In the AU scene, there have been a lot of low "division 1" (not necessarily invite level, but it's our top skill division so whatever) teams that have stuck it out for quite a while.

Bear in mind we're a different scene and as such skill divisions etc will be different to NA (no shit).

vivid reprisal (a team comprised mostly of admins, funnily enough I guess) have been together for 2, nearly 3 years and have worked their way from Division 3 (mid open I guess) all the way to a low/mid division 1 team (so low-mid IM I guess). For the most part, there have been a few members that have been there consistently season to season, but there are some new faces. The reason why some members left in the past was not necessarily the teams performance, but for personal reasons for the most part (and from my knowledge, occurred at the END of the season).

Sure in Australia we don't have the "structure" of ESEA, let alone a LAN as prestigious as ESEA for Division 1 finals etc, but as Ruwin said: people that have gotten into the top skill division through hard work and mettle have been proud of their accomplishment and quite a few of the teams have stuck it out for continuous seasons despite their "sub-par" performance. I'm not trying to compare the skill of Division 1 to Invite because for the most part the skill differences are pretty obvious. What I am trying to do is basically further reiterate Ruwin's previous posts.

I think people just need to stop being bitches at their teams performance and stick it out. If you stick it out with your team through thick and thin, THAT is where you start seeing yourselves becoming better.

TL;DR - don't leave your team (especially mid-season for the matter) unless it is actually important. Stop being a bitch.

On another note - Ozfortress has the ongoing "Ozfortress League" where teams that want to get into OWL (the main league) must prove their worth (ie, not disband in a week) before they even get considered for OWL. Maybe a similar idea is needed for ESEA?

EDIT: I guess it helps that the AU leagues are free - but I think my points are still relevant for the most part.

mouse4 all the way bby gurl

Pretty cool. I myself like using a scoreboard for "positive reinforcement" I suppose for the mental sake, but I can understand that working in the opposite way for others.

:))))))))))))))))))

ok now I'm just shitposting too much - I'm outta here.

swag on my dick

im not 12 im 4

swag yolo monkey face xd

gotta wear da tag to get da swag le xD

Gotta get that electronic sports swag

good thread

I'd be happy to either cast or coach some of these time permitting (I have a decent amount of time for a few weeks)

yuki` on gamesurge IRC or just add me on steam I guess (prefer IRC as I don't add many people to steam :x).

We just weren't ready for him.

I think we take the prize for having the best hacker in TF2:

Presenting sheepy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5a2WB9JWok

Sorry for the apparent "shitposting" - I'm just promoting discussion. I'm merely just trying to find out more about your idea, not what you just said in your OP and what's flailing around in my imagination. If what you were after was "so and so" from multiple players, I'll bow out and let you continue. Not trying to "win an argument" or anything, to be blunt.

I was merely satisfying my curiosity.

It isn't what you wrote, alas, but what I inferred from what you had said. I don't think it's a problem with the games at all - just the inherent nature of people. They start watching a live-stream of a game, and since they're (typically) on the computer and using a web browser, they often dawdle off elsewhere and forget about the thing.

Cut a soccer field in half - I dunno. Try whatever you want - I obviously can't stop you (lol). You seem awfully keen on the idea and the apparent fact that it will get TF2 more viewership.

And I did give you a critique of the idea - I said it would remove a large number of situations from the game, in turn removing a great deal of decisions/decision making (amongst other things). It just appears you didn't read my post in full.

This is about vods, not the actual live game? I'm confused. You can't really compare the start of an SC2 game to the start of a TF2 game. In the first 3-4 minutes of Sc2 games, players are typically just making workers and building infrastructure at their base. In the first 3-4 minutes of a TF2 game, a team CAN be up 1 or even 2-0 against another team. So "bigm8husky" speeding up games really has nothing to do with the actual game itself.

Not only that, but husky's VODs are pretty different compared to live casts.

Trying to see the correlation here.

Seems like something that would change the game significantly, and I feel negatively for that matter.

A lot of the really tough decisions that need to be made (along with execution) come with the pushes onto 4th CPs. Removing points like spire (one of the most interesting & studied points in the game) just seems like you're removing a big chunk of the game. The game may be sped up, sure, but doing so removes x amount of possible interesting situations that can arise in the game - leaving us with a lot less possible things to see occuring in games.

Look at it in the perspective if you were to do it to another game: imagine if duel maps in quake were limited to only a yellow armor, an LG, and a rocket launcher with 2x 50 health's. Sure, it'd be fast and "exciting", but you're removing SO MUCH from the game. I guess this isn't the best analogy since quake3/QL was a 10 min duel to whoever got the most kills, whereas TF2 is first to 5 and 2 30 min halves, but it should still give some idea of what you could do to the game.

I mean, Starcraft games can potentially go for 3+ hours in a bo7 (mind you the different game speed, and the stars would need to align for game series to go for that long consistently), that doesn't stop it being a good spectator Esport.

I think stalemates are good. I mean sure, 10+ minutes attacking/defending snakewater last can be seen as "NOT FUN", but the good stalemates that occur between mid -> 4th CP are where you get to see the decision making by each team, and whether they prevail or not because of said decisions. To be fair, the only reason why extended stalemates happen are because the top teams are so close in skill/knowledge, that it can be said that it's a mutual respect to the other team where they're basically saying "Hey, we can beat you on even ground, you can beat us on even ground. We're going to play this until x gets an advantage, then whoever has the bigger advantage WILL (should) win". To that credit, good stalemates happen at last attacks/defences also.