Profile of A_E

Regardless of the sample size not being ideal and the statics not being strong enough etc etc.

Whatever holes you want to poke at it, I think you're 100% wrong if you think Brits aren't woefully under-powered in elite level 1v1.

Two Brit players spring to mind: Aimstrong and HelpingHans these two only used Brits in tournaments before this one, they no longer feel they can due to the Brit crutches being removed and the faction now being woefully underpowered, so they're playing USF and Soviets instead. These two players are the most successful tournament Brits players of all time... and they now won't play brits.

We may not be able to prove this due to the 'low sample size' but given hardly anyone is even going to play Brits any more you're kind of defending the balance by saying "oh look no one is playing them, so you can't prove they're underpowered....".

Come Citadel and 7 Brit games total, we'll see them go 1W 6D probably. Then maybe we can revisit how ridiculous anyone defending balance of Brits is in this thread.

Thanks for hosting and casting. Constructive criticism (I realize was hitting 5hr mark) but the qual finals (devm v. talisman) was a little snarky for me. Would much prefer hearing analysis on why talisman was in such a terrible position than just constant jokes and snark of his play. Wasn't really preferable to watching the replay sans casting.

I completely understand where you're coming from, but after a full day of casting one sided games it's really difficult to keep up the commentary and the enthusiasm without having a bit of fun and trying to make light hearted entertainment out of it a little bit.

How much can you explain that Talisman's build order didn't work vs. DevM's build order. Talisman sat in base and was too defensive after being countered. DevM waited in good positions and kept pushing him back. I think we did say that several times?

If we overstepped the boundaries of snarkiness though please could you find the moment you started to get annoyed? I'd like to listen to it, as I never really watch these things back usually, and it may help us improve. Thank you!

Here is a video that explains why GCS2's brackets are legitimate, can be replicated by anyone, and the same brackets would be generated every time.



Here is a text explanation with links:

GCS2's brackets are based on traditional seeding where the higher seed the less likely they are to meet another high seed early on.

For GCS2.ORG it's done automatically and entirely based on that principle, and uses the exact same mechanism as Challonge and any other site like this one for example

The same numbers (seeds) are in the same places.

This can be proven if you take the 32 check ins we had for Barbarossa.

1) Take the original seeds. Remove no shows, and you're left with a list like this one.

2. Put players into tournament brackets, you can use a website like Challonge it will give you a result that looks like this.

The results will be exactly identical to the brackets for Barbarossa.

If any player ever feels hard done to or wants to question something please come to me Stormless, ed80hertz, Sturmpanther, Ishtari, LegioIXHispania, or Currahee. We're literally only trying our best to put on a cool competitive event, and are happy to help if there's ever any misunderstanding.

FYI There were three non-participants in the top 32 last time, which explains why despite the shakeup Ikab formally who was 28 and now 25, might get Hans again.

Also another clarification about Aimstrong and HelpingHans in particular as I've had messages about it, they both would have dropped a seed had one of the top seeds not been removed from the list.

The sherman arguments are redundant here, yes they should do a better job of helping players distinguish between them too... just because they don't it doesn't mean that they should have added fuel barrels to T34-76s on a random basis like they did!