way of course.
No, this is the same shit I put up with when we were all at GotFrag, too - the community has apparently evolved very little over that time. I'm sticking up for my writer, plain and simple. Please, friends, please keep pointing there are only 10 teams in the rankings, your stunning lack of common sense with that point is astounding.
Guaranteed three weeks into the season, no one will have a problem with the Open rankings and this entire conversation will be forgotten. Like it always is.
No, this is the same shit I put up with when we were all at GotFrag, too - the community has apparently evolved very little over that time. I'm sticking up for my writer, plain and simple. Please, friends, please keep pointing there are only 10 teams in the rankings, your stunning lack of common sense with that point is astounding.
Guaranteed three weeks into the season, no one will have a problem with the Open rankings and this entire conversation will be forgotten. Like it always is.
Guaranteed three weeks into the season, no one will have a problem with the Open rankings and this entire conversation will be forgotten. Like it always is.
I get that it's really tough to do a preseason evaluation of a 60 team division, because it's hard to say which team will be one to watch before any matches have been played and a clear upper sub division has been established. Because of this, I would almost rather see interviews of recurring teams, interesting players that have started over in open to try and climb back up, etc. rather than just reading a bunch of guesses (nothing against your opinions, but as you yourself has mentioned, it's hard to come up with anything concrete week 0).
I'm going to respond to this post, because it's part of one of the only reasonable posts on this entire thread.
The decision of *what* Deathanchor writes is taken out of his hand - it is the shared opinion of me / Few / other senior ESEA writers that the pre-season rankings stuff are of little value, since even at its most thorough and in-depth, all of its pontificating becomes irrelevant within the first rounds of the first matches. We specifically instruct our writers not to spend too much time on it because of that reason... and because no one will agree with them anyway.
[quote]
I get that it's really tough to do a preseason evaluation of a 60 team division, because it's hard to say which team will be one to watch before any matches have been played and a clear upper sub division has been established. Because of this, I would almost rather see interviews of recurring teams, interesting players that have started over in open to try and climb back up, etc. rather than just reading a bunch of guesses (nothing against your opinions, but as you yourself has mentioned, it's hard to come up with anything concrete week 0).
[/quote]
I'm going to respond to this post, because it's part of one of the only reasonable posts on this entire thread.
The decision of *what* Deathanchor writes is taken out of his hand - it is the shared opinion of me / Few / other senior ESEA writers that the pre-season rankings stuff are of little value, since even at its most thorough and in-depth, all of its pontificating becomes irrelevant within the first rounds of the first matches. We specifically instruct our writers not to spend too much time on it because of that reason... and because no one will agree with them anyway.
I get that it's really tough to do a preseason evaluation of a 60 team division, because it's hard to say which team will be one to watch before any matches have been played and a clear upper sub division has been established. Because of this, I would almost rather see interviews of recurring teams, interesting players that have started over in open to try and climb back up, etc. rather than just reading a bunch of guesses (nothing against your opinions, but as you yourself has mentioned, it's hard to come up with anything concrete week 0).
[/quote]
I'm going to respond to this post, because it's part of one of the only reasonable posts on this entire thread.
The decision of *what* Deathanchor writes is taken out of his hand - it is the shared opinion of me / Few / other senior ESEA writers that the pre-season rankings stuff are of little value, since even at its most thorough and in-depth, all of its pontificating becomes irrelevant within the first rounds of the first matches. We specifically instruct our writers not to spend too much time on it because of that reason... and because no one will agree with them anyway.
Most of the posts aren't even talking about his opinion about teams. They're talking about the numerous errors he made regarding team rosters and grammar. Fog only made one error with the rosters when he published his preseason rankings and he corrected it very quickly. It shouldn't be that hard to check rosters before submitting preseason articles, especially since this is a criticism we've been giving for a while.
Most of the posts aren't even talking about his opinion about teams. They're talking about the numerous errors he made regarding team rosters and grammar. Fog only made one error with the rosters when he published his preseason rankings and he corrected it very quickly. It shouldn't be that hard to check rosters before submitting preseason articles, especially since this is a criticism we've been giving for a while.
just don't try to kill this site too, rk
I don't think there is anything wrong with people pointing out mistakes in an article. Yeah he can't predict who is going to be where, it's only preseason. But people have the right to correct him.
just don't try to kill this site too, rk
I don't think there is anything wrong with people pointing out mistakes in an article. Yeah he can't predict who is going to be where, it's only preseason. But people have the right to correct him.
I don't think there is anything wrong with people pointing out mistakes in an article. Yeah he can't predict who is going to be where, it's only preseason. But people have the right to correct him.
Again, totally fine with corrections, it's nice to know what players have swapped to what classes - I was pissed at the asshats like 13, 15 or 23's of the world, and I feel justified in that.
And GotFrag needed to die, you can't still have your pants in a tizzy over that after all these years. If anything else, it needed to die so enigma could create a place like this - which is 1000% better than GotFrag ever was.
Again, totally fine with corrections, it's nice to know what players have swapped to what classes - I was pissed at the asshats like 13, 15 or 23's of the world, and I feel justified in that.
And GotFrag needed to die, you can't still have your pants in a tizzy over that after all these years. If anything else, it needed to die so enigma could create a place like this - which is 1000% better than GotFrag ever was.
And GotFrag needed to die, you can't still have your pants in a tizzy over that after all these years. If anything else, it needed to die so enigma could create a place like this - which is 1000% better than GotFrag ever was.
Hey deathanchor, so I read the first page of this thread and skimmed the rest (I'm at work). I know you don't get paid very much to do these predictions and articles but I think if next time, once you have looked at the rosters and picked the teams you think are deserving of being in the power rankings, if you took a little time to message someone from each of those teams to get a little bit of accurate info for the team write ups you wouldn't have as many complaints.
Hey deathanchor, so I read the first page of this thread and skimmed the rest (I'm at work). I know you don't get paid very much to do these predictions and articles but I think if next time, once you have looked at the rosters and picked the teams you think are deserving of being in the power rankings, if you took a little time to message someone from each of those teams to get a little bit of accurate info for the team write ups you wouldn't have as many complaints.
thrasheronce you have looked at the rosters and picked the teams you think are deserving of being in the power rankings, if you took a little time to message someone from each of those teams to get a little bit of accurate info for the team write ups you wouldn't have as many complaints.
100% agree with this. maybe some player interviews with some quotes and thoughts of the players.
[quote=thrasher]once you have looked at the rosters and picked the teams you think are deserving of being in the power rankings, if you took a little time to message someone from each of those teams to get a little bit of accurate info for the team write ups you wouldn't have as many complaints.[/quote]
100% agree with this. maybe some player interviews with some quotes and thoughts of the players.
100% agree with this. maybe some player interviews with some quotes and thoughts of the players.
rkAgain, totally fine with corrections, it's nice to know what players have swapped to what classes - I was pissed at the asshats like 13, 15 or 23's of the world, and I feel justified in that.
And GotFrag needed to die, you can't still have your pants in a tizzy over that after all these years. If anything else, it needed to die so enigma could create a place like this - which is 1000% better than GotFrag ever was.
my pants have been tizzied
[quote=rk]Again, totally fine with corrections, it's nice to know what players have swapped to what classes - I was pissed at the asshats like 13, 15 or 23's of the world, and I feel justified in that.
And GotFrag needed to die, you can't still have your pants in a tizzy over that after all these years. If anything else, it needed to die so enigma could create a place like this - which is 1000% better than GotFrag ever was.[/quote]
my pants have been tizzied
And GotFrag needed to die, you can't still have your pants in a tizzy over that after all these years. If anything else, it needed to die so enigma could create a place like this - which is 1000% better than GotFrag ever was.[/quote]
my pants have been tizzied
deathanchor is actually rk's eight year old son
it's the only logical explanation
deathanchor is actually rk's eight year old son
it's the only logical explanation
it's the only logical explanation
I feel like I have to chime in on this thread.
I personally think Deathanchor has the hardest division to write for, having to deal with 60 teams in Open while I have to deal with only 21 teams in IM. The main issue I see with writing about Open in general is the sheer size of the division, having to look through 60 full rosters, trying to figure out which teams are going to be considered the best in the pre-season. It's even harder when it's a mix of sandbaggers, new players that no one has ever heard of, and players who've been around Open before.
Another thing to realize about this is the amount of time one would have to put into getting organized in such a manner, contacting teams (which can be near impossible in some situations I've ran into), producing and revising rankings, the list goes on. From what I've seen with the open teams, players are moving around like crazy, switching between rosters and possibly positions as well. I can tell you for sure that I would not want to write for open with all the things considered.
Now for the actual content, the rankings all looked pretty fair and paints a good picture of the Open season. The errors and such probably could have been avoided, but again it's harder to write for Open than any other division in TF2.
Great job on the article, I know how much work you put into it
I feel like I have to chime in on this thread.
I personally think Deathanchor has the hardest division to write for, having to deal with 60 teams in Open while I have to deal with only 21 teams in IM. The main issue I see with writing about Open in general is the sheer size of the division, having to look through 60 full rosters, trying to figure out which teams are going to be considered the best in the pre-season. It's even harder when it's a mix of sandbaggers, new players that no one has ever heard of, and players who've been around Open before.
Another thing to realize about this is the amount of time one would have to put into getting organized in such a manner, contacting teams (which can be near impossible in some situations I've ran into), producing and revising rankings, the list goes on. From what I've seen with the open teams, players are moving around like crazy, switching between rosters and possibly positions as well. I can tell you for sure that I would not want to write for open with all the things considered.
Now for the actual content, the rankings all looked pretty fair and paints a good picture of the Open season. The errors and such probably could have been avoided, but again it's harder to write for Open than any other division in TF2.
Great job on the article, I know how much work you put into it
I personally think Deathanchor has the hardest division to write for, having to deal with 60 teams in Open while I have to deal with only 21 teams in IM. The main issue I see with writing about Open in general is the sheer size of the division, having to look through 60 full rosters, trying to figure out which teams are going to be considered the best in the pre-season. It's even harder when it's a mix of sandbaggers, new players that no one has ever heard of, and players who've been around Open before.
Another thing to realize about this is the amount of time one would have to put into getting organized in such a manner, contacting teams (which can be near impossible in some situations I've ran into), producing and revising rankings, the list goes on. From what I've seen with the open teams, players are moving around like crazy, switching between rosters and possibly positions as well. I can tell you for sure that I would not want to write for open with all the things considered.
Now for the actual content, the rankings all looked pretty fair and paints a good picture of the Open season. The errors and such probably could have been avoided, but again it's harder to write for Open than any other division in TF2.
Great job on the article, I know how much work you put into it
rkAnd GotFrag needed to die, you can't still have your pants in a tizzy over that after all these years. If anything else, it needed to die so enigma could create a place like this - which is 1000% better than GotFrag ever was.
You tried killing it to get people to use the esea forums instead let's not pretend like you had the community's greatest good in mind or some preternatural ability to sense that tf.tv would ever be a thing. Mind you had we never lost news/demos and some dod:s player didn't go insane we very well would probably still be on gotfrag
[quote=rk]And GotFrag needed to die, you can't still have your pants in a tizzy over that after all these years. If anything else, it needed to die so enigma could create a place like this - which is 1000% better than GotFrag ever was.[/quote]
You tried killing it to get people to use the esea forums instead let's not pretend like you had the community's greatest good in mind or some preternatural ability to sense that tf.tv would ever be a thing. Mind you had we never lost news/demos and some dod:s player didn't go insane we very well would probably still be on gotfrag
You tried killing it to get people to use the esea forums instead let's not pretend like you had the community's greatest good in mind or some preternatural ability to sense that tf.tv would ever be a thing. Mind you had we never lost news/demos and some dod:s player didn't go insane we very well would probably still be on gotfrag
Please
sign in through STEAM
to post a comment.