On April 02 2019 07:16 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I don't think P micro is easy positioning stuff targeting storms stasis etc, and it's active during whole fight too unlike siege. Well good T's will siege then target with tanks ofc as needed but not always etc..
trust me it is MORE easy that terran/zerg micro. thats just a fact.
yeah I think i've seen that pattern that you can be really good with P with lower APM than Z or T. Well apm is only a part of the difficulty in the game i think, and it has to do with having to be on your toes and react quick rather than really needing that much "true APM". Also Z or T maybe need more apm in ZvT than vs P ? ^^ Didn't flash say you can do most things with 150apm. Ps are more ok with reacting a second or two later at times because shields and big hp units.
Idk doesn't feel like it to me. That's only the micro part anyway. Obviously that's not the reason P is easy vs Z and it's not, at all. Neither vs T. Or P : /
the common trope is protoss is better at lower levels because the effect of having only 12 units on one hotkey and the longest duration macro cycles. these advantages are mitigated as you move up in mechanicals
i have a memory of something (interview? video?) where Flash mentioned that he thinks that one thing that other players could do better is prioritizing where to focus their attention. he said something like "your screen should be on the most important thing". does anyone remember this? i searched for interview he's done on TL but I didn't find it. maybe it was part of Nal Ra's Old Boy or Hyung-jun becomes a progamer?
On April 02 2019 01:47 BisuDagger wrote: My personal vote is EVER2004 OSL iloveoov > boxer * Team Kill * Not part of the poll, but the path to the finals was one of the hardest too (GoRush->Nada->Reach->Boxer) * Reading this is super emotional
BoxeR placed second in an OSL for the third time in his career. After the finals BoxeR broke down in tears. iloveoov later stated: "I really hope that now BoxeR will never hear from someone else that he is weak. I wish that BoxeR will win all of his future tournaments the same way he stepped past so many good players on his road to this EVER Starleague Final. I'm sure he was so determined because he hasn't had a win recently... I'm so sad. From now on, although I want to game again with BoxeR, I don't want to meet him in this kind of situation ever again. If I had beat someone other than Boxer, I think I would have been much happier.
Fun OSL facts: * There were a total of 14 Terran victories. * 4 went to the fifth game (3-2) * 4 went 3-1 * 6 went 3-0
The player that gave the terran champion the most difficulty on that given day is by default defined by the series scores (as in players who pushed the terran champion to a game five in the finals), but I personally feel their overall competitive excellence within that given time-frame is of importance also. This is because the results of the finals are affected by a variety of factors that has little to do with the overall competitive quality of the player who finished in second place. It could be heavily influenced by stylistic mismatches, the map pool, the schedule loading for both of the players, their overall conditioning on that given day, and the quality of help given by their surrounding support network.
I will personally define the hardest opponent as the player who had the best competitive form across all platforms by their overall number of victories (as imperfect as this metric is, it is easier to research), within a time-frame that spans a month before and after the date of the actual finals. Because the amount of available competitive scheduling always varies over time, I will judge it by how much more wins they had when compared to their contemporary peers.
I also get the feeling that expected outcome leading up the finals alone isn't how you defined the hardest opponent, and the actual performance on that given day plays an important role as well in defining the hardest opponent, so I will exclude all opponents who were shut-out completely three-to-zero.
That leaves us with the following finalists for inspection,
1. YellOw from Coca-Cola OGN StarLeague 2. H.O.T-Forever from NATE OGN StarLeague 3. YellOw from Olympus OGN StarLeague 4. BoxeR from EVER 2004 OGN StarLeague 5. ChoJJa from Shinhan OGN StarLeague S1 6. Anytime from Shinhan OGN StarLeague S2 7. Movie from EVER 2009 OGN StarLeague 8. Jaedong from Korean Air OGN StarLeague S2
Let's breakdown the players with the most competitive victories a month leading up to, and after the finals of the above mentioned finals. Records are taken from TLPD:
1. Top two players with the most number of victories a month before and after Coca-Cola OGN StarLeague finals took place (2001/08/08 ~ 2001/10/08)
TheMarine: 31-11 (73.81%) BoxeR: 31-15 (68.09%)
2. Top two players with the most number of victories a month before and after NATE OGN StarLeague finals took place (2002/05/09 ~ 2002/07/09)
NaDa: 24-17 (58.54%) YellOw: 22-17 (56.41%)
3. Top two players with the most number of victories a month before and after Olympus OGN StarLeague finals took place (2003/06/13 ~ 2002/08/13)
YellOw: 19-9 (67.86%) XellOs: 19-11 (63.33%)
4. Top two players with the most number of victories a month before and after EVER 2004 OGN StarLeague finals took place (2004/10/20 ~ 2004/12/20)
NaDa: 26-10 (72.22%) July: 16-7 (69.57%)
5. Top two players with the most number of victories a month before and after Shinhan OGN StarLeague S1 finals took place (2006/05/24 ~ 2006/07/24)
sAviOr: 20-8 (71.43%) Casy: 15-6 (71.43%)
6. Top two players with the most number of victories a month before and after Shinhan OGN StarLeague S2 finals took place (2006/10/18 ~ 2006/12/18)
sAviOr: 22-10 (68.75%) NaDa: 18-11 (62.07%)
7. Top two players with the most number of victories a month before and after Shinhan OGN StarLeague S2 finals took place (2009/12/17 ~ 2010/02/17)
Flash: 28-9 (75.68%) Kal: 24-11 (68.57%)
8. Top two players with the most number of victories a month before and after Shinhan OGN StarLeague S2 finals took place (2010/08/11 ~ 2010/10/11)
Flash: 25-10 (71.43%) Jaedong: 23-13 (63.89%)
Now out of the 8 finalists that were beaten by their terran rivals, only two makes it as a top two performer by my particular criteria (as flawed as the metric may be), for example, BoxeR was indeed impressive in late 2004, but his performance elsewhere within a team setting such as the ProLeague and the MBC Team League wasn't all that great, and his other individual league performances in tournaments of that particular era such as YATGK MSL and KT-KTF 2004/2005 Premier League wasn't that outstanding. Most of the struggle on that actual finals came down to the fact that it was a battle of wits between two players who knew each other extremely well, and outside of that particular tournament, neither were actually in tremendous form in terms of the overall competitive scale. Over the entire scope of the competitive landscape, it was actually NaDa that was killing it (most individual victories within MBC Movies Team League, reaching far into most of the tournaments he entered).
I actually think YellOw had the opportunity of his lifetime in mid-2003, when NaDa was starting to slowly lose his form after his mind-boggling Grand Slam of all three major individual leagues in early 2003, and iloveoov had yet to fully arrive as a top contender within a tournament setting. He was winning various minor open leagues (with its own separate qualifying stages) such as 5th iTV Ranking League, and GhemTV FindAll Challenger Open Starleague, and was a constant fixture in all the major individual leagues.
YellOw had two strategies prepared for Nostalgia (the map that was used twice), and on paper probably would have won both the games (if you include the one that was restarted due to technical issues), but since the first game was reset after YellOw had capitalized early with his zerglings, he was forced to play with an unprepared build order for the final match after he failed to close out the series.
This was probably the most heart-breaking defeat for YellOw, and in my mind he probably should have won this series given his overall form, the level of his contemporary rivals, and the way the series played out. This was the only series that went to all five games that also had two of the best players of that particular time-frame by the metrics I've defined above, competiting against one another for the title.
Of course, it suits his narrative better that he lost narrowly to prime BoxeR, prime NaDa, prime XellOs, and after all those players had fallen out of form, later came across prime iloveoov in the finals. I do think he was worthy of that OGN StarLeague trophy in 2003, both in terms of his overall competitive form surrounding that particular finals, and his actual performance on that given day. It just wasn't meant to be.
On April 02 2019 07:16 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I don't think P micro is easy positioning stuff targeting storms stasis etc, and it's active during whole fight too unlike siege. Well good T's will siege then target with tanks ofc as needed but not always etc..
trust me it is MORE easy that terran/zerg micro. thats just a fact.
sorry but tahts bs ... since 1999 everyone says
terran hardest to learn easiest to master protoss easiest to learn hardest to master
as someone who played protoss for like 10+ years and terran for 2 years, i would say protoss micro is SO MUCH HARDER its not even close how much harder it is. terran has harder macro but protoss has by far the harder micro then terran by a landslide i dont know where u get ur "facts" from but i would considere a new place to get them from xD
On April 02 2019 07:16 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I don't think P micro is easy positioning stuff targeting storms stasis etc, and it's active during whole fight too unlike siege. Well good T's will siege then target with tanks ofc as needed but not always etc..
trust me it is MORE easy that terran/zerg micro. thats just a fact.
sorry but tahts bs ... since 1999 everyone says
terran hardest to learn easiest to master protoss easiest to learn hardest to master
as someone who played protoss for like 10+ years and terran for 2 years, i would say protoss micro is SO MUCH HARDER its not even close how much harder it is. terran has harder macro but protoss has by far the harder micro then terran by a landslide i dont know where u get ur "facts" from but i would considere a new place to get them from xD
sure sure bro i dont feel like discussing all the details in terms of all the different micro challenges each race faces would take a couple of pages..
yeap protoss is the most easy race to play lets keep it at that.
On April 02 2019 07:16 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I don't think P micro is easy positioning stuff targeting storms stasis etc, and it's active during whole fight too unlike siege. Well good T's will siege then target with tanks ofc as needed but not always etc..
trust me it is MORE easy that terran/zerg micro. thats just a fact.
sorry but tahts bs ... since 1999 everyone says
terran hardest to learn easiest to master protoss easiest to learn hardest to master
as someone who played protoss for like 10+ years and terran for 2 years, i would say protoss micro is SO MUCH HARDER its not even close how much harder it is. terran has harder macro but protoss has by far the harder micro then terran by a landslide i dont know where u get ur "facts" from but i would considere a new place to get them from xD
On April 02 2019 07:16 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I don't think P micro is easy positioning stuff targeting storms stasis etc, and it's active during whole fight too unlike siege. Well good T's will siege then target with tanks ofc as needed but not always etc..
trust me it is MORE easy that terran/zerg micro. thats just a fact.
sorry but tahts bs ... since 1999 everyone says
terran hardest to learn easiest to master protoss easiest to learn hardest to master
as someone who played protoss for like 10+ years and terran for 2 years, i would say protoss micro is SO MUCH HARDER its not even close how much harder it is. terran has harder macro but protoss has by far the harder micro then terran by a landslide i dont know where u get ur "facts" from but i would considere a new place to get them from xD
On April 02 2019 07:16 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I don't think P micro is easy positioning stuff targeting storms stasis etc, and it's active during whole fight too unlike siege. Well good T's will siege then target with tanks ofc as needed but not always etc..
trust me it is MORE easy that terran/zerg micro. thats just a fact.
sorry but tahts bs ... since 1999 everyone says
terran hardest to learn easiest to master protoss easiest to learn hardest to master
as someone who played protoss for like 10+ years and terran for 2 years, i would say protoss micro is SO MUCH HARDER its not even close how much harder it is. terran has harder macro but protoss has by far the harder micro then terran by a landslide i dont know where u get ur "facts" from but i would considere a new place to get them from xD
yes this is a small micro challenge this is awesome everybody knows. mine sweeping is super risky and is hard with a small amout of goon. i was talking about the general micro having 12 units on 1 hotkey that are very mobile and deals damage quickly and is fine to throw sometimes 1a2a3a.
now quick bring up some details to make protoss not look easy to play guys
On April 02 2019 07:16 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I don't think P micro is easy positioning stuff targeting storms stasis etc, and it's active during whole fight too unlike siege. Well good T's will siege then target with tanks ofc as needed but not always etc..
trust me it is MORE easy that terran/zerg micro. thats just a fact.
sorry but tahts bs ... since 1999 everyone says
terran hardest to learn easiest to master protoss easiest to learn hardest to master
as someone who played protoss for like 10+ years and terran for 2 years, i would say protoss micro is SO MUCH HARDER its not even close how much harder it is. terran has harder macro but protoss has by far the harder micro then terran by a landslide i dont know where u get ur "facts" from but i would considere a new place to get them from xD
yes this is a small micro challenge this is awesome everybody knows. mine sweeping is super risky and is hard with a small amout of goon. i was talking about the general micro having 12 units on 1 hotkey that are very mobile and deals damage quickly is fine to throw away sometimes 1a2a3a.
now quick bring up some details to make protoss not look easy to play guys
So you want big army engagements? Here are some sick carpet storms from Jangbi:
On April 02 2019 07:16 ProMeTheus112 wrote: I don't think P micro is easy positioning stuff targeting storms stasis etc, and it's active during whole fight too unlike siege. Well good T's will siege then target with tanks ofc as needed but not always etc..
trust me it is MORE easy that terran/zerg micro. thats just a fact.
sorry but tahts bs ... since 1999 everyone says
terran hardest to learn easiest to master protoss easiest to learn hardest to master
as someone who played protoss for like 10+ years and terran for 2 years, i would say protoss micro is SO MUCH HARDER its not even close how much harder it is. terran has harder macro but protoss has by far the harder micro then terran by a landslide i dont know where u get ur "facts" from but i would considere a new place to get them from xD
yes this is a small micro challenge this is awesome everybody knows. mine sweeping is super risky and is hard with a small amout of goon. i was talking about the general micro having 12 units on 1 hotkey that are very mobile and deals damage quickly is fine to throw away sometimes 1a2a3a.
now quick bring up some details to make protoss not look easy to play guys
good job once again protoss is known to be easy at the lower level but the hardest at the expert-progamer level hence having an incredible multi-task is where a lot of expert protoss users cant make it to pro-level big engagements where you want to have perfect storms /stasis recalls etc is part of that
however, you don't need that perfection at mid level/high level. as displayed here
you didnt sound convinced about the high level part before though. terran doesnt even have to click once when he is sieged up + vultures on the right side when toss just 1a2a3as into his army.
well, nothing special here. terrans going strong with their propaganda for ages now.
On April 02 2019 23:34 [AS]Rattus wrote: you didnt sound convinced about the high level part before though. terran doesnt even have to click once when he is sieged up + vultures on the right side when toss just 1a2a3as into his army.
well, nothing special here. terrans going strong with their propaganda for ages now.
Terran Micro? Tank Micro??? (video is set to start at the correct time)
On April 02 2019 06:39 BisuDagger wrote: I'm curious if the Flash votes are purely cause his opponent was Jaedong even though JD got owned.
FLash's first OSL win had an insane road when you look at it. 2-1 Jaedong in the Ro8, 3-1 bisu in the semis, 3-0 stork in the finals. All within a couple weeks of also winning the GSI where he also beat Jaedong and Stork.
On April 02 2019 06:39 BisuDagger wrote: I'm curious if the Flash votes are purely cause his opponent was Jaedong even though JD got owned.
FLash's first OSL win had an insane road when you look at it. 2-1 Jaedong in the Ro8, 3-1 bisu in the semis, 3-0 stork in the finals. All within a couple weeks of also winning the GSI where he also beat Jaedong and Stork.
Yeah definitely, his road was insane. And he was 14 at the time? He was just an insane nerd baller kid.
The player that gave the terran champion the most difficulty on that given day is by default defined by the series scores (as in players who pushed the terran champion to a game five in the finals).
No...no it isnt. Whoever challenged him the most challenged him the most, we dont need some braindead useless contextless heuristic so we can snort and say "well, technically such and such did better because of score", an utterly useless barometer. x player cheeses blindly two games in a row, winning them, to be crushed three times. How could it possibly be said he challenged a player more than someone who actually challenged that player and brought them to the brink in four games, even if the overall result was 3-1?
The player that gave the terran champion the most difficulty on that given day is by default defined by the series scores (as in players who pushed the terran champion to a game five in the finals).
No...no it isnt. Whoever challenged him the most challenged him the most, we dont need some braindead useless contextless heuristic so we can snort and say "well, technically such and such did better because of score", an utterly useless barometer. x player cheeses blindly two games in a row, winning them, to be crushed three times. How could it possibly be said he challenged a player more than someone who actually challenged that player and brought them to the brink in four games, even if the overall result was 3-1?
Because this is competitive Brood War with clear end objectives, and the end objective is to win, not impress you specifically by winning less but creating a more fulfilling spectating experience on the way down. The player who reached game five by definition was closer to achieving his end objective of winning the series than the dude who played quality games but got beaten in four games. Who is to say the dude who got raped in all of the standard games had it in him to win two more games off cheap cheeses if the series hypothetically extended into a best-of-seven, and perhaps the dude who pushed the eventual champion to the brink in the orthodox matches would have lost in the exact same manner again and again to lose 1-4 in a hypothetical best-of-seven scenario.
You can claim that the player who performed worse was superior by other measures, such as overall ability, or competitive excellence elsewhere, to the player who performed better on that day. However, there is no rhyme or reason for you to get to override the actual competitive results for that given day on the basis of your personal spectating experience. This isn't figure skating.
Establish objective measures first, then discuss the nuances of those objectives afterwards if you are insightful enough. Otherwise you can ignore any reality that is not to your liking by citing it is based on a mere technicality, and replace it with your own imaginary interpretation of what happened. I'm not here to discuss what you thought happened, I'm citing what actually happened.
EPT
EVER2004 OSL
