Re: DRE: CTS community mail

  • From: Ryan Williams <ryan820509@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 19:26:08 +0200

*roflmao*
On 25 May 2015 19:16, "Stephen Scheidel" <gieroadsteve@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Off topic

This is why KI suck most of the dicks.

How the fvck are people expected to be hype about this garbage 1997 N64
looking shit ?

​

On 25 May 2015 at 19:12, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

It's hard to cater both to the pros and casual players. It's not like
they can say "pros only" or "casuals only" tournament.

There's more casual players than pros...so in terms of
marketing...they're choices with their rules was fine. In terms of trying
to be internationally recognized...not so much.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Stephen Scheidel <gieroadsteve@xxxxxxxxx
wrote:

Yeah I agree, getting raped and going home is truer to day to day life
for most of us anyway.
Life is not a party people.

On 25 May 2015 at 19:06, Ilitirit Sama <ilitirit@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

At the end of the day the tournament is more about marketing to the
masses than to find the best players. DE would have caused losers to hang
around with nothing to do until their matches, then lose again and go
home. Which is why I would have preferred DE for the main event, and a
side tourney for casuals that actually resulted in a meaningful outcome,
rather than that silly Faction competition.

We've seen it time and time again at CTS. People show up, get raped
and then they go home.


On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Couldn't they do 2 qualifiers for Western Cape to find top 4 for main
event with double elimination rule instead of Swiss rule?

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 6:55 PM, Stephen Scheidel <
gieroadsteve@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I'm glad you value my input Di.

On 25 May 2015 at 18:54, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks for all the input. I'll write up a more "neutral" and to the
point draft.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Stephen Scheidel <
gieroadsteve@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Yaaay the power is back on.

All TO's should consult with me first and all will be swell.
If they bumped this shit they wouldn't need my advice ~
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRHyBwNtkLA

On 25 May 2015 at 18:49, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Will do Stu.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Donaldson, Alasdair <
alasdair.donaldson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Do you care about grammar? If so, let me know before you send
it off. There are places where you mix tense or leave verbs out of
sentences.



Also, I would take out the entire bit about the Swiss rule. It
doesn’t serve a purpose here. This was not a tournament to find top 2
players (as double elim would); this was a qualifier for a future
tournament with the purpose of finding the top 4 players. In order
to do
that, you need either quadruple elimination, or Swiss rules (at
least 10
rounds considering the number of competitors). Don’t bitch about
something
where they have a good reason for doing it that way. It’s not a
choice
based on making players feel better, it’s the choice based on their
requirements.



For the rest, even if you’re bitching, I’d try to keep the tone
light. There were sponsors there who obviously like the idea of being
involved in gaming tournaments but don’t know what it is all about.
They
shouldn’t be made to feel like the event was a complete screw up as
this is
likely to reduce the chance that they would bother again.



*From:* cpt-fgc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
cpt-fgc-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Di Lhong
*Sent:* 25 May 2015 5:51 PM
*To:* cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

*Subject:* Re: DRE: CTS community mail



Here's a quick write up i did.



I think i got most of your inputs about the event. I'm trying to
make is sound neutral and "nice" lolz. Even though there's more
complaints
and praise.



Will try to iron it out and make it more readable.



Feels a bit odd having to write up about my own matches...not
sure how i can write that without looking like a kiss ass...maybe
you guys
can do that for me.



On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Ashraf Barendse <
ashraf.barendse@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

yep, Tournament Organiser



Swiss is also unhype.

It takes way too long. With all those setups, we couldv'e done
3-4 different games in the same time using double elim.

Plus, you could go the entire tourney without losing and then
lose once in the finals. Whereas someone else could lose once or
twice and
still win the whole thing.



On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

TO = ???



keep seeing that in the notes you guys did. I assume it's "the
organizers"?



On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 5:30 PM, lindsey kiviets <
lindseyak@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

for single fighting game tournament swiss will be okay, but
obviously theres more than one fighting gamem people play at
tournaments.
------------------------------

Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 16:55:51 +0200
Subject: Re: DRE: CTS community mail
From: ilitirit@xxxxxxxxx
To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx



For one, Swiss rules gives byes more significance than number of
games won.



On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Could someone explain why swiss rules isn't a good idea for
professional player? i get that it works for casual players because
they
get to play more than 1 game. But how does the swiss rule fail where
double
elimination works?



i'm not too familiar with the swiss rules in fighting
games...since it's my first time. the only issue i see is some one
from the
bubble may end up in top 16 battling casual players who won against
casual
players.



On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Donaldson, Alasdair <
alasdair.donaldson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Was any other character better represented?

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: sameegh jardine<mailto:sameegh@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: ‎2015-‎05-‎25 16:32
To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: DRE: CTS community mail

I have a feeling there'll be a few more at the next event :P

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 4:18 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Yep.

Will do my best.

Yeah, there's only 2 D'vorah. Maybe 3 if we count the random
matches from the girls...

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Ashraf Barendse <
ashraf.barendse@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:ashraf.barendse@xxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:
Wait, so are they flying all top 4 up to Jo'burg?

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Ashraf Barendse <
ashraf.barendse@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:ashraf.barendse@xxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:
That was a decent write up by Zombie Dredd. Even he knows swiss
rules are zzz.

My cousin told me Kim (gamerkid) was the best in their group. I
think they're from the belhar area, so not too far from Jeeva's.

Most played char...D'vorah? There were just 2, but I think cos Di
and Zolani were bopping so many ppl, it seemed like more.

Somebody pls bop draeka,



On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Lolz that CTS shirt shot. Marketing.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
So Mweb published their side of the story...


http://www.mweb.co.za/games/ViewNewsArticle/tabid/2549/Article/19753/Heres-what-you-missed-at-the-Western-Cape-MKX-Cup-Qualifiers.aspx

i'll send them ours.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
But i do agree on backdashing not using stamina.

It's already so vulnerable on recovery. Why do we have to spend
50% of our stamina to do so?

if backdashing doesn't use stamina. It'll help against mix up
characters and strings. Since most safe + abusable strings have gaps.

Also plz fix mileena's backdash...it sucks. lolz

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
But it's a fair change. It's not like if i do 1 wasp cancel it'll
deplete all my stamina.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Nicholas Robertson-Muir <
nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
-_-

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Lady Bug. lolz

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Nicholas Robertson-Muir <
nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Oh really?
Which characters specifically?

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 3:32 PM, richard moorcroft <
greattekkenmaster@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:greattekkenmaster@xxxxxxxxx>>
wrote:

Wow Nic, this would make mixup characters piss weak

On May 25, 2015 3:30 PM, "Nicholas Robertson-Muir" <
nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I know it's wrong for a game of this nature, but I tend to think
about the fighting part realistically anyway.
What uses stamina in real life?
That kind of thing.

IMO
Backdashing shouldn't use stamina
Block counters shouldn't use stamina.
Running should use stamina.
Strings should use stamina.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
How about characters with faster runs takes more stamina?

Cassie's b124 is a half screen advancement move...fuck. 10frames
and 0 on block...you can technically backdash out of the last hit so
it
wiff. But nothing is guaranteed. You lose 50% of stamina for not
giving her
0frames on block but she can simply do it again to advance.

However, you can use armor moves to fuck it up. But this would
only be useful for those who have armor moves that launches.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hopefully NRS will wake up and sense something about the stamina
bar...

but i doubt they will...it's a new toy and in their point of
view...it's cool and nice...

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Di Lhong <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Lolz

D'vorah confirmed trash tier if that's the case. Need stamina to
wasp cancel and her f112 gets depleted...goodbye lady bug.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Nicholas Robertson-Muir <
nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

Here's an idea.
Strings that get blocked should deplete the agressors' stamina.

On 25 May 2015 14:24, "Di Lhong" <marongdin@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:
marongdin@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I would love this change.

backdashing shouldn't require stamina. Since it only dodges a few
frames on the move and you can't block for a while...so technically
it's
very risky. Running requiring stamina is fine by me. Because they
want to
eliminate the whole MK9 dash block stuff. Also it will reduce some
character's offense...aka Cassie. Cassie without meter doesn't do
much. If
running doesn't cost meter...Cassie would be insane. Along with
other great
pressure characters.

Cassie's corner rocket set up is so messed up. Only way you can
dodge it is to backdash it at the right moment so you don't block or
get
hit by the rocket...by backdashing...you're vulnerable and can't
block for
a while. Meaning, you dodge the rocket yes. But Cassie can just do
212~flip
and start a combo while you're still recovering from the backdash...

I'm playing this bitch lolz

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Ilitirit Sama <
ilitirit@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:ilitirit@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I don't get why you lose all stamina after, and why breaking
requires stamina on top of meter. I don't get why backdashing
requires
stamina.

If I had to change the game I would make it so that movement
options don't require stamina, but any combos that involve running
depletes
the bar.

On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Nicholas Robertson-Muir <
nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

I think blocking breaker would be worth a damn if it gave some
advantage.
It could turn the game on it's head.


















**********************************************************************
The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this
e-mail
by anyone else is unauthorized. If you have received this
communication in
error, please address with the subject heading "Received in error,"
send to
the original sender, then delete the e-mail and destroy any copies
of it.
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance
on it,
is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained
in this
e-mail are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the
governing
KPMG client engagement letter. Opinions, conclusions and other
information
in this e-mail and any attachments that do not relate to the official
business of the firm are neither given nor endorsed by it.

KPMG cannot guarantee that e-mail communications are secure or
error-free, as information could be intercepted, corrupted, amended,
lost,
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.

This email is being sent out by KPMG International Cooperative
("KPMG International") on behalf of the local KPMG member firm
providing
services to you. KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG
International") is
a Swiss entity that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of
independent firms operating under the KPMG name. KPMG International
provides no services to clients. Each member firm of KPMG
International is
a legally distinct and separate entity and each describes itself as
such.
Information about the structure and jurisdiction of your local KPMG
member
firm can be obtained from your KPMG representative.

This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been
swept by AntiVirus software.
You are subscribed to the Cape Town Fighting Game Community
mailing list.

//www.freelists.org/list/cpt-fgc










------------------------------
The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this
e-mail
by anyone else is unauthorized. If you have received this
communication in
error, please address with the subject heading "Received in error,"
send to
the original sender, then delete the e-mail and destroy any copies
of it.
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance
on it,
is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained
in this
e-mail are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the
governing
KPMG client engagement letter. Opinions, conclusions and other
information
in this e-mail and any attachments that do not relate to the official
business of the firm are neither given nor endorsed by it.

KPMG cannot guarantee that e-mail communications are secure or
error-free, as information could be intercepted, corrupted, amended,
lost,
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.

This email is being sent out by KPMG International Cooperative
("KPMG International") on behalf of the local KPMG member firm
providing
services to you. KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG
International") is a
Swiss entity that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of
independent firms operating under the KPMG name. KPMG International
provides no services to clients. Each member firm of KPMG
International is
a legally distinct and separate entity and each describes itself as
such.
Information about the structure and jurisdiction of your local KPMG
member
firm can be obtained from your KPMG representative.

This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been
swept by AntiVirus software.











JPEG image

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. cpt-fgc
  3. Archive
  4. 05-2015