|
I believe that toss vs toss is, moreso than any other mirror matchup, similar to a game of poker. What's difficult about it is the difficulty of scouting, especially in the early game but also when observers come into play.
Lemme give you an example.
You go 2 gate. You scout the opponent. He has 2 zealots blocking his ramp and he brings in maybe 2 goons after that. You have no way of knowing for sure whether he will go dark templar, shuttle/reaver or simply play standard - going for goons/zealots.
Let's say you go observatory or cannons to defend against dts. But let's suppose your opponent skipped dts altogether, instead opting for mass goons. This puts you at a disadvantage. Or he might have gone shuttle/reaver, in which case all your probes might disappear in the next 10 seconds unless you defend against it. This also leaves your front door slightly more vulnerable though. Once observers pop out, you either see the guy's 200/200 army (at which point it's too late to do anything), or your observer gets sniped by cannons or enemy observes.
Basically, you always need to guess whether your opponent is teching or massing units. And that's a pretty darn difficult choice to make, especially in an rts game.
Of course, this runs both ways. Neither toss player knows exactly what the other guy is up to. At this point it becomes almost like a game of poker, where you can only make an educated guess as to what hand your opponent has and "bluffing" becomes a part of the game.
EDIT: LOL I'm not sure why poker is underlined...
 
|
On May 05 2010 11:33 zeratultassadar wrote:
I believe that toss vs toss is, moreso than any other mirror matchup, similar to a game of poker. What's difficult about it is the difficulty of scouting, especially in the early game but also when observers come into play.
Lemme give you an example.
You go 2 gate. You scout the opponent. He has 2 zealots blocking his ramp and he brings in maybe 2 goons after that. You have no way of knowing for sure whether he will go dark templar, reaver/shuttle or simplay play standard - going for goons/zealots.
Let's say you go observatory or cannons to defend against dts. But let's suppose your opponent skipped dts altogether, instead opting for mass goons. This puts you at a disadvantage. Or he might have gone shuttle/reaver, in which case all your probes might disappear in the next 10 seconds unless you defend against it. This also leaves your front door slightly more vulnerable though. Once observers pop out, you either see the guy's 200/200 army (at which point it's too late to do anything), or your observer gets sniped by cannons or enemy observes.
Basically, you always need to guess whether your opponent is teching or massing units. And that's a pretty darn difficult choice to make, especially in an rts game.
Of course, this runs both ways. Neither toss player knows exactly what the other guy is up to. At this point it becomes almost like a game of poker, where you can only make an educated guess as to what hand your opponent has and "bluffing" becomes a part of the game.
EDIT: LOL I'm not sure why poker is underlined...
because of liquid poker, i believe it auto links it
edit: or not, because mine's not linked lol
|
|
|
Korea (South)17174 Posts
rock paper scissors would be a much better comparison than poker
|
rock paper scissors is poker.
|
On May 05 2010 11:38 Rodiel wrote:
rock paper scissors is poker.
Easily the most ignorant statement of the day today.
Don't comment on things you don't understand please 
|
i have to say, of all my matchups, i find PvP to be the most annoying for me. I usually find that i can keep my scout alive long enough to see smaller things like core timings and whatnot, but i usually depend on observers to tell me what build my opponent is going.
|
I would say it's more like horseshoes.
lemme give you an example.
You go 2 gate, and you throw zealots at your opponents base. This is very similar to throwing a horseshoe at a metal rod, just like in the game horseshoes. Sometimes your throw hits and you win the game, other times you miss and have to throw again (this would be like switching tech) other times your opponent is a huge faggot and force fields his ramp so your perfectly tossed horseshoe bounces in some random ass direction and ends up in the neighbors yard because the AI fucking sucks fuck this game I hate horses
|
Korea (South)17174 Posts
On May 05 2010 11:47 floor exercise wrote:
I would say it's more like horseshoes.
lemme give you an example.
You go 2 gate, and you throw zealots at your opponents base. This is very similar to throwing a horseshoe at a metal rod, just like in the game horseshoes. Sometimes your throw hits and you win the game, other times you miss and have to throw again (this would be like switching tech) other times your opponent is a huge faggot and force fields his ramp so your perfectly tossed horseshoe bounces in some random ass direction and ends up in the neighbors yard because the AI fucking sucks fuck this game I hate horses
LMAO u have a good point
|
On May 05 2010 11:41 Carthac wrote:Easily the most ignorant statement of the day today. Don't comment on things you don't understand please
He was more pointing out that if you're going to simplify PvP that much, you might as well simplify poker that much as well... I assume ;P
|
On May 05 2010 11:47 floor exercise wrote:
I would say it's more like horseshoes.
lemme give you an example.
You go 2 gate, and you throw zealots at your opponents base. This is very similar to throwing a horseshoe at a metal rod, just like in the game horseshoes. Sometimes your throw hits and you win the game, other times you miss and have to throw again (this would be like switching tech) other times your opponent is a huge faggot and force fields his ramp so your perfectly tossed horseshoe bounces in some random ass direction and ends up in the neighbors yard because the AI fucking sucks fuck this game I hate horses
lol oh my god this is classic
|
On May 05 2010 11:54 Ftrunkz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2010 11:41 Carthac wrote:On May 05 2010 11:38 Rodiel wrote:
rock paper scissors is poker. Easily the most ignorant statement of the day today. Don't comment on things you don't understand please He was more pointing out that if you're going to simplify PvP that much, you might as well simplify poker that much as well... I assume ;P
I'm pretty sure that he said poker is rock paper scissors, which is a game of chance, unless you play like rock paper scissors tournaments on ESPN lolol
|
On May 05 2010 11:34 BDF92 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2010 11:33 zeratultassadar wrote:
I believe that toss vs toss is, moreso than any other mirror matchup, similar to a game of poker. What's difficult about it is the difficulty of scouting, especially in the early game but also when observers come into play.
Lemme give you an example.
You go 2 gate. You scout the opponent. He has 2 zealots blocking his ramp and he brings in maybe 2 goons after that. You have no way of knowing for sure whether he will go dark templar, reaver/shuttle or simplay play standard - going for goons/zealots.
Let's say you go observatory or cannons to defend against dts. But let's suppose your opponent skipped dts altogether, instead opting for mass goons. This puts you at a disadvantage. Or he might have gone shuttle/reaver, in which case all your probes might disappear in the next 10 seconds unless you defend against it. This also leaves your front door slightly more vulnerable though. Once observers pop out, you either see the guy's 200/200 army (at which point it's too late to do anything), or your observer gets sniped by cannons or enemy observes.
Basically, you always need to guess whether your opponent is teching or massing units. And that's a pretty darn difficult choice to make, especially in an rts game.
Of course, this runs both ways. Neither toss player knows exactly what the other guy is up to. At this point it becomes almost like a game of poker, where you can only make an educated guess as to what hand your opponent has and "bluffing" becomes a part of the game.
EDIT: LOL I'm not sure why poker is underlined... because of liquid poker, i believe it auto links it edit: or not, because mine's not linked lol God dammit stop quoting the entire OP just to post a two-liner immediately after. Chances are, you don't even need to quote anything because it's obvious what you're responding to. People's memories certainly don't need to be refreshed as to what that guy way above your head had said. It's not like it's a post buried under two pages of other stuff.
|
The World Series of RPS 2020
RPS = Rock Paper Scissors.
|
Ya me and my clanmates refer to PvP as a rock paper scissors match, blizz should do something about that imo.
|
if you think pvp is simply rock paper scissors you dont play enough starcraft
|
As a Z player, I hated ZvZ BO advantage so bad that I switched to Protoss. Little did I know that PvP is equally, if not more BO advantage
|
On May 05 2010 11:47 floor exercise wrote:
I would say it's more like horseshoes.
lemme give you an example.
You go 2 gate, and you throw zealots at your opponents base. This is very similar to throwing a horseshoe at a metal rod, just like in the game horseshoes. Sometimes your throw hits and you win the game, other times you miss and have to throw again (this would be like switching tech) other times your opponent is a huge faggot and force fields his ramp so your perfectly tossed horseshoe bounces in some random ass direction and ends up in the neighbors yard because the AI fucking sucks fuck this game I hate horses
This is way better than the OP
|
From my experience:
1. You really need to keep your scout for as long as possible
2. There is a point that you simply cannot scout anymore. This is where A LOT of inference drawing comes up...I suppose better players smell foul play better...be it the position of the opponent's army, scout (or the lack thereof) timing.
If I'm not sure, I go 3 gate zlot rush and pray that my opponent's base has a short rush distance. Better to take luck in my own hands than to hope that my opponent doesn't do something gay.
|
I usually don't even bother scouting my opponent's main unless it's a two player map. I'd rather have a clean, tight build order that squeezes the most out of my money, and then use the units which cannot mine minerals that I've paid for to find out what the opponent is up to. Trying to play a reactive game usually means everything you do is late.
|
I was so afraid this was going to be about SC2. I'm so glad it wasn't.
But anyway, all mirror matchups tend to be very rock-paper-scissors-y. TvT not so much past the early game, but still.
|
On May 05 2010 11:47 floor exercise wrote:
I would say it's more like horseshoes.
lemme give you an example.
You go 2 gate, and you throw zealots at your opponents base. This is very similar to throwing a horseshoe at a metal rod, just like in the game horseshoes. Sometimes your throw hits and you win the game, other times you miss and have to throw again (this would be like switching tech) other times your opponent is a huge faggot and force fields his ramp so your perfectly tossed horseshoe bounces in some random ass direction and ends up in the neighbors yard because the AI fucking sucks fuck this game I hate horses
You just won the blog section for the upcoming week.
|
hahahaha omg I hate horses xD
wonderful
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
