EPTTop 50 GM as protoss in one month - Page 4
| Blogs > intense555 |
|
Waise
3165 Posts
| ||
|
Faust852
Luxembourg4004 Posts
| ||
|
painkilla
United States695 Posts
| ||
|
BakedButters
United States748 Posts
I hope you can make it. Everybody should just switch and play PvP | ||
|
tshi
United States2495 Posts
On December 17 2013 16:03 aZealot wrote: Because, the argument: premise: Make GM top 50 with Protoss in one month conclusion: Protoss is both strategically and mechanically less demanding than Z and T makes no worthwhile sense. (Nony alludes to it above, too.) Look at all of the factors contained in that single statement. Then match the intent which is to extrapolate it to 1/3 of the player base, tournament level play, and make it into some sort of definitive statement on the game. That's some gall. So yeah, the guy is an idiot. But, I clicked into the stream for a minute and saw that it's literally, a kid. No point getting too worked up about it, even if it only encourages more idiocy on TL (and we've had quite a bit of it of late). I'd suggest he get rid of the chip on his shoulder, but as his head is stuck quite far up his own arse, I don't think he'd be able to manage it. Well, I dont know if being a kid has so much to do with it. I mean, what if Avilo praises him? Are you saying that an adult GM Terran player who also has disdain for Protoss (DAE where can I buy "FUCK PROTOSS" beanie?) agrees with him, it still doesn't have value? What if it is just to prove to himself that he is capable of doing it? When I was young, everyone called me an idiot, but i was still right -- same here. intense, I support your cause. Every win as P will make your case stronger and that much more worthwhile. I'm sure this will get the attention of the higher-ups at blizzard. Hopefully, at the very least, you get invited into the Pro Forums on Blizzard when they do the Legacy of the Void Beta to give them your input; I know avilo was in there, right? | ||
|
aZealot
New Zealand5447 Posts
As for proving to himself that he could do it - hell, yeah. That would be a worthwhile goal. I've got nothing but admiration for players who make it as GM with multiple races (either as random or as a standalone ladder race). That takes skill. But, that has little to do with "proving" whether a race is less demanding (be it mechanically or strategically or both). That said, all this Terran whine does make a Protoss want to savour all those delicious salty tears from the Terran cry-babies... | ||
|
ETisME
12621 Posts
Someone made it to top GM level with 6 pool only and even beat established players like white-ra, it doesn't mean zerg is proven to be "less mechanically and strategically challenging" or whatever. And that is only ONE strategy facing ALL 3 races. I am completely baffled at how terran GMs are so keen on proving that their race is superior in terms of mechanics etc by an inappropriate method and makes the lower league players thinking the same thing like how protoss so easy etc. | ||
|
Waise
3165 Posts
On December 17 2013 17:34 aZealot wrote: You know, I stand corrected. Thanks. He'd still be an idiot, adult or otherwise. As for proving to himself that he could do it - hell, yeah. That would be a worthwhile goal. I've got nothing but admiration for players who make it as GM with multiple races (either as random or as a standalone ladder race). That takes skill. But, that has little to do with "proving" whether a race is less demanding (be it mechanically or strategically or both). That said, all this Terran whine does make a Protoss want to savour all those delicious salty tears from the Terran cry-babies... not seeing any "whine" in the OP at all, actually. he laid out his plan, explained his thought process and started his experiment. if you categorize any opinion about the game other than "it's perfectly balanced and i love it!!" as "balance whine," then why even have a forum? when did "whining" become synonymous with "criticizing?" if i say i don't like how protoss is designed, i'm a balance whiner. if i say i don't like something about terran or protoss, i'm "biased" because i'm zerg. what's with the rash of "you're not allowed to have a negative opinion of anything" on TL? sure, if someone is being BM or raging, i understand calling the person a whiner and putting down their thread. but i don't see OP dropping curse words, belittling other players, trashing blizzard or asking for handouts. he's just trying to extrapolate a belief he has through experimentation. he didn't spam up SC2 general with it, he posted it under blogs (unless it was moved, in which case my mistake) imagine if everyone in scientific fields who came up with a hypothesis and tried to experiment upon it were labeled a whiny idiot. that would be great for the world | ||
|
QzYSc2
Netherlands281 Posts
 | ||
|
-Celestial-
United Kingdom3867 Posts
The funniest part is because SjoW already tried this and failed even if the OP does it that'll make it a 50-50 success rate for Terrans trying to reach GM with Protoss. Hardly a convincing number. On a side note I find it very amusing that the OP is hiding the fact that he already has hundreds of games played as Protoss before he even started this. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45166 Posts
On December 17 2013 16:28 painkilla wrote: Protoss players. He is not balance whining "imbatoss ez op". He is actually trying to prove it. So please take your whining about whining elsewhere. I don't think you understand how that works. On December 17 2013 20:15 QzYSc2 wrote: so many people who understand how to validate a claim in here Fixed that for you. | ||
|
Waise
3165 Posts
On December 17 2013 21:39 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I don't think you understand how that works. Fixed that for you. jesus, you're being pedantic. saying he's trying to prove it doesn't mean "if this one player succeeds at this, it's undeniable proof and everyone has to admit protoss is OP." it means he's trying to aid the effort of "proving" it (yes, everyone knows you technically can't "prove" something like this beyond opinion) by adding his experiences to the body of evidence we all have to consider | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45166 Posts
On December 17 2013 21:54 Waise wrote: jesus, you're being pedantic. saying he's trying to prove it doesn't mean "if this one player succeeds at this, it's undeniable proof and everyone has to admit protoss is OP." it means he's trying to aid the effort of "proving" it (yes, everyone knows you technically can't "prove" something like this beyond opinion) by adding his experiences to the body of evidence we all have to consider I'm not even talking about the actual definition of proof. If you've read the responses, you'd see pretty good explanations as to why the OP trying this doesn't do anything at all besides merely show he's good at the game with multiple races. The conclusion about Protoss being easier isn't a valid one to make after he makes this GM run (if he does in the first place). | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On December 17 2013 16:28 painkilla wrote: Protoss players. He is not balance whining "imbatoss ez op". He is actually trying to prove it. So please take your whining about whining elsewhere. Actually he is. Trying to prove it is secondary. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
| ||
|
abmab
Poland2 Posts
On December 17 2013 21:54 Waise wrote: jesus, you're being pedantic. saying he's trying to prove it doesn't mean "if this one player succeeds at this, it's undeniable proof and everyone has to admit protoss is OP." it means he's trying to aid the effort of "proving" it (yes, everyone knows you technically can't "prove" something like this beyond opinion) by adding his experiences to the body of evidence we all have to consider OP says that goal is to show that protoss is less mechanicaly and strategically challenging than the other two races. First of all, why two races? How this 'experiment' is going to show that protoss is less mechanicaly and strategically more challenging than zerg? Secondly, if someone is saying that he will 'show' us something, that means that he's already made his mind about certain subject, isn't he? And this is not good attitiude when conducting an experiment. You say that he's not trying to prove the statment about, let's call it, "inferiority" of Protoss, that he's only "adding the experience to the body of evidence we all have to consider". Sorry, but if you want to consider some set of data an evidence, then you must take specific steps, and this endevour does not meet the criteria of objective, scientific experiment at all (he doesnt have proper hypothesis, he is not chosing variables based on some theory, he is not operationalising variables, he doesnt have proper measuring tools, and he has no statistical means to analyze the data). For me you are saying that he's not conducting experiment while conducting experiment that will bring some 'evidence'. Let's assume that he will reach the top 50 GM with Protoss. What will that show? That he is capable of playing Protoss on reasonably high level. If he would have said in OP that this is his goal, everything would be fine. But he is saying something very different. And that's the problem. | ||
|
RampancyTW
United States577 Posts
On December 17 2013 15:17 Qwyn wrote: Uhhh.Not really? The time period of one month says A LOT by itself, rofl... If he's already in GM as Terran it stands to reason that he has good mechanics, game sense, etc. He may break top 50 GM as P, and he may not, but that doesn't really show anything unless he's unable to break top 50 as Terran. | ||
|
DinoMight
United States3725 Posts
On December 17 2013 23:07 abmab wrote: OP says that goal is to show that protoss is less mechanicaly and strategically challenging than the other two races. First of all, why two races? How this 'experiment' is going to show that protoss is less mechanicaly and strategically more challenging than zerg? Secondly, if someone is saying that he will 'show' us something, that means that he's already made his mind about certain subject, isn't he? And this is not good attitiude when conducting an experiment. You say that he's not trying to prove the statment about, let's call it, "inferiority" of Protoss, that he's only "adding the experience to the body of evidence we all have to consider". Sorry, but if you want to consider some set of data an evidence, then you must take specific steps, and this endevour does not meet the criteria of objective, scientific experiment at all (he doesnt have proper hypothesis, he is not chosing variables based on some theory, he is not operationalising variables, he doesnt have proper measuring tools, and he has no statistical means to analyze the data). For me you are saying that he's not conducting experiment while conducting experiment that will bring some 'evidence'. Let's assume that he will reach the top 50 GM with Protoss. What will that show? That he is capable of playing Protoss on reasonably high level. If he would have said in OP that this is his goal, everything would be fine. But he is saying something very different. And that's the problem. THIS +1000000000000 Just because I can offrace Terran fairly well doesn't mean that any conjecture I make about Terran is automatically correct. The same applies to this guy and Protoss. | ||
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
The statement intense made was a rather asinine one, but he is a smart player. I've been watching his stream, and he's doing fairly well with protoss considering. He lacks a fundamental understanding of how the race works, but his mechanics and general decision making are fairly strong, strong enough to beat most masters players who suck balls. In the end, I'm not sure if getting to GM as protoss proves anything about the race, but is probably more a testament to intense's skill. I originally came here to hate, but. I hope intense has a good experience and I hope he learns a few things about protoss he didn't know before. | ||
|
intense555
United States474 Posts
| ||
| ||
