I'm agree about transparency. Its a community sponsored event, admins should be more aware about community feedback.
I know schedule is tight but quarter finals we schedule is just terrible. It should be 1 week earlier or 1 week later but not between Christmas and new year.
I don't understand why rosters are fixed till competition hasn't started neither.
It could be good too to have some information about qualifiers groups. How they are built ? When they'll be announced ? Which format ?
I imagine this event is a lot of job, but you guys propose for it and ask the community to invest in it. So please be transparent and try to make that even what it should be.
Legendary Snails aren't even concerned by the "****" rules. However, I agree with almost everything said above, especially regarding roster changes until WEDNESDAY (let's give some more time to teams to setup could be more reasonable ?).
"Community-made event" : when I first heard of this event, I imagined some kind of multiple posts asking the community to provide splashscreens, qualifiers format discussions (yes, I still don't like this "BO3/5/7/9 formats", find these unfair on NS2), LAN event content discussions etc...
I even think it might be easier for organizers to do so... Less art works, good feedbacks from experienced competitive players to get the most fair matches NS2 have never seen, less failness, more professional looking, involving more community members. Above all : making the community live with NS2WC ?
However, I still love the fact there ARE organizers for such an event and respect them a lot for that, for their job & free-time usage.
AiorosJoin Date: 2003-03-24Member: 14850Members, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow
edited December 2013
I didnt want to write to this thread at all after the other one was closed, but ....
How about u make a big teammeeting. Invite all the Teamleader from all the teams who signed up to this event into teamspeak/mumble and have a open discussion with them about all their points. If you @zefram@wasabione explain why you do these changes and talk to the the teams, you would have less posts like this.
For the community it feels like your doing rule changes random and for your own purpose and goals. This is the result of no transperancy about anything regarding the ns2wc.
For example, after i talked to zefram about the 6 players get the tickets and these players are only allowed to play rule. I explained him my concerns about the matter, he explaint his and we found something inbetween to agree on. You will never find rules and stuff which everyone in this community will agree on, but at least try to be open why you do stuff and why not.
In the NS2 balancemod Cup, sewlek did a lot of changes to the last build like 1 day before most of the matches happend. So we had an open discussion with him and everyteam i could get my hands on. Sewlek explaint why he wanted to do theses changes and why he wanted to test them in this Cup.
After like 2 hours teamspeak meeting 95% of the teams agreed on all the changes sewlek made without any negativ feedback afterwards.
It should not be a problem to do this and i think @reddog will agree that the support of the teams is as important as anything else.
All the people ask for is to get open honest feedback and an answer which is not writen with meaningless input which are not answering anything.
fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
edited December 2013
Well, Godar have the fourth seed, whilst Titus has the second seed, so that wouldn't actually be the wrong way to set up the groups, herakl3s. It would have to be done according to seedings though. It should be something like the following:
Top half of bracket:
Group 1
1st seed (Legendary Snails)
8th seed (BlueBabblerSquad? Don't know if they are participating)
9th seed (Singularity? Don't know if they are participating)
16th seed
17th seed
24th seed
25th seed
Group 4
4th seed (Godar)
5th seed (Quactus -- I assume they will get Quaxy's fifth seed from nsl s3)
12th seed
13th seed
20th seed
21st seed
28th seed
Bottom half of bracket:
Group 2
2nd seed (Titus Gaming)
7th seed (RadicaL? Don't know if they are participating)
10th seed
15th seed
18th seed
23rd seed
26th seed
Group 3
3rd seed (Saunamen)
6th seed (Priori? Don't know if they are participating)
11th seed
14th seed
19th seed
22nd seed
27th seed
There will be a lot of teams who don't have a seeding from nsl season 3, though, so those may be randomized into groups unless the admins choose to manually assign seedings to them.
While there has been some permanent damage done by the administration, and I hope they extend signups until wednesday as I previously suggested, I feel very relieved that some of the troublesome rules have been been modified. If this change in policy can usher in a new era of transparency and respect for community feedback on rules, we may very well have an entertaining tournament on our hands. With the "top 4" teams looking a bit shaky in practice lately, and several wildcard teams challenging -- including Quactus, Imagine, the Australian team and a potential new American team -- we might see some surprisingly closely fought matches, and possibly even upsets. At this point, no-one is guaranteed a trip to Cologne.
Given that some of the unseeded teams are likely going to outperform the seeded teams from division 1, it might make more sense to use the same format for drawing groups as UEFA does for drawing groups for the European Football Championship. Read "Final draw": ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Euro_2012#Qualified_teams ). In that case unseeded teams would have to be manually placed into "pots" according to their predicted performance level.
Well, I am interested in philosophy of gaming and this thing gave me inspiration to make an abstract about this situation.
In competitive gaming there are three different parties. Players, organizers (NSL admins for example) and spectators (including shoutcasters).
1. Players build the core of competitive gaming. Obviously you can’t have competitive gaming without players.
2. Organizers play big role making competing more fun between players by organizing tournaments. Also justice department belongs to them. They are the party who should write the rules of gaming. They normally are also transmitter between players and spectators. They make possible that spectators have something to watch.
3. Spectators, however, are surplus of competitive gaming. Players don’t need spectators to have fun or compete. Competitive scene can be healthy without spectators like we saw in NS1.
One party cannot dominate over other. We have to find equilibrium. Order to do this, we have to make compromises. Normally smaller the game more power the players have over others and mutually bigger the game more power spectators have over other parties. NS1 and NS2 actually are both excellent examples.
I played NS1 almost 10 years by that time we had tons of tournaments and hundreds of players. NS1 had more competitive players than NS2, probably almost 10x more during it golden age compared to current state of NS2. However, spectators were mostly other players and you were happy if you had 100 viewers for finals. NS1 is best possible example about game where players dominate competitive scene. Organizers were mostly players and the rules focused around players. You didn’t have to make compromises.
NS2, however, has been dominated by spectators. It’s really ironic because NS2 isn’t by any means a big game. Good example has been NSL_maps on live events, guess which party have had to make compromises? I started to fear this back in beta when first tournaments were organized by shoutcasters. Don’t get me wrong, of course they are just trying to make everyone happy, but unconsciously they see spectators first and players last. When competitive gaming turns ”esport” spectators are dominating two other parties. There start to be more viewers than players. Tournament funding and prize pool start come from sponsors who cares mostly about viewers. Organizers start to listen money and fame (spectators). They become tools of spectators. What happens to justice and for players rights when this happens?
We act like NS2 is esport and this really harmful toward players. In true esport games players get real money and they have agents who represent their rights. We are amateurs, we have other things in our lives which are more important than playing a video game. I will not insult my family because of this game by playing video games during the only time I can see them.
Wait, the NSL maps weren't used on live events? It can't be because of spectators, because there's always been a mod to restore the visuals for spectators...
fanaticThis post has been edited.Join Date: 2003-07-23Member: 18377Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue
edited December 2013
No significant mods were allowed at either of the events I attended; only very minor mods such as custom crosshairs. It wasn't a big problem, but it was a bit annoying.
Update your signature, Tane, you backstabbing bast.
would anyone else find it amusing if he actually did cheat in scrim/matches? i'm not saying that he did, just that there isn't 100% proof that he didn't, so it's still possible (no matter how unlikely) and would be hilarious after all of these threads
DC_DarklingJoin Date: 2003-07-10Member: 18068Members, Constellation, Squad Five Blue, Squad Five Silver
Im glad its slowly getting a long.
but @ironhorse and everyone else.
yes, it is actually good to not use chat but a topic. Ill repeat it once more. Its a community event, community sponsored, so the entire community should have the ability to be totally informed.
Forums are guest access and allow just that. So it wasnt just a last resort of fana to post, it was the best choice to begin with.
I do believe posting info for this event by the ns2wc admins, starting topics like these, should have been mandatory.
It would appear a lot of the issues are either resolved, or being talked about.
But as far as the whole Eissgate controversy is concerned, I can see the situation from both sides. Rules are rules and the organizers are of the mindset that they should be enforced as-is, which is commendable, because what is the point of having a standard if you're going to circumvent it anyways? (e.g. it's like telling students to write a 5-7 page paper, but yelling at students who only write 5 pages.)
Conversely, however, as other people have already pointed out in this thread (and others), Eiss has a pristine community record. He is well-liked by all—fans, teammates, and opponents alike. I'm not going to get into a "he-cheats/he-doesn't-cheat" debate, as that would go nowhere (as it is already in this thread). Instead, I would implore the organizers to rethink this: what is wrong with evaluating each instance independently? Of course there are rules to uphold, but what, exactly, is lost/at stake by examining controversial issues on a case-by-case basis, and deciding to overrule the rules themselves?
Integrity? Respect?
Call me crazy, but I don't think either would diminish to any noticable degree (if at all) if the Eiss ban was lifted.
If the ban is upheld, however, what will be gained? A few pats on the back for upholding a rule that—as many have pointed out already—isn't nearly as tyrannically pursued by other entities overseeing much BIGGER eSports competitions? The NS2 community is small as it is, and a great majority of them (fans of Eiss) are being alienated by this decision. This tournament has been billed as "By the Community, For the Community," though in that same breath, the community's voice is being ignored.
These are simply two sides of the same coin. If the ban is reversed, I can guarantee, no one will think any less of you—the organizers—or the tournament itself. If the ban is kept, though... however successful this championship pans out to be, it will still have this cloud hanging over its preliminary stages. And for what, really?
As Eiss has said himself, just require him to stream all his games. That should be sufficient enough. In fact, he'd probably get more viewers than the shoutcast stream itself.
Soz, good points well made, but I'd also remind you that eiss didn't break any rules of the ns2wc. It hasn't even begun and at the time this kicked off he hadn't even signed up to any rules. So presumably anyone who has ever received a vac ban should also be excluded? How far back in time should that go?
There is no defensible basis for eiss's exclusion.
but I'd also remind you that eiss didn't break any rules of the ns2wc.
True! It would appear that their stentorian approach to this ruling is to put on some sort of guise that this is a professional, no-nonsense tournament... when in reality, it's really no different than the previous ones we've had.
regarding the roster lock:
The damage has already been done to our "team". It doesn't matter at this point what amendments have been made - it's simply too little, too late. The players have already begun practicing with other teams and pursuing other options - what else do you expect them to do when there is zero communication?
The initial threat of the roster lock rule to prevent the formation of said team is beyond shameful and completely unsportsmanlike. I will not be participating in this event as a result. I have no desire to devote my time to people that are willing to create senseless rules and maliciously enforce them to deny competition.
The initial threat of the roster lock rule to prevent the formation of said team is beyond shameful and completely unsportsmanlike. I will not be participating in this event as a result. I have no desire to devote my time to people that are willing to create senseless rules and maliciously enforce them to deny competition.
That's really the sensational nonsense that's so offputting from this community. The admins were ready to allow the team to be created and it was the team who fell apart, not the rules forcing them to. You should blame your own players for that.
And then to accuse the admins of maliciously enforcing rules to deny competition is the biggest asshat insult you can possibly muster.
I've heard from a member of BVB and admins. From how I understand it the rules were initially enforced but then, like every time people have problems with the rules, they were discussed in private and changed to benefit the players who were being hurt by the rules. Then BVB didn't want to play together anymore, despite having rules amended in their favor.
The rules were amended once in this thread and it was not a real amendment, as it still affected one of our players. Finally, last night they were amended to remove the restriction from all of our players - after telling us that they had unanimously ruled against us, after blatantly ignoring our requests, and most importantly after our players had already begun practicing with other teams. This gave us a 24 hour time window to re-gather our players, and begin practicing.
This weekend was the only 3-4 days I had free to practice due to the poor timing schedule of the qualifiers, so essentially if we were to reform the team I would be going into it with 2 scrims worth of rust removed (that was all the games we were able to play before the ruling was dropped on us).
All that aside, my point was that enforcing that rule initially is just inane. There's no reason to not look at the rules, re-assess the situation, and understand that the only reason to enforce that rule is merely to deny competition. It was said in direct response to pulling players from their team to form BVB. What more is there to understand?
They were dumb rules, I agree. That's why they were also changed when they became a problem. They definitely weren't enforced to advantage Titus as you are insinuating.
You posted two out of context messages which, assuming they're even accurate, don't demonstrate any kind of favoritism. They show an adherence to rules (albeit bad rules) in what seems like an initial response -- not the definitive answer. It's pretty obvious that the rules were not written to shutdown BVB, but BVB got snagged by them after the fact. Then the players appealed and within a couple days the rules were amended in favor of BVB. Now BVB doesn't want to play. Nothing is stopping you guys from playing except for yourselves.
It's not difficult to summarize it and make it sound much simpler than it is. The admins completely stonewalled us until this post was made. Individual attempts to contact admins were ignored or told that they would not be changing their minds. As a result, the team broke up. After our only chance to practice prior to the event had passed, after this post highlighted their errors, they reformed the rules in a manner which still kept Titus' roster intact, and ours lacking a commander. Finally, with less than 24 hours to re-create the team, they told an individual member that they would be free to make the team as we originally intended it. Since when is blind adherence to rules a favorable trait for event organizers? You are right though that nothing is stopping us, now. I have chosen to not participate because the entire series of events has been a bit gross and revealing.
As Eiss has said himself, just require him to stream all his games. That should be sufficient enough. In fact, he'd probably get more viewers than the shoutcast stream itself.
100% agree. I would watch his FP stream over the shoutcast stream anyday. Totally agree on all your points as well.
What I love about this community is that it is extremely passionate. We may be small, but damnit we pack a punch!
Wasabi, Zefram, and myself have discussed the Eissfeldt issue at length over the past few days. It has been decided that Eissfeldt will be allowed to play with his team in the qualifiers and is no longer be banned. He is required, however, to publicly stream any game he plays and that will be watched by an NS2WC admin and open to anyone else. The recording of the match after it has concluded is to be saved in his Twitch account until the NS2WC is over (in case there is any need for further review).
We hope this decision brings crowds into the square, trumpets blaring from the rooftops, and children frolicking in the streets in peppermint-colored outfits.
You say he's not allowed to play during qualifying matches due to a chance of him actually cheating, which is understandable. However, the community and Eissfeldt have suggested/offered to stream all of his qualifying matches, which counters your argument on why he shouldn't be allowed to play those matches. A large amount of players, spectators & other community members were against this pathetic decision of yours of not allow him to play, you can't ignore what made this all possible, the community.
You're taking this VAC ban way too seriously.
EDIT: Didn't notice Reddogs post before I finished mine.
Comments
I know schedule is tight but quarter finals we schedule is just terrible. It should be 1 week earlier or 1 week later but not between Christmas and new year.
I don't understand why rosters are fixed till competition hasn't started neither.
It could be good too to have some information about qualifiers groups. How they are built ? When they'll be announced ? Which format ?
I imagine this event is a lot of job, but you guys propose for it and ask the community to invest in it. So please be transparent and try to make that even what it should be.
#freeTheWholeCommunity
Legendary Snails aren't even concerned by the "****" rules. However, I agree with almost everything said above, especially regarding roster changes until WEDNESDAY (let's give some more time to teams to setup could be more reasonable ?).
"Community-made event" : when I first heard of this event, I imagined some kind of multiple posts asking the community to provide splashscreens, qualifiers format discussions (yes, I still don't like this "BO3/5/7/9 formats", find these unfair on NS2), LAN event content discussions etc...
I even think it might be easier for organizers to do so... Less art works, good feedbacks from experienced competitive players to get the most fair matches NS2 have never seen, less failness, more professional looking, involving more community members. Above all : making the community live with NS2WC ?
However, I still love the fact there ARE organizers for such an event and respect them a lot for that, for their job & free-time usage.
How about u make a big teammeeting. Invite all the Teamleader from all the teams who signed up to this event into teamspeak/mumble and have a open discussion with them about all their points. If you @zefram @wasabione explain why you do these changes and talk to the the teams, you would have less posts like this.
For the community it feels like your doing rule changes random and for your own purpose and goals. This is the result of no transperancy about anything regarding the ns2wc.
For example, after i talked to zefram about the 6 players get the tickets and these players are only allowed to play rule. I explained him my concerns about the matter, he explaint his and we found something inbetween to agree on. You will never find rules and stuff which everyone in this community will agree on, but at least try to be open why you do stuff and why not.
In the NS2 balancemod Cup, sewlek did a lot of changes to the last build like 1 day before most of the matches happend. So we had an open discussion with him and everyteam i could get my hands on. Sewlek explaint why he wanted to do theses changes and why he wanted to test them in this Cup.
After like 2 hours teamspeak meeting 95% of the teams agreed on all the changes sewlek made without any negativ feedback afterwards.
It should not be a problem to do this and i think @reddog will agree that the support of the teams is as important as anything else.
All the people ask for is to get open honest feedback and an answer which is not writen with meaningless input which are not answering anything.
Herakles, keeping the drama up, out.
Top half of bracket:
Group 1
1st seed (Legendary Snails)
8th seed (BlueBabblerSquad? Don't know if they are participating)
9th seed (Singularity? Don't know if they are participating)
16th seed
17th seed
24th seed
25th seed
Group 4
4th seed (Godar)
5th seed (Quactus -- I assume they will get Quaxy's fifth seed from nsl s3)
12th seed
13th seed
20th seed
21st seed
28th seed
Bottom half of bracket:
Group 2
2nd seed (Titus Gaming)
7th seed (RadicaL? Don't know if they are participating)
10th seed
15th seed
18th seed
23rd seed
26th seed
Group 3
3rd seed (Saunamen)
6th seed (Priori? Don't know if they are participating)
11th seed
14th seed
19th seed
22nd seed
27th seed
There will be a lot of teams who don't have a seeding from nsl season 3, though, so those may be randomized into groups unless the admins choose to manually assign seedings to them.
While there has been some permanent damage done by the administration, and I hope they extend signups until wednesday as I previously suggested, I feel very relieved that some of the troublesome rules have been been modified. If this change in policy can usher in a new era of transparency and respect for community feedback on rules, we may very well have an entertaining tournament on our hands. With the "top 4" teams looking a bit shaky in practice lately, and several wildcard teams challenging -- including Quactus, Imagine, the Australian team and a potential new American team -- we might see some surprisingly closely fought matches, and possibly even upsets. At this point, no-one is guaranteed a trip to Cologne.
Given that some of the unseeded teams are likely going to outperform the seeded teams from division 1, it might make more sense to use the same format for drawing groups as UEFA does for drawing groups for the European Football Championship. Read "Final draw": ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Euro_2012#Qualified_teams ). In that case unseeded teams would have to be manually placed into "pots" according to their predicted performance level.
In competitive gaming there are three different parties. Players, organizers (NSL admins for example) and spectators (including shoutcasters).
1. Players build the core of competitive gaming. Obviously you can’t have competitive gaming without players.
2. Organizers play big role making competing more fun between players by organizing tournaments. Also justice department belongs to them. They are the party who should write the rules of gaming. They normally are also transmitter between players and spectators. They make possible that spectators have something to watch.
3. Spectators, however, are surplus of competitive gaming. Players don’t need spectators to have fun or compete. Competitive scene can be healthy without spectators like we saw in NS1.
One party cannot dominate over other. We have to find equilibrium. Order to do this, we have to make compromises. Normally smaller the game more power the players have over others and mutually bigger the game more power spectators have over other parties. NS1 and NS2 actually are both excellent examples.
I played NS1 almost 10 years by that time we had tons of tournaments and hundreds of players. NS1 had more competitive players than NS2, probably almost 10x more during it golden age compared to current state of NS2. However, spectators were mostly other players and you were happy if you had 100 viewers for finals. NS1 is best possible example about game where players dominate competitive scene. Organizers were mostly players and the rules focused around players. You didn’t have to make compromises.
NS2, however, has been dominated by spectators. It’s really ironic because NS2 isn’t by any means a big game. Good example has been NSL_maps on live events, guess which party have had to make compromises? I started to fear this back in beta when first tournaments were organized by shoutcasters. Don’t get me wrong, of course they are just trying to make everyone happy, but unconsciously they see spectators first and players last. When competitive gaming turns ”esport” spectators are dominating two other parties. There start to be more viewers than players. Tournament funding and prize pool start come from sponsors who cares mostly about viewers. Organizers start to listen money and fame (spectators). They become tools of spectators. What happens to justice and for players rights when this happens?
We act like NS2 is esport and this really harmful toward players. In true esport games players get real money and they have agents who represent their rights. We are amateurs, we have other things in our lives which are more important than playing a video game. I will not insult my family because of this game by playing video games during the only time I can see them.
Update your signature, Tane, you backstabbing bast.
I laughed heartily.
but @ironhorse and everyone else.
yes, it is actually good to not use chat but a topic. Ill repeat it once more. Its a community event, community sponsored, so the entire community should have the ability to be totally informed.
Forums are guest access and allow just that. So it wasnt just a last resort of fana to post, it was the best choice to begin with.
I do believe posting info for this event by the ns2wc admins, starting topics like these, should have been mandatory.
edit: I had something to add, but realized the only thing that would accomplish is add drama, so I deleted it :DD
But as far as the whole Eissgate controversy is concerned, I can see the situation from both sides. Rules are rules and the organizers are of the mindset that they should be enforced as-is, which is commendable, because what is the point of having a standard if you're going to circumvent it anyways? (e.g. it's like telling students to write a 5-7 page paper, but yelling at students who only write 5 pages.)
Conversely, however, as other people have already pointed out in this thread (and others), Eiss has a pristine community record. He is well-liked by all—fans, teammates, and opponents alike. I'm not going to get into a "he-cheats/he-doesn't-cheat" debate, as that would go nowhere (as it is already in this thread). Instead, I would implore the organizers to rethink this: what is wrong with evaluating each instance independently? Of course there are rules to uphold, but what, exactly, is lost/at stake by examining controversial issues on a case-by-case basis, and deciding to overrule the rules themselves?
Integrity? Respect?
Call me crazy, but I don't think either would diminish to any noticable degree (if at all) if the Eiss ban was lifted.
If the ban is upheld, however, what will be gained? A few pats on the back for upholding a rule that—as many have pointed out already—isn't nearly as tyrannically pursued by other entities overseeing much BIGGER eSports competitions? The NS2 community is small as it is, and a great majority of them (fans of Eiss) are being alienated by this decision. This tournament has been billed as "By the Community, For the Community," though in that same breath, the community's voice is being ignored.
These are simply two sides of the same coin. If the ban is reversed, I can guarantee, no one will think any less of you—the organizers—or the tournament itself. If the ban is kept, though... however successful this championship pans out to be, it will still have this cloud hanging over its preliminary stages. And for what, really?
As Eiss has said himself, just require him to stream all his games. That should be sufficient enough. In fact, he'd probably get more viewers than the shoutcast stream itself.
There is no defensible basis for eiss's exclusion.
Steam profile (VAC banned): http://steamcommunity.com/id/relaxinsom
ESEA profile: http://play.esea.net/users/463446
ESEA team: http://play.esea.net/teams/69048
example 2
Steam alt profile (VAC banned): http://steamcommunity.com/id/8452745134/
ESEA profile: http://play.esea.net/users/473583
ESEA team: http://play.esea.net/teams/46944
please allow eissfeldt to play.
regarding the roster lock:
The damage has already been done to our "team". It doesn't matter at this point what amendments have been made - it's simply too little, too late. The players have already begun practicing with other teams and pursuing other options - what else do you expect them to do when there is zero communication?
The initial threat of the roster lock rule to prevent the formation of said team is beyond shameful and completely unsportsmanlike. I will not be participating in this event as a result. I have no desire to devote my time to people that are willing to create senseless rules and maliciously enforce them to deny competition.
That's really the sensational nonsense that's so offputting from this community. The admins were ready to allow the team to be created and it was the team who fell apart, not the rules forcing them to. You should blame your own players for that.
And then to accuse the admins of maliciously enforcing rules to deny competition is the biggest asshat insult you can possibly muster.
This weekend was the only 3-4 days I had free to practice due to the poor timing schedule of the qualifiers, so essentially if we were to reform the team I would be going into it with 2 scrims worth of rust removed (that was all the games we were able to play before the ruling was dropped on us).
All that aside, my point was that enforcing that rule initially is just inane. There's no reason to not look at the rules, re-assess the situation, and understand that the only reason to enforce that rule is merely to deny competition. It was said in direct response to pulling players from their team to form BVB. What more is there to understand?
You posted two out of context messages which, assuming they're even accurate, don't demonstrate any kind of favoritism. They show an adherence to rules (albeit bad rules) in what seems like an initial response -- not the definitive answer. It's pretty obvious that the rules were not written to shutdown BVB, but BVB got snagged by them after the fact. Then the players appealed and within a couple days the rules were amended in favor of BVB. Now BVB doesn't want to play. Nothing is stopping you guys from playing except for yourselves.
Or were they?
/tinfoil hat
100% agree. I would watch his FP stream over the shoutcast stream anyday. Totally agree on all your points as well.
What I love about this community is that it is extremely passionate. We may be small, but damnit we pack a punch!
Wasabi, Zefram, and myself have discussed the Eissfeldt issue at length over the past few days. It has been decided that Eissfeldt will be allowed to play with his team in the qualifiers and is no longer be banned. He is required, however, to publicly stream any game he plays and that will be watched by an NS2WC admin and open to anyone else. The recording of the match after it has concluded is to be saved in his Twitch account until the NS2WC is over (in case there is any need for further review).
We hope this decision brings crowds into the square, trumpets blaring from the rooftops, and children frolicking in the streets in peppermint-colored outfits.
Thank you!
You're taking this VAC ban way too seriously.
EDIT: Didn't notice Reddogs post before I finished mine.
#2: I love how you're all upset now that YOU didn't get what you wanted.
Bugger off.