In terms of watching SC2. The reason SC2 doesn't work is because the game is overly balanced. Although some would argue Protoss are overpowered, or now Zerg. The point is when a player becomes exceptionally efficient at a strategy, to the extent where he cannot be beat, the strategy gets nerfed i.e., Innovation and Hellbats. Nevertheless, what does every sport need in order to achieve? It needs a star! Jordan, Pele, Ronaldo, Tiger etc. The star can be promoted and this in turn develops a fan base around the star and then the viewers get emotionally attached and more involved in the sport. This is the cycle of how sports get large fanbases. Indeed, you can support teams, however SC2 to a large extent is an individual game such as golf.
From the perspective of professionals
If the game is constantly balanced stars cannot emerge. For instance, Innovation was the best player around with Hell Bat drops but then they got nerfed and now he is still a good player but very beatable. When there are no stars within a sport it is very difficult for the viewer to become emotionally attached to the game. This is what SC2 needs emotion. Last year Jaedong held startcraft on his back! One of the only times I was truly emotionally invested was when I watched Jaedong play last year. But now watching Jaedong play makes me want to cry. Without engaging the viewer SC2 will fail. SC2 needs to have stars that we want to see win but if the game is consistently being re-balanced this will not occur as no one player can dominate.
The issue with balancing is that it assumes that there should be equality between the races and this creates a Zero Sum game whereby when you nerf (buff) a race you directly disadvantage (advantage) one race over the other. Whilst I appreciate Blizzard are in a difficult position and should not just let one race be better than another, I think they should place more emphasis on allowing professionals to be creative and this may help stars emerge. Many commnetators acknowledge that lesser players simply watch the best players and replicate their style. This leads to a batch of very uncreative players. An example of innovation is Polt's strategy to counter attack blink stalkers when they leave the base. It is a very dangerous path when a company goes down the root of patching the game to make it more balanced because it can be viewed as: Oh a player gets so good that he wins, this players vods are mimicked by other players, oh now the race is OP. So is it by chance that there are so many Protoss players and Protoss are deemed to be OP. Or does the rationale work differently? Protoss is also the least standard out of all the races, therefore timings and costly strats are very powerful albeit risky. Or because there are so many Protoss players more Protoss play more often, they invest more time and energy into understanding how Protoss by the very fact there are more players play one particular race. Now this race that is far more developed than other races can beat other races (including Protoss themselves) because all this investment by the players has produces more intricate play, but rather than rewarding player for developing a better understanding of the game Blizzard nerfs them! The motto from Blizzard is play and be good, but dont be too good otherwise we will nerf you because everyone should have the equal opportunity to win. Is that the rationale of Sports to you? Does a soccer team like Leeds United have the same chance of wining as Real Madrid? No, they are not playing on an equal playing ground. When Messi or Ronaldo dominate a sport does Fifa say hey we have to put them with a lesser team as to level the playing ground? In addition, balance changes can be triggered by populous opinion.
In my opinion video games are not a traditional form of sport, they are post-modern. Do you know any other sports where the conditions by which the game is played change so much? How many times do they bring out new football pitches? new goal? new soccer shoes? Moreover, all these changes could rationale be considered minor in comparison to patch changes that regularly occur in SC2.
From the perspective of the consumer/casual player
Also, the psychological qualities necessary to play games are very different. invariably SC2 requires too much initial investment in order to reap the benefits out of it, I think that you are only going to attract a certain type of player with this mechanic, there is not enough luck involved, if you are playing someone who is better than you that is it, you are very unlikely to win.This would be simple to measure, wins versus loses and see does APM on average predict the winner throughout the leagues. Psychological this is a big problem for casual gamers. Learning all the strats the counters, timings, increasing APM, improving micro it can be a form of self-flagellation. Whereas I believe MOBA games are really all about just clicking on enemies and casting spells? This has a very appeasing sensation to the person neurologically an extremely hedonistic game play (Operant conditioning: a stimulus that is presented in a variable ratio offers the most effective form of positive reinforcement and the quickest and most enjoyable way that humans learn i.e., slot machines at casinos). I play a game for fun not to learn a whole load of strats before I can make it out of Bronze league!! So to wrap it up MOBA=Hedonism SC2= psychological self mutilation. That being said perhaps there are inherent cultural differences which explain why let's say Americans (hedonistic nation) are not that invested in SC2 while Koreans (honour nation) are. I will write more or answer questions if there is an appetite for the discussion.
You can still have stars in a balanced game. The problem with hellbats was that EVERYBODY was abusing them and there was no inherent risk with going for them. Stars that abuse one thing that is imbalanced aren't stars at all. Think about Polt. He's been doing the same 1-2 builds for years with balanced units and is still winning tournaments. This is because he's an all-around solid player that found a solid build that compliments his style. He's a true superstar Terran. Being a star is based on being all-around solid and being charismatic.
The thing that makes a game unbalanced should not be the game but the players skill. These supers stars of other sports are not abusing a unbalance in the game they are abusing the unbalance in there skill.
wow, finally someone says "overly balanced". I agree 100000x
Blizzard just patches everything that seems strong, even if excellent players made the difference and not the unit itself. A very great example is the decrease of infestor speed in may2011 (I think), Everyone except few sucked at control own infestors and after that patch everyone control them very good and the "few" lost one of their strenght: fights with great control of own support-units. (Yes the speed-decrease was a huge buff for everyone, almost nothing for better players)
Design of sc2 hurts me pretty hard. Deathball, 2sec fights at 200/200, 3base income-cap, hardcounter units, very straightforwardly games, t3 units most boring sc2 units, spells like FF & TimeWarp, etc.
At any time, if there comes a new rts-game to esports, goodbye sc2 for me.
Edit: 50-50 is always bad/boring. A vs B 52-48, B vs C 52-48, C vs A 52-48 is much more exciting.
You know what other game is, to use your term, overly balanced but still has stars? Chess, which has been a non-traditional sport for much longer than any video game and still has had its stars. The analogy often used between Chess and Starcraft is apt for a number of reasons, in that strategically speaking you cannot employ certain strategies and expect to make forward progress in your ELO or ladder ranking respectively. So when you say:
I play a game for fun not to learn a whole load of strats before I can make it out of Bronze league!!
You are ignoring the fundamental premise of the entire game which is strategy. Now if you want to play for fun, and do wonky builds that is fine and well, I lost to mass Raven on Antiga Shipyard, and remember being rather pissed about it; but saying that a steeper learning curve is killing the game is a gross overstatement.
Bobby Fisher, to stretch the tired Chess analogy even further, thought that standard Chess had become stale as well, that the early game was almost completely sorted in terms of viable strategies and he opted to create a game called Chess, or Fisher960 (the two are used interchangeably at times) wherein the back row of pieces is completely random, and there are 960 possible combinations or orders of the back rank. Similar things have happened with the Arcade and Starbow.
There are many ways to skin a cat so to speak, or have fun with SC2. You seem to have a rather narrow scope of your options.
The issue with balancing is that it assumes that there should be equality between the races...
You ever sat on a three-legged stool where one leg is shorter than the other two, or all three were different lengths?
Your thoughts on Protoss are also about six months behind, and rather strange at that. I would say the focal point of balance of late has been the reemergence of Hellbats post Transformation Servos removal.
Protoss is also the least standard out of all the races...
Warp in not withstanding, mechanically Terran and Protoss are much more akin to one another than Zerg is to any of the other races.
its the same reason why nobody watches the world cup, soccer is a mirror matchup so its boring as shit and way too balanced so theres no stars
and clearly people doing well with a certain race suddenly is not due to imbalance but because they clearly are all working harder than the other races
have you ever considered over representation of a certain race or unit or build is due to their increased effectiveness shutting out the competition and not some kind of conspiracy by blizzard to nerf anything effective to the ground?
So if racial imbalance creates stars... then I guess Warcraft II had the starpower, and BW had none?
I think the premise is faulty, and therefore so are the conclusions.
If instead of 'balance' you meant 'signature moves', then we might have something there. BW had a lot of signature moves whether it was muta micro or vulture micro. But an imbalanced race doesn't create stars so much as revulsion (or else capitulation- everyone play Orc). An OP units just means you will see them every game. But unless they have intrinsic microbility, it again doesn't create starpower, only " *yawn. I only see X unit in every matchup, in every game."
On June 27 2014 23:27 Dingodile wrote: Edit: 50-50 is always bad/boring. A vs B 52-48, B vs C 52-48, C vs A 52-48 is much more exciting.
No, the human factor is more than enough to make seemingly boring stats be exciting. A slight percentage of difference doesn't change anything because it's what's called the margin of error, which is much less important than just people being people and general shifts in meta and whatever.
That said it has always been my opinion that part of the reason why I can't find SC2 exciting anymore is that the emphasis for the game is put on making it balanced rather than making it enjoyable to play and to watch. That's not to say it's boring, although I myself have not been really enjoying it for the last >year. It's just that I feel like the design philosophy has always been about competitive play and finding the best of the best. By itself, it sounds like a great idea and I might have thought it was when I was at the Blizzcon in 2009 and I couldn't wait for SC2 to come out and I wanted it to be a hard, unforgiving game.
Yet in the end I think that too much of the design philosophy goes into balance, as if Kim and Browder were just looking at fluctuations in the meta, looking at how those affect win rates and pushing those inconsistencies down with hotfixes as if game design was now just a game of whack-a-mole on a misshapen bell curve. In some cases, it's justified, but to me it seemed like the expansion was just a slightly more elaborate instance of this happening. They just slapped on some mud and polished it so it would fit into this bland preconception of how the game should be played. A sort of mold which limits creativity, imagination and the fun that reavers and mutas used to be.
Despite that, SC2 is not dying. Perhaps it's not as popular as it might have been if Blizzard had better supported the game when it was new and if blizzard ceased to operate like a company in the 90's and the early 2000's. Yet, it's not dying. SC2 is where it should be, as an aging, complicated game that retailed for $60 and up to $80-90 if you bought the game and its expansion on amazon.ca today. Even with the cards played right, nothing could have competed with the recent surge of F2P MOBAs which were frankly destined, regardless of SC2's success, to overtake it without contest. I hate them, but you can't deny that those games inherently have what it takes to get people playing it. It's free, it's easy to get into the game and play with people who are of your level, it's easy to lie to yourself and blame your team for your failings, it's easy to feel confident about your ability even when you don't know what you're doing. SC2 is expensive and it's a niche, it's complex, it's stagnant.
There's no harm in being a niche and I think that all those "SC2 is dying" doomsday messages come from the fact that SC2 used to be the big shot game and now that it isn't, people feel like somehow something is wrong about SC2 while in reality it's just that there's something incredibly right about MOBAs from a marketing standpoint.
1st Point: What evidence is there that SC2 is dying? Blizzard has at least one more expansion pack planned, prize pools continue to rise, ladder games queue up quickly and the meta-game rarely becomes stale before Blizzard unleashes new maps or a patch. KeSPA runs a healthy pro-league and the GSL remains popular.
2nd Point: There aren't stars? Soo isn't a Star? Parting? MC? Maru? I think what you mean is that there aren't Stars with long careers (NesTea being the notable exception), but that is due to the nature of e-sports (It's a young man's game) especially in Korea where players careers are cut short for mandatory military service. Still, powerhouse teams like SKT remain relevant through roster changes and foreign teams have been quick to sign popular stars like Jaedong to keep their careers alive.
3rd Point: The LoL factor. I don't think we should be surprised MOBA's are surpassing SC2 in popularity especially outside Korea. They are considerably more accessible to play and team sports have a long history of being more popular than their individual counterparts. That said, nothing beats Starcraft as a test of skill and strategy and it looks to remain the crown jewel of individual e-sports for the foreseeable future.
The Broader Point: Starcraft will always be a niche game in most places. It's just too damn fucking challenging to be anything else. If it's dying (which I've established, it's not), that's the reason. It's dip in popularity have nothing to do with balance or specific game mechanics. But for those of us who have committed to learning the game, seeing it played at the highest level is a beautiful thing. Check out Heart's comeback versus XiGua in game 2 of their series(WCS America) and tell me again that SC2 is in anything but great shape.
Its actually amusing at one point, after reading for a time, because he mentions people like pele being stars in soccer (or football for most people I suppose, I'm north american)...at that point the argument should have been relinquished. Soccer, a game where both sides are evenly balanced, and both sides play by the same rules. And there are still superstars, people who gain national and sometimes worldwide acclaim. You don't need to read anything else after that. The same is true for countless other games and sports.
Chess is perfectly balanced, you could not have a more even game besides who goes first (which is minor as best as we can tell). Yet you have superstars in chess that people love to watch, like Magnus Carlsen or Viswanathan Anand. Think of any number of other professional sports, there are stars everywhere. You can only conclude that the issue has nothing to do with over-balancing the game. Even at ideal balance levels it should be irrelevant if *every other* sport is any indication!
Anyway I think it would irritate everyone to no end to see the game being blatantly imbalanced in some way. I'd rather they try the opposite even if it makes the game a bit more boring.
On June 28 2014 01:21 radscorpion9 wrote: Its actually amusing at one point, after reading for a time, because he mentions people like pele being stars in soccer (or football for most people I suppose, I'm north american)...at that point the argument should have been relinquished. Soccer, a game where both sides are evenly balanced, and both sides play by the same rules. And there are still superstars, people who gain national and sometimes worldwide acclaim. You don't need to read anything else after that. The same is true for countless other games and sports.
Chess is perfectly balanced, you could not have a more even game besides who goes first (which is minor as best as we can tell). Yet you have superstars in chess that people love to watch, like Magnus Carlsen or Viswanathan Anand. Think of any number of other professional sports, there are stars everywhere. You can only conclude that the issue has nothing to do with over-balancing the game. Even at ideal balance levels it should be irrelevant if *every other* sport is any indication!
Anyway I think it would irritate everyone to no end to see the game being blatantly imbalanced in some way. I'd rather they try the opposite even if it makes the game a bit more boring.
Balancing has hardly ever been the reason why a player fell off.
INnoVation's main strength wasn't hellbats. It was his main strength in TvT, and even there I'd argue there were better TvTers at that time to begin with (like Bomber or Maru). And he didn't fall off after the patch. He wasn't superdominant to begin with (Soulkey winning WCS season 1, Maru winning season 2; INnoVation only taking the season finals in that time periode, and no other title at all).
And same goes for others. Mvp/Nestea - dominant over various patches. Life being strong with BL/Infestor, in early HotS without it, and then bouncing back and forth. MC, amazing player regardless of the balance state. Sniper/Seed... falling off without any real updates happening.
People attribute far too much of an individuals performance to balance. INnoVation was the best Terran (shared with Taeja) at the end of WoL and the best Terran at the beginning of HotS. If the only reason for him falling off would be balance, then he could still be the best Terran, which he simply wasn't anymore towards the end of 2013. Not because "no more hellbat drops", but because other players simply got better and he didn't as much. These days, it looks like he could be coming back to the very top of Terrans. Not by some magic patch, but by him stepping up is game again.
On June 27 2014 22:42 TheCzarOfAll wrote: You can still have stars in a balanced game. The problem with hellbats was that EVERYBODY was abusing them and there was no inherent risk with going for them. Stars that abuse one thing that is imbalanced aren't stars at all. Think about Polt. He's been doing the same 1-2 builds for years with balanced units and is still winning tournaments. This is because he's an all-around solid player that found a solid build that compliments his style. He's a true superstar Terran. Being a star is based on being all-around solid and being charismatic.
First of all charisma is an attribute given to a group member by it''s members, charisma is something defined by the group and an intrinsic quality. Therefore, it is hard to inherently be charismatic. Where does Polt end up these days? Zerg has been knocking him out recently! Nevertheless, I like Polt and your opinions, I agree that you can have stars in a balanced game but there success tends to end after a period of time, further relative to other sports that is a short period of time!
Thank you for your input, indeed you can have stars, but by the time they get real stardom someone gets nerfed and then they end up not being such a star.
On June 27 2014 23:13 Dizmaul wrote: The thing that makes a game unbalanced should not be the game but the players skill. These supers stars of other sports are not abusing a unbalance in the game they are abusing the unbalance in there skill.
So there is no imbalance in the transfer policies in soccer???
On June 27 2014 23:40 ThomasjServo wrote: You know what other game is, to use your term, overly balanced but still has stars? Chess, which has been a non-traditional sport for much longer than any video game and still has had its stars. The analogy often used between Chess and Starcraft is apt for a number of reasons, in that strategically speaking you cannot employ certain strategies and expect to make forward progress in your ELO or ladder ranking respectively. So when you say:
I play a game for fun not to learn a whole load of strats before I can make it out of Bronze league!!
You are ignoring the fundamental premise of the entire game which is strategy. Now if you want to play for fun, and do wonky builds that is fine and well, I lost to mass Raven on Antiga Shipyard, and remember being rather pissed about it; but saying that a steeper learning curve is killing the game is a gross overstatement.
Bobby Fisher, to stretch the tired Chess analogy even further, thought that standard Chess had become stale as well, that the early game was almost completely sorted in terms of viable strategies and he opted to create a game called Chess, or Fisher960 (the two are used interchangeably at times) wherein the back row of pieces is completely random, and there are 960 possible combinations or orders of the back rank. Similar things have happened with the Arcade and Starbow.
There are many ways to skin a cat so to speak, or have fun with SC2. You seem to have a rather narrow scope of your options.
The issue with balancing is that it assumes that there should be equality between the races...
You ever sat on a three-legged stool where one leg is shorter than the other two, or all three were different lengths?
Your thoughts on Protoss are also about six months behind, and rather strange at that. I would say the focal point of balance of late has been the reemergence of Hellbats post Transformation Servos removal.
Protoss is also the least standard out of all the races...
Warp in not withstanding, mechanically Terran and Protoss are much more akin to one another than Zerg is to any of the other races.
As an avid chess player I can tell you playing as Black or White has immense repercussion for the game. In fact chess is quite imbalanced White has first move, the location of the Bishops and importance of this location vary as a function of Black or White.
When I said '
I play a game for fun not to learn a whole load of strats before I can make it out of Bronze league!!
' I was speaking as someone who is only interested in casual play, that is all, it was not my personal opinion, also should people be penalized for only being casual players?
The step learning curve as you aptly put it is killing the game! Look at the amount of people watching LOL on Twitch now versus SC2 enough said.
As a chess player, Fischer960 is not popular.
But the way you play three different races is very different. i.e., hatch timings for zerg versus nexus, Zerg you must expand quicker. As opposed to relishing the difference balance is emphasized.
I wasnt talking about mechanics I was talking about all-in based strats.
I disagree with OP. I don't watch or enjoy SC2 anymore because I found the metagame to be boring, too much emphasis on timing attacks and surprise all-ins - not enough focus on outplaying your opponent in the traditional SC1 sense. I played Protoss and it's shitty when the optimal way to play the race is two base timing attacks. In my opinion, SC2 needs to incorporate more of a defenders advantage, and encourage more expanding.
On June 28 2014 01:21 radscorpion9 wrote: Its actually amusing at one point, after reading for a time, because he mentions people like pele being stars in soccer (or football for most people I suppose, I'm north american)...at that point the argument should have been relinquished. Soccer, a game where both sides are evenly balanced, and both sides play by the same rules. And there are still superstars, people who gain national and sometimes worldwide acclaim. You don't need to read anything else after that. The same is true for countless other games and sports.
Chess is perfectly balanced, you could not have a more even game besides who goes first (which is minor as best as we can tell). Yet you have superstars in chess that people love to watch, like Magnus Carlsen or Viswanathan Anand. Think of any number of other professional sports, there are stars everywhere. You can only conclude that the issue has nothing to do with over-balancing the game. Even at ideal balance levels it should be irrelevant if *every other* sport is any indication!
Anyway I think it would irritate everyone to no end to see the game being blatantly imbalanced in some way. I'd rather they try the opposite even if it makes the game a bit more boring.
Is the method of attaining players balanced? Soccer is super inbalanced, come on son.
Chess is not perfectly balanced, white moves first dictates how the game is played, Bishops on different places, better castling position for white. There are difference in chess, yet the strats embrace this, the game doesnt get patched.
On June 28 2014 00:47 Slayer91 wrote: its the same reason why nobody watches the world cup, soccer is a mirror matchup so its boring as shit and way too balanced so theres no stars
and clearly people doing well with a certain race suddenly is not due to imbalance but because they clearly are all working harder than the other races
have you ever considered over representation of a certain race or unit or build is due to their increased effectiveness shutting out the competition and not some kind of conspiracy by blizzard to nerf anything effective to the ground?
It must be an Irish thing, but you seem to get what I am talking about!
On June 28 2014 01:55 Big J wrote: Balancing has hardly ever been the reason why a player fell off.
INnoVation's main strength wasn't hellbats. It was his main strength in TvT, and even there I'd argue there were better TvTers at that time to begin with (like Bomber or Maru). And he didn't fall off after the patch. He wasn't superdominant to begin with (Soulkey winning WCS season 1, Maru winning season 2; INnoVation only taking the season finals in that time periode, and no other title at all).
And same goes for others. Mvp/Nestea - dominant over various patches. Life being strong with BL/Infestor, in early HotS without it, and then bouncing back and forth. MC, amazing player regardless of the balance state. Sniper/Seed... falling off without any real updates happening.
People attribute far too much of an individuals performance to balance. INnoVation was the best Terran (shared with Taeja) at the end of WoL and the best Terran at the beginning of HotS. If the only reason for him falling off would be balance, then he could still be the best Terran, which he simply wasn't anymore towards the end of 2013. Not because "no more hellbat drops", but because other players simply got better and he didn't as much. These days, it looks like he could be coming back to the very top of Terrans. Not by some magic patch, but by him stepping up is game again.
Funny cause your argument supports the idea that Blizzard should not balance, if it makes not difference whether you patch or not then why do it?
On June 28 2014 02:19 Salv wrote: I disagree with OP. I don't watch or enjoy SC2 anymore because I found the metagame to be boring, too much emphasis on timing attacks and surprise all-ins - not enough focus on outplaying your opponent in the traditional SC1 sense. I played Protoss and it's shitty when the optimal way to play the race is two base timing attacks. In my opinion, SC2 needs to incorporate more of a defenders advantage, and encourage more expanding.
On June 27 2014 22:56 Paljas wrote: can comfirm, i only watch sc2 with a laptop on a cemetery, otherwise it just doesnt have the right atmosphere
I was going to make a "nah, it's not dying, only shrinking to fit the current needs of the scene," comment, and then I scrolled down.
ROFL.
I mean, you can talk about whether the game is fun or not, and whether or not it is designed well or not (I have a good comparison to BW I always make that really sums up why I feel the two games are different), which has been done before to DEATH, but the game is still going strong.
Of COURSE it is shrinking - there are too many players and everything is so stacked, and other games are in the scene now competing for eyes and ears.
But dying? Nah I think that's too much. Giving into a bit of sensationalism. The game isn't dead until the last player drops dead of exhaustion! BW is a wonderful example of a game which is still going strong after so many years of time. I'm sure you can think of more than a few others ^^.
On June 28 2014 01:55 Big J wrote: Balancing has hardly ever been the reason why a player fell off.
INnoVation's main strength wasn't hellbats. It was his main strength in TvT, and even there I'd argue there were better TvTers at that time to begin with (like Bomber or Maru). And he didn't fall off after the patch. He wasn't superdominant to begin with (Soulkey winning WCS season 1, Maru winning season 2; INnoVation only taking the season finals in that time periode, and no other title at all).
And same goes for others. Mvp/Nestea - dominant over various patches. Life being strong with BL/Infestor, in early HotS without it, and then bouncing back and forth. MC, amazing player regardless of the balance state. Sniper/Seed... falling off without any real updates happening.
People attribute far too much of an individuals performance to balance. INnoVation was the best Terran (shared with Taeja) at the end of WoL and the best Terran at the beginning of HotS. If the only reason for him falling off would be balance, then he could still be the best Terran, which he simply wasn't anymore towards the end of 2013. Not because "no more hellbat drops", but because other players simply got better and he didn't as much. These days, it looks like he could be coming back to the very top of Terrans. Not by some magic patch, but by him stepping up is game again.
Funny cause your argument supports the idea that Blizzard should not balance, if it makes not difference whether you patch or not then why do it?
no it does not support it. It makes a difference for being the best player. It makes no difference for INnoVation being the best Terran. All the players that fell off didn't just fall off as the X-th best player, but also stoppped being the best player of their own race. Ergo the reason for them falling off cannot possible have been the balance change to begin with.
The chances to win as Zerg or Protoss should be equal. That's what balance is for. The chance that DIMAGA wins the GSL instead of soO doesn't change through that. So soO's stardom doesn't get influenced by it. What does change INnoVations stardom is when you don't buff Terran after months of being dominated by Zerg and Protoss.
I don't understand why it is always stated that chess is imbalanced. This is not the case because players always have to play both colors the same number of times in a tournament.
Likewise, the balance problem in StarCraft wouldn't exist if each player would have to play all 3 races in a matchup.
On June 27 2014 22:56 Paljas wrote: can comfirm, i only watch sc2 with a laptop on a cemetery, otherwise it just doesnt have the right atmosphere
I was going to make a "nah, it's not dying, only shrinking to fit the current needs of the scene," comment, and then I scrolled down.
ROFL.
I mean, you can talk about whether the game is fun or not, and whether or not it is designed well or not (I have a good comparison to BW I always make that really sums up why I feel the two games are different), which has been done before to DEATH, but the game is still going strong.
Of COURSE it is shrinking - there are too many players and everything is so stacked, and other games are in the scene now competing for eyes and ears.
But dying? Nah I think that's too much. Giving into a bit of sensationalism. The game isn't dead until the last player drops dead of exhaustion! BW is a wonderful example of a game which is still going strong after so many years of time. I'm sure you can think of more than a few others ^^.
I think it is dying in terms of new fans emerging. Professionals emerge yeah because it is a job for them. I mean genuinely new fanbase, not a small niche of passionate fans (which by the way I have no problem with at all, I am one)
On June 28 2014 02:44 urboss wrote: I don't understand why it is always stated that chess is imbalanced. This is not the case because players always have to play both colors the same number of times in a tournament.
Likewise, the balance problem in StarCraft wouldn't exist if each player would have to play all 3 races in a matchup.
Agreed, but the culture of specifying one race in SC and only playing them, de-facto leads to imbalance! Players should be more like Scarlett!!
On June 28 2014 01:55 Big J wrote: Balancing has hardly ever been the reason why a player fell off.
INnoVation's main strength wasn't hellbats. It was his main strength in TvT, and even there I'd argue there were better TvTers at that time to begin with (like Bomber or Maru). And he didn't fall off after the patch. He wasn't superdominant to begin with (Soulkey winning WCS season 1, Maru winning season 2; INnoVation only taking the season finals in that time periode, and no other title at all).
And same goes for others. Mvp/Nestea - dominant over various patches. Life being strong with BL/Infestor, in early HotS without it, and then bouncing back and forth. MC, amazing player regardless of the balance state. Sniper/Seed... falling off without any real updates happening.
People attribute far too much of an individuals performance to balance. INnoVation was the best Terran (shared with Taeja) at the end of WoL and the best Terran at the beginning of HotS. If the only reason for him falling off would be balance, then he could still be the best Terran, which he simply wasn't anymore towards the end of 2013. Not because "no more hellbat drops", but because other players simply got better and he didn't as much. These days, it looks like he could be coming back to the very top of Terrans. Not by some magic patch, but by him stepping up is game again.
Funny cause your argument supports the idea that Blizzard should not balance, if it makes not difference whether you patch or not then why do it?
no it does not support it. It makes a difference for being the best player. It makes no difference for INnoVation being the best Terran. All the players that fell off didn't just fall off as the X-th best player, but also stoppped being the best player of their own race. Ergo the reason for them falling off cannot possible have been the balance change to begin with.
The chances to win as Zerg or Protoss should be equal. That's what balance is for. The chance that DIMAGA wins the GSL instead of soO doesn't change through that. So soO's stardom doesn't get influenced by it. What does change INnoVations stardom is when you don't buff Terran after months of being dominated by Zerg and Protoss.
So if balance doesnt effect how the best players of each race play, then why balance???
Why should the chance of Zerg beating Protoss be equal they are two different races? So what happens the people who play Zerg come up with really good ways of beating Protoss? They get patched? For instance, I have heard commentators like Tod saying that if Protoss comes out with a new build everyone will do it, whereas when it comes to Terran people do not do the same. This suggests there are cultural norms within each race and one norm is more adaptive than another. Thus, one race more likely to win than another!
On June 27 2014 23:22 Nebuchad wrote: "The issue with balancing is that it assumes that there should be equality between the races"
Genius.
Thanks, I think maybe instead of striving for equality Blizzard could enhance the differences and try to make the differences comparable to a certain extent.
On June 28 2014 01:55 Big J wrote: Balancing has hardly ever been the reason why a player fell off.
INnoVation's main strength wasn't hellbats. It was his main strength in TvT, and even there I'd argue there were better TvTers at that time to begin with (like Bomber or Maru). And he didn't fall off after the patch. He wasn't superdominant to begin with (Soulkey winning WCS season 1, Maru winning season 2; INnoVation only taking the season finals in that time periode, and no other title at all).
And same goes for others. Mvp/Nestea - dominant over various patches. Life being strong with BL/Infestor, in early HotS without it, and then bouncing back and forth. MC, amazing player regardless of the balance state. Sniper/Seed... falling off without any real updates happening.
People attribute far too much of an individuals performance to balance. INnoVation was the best Terran (shared with Taeja) at the end of WoL and the best Terran at the beginning of HotS. If the only reason for him falling off would be balance, then he could still be the best Terran, which he simply wasn't anymore towards the end of 2013. Not because "no more hellbat drops", but because other players simply got better and he didn't as much. These days, it looks like he could be coming back to the very top of Terrans. Not by some magic patch, but by him stepping up is game again.
Funny cause your argument supports the idea that Blizzard should not balance, if it makes not difference whether you patch or not then why do it?
no it does not support it. It makes a difference for being the best player. It makes no difference for INnoVation being the best Terran. All the players that fell off didn't just fall off as the X-th best player, but also stoppped being the best player of their own race. Ergo the reason for them falling off cannot possible have been the balance change to begin with.
The chances to win as Zerg or Protoss should be equal. That's what balance is for. The chance that DIMAGA wins the GSL instead of soO doesn't change through that. So soO's stardom doesn't get influenced by it. What does change INnoVations stardom is when you don't buff Terran after months of being dominated by Zerg and Protoss.
So if balance doesnt effect how the best players of each race play, then why balance???
Why should the chance of Zerg beating Protoss be equal they are two different races? So what happens the people who play Zerg come up with really good ways of beating Protoss? They get patched? For instance, I have heard commentators like Tod saying that if Protoss comes out with a new build everyone will do it, whereas when it comes to Terran people do not do the same. This suggests there are cultural norms within each race and one norm is more adaptive than another. Thus, one race more likely to win than another!
On June 28 2014 01:55 Big J wrote: Balancing has hardly ever been the reason why a player fell off.
INnoVation's main strength wasn't hellbats. It was his main strength in TvT, and even there I'd argue there were better TvTers at that time to begin with (like Bomber or Maru). And he didn't fall off after the patch. He wasn't superdominant to begin with (Soulkey winning WCS season 1, Maru winning season 2; INnoVation only taking the season finals in that time periode, and no other title at all).
And same goes for others. Mvp/Nestea - dominant over various patches. Life being strong with BL/Infestor, in early HotS without it, and then bouncing back and forth. MC, amazing player regardless of the balance state. Sniper/Seed... falling off without any real updates happening.
People attribute far too much of an individuals performance to balance. INnoVation was the best Terran (shared with Taeja) at the end of WoL and the best Terran at the beginning of HotS. If the only reason for him falling off would be balance, then he could still be the best Terran, which he simply wasn't anymore towards the end of 2013. Not because "no more hellbat drops", but because other players simply got better and he didn't as much. These days, it looks like he could be coming back to the very top of Terrans. Not by some magic patch, but by him stepping up is game again.
Funny cause your argument supports the idea that Blizzard should not balance, if it makes not difference whether you patch or not then why do it?
no it does not support it. It makes a difference for being the best player. It makes no difference for INnoVation being the best Terran. All the players that fell off didn't just fall off as the X-th best player, but also stoppped being the best player of their own race. Ergo the reason for them falling off cannot possible have been the balance change to begin with.
The chances to win as Zerg or Protoss should be equal. That's what balance is for. The chance that DIMAGA wins the GSL instead of soO doesn't change through that. So soO's stardom doesn't get influenced by it. What does change INnoVations stardom is when you don't buff Terran after months of being dominated by Zerg and Protoss.
So if balance doesnt effect how the best players of each race play, then why balance???
Why should the chance of Zerg beating Protoss be equal they are two different races? So what happens the people who play Zerg come up with really good ways of beating Protoss? They get patched? For instance, I have heard commentators like Tod saying that if Protoss comes out with a new build everyone will do it, whereas when it comes to Terran people do not do the same. This suggests there are cultural norms within each race and one norm is more adaptive than another. Thus, one race more likely to win than another!
Why should we play a game with more than 1unit then anyways? If it's ok that things aren't equally good, why even introduce them?
Edit: If you ask like that, of course you are going to have a point. There is no axiom in the world that forces designers to balance a game. However, the blizzard designers gave out a goal that was racial balance. If you don't agree with that goal, it's OK. Most people don't. Most people are interested in racial balance for one reason or another. Including the ones that are in charge.
Brood War was patched for the last time over 10 years after its release. The last "balance patch" was only 3 years after the release of the original starcraft, everything after that was bug fixes and feature improvements (right click instead of R,click to rally, etc). It is now almost 4 years since the release of WoL. I don't know what this says about whether the game should continue to be "balanced." However I support just creating new maps and allowing the players an opportunity to defeat the strategies with new builds rather than simply rebalancing everything.
yeah but brood war was a better designed game and also lucked out with quite a few glitches that ended up being really important (muta stacking hold lurkers reaver AI etc)
It's all very well to talk about not trying for perfect balance, but the community at large (at least that part of it that posts on TL/SC2 Forums/Reddit) tends to be very vocal when it comes to balance. Of course, then parts of that community also whine about the game being stale etc but consistency is difficult to ask for in anyone, let alone SC2 players.
I'd like it if Blizzard left the game alone for extended periods, and made public statements to that effect, but I'm in a minority.
On June 28 2014 05:34 aZealot wrote: It's all very well to talk about not trying for perfect balance, but the community at large (at least that part of it that posts on TL/SC2 Forums/Reddit) tends to be very vocal when it comes to balance. Of course, then parts of that community also whine about the game being stale etc but consistency is difficult to ask for in anyone, let alone SC2 players.
I'd like it if Blizzard left the game alone for extended periods, and made public statements to that effect, but I'm in a minority.
Agreed, I am all for patching bugs and making the game more efficient to play, but patches that make the units better or worse, MSC, Oracle, Hellbat, Infestor etc... it is detrimental to the players-> fanbase -> game.
Is that the rationale of Sports to you? Does a soccer team like Leeds United have the same chance of wining as Real Madrid? No, they are not playing on an equal playing ground. When Messi or Ronaldo dominate a sport does Fifa say hey we have to put them with a lesser team as to level the playing ground? In addition, balance changes can be triggered by populous opinion.
With all your pretentiousness you can't even see that in sports everybody is playing as "Terran", so there is nothing to be blamed but the person's skill (except for drugs in certain sports). Whereas in SC2 people can blame the race.
A better comparison to SC2 would be:
When Innovation or Flash dominate an esport does Kespa say hey we have to put them with a lesser team as to level the playing ground?
Next, you ask for one player to dominate
SC2 needs to have stars that we want to see win but if the game is consistently being re-balanced this will not occur as no one player can dominate.
and you follow up by wanting people who are better to lose to others, stopping them from being able to dominate.
I think that you are only going to attract a certain type of player with this mechanic, there is not enough luck involved, if you are playing someone who is better than you that is it, you are very unlikely to win
wth? Isn't the whole point of being way better than someone that you will dominate the other guy who is way worse? You don't even know what you want. It's no wonder you self-mutilate
Besides, you actually have more luck winning in SC2 because you can't cheese in sports. You don't see Manchester United winning the English Premier League or UEFA anytime soon right? Nor would you stand a chance against Djokovic even if he gives you a 3 point handicap every game, nor would you beat Kobe in basketball any time.
I play a game for fun not to learn a whole load of strats before I can make it out of Bronze league!!
if you want to play for fun, stay in Bronze league. Seriously.
If you want to play football for fun would you get 10 of your buddies to play against your local football club or your national team? No. you'd play with your friends, and in football, you and your friends would be in Wood league. (Assuming you didn't represent your school, in which you'd be in Aluminium)
Or better yet just pick a hedonistic game where everybody is a winner, it fits you more. Multilating yourself is waaaaaay stupider that someone making a bad game or making a game bad.
I could go on but in short: You are delusional, and definitely not as smart as you think you are.
And btw, no you don't need to learn a load of strats in bronze. I quit SC2 after 6 months of playing it and I'm sure I can beat a bronze player without knowing any strats or what the new units do, and all that while only using one hand -- Because I'm better.
On June 27 2014 22:56 Paljas wrote: can comfirm, i only watch sc2 with a laptop on a cemetery, otherwise it just doesnt have the right atmosphere
There's not enough RNG in SC2 to hold my interest anymore. You know exactly who's going to win a battle based on their amount of units, unit composition, and position on the battlefield. Unfortunately the latter isn't as important as it was in BroodWar because units clump up so much into deathballs and die so quickly that often their position makes a negligible difference. I liked how in BW you had to manage individual clumps of units into a good position in each fight, mainly because you could only select 12 units at a time. This way, you could actually win battles even with a smaller supply of units than your opponent, which rarely happens in SC2. BW is a better spectator's game.
Blizzard's implementation with Battle.net 2.0 is another reason I left. I have no friends who play SC2, and it just felt so lonely whenever I logged on. Blizzard never bothered to put in-game tournaments in SC2, like they'd done in WC3, and the game just wasn't fun to play anymore. I had no incentive to continue playing. Their lack of chat channels for the longest time also attributed to that feeling of loneliness. If I ever get LOTV, it's likely only going to be for the single-player campaign because I like the lore.
Is that the rationale of Sports to you? Does a soccer team like Leeds United have the same chance of wining as Real Madrid? No, they are not playing on an equal playing ground. When Messi or Ronaldo dominate a sport does Fifa say hey we have to put them with a lesser team as to level the playing ground? In addition, balance changes can be triggered by populous opinion.
With all your pretentiousness you can't even see that in sports everybody is playing as "Terran", so there is nothing to be blamed but the person's skill (except for drugs in certain sports). Whereas in SC2 people can blame the race.
I think that you are only going to attract a certain type of player with this mechanic, there is not enough luck involved, if you are playing someone who is better than you that is it, you are very unlikely to win
wth? Isn't the whole point of being way better than someone that you will dominate the other guy who is way worse? You don't even know what you want. It's no wonder you self-mutilate
Besides, you actually have more luck winning in SC2 because you can't cheese in sports. You don't see Manchester United winning the English Premier League or UEFA anytime soon right? Nor would you stand a chance against Djokovic even if he gives you a 3 point handicap every game, nor would you beat Kobe in basketball any time.
I play a game for fun not to learn a whole load of strats before I can make it out of Bronze league!!
if you want to play for fun, stay in Bronze league. Seriously.
If you want to play football for fun would you get 10 of your buddies to play against your local football club or your national team? No. you'd play with your friends, and in football, you and your friends would be in Wood league. (Assuming you didn't represent your school, in which you'd be in Aluminium)
Or better yet just pick a hedonistic game where everybody is a winner, it fits you more. Multilating yourself is waaaaaay stupider that someone making a bad game or making a game bad.
I could go on but in short: You are delusional, and definitely not as smart as you think you are.
And btw, no you don't need to learn a load of strats in bronze. I quit SC2 after 6 months of playing it and I'm sure I can beat a bronze player without knowing any strats or what the new units do, and all that while only using one hand -- Because I'm better.
On June 27 2014 22:56 Paljas wrote: can comfirm, i only watch sc2 with a laptop on a cemetery, otherwise it just doesnt have the right atmosphere
Hahaha whoever said germans weren't funny? :D
The overarching theme is SC2 is dead, thus when I say no one dominates (it implies professional players), I was arguing that this prevents a large fanbase entering from watching the esport, as the emotional investment of watching your favorite player not winning constantly leaves the consumer disillusioned. FYI women also play the sport not just guys. Whereas when I said if someone is better than you, you are less likely to win, I meant this from the perspective of a casual player, it was the theme of the paragraph, sorry if you mixed that up. I might have to label my paragraphs in the future.
A hedonistic game is not one where everyone wins (that would be a narcissistic game; see below), rather it is a sport where everyone derives pleasure from the experience. I argued based with the use of a very primitive and basic psychological principle (operant conditioning) that MOBA games are more hedonistic. You made a pretentious inference and subsequently made an ad hominem argument.
Your last comment makes you seem a bit narcissistic. To answer your second ad hominem argument I do not think I am smart. It appears as though you are threatened by what I said and now you are responding out of anger.
If I represented my school I would be Aluminium?? How could we play in aluminium, that would be quite 'hard'.
I do see Manchester winning the Premier league in the near future. Have you seen how Van Gaal has the Netherlands playing?
In football not everyone plays as 'Terran'. There are underlying cultures and historical influences that players from particular countries learn. Therefore, when they learn the game they learn in different ways: Spanish tiki-taka, if your English you may be more focused on defense such as Italian. Dutch and Brazilian more flare, German's more industrious. Although they use the same ball and have the same number of players the underlying philosophies make different playing styles. Moreover, look at how the game has changed (being patched), diving has become a norm, tackling is now discouraged much more so than before. Soccer has become a much more passive game in terms of defense. So please move from the concrete stage of development to the abstract and you might see what is before your eyes!
So I am disillusioned, so when someone has an opinion you think it is wise and just to create ad hominem arguments and then insult them in order to prove what point? I am just raising my opinion that is all, I am not asking you to believe in it. I am not suggesting I have solved every issue at hand, I am just raising an alternative perspective, not as a means of causing controversy, rather I am merely using the knowledge I have learnt as a psychologist to try and explain why a game I love is spiraling down the drain and losing momentum, and if you feel you have the power to sanction me for this, so be it. But I will use my logic to respond and not fallacies!
On June 28 2014 07:23 Epishade wrote: There's not enough RNG in SC2 to hold my interest anymore. You know exactly who's going to win a battle based on their amount of units, unit composition, and position on the battlefield. Unfortunately the latter isn't as important as it was in BroodWar because units clump up so much into deathballs and die so quickly that often their position makes a negligible difference. I liked how in BW you had to manage individual clumps of units into a good position in each fight, mainly because you could only select 12 units at a time. This way, you could actually win battles even with a smaller supply of units than your opponent, which rarely happens in SC2. BW is a better spectator's game.
Blizzard's implementation with Battle.net 2.0 is another reason I left. I have no friends who play SC2, and it just felt so lonely whenever I logged on. Blizzard never bothered to put in-game tournaments in SC2, like they'd done in WC3, and the game just wasn't fun to play anymore. I had no incentive to continue playing. Their lack of chat channels for the longest time also attributed to that feeling of loneliness. If I ever get LOTV, it's likely only going to be for the single-player campaign because I like the lore.
I agree man. Thank you for the valuable input. I was hoping for tournaments like in WC3!
On June 28 2014 00:35 GeckoXp wrote: SCII already died in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. You're a bit late to the party.
Hey, it's 2014 now, can't break the death streak, gotta keep it going
[Edit] I also wonder if OP's heard of this guy called Taeja. Nah, Taeja's probably not that big enough of a star, too obscure for OP, Taeja hasn't like gone undefeated at dreamhack or won a bajillion of titles or anything
Every time I see the words SC2 dying, I feel annoyed. Yes, the scene isn't as large as it was back in the starting days, and certainly there are a lot of problems right now plaguing the scene and the popularity of SC2. However, to state a bunch of similar, repetitive, nonsensical reasons to somehow show that the scene is dead and gone is stupid. The game and the pro scene has never been more playable or enjoyable to watch than ever before, yet everybody want's to complain with a multitude of different reasons that all are simply weak in premise or arguments. If anyone remembers the stale games in late WoL, then you'll get what I mean.
You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
On June 28 2014 00:35 GeckoXp wrote: SCII already died in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013. You're a bit late to the party.
Hey, it's 2014 now, can't break the death streak, gotta keep it going
[Edit] I also wonder if OP's heard of this guy called Taeja. Nah, Taeja's probably not that big enough of a star, too obscure for OP, Taeja hasn't like gone undefeated at dreamhack or won a bajillion of titles or anything
Yeah he has won, Dreamhacks and MLG wow, real top tier tournaments. How long did he last in IEM Katowice? Why dont Taeja play Code S? Global finals before Taeja retires we will see how good he is then when Kespa in the room. Personally I would like to see him win it (emotional investment in stars, nice to see Taeja get his dream retirement package), but his wrists prevent him from playing quite a lot.
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote: You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote: You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think the only reason the StarCraft franchise will die is for the lack of competitive competition. It's one thing to play a game and get through the campaign, then play some online games. What then? You may get bored and move on to the next big hit. StarCraft is more than that. You can win money. Make a living. That's what makes this game worth being good at. Some folks are short sighted and think that this generation are the only ones that will play and be good at the game. What of the up and coming kids that love gaming? StarCraft out the door? I think not. If the sponsors are still there and the other companies that back progamers, StarCraft will not die for a long time.
On June 28 2014 05:34 aZealot wrote: It's all very well to talk about not trying for perfect balance, but the community at large (at least that part of it that posts on TL/SC2 Forums/Reddit) tends to be very vocal when it comes to balance. Of course, then parts of that community also whine about the game being stale etc but consistency is difficult to ask for in anyone, let alone SC2 players.
I'd like it if Blizzard left the game alone for extended periods, and made public statements to that effect, but I'm in a minority.
Agreed, I am all for patching bugs and making the game more efficient to play, but patches that make the units better or worse, MSC, Oracle, Hellbat, Infestor etc... it is detrimental to the players-> fanbase -> game.
Actually, now that I think about it, Blizzard have said they are happy with 55 - 45 which is reasonable to me and is not perfect balance. That said, I still think that the game could be left alone a lot more than it is - if not for all the crying and the whine.
However, I don't agree with your claim that SC2 is dying. That really is a load of horseshit. And has been for a long time.
On June 28 2014 05:34 aZealot wrote: It's all very well to talk about not trying for perfect balance, but the community at large (at least that part of it that posts on TL/SC2 Forums/Reddit) tends to be very vocal when it comes to balance. Of course, then parts of that community also whine about the game being stale etc but consistency is difficult to ask for in anyone, let alone SC2 players.
I'd like it if Blizzard left the game alone for extended periods, and made public statements to that effect, but I'm in a minority.
Agreed, I am all for patching bugs and making the game more efficient to play, but patches that make the units better or worse, MSC, Oracle, Hellbat, Infestor etc... it is detrimental to the players-> fanbase -> game.
Actually, now that I think about it, Blizzard have said they are happy with 55 - 45 which is reasonable to me and is not perfect balance. That said, I still think that the game could be left alone a lot more than it is - if not for all the crying and the whine.
However, I don't agree with your claim that SC2 is dying. That really is a load of horseshit. And has been for a long time.
I agree man, in hindsight I should have labelled it something else, I am not that embedded within the community so I didnt know there it was so taboo/polarizing statement to say SC2 is dead.
The premise of this blog is completely off from the current reality of the situation - which is the opposite. Viewership is where it's at now, an all time low, because the game is not being balanced. You cannot have 1+ year of Protoss domination and leave the game as it currently is for much longer.
Also, when SC2 had the most viewership was when there were more foreigners competing with Koreans, less Korean domination, and the game was way more balanced with better representation of all 3 races, and even when T or Z or P did win a few things in a row the domination / OPness was no where near the current level of Protoss imo.
At the current point in time, as a community we should be asking blizzard to more consistently balance and tweak the game, because right now they essentially ignore SC2 for 3-5 months at a time, and then will come in with 1 small change and then ignore the balance again for another 4-5 months.
On June 28 2014 23:01 avilo wrote: The premise of this blog is completely off from the current reality of the situation - which is the opposite. Viewership is where it's at now, an all time low, because the game is not being balanced. You cannot have 1+ year of Protoss domination and leave the game as it currently is for much longer.
Also, when SC2 had the most viewership was when there were more foreigners competing with Koreans, less Korean domination, and the game was way more balanced with better representation of all 3 races, and even when T or Z or P did win a few things in a row the domination / OPness was no where near the current level of Protoss imo.
At the current point in time, as a community we should be asking blizzard to more consistently balance and tweak the game, because right now they essentially ignore SC2 for 3-5 months at a time, and then will come in with 1 small change and then ignore the balance again for another 4-5 months.
OMG how cool is this, it is Avilo, that may be the case for professionals, but for casual users price tag and difficult learning curve is hurting the game.
Well the problem with patching is the moment you start you open up a can of worms. Now it's patch everything!
In terms of overall balance Zerg and Protoss are pretty equal I saw today in the GSL finals global stats 52% - 48% for one map and the inverse on a different map. I understand Terrans have not being doing too well, and I think the problem here is the lack of ingenuity when it comes to Terran unit design, in essence they use too much of a prototypical war design, tanks etc... plus this mech vs bio thing is messed up. Still, Taeja and Polt do so well it is hard to argue, even though Terran appear to be lacking! Maybe more friendly maps for Terran?
Yeah in order for the game to be more viable we need more foreigners, the interesting element is how some Koreans have now been assimilated into other regions such as MC (EU) and Polt (NA), so from an advertising perspective they filled a niche! I wonder was that a conscious effort by the players or the actual casters/esports?
Anyway Avilo I appreciate your candidness and respect your comments just as everyone else!
On June 28 2014 23:01 avilo wrote: The premise of this blog is completely off from the current reality of the situation - which is the opposite. Viewership is where it's at now, an all time low, because the game is not being balanced. You cannot have 1+ year of Protoss domination and leave the game as it currently is for much longer.
Also, when SC2 had the most viewership was when there were more foreigners competing with Koreans, less Korean domination, and the game was way more balanced with better representation of all 3 races, and even when T or Z or P did win a few things in a row the domination / OPness was no where near the current level of Protoss imo.
At the current point in time, as a community we should be asking blizzard to more consistently balance and tweak the game, because right now they essentially ignore SC2 for 3-5 months at a time, and then will come in with 1 small change and then ignore the balance again for another 4-5 months.
OMG how cool is this, it is Avilo, that may be the case for professionals, but for casual users price tag and difficult learning curve is hurting the game.
Well the problem with patching is the moment you start you open up a can of worms. Now it's patch everything!
In terms of overall balance Zerg and Protoss are pretty equal I saw today in the GSL finals global stats 52% - 48% for one map and the inverse on a different map. I understand Terrans have not being doing too well, and I think the problem here is the lack of ingenuity when it comes to Terran unit design, in essence they use too much of a prototypical war design, tanks etc... plus this mech vs bio thing is messed up. Still, Taeja and Polt do so well it is hard to argue, even though Terran appear to be lacking! Maybe more friendly maps for Terran?
Yeah in order for the game to be more viable we need more foreigners, the interesting element is how some Koreans have now been assimilated into other regions such as MC (EU) and Polt (NA), so from an advertising perspective they filled a niche! I wonder was that a conscious effort by the players or the actual casters/esports?
Anyway Avilo I appreciate your candidness and respect your comments just as everyone else!
You say we need more foreigners but in BW foreigners barely mattered, it was all about the koreans. Ofcourse having foreigners compete with the top koreans is exciting, but I dont think its at all required for a healthy scene.
I think OP doesnt do a very good job at explaining his point, but I agree with his premise. Blizzard has from day1 been nerfing whatever unit or race was strongest at the time, it has led to a horribly boring game. I used to love watching starcraft2. Nowadays I dont even know who the top players are and havent watched a starcraft2 game in months.
I know that dota is not too well liked among hardcore sc2 fans, but im convinced blizzards dev team could learn a great deal from how icefrog balances the game. Icefrog doesnt nerf the shit out of everything, instead he creates an environment where everything has some 'overpowered' aspects in some way. It keeps the game fresh and interesting. Balancing starcraft works very differently from dota (the races directly affect each other every game) but blizzards design philosophy is simply flawed imo.
On June 28 2014 05:34 aZealot wrote: It's all very well to talk about not trying for perfect balance, but the community at large (at least that part of it that posts on TL/SC2 Forums/Reddit) tends to be very vocal when it comes to balance. Of course, then parts of that community also whine about the game being stale etc but consistency is difficult to ask for in anyone, let alone SC2 players.
I'd like it if Blizzard left the game alone for extended periods, and made public statements to that effect, but I'm in a minority.
Agreed, I am all for patching bugs and making the game more efficient to play, but patches that make the units better or worse, MSC, Oracle, Hellbat, Infestor etc... it is detrimental to the players-> fanbase -> game.
Actually, now that I think about it, Blizzard have said they are happy with 55 - 45 which is reasonable to me and is not perfect balance. That said, I still think that the game could be left alone a lot more than it is - if not for all the crying and the whine.
However, I don't agree with your claim that SC2 is dying. That really is a load of horseshit. And has been for a long time.
I agree man, in hindsight I should have labelled it something else, I am not that embedded within the community so I didnt know there it was so taboo/polarizing statement to say SC2 is dead.
Fair play.
IIRC, there was an interview before HOTS where DK said that Blizzard would be OK with 55 - 45 (so, not perfect balance). Although, IIRC, he did not specify how long Blizzard would be happy with a period of "imbalance" (3 months? 6 months? etc).
And, yeah, the SC is dying meme has been done to death (hawhaw) while the game appears to be still going strong (in some cases, we are our own worst enemies). Hence, some community members have little patience with it.
On June 28 2014 23:01 avilo wrote: The premise of this blog is completely off from the current reality of the situation - which is the opposite. Viewership is where it's at now, an all time low, because the game is not being balanced. You cannot have 1+ year of Protoss domination and leave the game as it currently is for much longer.
Also, when SC2 had the most viewership was when there were more foreigners competing with Koreans, less Korean domination, and the game was way more balanced with better representation of all 3 races, and even when T or Z or P did win a few things in a row the domination / OPness was no where near the current level of Protoss imo.
At the current point in time, as a community we should be asking blizzard to more consistently balance and tweak the game, because right now they essentially ignore SC2 for 3-5 months at a time, and then will come in with 1 small change and then ignore the balance again for another 4-5 months.
LOL! Avilo. Still playing shit Starcraft and whining for the "I win" patch, I see.
Come on son, Taeja only wins when Kespa dont bother to show up!
Or when they go to DH and get rekt before the even hit the money
I think a more realistic comparison was IEM Katowice
Right the foreign tournament where sOs beat Taeja is a better example than a foreign tournament where Taeja beat sOs because... REASONS.
Believe it or not you can't pick and choose where you pull your stats from just because it helps your point. I'm on my phone but if I weren't I would link you to foreign tournaments where kespa players bombed (because there are several). Btw horrible title mate... Although I think that has been addressed
Come on son, Taeja only wins when Kespa dont bother to show up!
Or when they go to DH and get rekt before the even hit the money
I think a more realistic comparison was IEM Katowice
Right the foreign tournament where sOs beat Taeja is a better example than a foreign tournament where Taeja beat sOs because... REASONS.
Believe it or not you can't pick and choose where you pull your stats from just because it helps your point. I'm on my phone but if I weren't I would link you to foreign tournaments where kespa players bombed (because there are several). Btw horrible title mate... Although I think that has been addressed
Did SoS ever even attend DreamHack? Did Taeja win the global finals last year, there were 3? Dreamhack was on during Proleague and GSL so Taeja is the best otherwise!
Come on son, Taeja only wins when Kespa dont bother to show up!
Or when they go to DH and get rekt before the even hit the money
I think a more realistic comparison was IEM Katowice
Right the foreign tournament where sOs beat Taeja is a better example than a foreign tournament where Taeja beat sOs because... REASONS.
Believe it or not you can't pick and choose where you pull your stats from just because it helps your point. I'm on my phone but if I weren't I would link you to foreign tournaments where kespa players bombed (because there are several). Btw horrible title mate... Although I think that has been addressed
Did SoS ever even attend DreamHack? Did Taeja win the global finals last year, there were 3? Dreamhack was on during Proleague and GSL so Taeja is the best otherwise!
He attended DH Bucharest (Sep. 2013) and DH Winter (Nov. 2013). He lost to Taeja at both of these events. He also took losses to Hyun, Patience, and Innovation as far as non-Kespa goes at those two Dreamhacks. Keep in mind that he was invited to DH Winter based on his Blizzcon win and lost to Taeja/Inno/Patience at DH. Partner that with the overall failure of other Kespa players at DH (Flash, TY, RorO come to mind off the top of my head) and your "Taeja only wins when Kespa doesn't show up!" argument sounds silly.
MLG held Kespa qualifiers and Stats, the King of Kongs soO, and Dear all qualified. Dear made top 6 but lost to Polt and Naniwa, soO was defeated by Sage, and Stats lost to JD. I know people like to say that "Oh well if Kespa just sent good players to foreign events they would win them all" but that is clearly not the case. And I will give credit and say that Trap was the best player at MLG that weekend and deservedly won. But I will also say that RorO lost to a foreigner at DH Bucharest and was left out of the top 16 and TY got dominated by MC at the same tournament.
TLDR: Kespa players aren't gods and saying, "Other people only win tournaments when Kespa doesn't show up!" isn't true at all.
What about the best Kespa players? Soulkey? Rain? Parting? Zest? Maru? Anyway if you are entitled to your opinion! You have provided legitimate evidence and that holds up. We will see with global finals. Oh yeah who dominated the global finals last year?
On June 29 2014 08:46 PickyProtoss wrote: What about the best Kespa players? Soulkey? Rain? Parting? Zest? Maru? Anyway if you are entitled to your opinion! You have provided legitimate evidence and that holds up. We will see with global finals. Oh yeah who dominated the global finals last year?
Some of the better Kespa players haven't gone to foreign events true enough but soO/Dear/sOs are all top tier Kespa talent (Dear has recently been in a slump but at the time he participated in a foreign tournament he was better). Also Rain lost to Polt at IEM Cologne. And yeah I suppose we shall see at the global finals.
On June 29 2014 08:46 PickyProtoss wrote: What about the best Kespa players? Soulkey? Rain? Parting? Zest? Maru? Anyway if you are entitled to your opinion! You have provided legitimate evidence and that holds up. We will see with global finals. Oh yeah who dominated the global finals last year?
Some of the better Kespa players haven't gone to foreign events true enough but soO/Dear/sOs are all top tier Kespa talent (Dear has recently been in a slump but at the time he participated in a foreign tournament he was better). Also Rain lost to Polt at IEM Cologne. And yeah I suppose we shall see at the global finals.
Still wish you hadn't made an SC2 daed gaem blog
I didn't know that sOs had a double of himself.
Also Dear is a bad example because he is under huge stress of finding a team.
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote: You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote: You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote: You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote: You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote: You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote: You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote: You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
On June 28 2014 12:58 usedtocare wrote: You are arguing weak points. There's an obvious way to solve these issues - make the game more manual, bring back the mechanics where the difference in skillset will impact the outcome significantly enough. You get your stars back, you get new ceiling and basically sc2 becomes bw.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
I was A- on WGTour and B rank on iCCup, what are you, D+/C-? I'm tired of discussing things with people who have no clear idea what they're talking about. Since you have nothing to contribute to this discussing except saying the same stupid arguments over and over again, stay in school, go read a book, do something to educate yourself.
Only once in a great span of timeless time does someone etch onto the wall of Teamliquid such an epic legendary post that changes the very course of human history, and I believe you have done it today with these eloquent and powerful words. I do believe deep down in my heart that you are the light in the darkness, the ray of hope piercing the dark void of despair that shall save SC2 from inevitable doom. Finally, someone with an idea so profound that it will completely save StarCraft 2 and also make it become Brood War, bring the stars back, and create a brave new ceiling that we can only dream of aspiring to reach. User interface and fundamentals of rudimentary gameplay be damned! Let us reconstruct SC2 into the image of a game without MBS and much more limited unit selection, and less clumpy unit pathing AI! For, if there is any gripe of the plebeian concerning the overarching problem with games in this day and age, it is most definitely MBS. I look forward to seeing the stars glow once more, thanks to your genius recommendation, which could only have been divinely inspired.
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
I was A- on WGTour and B rank on iCCup, what are you, D+/C-? I'm tired of discussing things with people who have no clear idea what they're talking about. Since you have nothing to contribute to this discussing except saying the same stupid arguments over and over again, stay in school, go read a book, do something to educate yourself.
Have a wonderful day.
Yeah, everyone claims to have been "A- on WGTour" because there's no way to check. What's your iCCup ID, mr. B rank?
You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was. But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds.
I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit. Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share. Maybe someone will finish both of your posts as a bonus, lmao
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
I was A- on WGTour and B rank on iCCup, what are you, D+/C-? I'm tired of discussing things with people who have no clear idea what they're talking about. Since you have nothing to contribute to this discussing except saying the same stupid arguments over and over again, stay in school, go read a book, do something to educate yourself.
Have a wonderful day.
Yeah, everyone claims to have been "A- on WGTour" because there's no way to check. What's your iCCup ID, mr. B rank?
I think you have me confused with someone else. Or not. I'm not sure. Every sentence is like an incomplete thought, but since your account is locked for a bit, I may never know the answer, therefore, the only course of action I can now take is to argue with myself to complete this discussion.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
I was A- on WGTour and B rank on iCCup, what are you, D+/C-? I'm tired of discussing things with people who have no clear idea what they're talking about. Since you have nothing to contribute to this discussing except saying the same stupid arguments over and over again, stay in school, go read a book, do something to educate yourself.
Have a wonderful day.
Yeah, everyone claims to have been "A- on WGTour" because there's no way to check. What's your iCCup ID, mr. B rank?
Look up gNs.I-Seraphim or Barbedwire
Okay, bye.
"ID not found" for both of those. Good job looking like a total idiot.
I'm sure you will waste time arguing with yourself, just like you wasted time posting something absolutely useless to the discussion. Of course, after what you posted, I'm not entirely sure you would understand what I was trying to say.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
I was A- on WGTour and B rank on iCCup, what are you, D+/C-? I'm tired of discussing things with people who have no clear idea what they're talking about. Since you have nothing to contribute to this discussing except saying the same stupid arguments over and over again, stay in school, go read a book, do something to educate yourself.
Have a wonderful day.
Yeah, everyone claims to have been "A- on WGTour" because there's no way to check. What's your iCCup ID, mr. B rank?
Look up gNs.I-Seraphim or Barbedwire
Okay, bye.
"ID not found" for both of those. Good job looking like a total idiot.
I accept your condescending comment as a sign of your willingness to spar with me intellectually, and I will oblige you in this cerebral text-based duel. You say the following:
"You have definitely improved since starting out as a support cast for some mexican teams on US East (or showmatches?) - I'm sorry I can't remember what it was."
I have never have been on the supporting cast for a mexican television show, although, I think that it is highly possible that I could do this in the future.
"But, you should be eloquent enough now to generate wittier replies - this is pretty bleak. I guess MBS numbs even the more curious of minds."
With this "but", I assume this thought is a continuation of the previous thought, however, this does not appear to be the case because nothing you said in the first line correlates with this second line unless the first line was some sort of thinly-veiled insult, lampooning my humor because it was directed towards you in a way that you took to be an insult, and have attempted to disparage original comment by saying that my humor is weak despite my mexican daytime drama experience, and my usage of MBS, neither of which I have done. Also, the first sentence would be better of dictated as such: "You should be eloquent enough by now to generate wittier replies, but what you have posted here lacks any indication of a sharpening of wit on your part."
"I know the concept must be so rudimentary and obvious - it must be painful to admit."
You begin a whole new paragraph for this line, so I'm not sure which concept you are referring to, is it humor or changing SC2? However, I do not understand how it would be painful to admit to either being incorrect about a proposition to make SC2 more 'popular', or to admit that my humor may have fallen flat, but you did end the last paragraph by mentioning that MBS is 'numbing', so how would I feel the pain to begin with? Well, perhaps your next sentence will elaborate further on what you meant to say here...
"Once you come up with more ideas on why exactly former C+ players sporadically take games off of professional gamers - feel free to share."
...or not. I'm not sure what you're trying to point out here. Perhaps it's that non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on. But that's Brood War, I assume you're talking about SC2, which is on, what? Its fourth year? From what I recall reading, foreigners still could beat Koreans in 2001, four years after BW's release. But that kind of kicks your argument in the face, so I await your strange, other-worldly explanation as to why I am wrong.
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
I was A- on WGTour and B rank on iCCup, what are you, D+/C-? I'm tired of discussing things with people who have no clear idea what they're talking about. Since you have nothing to contribute to this discussing except saying the same stupid arguments over and over again, stay in school, go read a book, do something to educate yourself.
Have a wonderful day.
Yeah, everyone claims to have been "A- on WGTour" because there's no way to check. What's your iCCup ID, mr. B rank?
Look up gNs.I-Seraphim or Barbedwire
Okay, bye.
"ID not found" for both of those. Good job looking like a total idiot.
iccup probably deleted them, so what
Go 1v1? We'll go bo5
Python, Destination, Fighting Spirit, Electric Circuit, Heartbreak Ridge
Thanks for writing me a wall of text that nobody is ever going to read. It is clear from what you just wrote that you have little to no understanding of what I am talking about, and have decided to hide your ignorance by being a smart-ass. First of all, I have seen some of your casting work, and from the ten seconds I had the displeasure of viewing, you offered nothing substantial in terms of game knowledge, only some tenth-grade level joking that made me smirk, but mostly out of embarrassment for you. Second of all, I'm not disputing that new players beat pros in BW. Get that through your head, if you can.
I'm talking about random newbies from BW who are able to beat seasoned pro-gamers from BW in SC2. What does that tell you? Well, for someone who can put one and one together like myself, it indicates to me that the skill ceiling for SC2 is not as high as BW and caters to newbs. Furthermore, your "in 2001" analogy is a classic case of false equivalency because the RTS scene was so dramatically underdeveloped compared to today's understanding of RTS games. It took BW a good 10 years to be figured out, but that was because there was no background from which to work on working it out, however, with SC2, there is a distinct similarity to BW that would allow someone to take their knowledge of BW and apply it to SC2 to figure the game out quickly. Now, how can a C+ noob have the equivalent knowledge to a former BW pro? And don't give me a smart-ass answer or this conversation is over.
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
I was A- on WGTour and B rank on iCCup, what are you, D+/C-? I'm tired of discussing things with people who have no clear idea what they're talking about. Since you have nothing to contribute to this discussing except saying the same stupid arguments over and over again, stay in school, go read a book, do something to educate yourself.
Have a wonderful day.
Yeah, everyone claims to have been "A- on WGTour" because there's no way to check. What's your iCCup ID, mr. B rank?
Look up gNs.I-Seraphim or Barbedwire
Okay, bye.
"ID not found" for both of those. Good job looking like a total idiot.
iccup probably deleted them, so what
Go 1v1? We'll go bo5
Python, Destination, Fighting Spirit, Electric Circuit, Heartbreak Ridge
Get on iccup or fish
lol, I haven't played in like 2 years and don't even have BW installed, what makes you think I'm going to play you and let you pick a bunch of maps I don't even know?
I think you pretty much answered your own question, but you're assuming SC2 is the same game as BW with a lower skill ceiling. SC2 is a quite different game from BW, which, by the way, has not been "figured out", as you put it, but had a very high practice regimen for proleague players. This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good. You can blame the game all you want, but a small handful of Korean pros are dominating in SC2 right now, even if they get knocked out early in tournaments.
Being a pro at BW may or may not necessarily translate into an advantage in SC2. For some players, like Bogus and Jaedong and so on, it definitely does to some extent, but they also have the advantage of having really supportive practice houses that allow them to train really hard to win. Remember when Jaedong first picked up SC2? I was watching those streams and he kinda sucked. If you're talking about foreigner pros, most of them are wildly inconsistent, and have a tendency to die easily to strategies they are uncomfortable with, or simply make too many small mistakes to deal with.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
I was A- on WGTour and B rank on iCCup, what are you, D+/C-? I'm tired of discussing things with people who have no clear idea what they're talking about. Since you have nothing to contribute to this discussing except saying the same stupid arguments over and over again, stay in school, go read a book, do something to educate yourself.
Have a wonderful day.
Yeah, everyone claims to have been "A- on WGTour" because there's no way to check. What's your iCCup ID, mr. B rank?
Look up gNs.I-Seraphim or Barbedwire
Okay, bye.
"ID not found" for both of those. Good job looking like a total idiot.
iccup probably deleted them, so what
Go 1v1? We'll go bo5
Python, Destination, Fighting Spirit, Electric Circuit, Heartbreak Ridge
Get on iccup or fish
lol, I haven't played in like 2 years and don't even have BW installed, what makes you think I'm going to play you and let you pick a bunch of maps I don't even know?
I see, you're going to talk about how you're "B rank" and say I'm a noob at Brood War, and then do this. Why would you ever uninstall Brood War to begin with? Go install it, I'll wait.
lol, I can only assume you're too noob at BW to see the difference between pro-players and iccup scrubs. But that's to be expected from US East users. I don't know how you can sit there and pretend that there isn't something wrong when someone who sucked at BW can beat someone who was godly in BW when they play SC2 because it's suddenly "a different game", especially when you yourself mention that pro-gamers have practice houses where they can train full-time. If you practice full-time, you shouldn't drop games to someone who never was good at RTS to begin with, and only plays part-time on NA server.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
I was A- on WGTour and B rank on iCCup, what are you, D+/C-? I'm tired of discussing things with people who have no clear idea what they're talking about. Since you have nothing to contribute to this discussing except saying the same stupid arguments over and over again, stay in school, go read a book, do something to educate yourself.
Have a wonderful day.
Yeah, everyone claims to have been "A- on WGTour" because there's no way to check. What's your iCCup ID, mr. B rank?
Look up gNs.I-Seraphim or Barbedwire
Okay, bye.
"ID not found" for both of those. Good job looking like a total idiot.
iccup probably deleted them, so what
Go 1v1? We'll go bo5
Python, Destination, Fighting Spirit, Electric Circuit, Heartbreak Ridge
Get on iccup or fish
lol, I haven't played in like 2 years and don't even have BW installed, what makes you think I'm going to play you and let you pick a bunch of maps I don't even know?
I see, you're going to talk about how you're "B rank" and say I'm a noob at Brood War, and then do this. Why would you ever uninstall Brood War to begin with? Go install it, I'll wait.
I'm really out of form, you'd probably win, besides, I only play DotA2 now. gl with your delusions though.
Did you even read what I wrote, or are you illiterate? Did you miss the part where I said "This, by no means, made any of them invincible or unbeatable, and the same goes for SC2 pros, so I don't really see why you're so surprised that someone good can lose to someone not as good."? or when I said "non-pros sometimes beat pros, like LancerX beating sSak, Bizzy beating Bisu, dRaW beating TerrOr[fOu], Mondragon beating SaviOr, Incontrol and Advokate beating Jaedong, Testie beating Midas, and so on."? You keep going back to Brood War to make some kind of circular argument about how progamers are unbeatable when there is no evidence to support that claim. Pro-gamers will, of course, beat nub players more than they lose, but you can't win every single game ever, especially when the "newbs" have a lot of experience themselves.
Also, don't talk about BW skill if you don't play.
I was A- on WGTour and B rank on iCCup, what are you, D+/C-? I'm tired of discussing things with people who have no clear idea what they're talking about. Since you have nothing to contribute to this discussing except saying the same stupid arguments over and over again, stay in school, go read a book, do something to educate yourself.
Have a wonderful day.
Yeah, everyone claims to have been "A- on WGTour" because there's no way to check. What's your iCCup ID, mr. B rank?
Look up gNs.I-Seraphim or Barbedwire
Okay, bye.
"ID not found" for both of those. Good job looking like a total idiot.
iccup probably deleted them, so what
Go 1v1? We'll go bo5
Python, Destination, Fighting Spirit, Electric Circuit, Heartbreak Ridge
Get on iccup or fish
lol, I haven't played in like 2 years and don't even have BW installed, what makes you think I'm going to play you and let you pick a bunch of maps I don't even know?
I see, you're going to talk about how you're "B rank" and say I'm a noob at Brood War, and then do this. Why would you ever uninstall Brood War to begin with? Go install it, I'll wait.
I'm really out of form, you'd probably win, besides, I only play DotA2 now. gl with your delusions though.
The problem with SC2 is that it's overly balanced? Wtf am I reading? Is Chess "overly balanced?" Both players LITERALLY have exactly the same pieces that start in the same position, the only difference between them is one player gets to move first; it doesn't get any more balanced than that! And yet, Chess has managed to be a highly competitive sport (if you want to call it that) for years.
On June 30 2014 04:27 Penguinator wrote: The problem with SC2 is that it's overly balanced? Wtf am I reading? Is Chess "overly balanced?" Both players LITERALLY have exactly the same pieces that start in the same position, the only difference between them is one player gets to move first; it doesn't get any more balanced than that! And yet, Chess has managed to be a highly competitive sport (if you want to call it that) for years.
Have you ever watched a professional chess match? It's like every game is a draw so they have to play over and over for days with no food or sleep until someone wins a best of five, so it's like three wins, two losses, fifteen draws at the end.
Oh, I was just playing around with the TaeJa love post. My little nod to BisuDagger or any other rabid fanboy/fangal.
Seeing as it took over the discussion, it seems like more DH's and HSC's with huge prize pools and interesting breaks between matches, would be exactly what would help boost SC2 up in popularity. Is this not the goal? I love GSL, less then in years past, but still big ♥♥♥'s.
Korea needs to build up however suits them best, forge the mightiest warriors in the crucible of PL and GSL. Train snipers, macro bots, 12 year old wonderkids! If they then send out those best of the best players to our foreign tournaments we will get epic clashes of styles and skills. The fans will debate stats and who is better, what tournaments really matter, what patch who rode to the 1st prize.
Wait... we do that already. Must be that SC2 is doing just fine.
On June 30 2014 09:50 Yourmomsbasement wrote: Oh, I was just playing around with the TaeJa love post. My little nod to BisuDagger or any other rabid fanboy/fangal.
Seeing as it took over the discussion, it seems like more DH's and HSC's with huge prize pools and interesting breaks between matches, would be exactly what would help boost SC2 up in popularity. Is this not the goal? I love GSL, less then in years past, but still big ♥♥♥'s.
Korea needs to build up however suits them best, forge the mightiest warriors in the crucible of PL and GSL. Train snipers, macro bots, 12 year old wonderkids! If they then send out those best of the best players to our foreign tournaments we will get epic clashes of styles and skills. The fans will debate stats and who is better, what tournaments really matter, what patch who rode to the 1st prize.
Wait... we do that already. Must be that SC2 is doing just fine.
Liquid Fighting.
Never back down from a well thought out fanboy post. You've definitely shown me I should be posting Bisu's name more times in my posts as well. My compliments to you geniusness.
Haha oh lord! Nina wins thread again spending an entire page in a self argument. All we can really surmise is that Ninazerg clearly destroyed her opponent in the debate.
Maybe people are just bored of sc 2. It is an old game. Think about it, only real die hards watched and played bw when Warcraft 3 was in its prime. Now wc 3 is dead, cause everyone moved to sc 2 I guess for myself if I'm not playing it I'm not gonna watch it.
On June 28 2014 05:34 aZealot wrote: It's all very well to talk about not trying for perfect balance, but the community at large (at least that part of it that posts on TL/SC2 Forums/Reddit) tends to be very vocal when it comes to balance. Of course, then parts of that community also whine about the game being stale etc but consistency is difficult to ask for in anyone, let alone SC2 players.
I'd like it if Blizzard left the game alone for extended periods, and made public statements to that effect, but I'm in a minority.
Agreed, I am all for patching bugs and making the game more efficient to play, but patches that make the units better or worse, MSC, Oracle, Hellbat, Infestor etc... it is detrimental to the players-> fanbase -> game.
Actually, now that I think about it, Blizzard have said they are happy with 55 - 45 which is reasonable to me and is not perfect balance. That said, I still think that the game could be left alone a lot more than it is - if not for all the crying and the whine.
However, I don't agree with your claim that SC2 is dying. That really is a load of horseshit. And has been for a long time.
just take a look at the brood war section. that game will be 17 this year and people still play, talk, and love bw. LotV isn't even out yet so no way is sc2 dead
Being overly balanced actually produces stars, because winning games via taking advantage of a matchup advantage is not a real star. Real stars win through their own skill, and playing matches that are balanced rather than imbalanced (makes it harder for them to win on disadvantageous matchups) gives them consistency
On April 11 2015 01:46 parkufarku wrote: Being overly balanced actually produces stars, because winning games via taking advantage of a matchup advantage is not a real star. Real stars win through their own skill, and playing matches that are balanced rather than imbalanced (makes it harder for them to win on disadvantageous matchups) gives them consistency
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/rFKPPrd.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kHVKpJv.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/agdYERq.png)
