|
On January 11 2012 14:06 sickoota wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 14:01 Plexa wrote:On January 11 2012 13:53 sickoota wrote:
You can only dress up coinflipping so much, sorry. If mindgames alone can dictate 4 out of every 5 games that is not a good place for a game to be in competitively. Denying scouting and putting a bunker on the lowground isn't some revolutionary, highly intelligent play, its just praying that dumb luck will favor you based on a couple of replays you watched of your competitor and it makes for a horrid spectator experience. I guess poker is just coinflips to you too. I guess you can't deny that "the current trend is x, so I will assume my opponent will be preparing for x so I will do Y instead and hopefully win" is strategy of a sort, but I remain highly skeptical of the OP's claim that this is demonstrative of any sort of strategical brilliance or that spectators should be enthralled by the intelligence of these player's decisions. Isn't the fact that you can sum up each of these games in one sentence each (leenock thought MC was X because of current metagame trends but instead he Y, GG) indicative of something lacking? Compared to macro games, where the decisions would take pages and pages to explicate, there is something clearly unsatisfying about matches decided solely by BO mindgames.
this post explains very well how I sometimes feel about sc2. both as a spectator and as a player. nice post.
Surely everyone can agree that the best games require some back and forth action right?
|
Those are some great points that've been pointed out. props
|
Eye-opening indeed, very nice post.
|
Very nice post. I liked most the supernova game felt sorry for MC in that game.
I wish zerg had oportunity to make such mindgames in his matchups. All feel same macro up, defend all pressure, win in lategame with superior production. You cant rly make cute moves like this :/
|
Loved that Supernova expand feint, such a smart move, great run-down 
|
Great read, though I do still feel for Leenock. It seems harder for Zerg to use clever mindgames to surprise your opponent and sweep a quick win. Only time it's possible is an all-in vs forge fe I think.
|
Good writeup.
Most of the mind games made sense during the match.
The important thing that lower level players like us need to remember is that it's VERY rare for a pro in a tournament to just blindly execute one of these builds with no thought process behind it.
People like to say coin flip, but look at the stats.
Outside of the top 3-5 players in the world, win rates eventually approach 50% as the game is played out.
If you see an edge because of a map or a build by your opponent or a weakness in the meta game, and you think your build has a say 65% chance of working, it's actually quite a sound bet.
|
On January 11 2012 21:56 Veriol wrote:
Very nice post. I liked most the supernova game felt sorry for MC in that game.
I wish zerg had oportunity to make such mindgames in his matchups. All feel same macro up, defend all pressure, win in lategame with superior production. You cant rly make cute moves like this :/
I would disagree that all zerg can do is hold pressure go macro and try win later. Zerg have both drops and nydus worm and they nearly never use them even though both are very powerful, zerg insist on playing macro because its proven to work really well I just feel that at some stage double infestor or infestor baneling drops to kill off whole mineral lines and nydus flanks have to happen. Even the old style +2 attack baneling drop is really effective if your opponent doesnt react quickly enough. I just feel like zerg puts themselves in this macro box where they have to have more bases at all times when really having more units positioned better is a really good way to play also.
|
Also great OP nice to see more than just complaints about balance being posted and to have actual strategy discussed
|
On January 11 2012 14:39 Blitzkrieg0 wrote:
Are the sc2 pros really that into mind fucking eachother? I suppose group B was the group of death and desperate times call for desperate measures, but that's some serious dedication ^_^
Not sure if this has been said yet, but there were 3 oGs members in that group, so I think it's safe to assume they're far more familiar with each others' tendencies and playstyles than most players.
Nice analysis, I also quite liked MCs proxy Stargate on Metropolis after he realized exactly what build ForGG was going for.
|
I definitely have a deeper understanding after reading all that. I did not even slightly catch how MC had been tricked into Banshee cloak play but your analysis is dead-on.
|
This is great. Thank you.
Now I will have to go back to those game and see them again just to appreciate these mind tricks :-D
|
Good read, and thanks for the insight, let me help you out with how to use the word metagame.
On January 11 2012 09:11 iamke55 wrote:
standard macro opening in the current metagame: 1 rax FE with no gas.
Supernova, knowing MC's play style and the fact that the current metagame favors 4 gate against Terran's gasless FE, mindgamed MC by going for cloaked banshees disguised as a gasless FE.
all popular in the current metagame:[list][*]4 gate +1 zealot pressure. This build exploits the trend of Zergs expanding twice without gas to skip any sentries or additional cannons beyond the first and sending 8 zealots with +1 weapons to the Zerg's 3rd base at 8 minutes.
Three oGs players today were able to take advantage of trends in the metagame and knowledge of players' past tendencies to disguise their builds, inducing their opponents into sub-optimal responses to their real strategy.
The first metagame should be replaced with Trend in strategy.
(metagame has to have a specific opponent in mind, there is no general metagame that works for the general public, because not everybody follows the same trend on whatever match up we are talking about, to apply metagame one must know something about the opponent, knowing the trend of what the general public would think in that particular match up doesn't imply what your opponent might do, it only implies what he knows.)
On the second sentence the word metagame should be replaced with Trend in strategy, and the word mindgamed should be replaced with metagame.
(Supernova can use his knowledge of MC's play style to metagame MC, as he knows how MC would react. He can't use the current trends of tvp to metagame MC, as he has no idea whether or not MC would follow the current trends of tvp if Supernova does not have any knowledge of MC's play style.)
On the 3rd sentence the word metagame should be replaced with Trend in strategy
(again, popular trend can only be interchangeable with metagame if the particular opponent's style follows strictly with the popular trend with little to no deviation.)
On the 4th sentence it should have just been trends in strategy, instead of trends in the metagame.
( you almost got it, you have half of the phase right, and then you put metagame in it and screw everything up. a;ldfjaldfjadfkja;dklfjakl;dfj)
|
I wish that all write-ups were this in-depth and informative.
|
Nice write up but i think your view of scouting is alittle bit off, or perception of scouting" very much so in tvp since that opening can be any of the following gasless FE or 111 or cloackbanshe to mech or just a 5-6 rax allin.
it was just simply bad play from mc's part i belive since he easy could have gotten the scout just buffer bunker with a stalker/zealot and run by with stalker/probe
|
How can people think mindgames are a bad thing?..... Hell, the majority of series in individual leagues in broodwar are based around mindgames much more heavily then is used in SC2 currently. Mind games are gooood, it adds a completely different level to the game where you have to actually think and not be a mechanical monkey.
|
Nice read! Unfortunately I haven't seen the games but I would love to read more analyses like this.
|
Waa this was an awesome read.
My PvZ will never be the same again.
Prepare for rape EU zergs!!!!
|
SoCal8910 Posts
im kinda curious if supernova and forgg planned those strategies in order to mess with MC - think about how intelligent that would be (albeit frustrating)
show MC that ogs terrans are capable and willing to switch into cloaked banshees and force him to play safely. then with the knowledge he'll play safely, take a quick third the next with NO gas.
might have been more viable in the old format, but interesting to think about nonetheless
|
sick read. glad to see that players are finally intelligently utilizing metagame tactics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
