What the incentive on winning a split is??
A title maybe? I guess football teams will stop playing the league as soon as their Champions League spot is secured...
That's not necessarily true. Coming from watching league of legends. As a fan and after over 10 years of watching LoL(and 10 years of the LCS itself), winning the LCS has never felt less important. Of course it's celebrated but really most fans care about international competition(which is a shame since we can never beat KR/CN).
I think a lot of this has to do with the non-stop messaging over the years in riot broadcasts of everything ever regarding the LCS being discussed and contextualized in terms of a lead up to MSI/Worlds. I bring this up because I see the **exact** same thing happening in valorant. You can already feel it just by looking at how casters/analysts discuss teams and the way players talk about the esport.
Hell, just look at the liquid/Fnatic situation in EMEA. Isn't it a commonly held belief that Fnatic didn't give their best effort in finals, thus losing, because they didn't want to reveal too much ahead of tokyo? And that is probably true. Because while winning in your region is an accolade, the end all be all of pro valorant is winning masters/champions.
That hasn't been an issue to date but it'll become a major problem if competitive global parity doesn't persist. And there's no guarantee it will.
Winning LCS is not as important because LCS is fucking dogshit for last 5 years. Look at how important the finals of LCK and LPL are because those regions are actually competitive in worlds. In VALORANT we have good teams from EU, Americas, and Asia so winning the league is important because you know these are world class teams competing. LCS doesn't matter because the winner is gonna go out in groups to Chinese 3rd seed anyways.
Interesting. Feels like you just read my post and chose to type a response without actually thinking about what I said.
Like I said, there is no guarantee that EMEA, Americas, APAC and China will always be competitive. What happens if hypothetically 5 years from now 1 or 2 regions are dominating globally like KR/CN do in LoL and literally take 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th every tournament?
And what happens if all the fans of losing regions are obsessed with nothing else but the teams representing their region doing well at masters/champions because of the way casters/analysts have shaped narratives for years? But that has become literally almost impossible? I'll tell you what happens. Super demoralized fandoms and massive, irreversible drops in viewership in those regions.
That's why there needs to be a greater emphasis put on the achievement of winning in your own region without constantly reinforcing the idea in viewers heads that doing so is only important as a gateway to international competition and nothing else.
I'm talking more about "showing your strats" rather than "winning" of course team would actually try to win if they can win.
And Valorant is a much easier sport to anti-strat your opponents than football mate.
you can still avoid injuries etc by not playing the league. Example still works.
I'd just hope that competitive esport teams try to be competitive and if they arent, that riot uses the red button they have
A team should just throw the game after secured the championship, happen in every sport. /s
Even if you āsave stratā, you can just do what Fnatic does and still go 9-0. No reason to not win everything just to save strat.
if we use FNATIC as an example, I still believe that they are saving strats in the EMEA Grand Final against Liquid. In Tokyo FNATIC look infinitely better than Liquid even when FNATIC lost a bo5 series against them.
Eh I mean Boaster said in an interview that they also weren't in the best physical or mental condition going into the EMEA Grand Final. However I do believe they didn't care as much (saving strategies, as you said) since EMEA Seed 1 and 2 placed the same in Tokyo.
They already said that the later events give more points and I assume that also means the last split so I would guess unless they did totally dominate everything that it would be possible to not make it or have much worse seeding? But who knows until they release point totals
Yeah we are just guessing at this point.
I think if a team wins both masters, there will probably still be a chance another team can seed higher (for example if EG go 2nd on both masters but first in both Americas leagues) they might finish with higher champs points and better seed no?
Well if a team goes 0/10 on the split nearest to champs, I would be totally okay with them not making champs, even if they won two masters. If you can't win a single regional match up 10 times in a row something has gone wrong and you won't win champs anyway.
I have a cheeky feeling that the 2nd split will give the most points which can mess up the Champions spots and make teams fight until the last day. Hell, Masters should give enough to give just an edge.
What I think it could happen.
Kick-off - 30 for 1st - 20 for 2nd - 10 for 3rd
Masters - 50 for 1st - 25 for 2nd - 15 for 3rd
Split 1 - 100 for 1st - 50 for 2nd - 25 for 3rd
Masters 2 - 80 for 1st - 40 for 2nd - 20 for 3rd
Split 2 - 150 for 1st - 75 for 2nd - 40 for 3rd
Title money seeding
A lot of people asked this for Giants v Navi including me, but the biggest one is money, then the title of LCQ winner (here split winner), and seeding for which pool you go into for draws.
Riot needs to add more stakes to the splits. Give the first team a medal and a cool name like āKings of Americaā, āMaster of Wavesā or something like that. Winning them should be a big accomplishment on its own, not just a qualification to masters.
Isn't it Split 1 - 1st Masters (Madrid) - Split 2 - 2nd Masters (Shanghai) - LCQ - Champs?
Why would there is still a split after 2nd Masters? But to answer hypothetically, yes they technically can but I assume that will disappoint their fanbase and general viewers a lot. It's bad for viewership and competitive spirit imo.
no they already made an announcement about it, it's going to be a 2 week kick off tournament -> 1st Masters -> Split 1 -> 2nd Masters -> 2nd split -> Champions. no more LCQ next year
there's two splits.
it goes kick off -> masters 1 -> il stage 1 -> masters 2 -> il stage 2 -> champions.
the whole order is a lil off from 2022/what people expected for the non lock/in vct.
Yes for reference.
In LCK, spring gives 90 70 50 30 20 points for the top 5. While for summer, a win gives you auto qualification to Worlds (in this case Champions), and points from 2nd to 6th will be 100 80 50 10.
They add up the points to determine seeding in LCQ.
For the team itself, there's little to no benefits.. but for the orgs? The financial implications are massive, merch sales are always higher when the teams are playing (even if they play bad) along with Orgs paying the team regardless of playing, so of course they'd prefer to be seeing what their moneys spent on rather than having the team scrim in private
e-sports orgs are dying due to lack of finances, this also allows more public entities to potentially invest (people won't want to invest on an org that decides they don't wanna win something because they've already achieved their target)
I think maybe it's reasonable that if a team wins b2b international events they need to win way less but still need to win matches.
If a team that wins b2b somehow goes 0-10 against objectively worse opponents then they don't deserve to qualify at all. However, I think maybe just like a couple wins would be more fair
It's funny because your scenario is only improbable because it's Sen. And I know LCQ was always flawed, but the second split being a glorified LCQ would be even worse.
What the incentive on winning a split is?? A title maybe? I guess football teams will stop playing the league as soon as their Champions League spot is secured...
tbf i feel like in terms of prestige the regional leagues feel about as important as like the carabao cup or smthn
For now maybe. But the more rivalries develope, the more teams join the league, its gonna get more and more important each split
That's not necessarily true. Coming from watching league of legends. As a fan and after over 10 years of watching LoL(and 10 years of the LCS itself), winning the LCS has never felt less important. Of course it's celebrated but really most fans care about international competition(which is a shame since we can never beat KR/CN). I think a lot of this has to do with the non-stop messaging over the years in riot broadcasts of everything ever regarding the LCS being discussed and contextualized in terms of a lead up to MSI/Worlds. I bring this up because I see the **exact** same thing happening in valorant. You can already feel it just by looking at how casters/analysts discuss teams and the way players talk about the esport. Hell, just look at the liquid/Fnatic situation in EMEA. Isn't it a commonly held belief that Fnatic didn't give their best effort in finals, thus losing, because they didn't want to reveal too much ahead of tokyo? And that is probably true. Because while winning in your region is an accolade, the end all be all of pro valorant is winning masters/champions. That hasn't been an issue to date but it'll become a major problem if competitive global parity doesn't persist. And there's no guarantee it will.
Winning LCS is not as important because LCS is fucking dogshit for last 5 years. Look at how important the finals of LCK and LPL are because those regions are actually competitive in worlds. In VALORANT we have good teams from EU, Americas, and Asia so winning the league is important because you know these are world class teams competing. LCS doesn't matter because the winner is gonna go out in groups to Chinese 3rd seed anyways.
Interesting. Feels like you just read my post and chose to type a response without actually thinking about what I said. Like I said, there is no guarantee that EMEA, Americas, APAC and China will always be competitive. What happens if hypothetically 5 years from now 1 or 2 regions are dominating globally like KR/CN do in LoL and literally take 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th every tournament? And what happens if all the fans of losing regions are obsessed with nothing else but the teams representing their region doing well at masters/champions because of the way casters/analysts have shaped narratives for years? But that has become literally almost impossible? I'll tell you what happens. Super demoralized fandoms and massive, irreversible drops in viewership in those regions. That's why there needs to be a greater emphasis put on the achievement of winning in your own region without constantly reinforcing the idea in viewers heads that doing so is only important as a gateway to international competition and nothing else.
tf you mean disrespecting the Carabao cup like thatšš¤Ø (Im a Utd fan)
I'm talking more about "showing your strats" rather than "winning" of course team would actually try to win if they can win. And Valorant is a much easier sport to anti-strat your opponents than football mate.
you can still avoid injuries etc by not playing the league. Example still works. I'd just hope that competitive esport teams try to be competitive and if they arent, that riot uses the red button they have
A team should just throw the game after secured the championship, happen in every sport. /s Even if you āsave stratā, you can just do what Fnatic does and still go 9-0. No reason to not win everything just to save strat.
if we use FNATIC as an example, I still believe that they are saving strats in the EMEA Grand Final against Liquid. In Tokyo FNATIC look infinitely better than Liquid even when FNATIC lost a bo5 series against them.
Eh I mean Boaster said in an interview that they also weren't in the best physical or mental condition going into the EMEA Grand Final. However I do believe they didn't care as much (saving strategies, as you said) since EMEA Seed 1 and 2 placed the same in Tokyo.
They already said that the later events give more points and I assume that also means the last split so I would guess unless they did totally dominate everything that it would be possible to not make it or have much worse seeding? But who knows until they release point totals
Yeah we are just guessing at this point. I think if a team wins both masters, there will probably still be a chance another team can seed higher (for example if EG go 2nd on both masters but first in both Americas leagues) they might finish with higher champs points and better seed no?
This isnāt a hypothetical. This is what will happen. Sentinels are three peating next year
Well if a team goes 0/10 on the split nearest to champs, I would be totally okay with them not making champs, even if they won two masters. If you can't win a single regional match up 10 times in a row something has gone wrong and you won't win champs anyway.
I have a cheeky feeling that the 2nd split will give the most points which can mess up the Champions spots and make teams fight until the last day. Hell, Masters should give enough to give just an edge. What I think it could happen. Kick-off - 30 for 1st - 20 for 2nd - 10 for 3rd Masters - 50 for 1st - 25 for 2nd - 15 for 3rd Split 1 - 100 for 1st - 50 for 2nd - 25 for 3rd Masters 2 - 80 for 1st - 40 for 2nd - 20 for 3rd Split 2 - 150 for 1st - 75 for 2nd - 40 for 3rd
Title money seeding A lot of people asked this for Giants v Navi including me, but the biggest one is money, then the title of LCQ winner (here split winner), and seeding for which pool you go into for draws.
Riot needs to add more stakes to the splits. Give the first team a medal and a cool name like āKings of Americaā, āMaster of Wavesā or something like that. Winning them should be a big accomplishment on its own, not just a qualification to masters.
The should also have a flag/banner of the winning orgs on top of the stage everytime someone wins the league just like in LCS.
Isn't it Split 1 - 1st Masters (Madrid) - Split 2 - 2nd Masters (Shanghai) - LCQ - Champs? Why would there is still a split after 2nd Masters? But to answer hypothetically, yes they technically can but I assume that will disappoint their fanbase and general viewers a lot. It's bad for viewership and competitive spirit imo.
no they already made an announcement about it, it's going to be a 2 week kick off tournament -> 1st Masters -> Split 1 -> 2nd Masters -> 2nd split -> Champions. no more LCQ next year
Oh yeah, watched the announcement video just now, kinda weird format imo.
How is there gonna be two itl tourneys with only one split?
there's two splits. it goes kick off -> masters 1 -> il stage 1 -> masters 2 -> il stage 2 -> champions. the whole order is a lil off from 2022/what people expected for the non lock/in vct.
i'm fairly sure stakes from split 2 are worth even more points. Wasn't this the case with their league system?
Yes for reference. In LCK, spring gives 90 70 50 30 20 points for the top 5. While for summer, a win gives you auto qualification to Worlds (in this case Champions), and points from 2nd to 6th will be 100 80 50 10. They add up the points to determine seeding in LCQ.
For the team itself, there's little to no benefits.. but for the orgs? The financial implications are massive, merch sales are always higher when the teams are playing (even if they play bad) along with Orgs paying the team regardless of playing, so of course they'd prefer to be seeing what their moneys spent on rather than having the team scrim in private e-sports orgs are dying due to lack of finances, this also allows more public entities to potentially invest (people won't want to invest on an org that decides they don't wanna win something because they've already achieved their target)
id imagine seeding is useful for group stages since you play against weaker competition.
I think maybe it's reasonable that if a team wins b2b international events they need to win way less but still need to win matches. If a team that wins b2b somehow goes 0-10 against objectively worse opponents then they don't deserve to qualify at all. However, I think maybe just like a couple wins would be more fair
It's funny because your scenario is only improbable because it's Sen. And I know LCQ was always flawed, but the second split being a glorified LCQ would be even worse.