On January 13 2007 14:40 IdrA wrote:
Show nested quote +
it really doesnt have to be all p. On January 13 2007 14:24 BalloonFight wrote:
There have been no outrageous statements that I have said. BGH 1v1 focuses completely on what I have previously said (PvP). It's micro, macroing while you micro (off of 2-6 or whatever gates if the game lasts really long), knowing when to add more gates, and knowing when to transition to a higher tech.. meaning goons/dt. It's very simple when you think about it.
On January 13 2007 13:44 Gandalf wrote:
Well after you completely misinterpreted my relatively succinctly stated arguments, what was I to do? I felt compelled to make a full blown example-assisted explanation!
Your current argument I can agree with because it doesn't make any outrageous assessments
Now I wont have to kill you! Or, I can kill you, but then I'd have to tell you.
On January 13 2007 13:32 BalloonFight wrote:
(Even though I'm pages late..)
You didn't need to make such a long post for this Chris, it's pretty simple to argue. If testies micro is as good as koolams, which I would bet my money on it, thats all there is to it. Nothing further.
On January 13 2007 03:38 Gandalf wrote:
You've misinterpreted my post completely. I don't know why you're arguing about assimilating BGH strategies. I've clearly stated several times that strategy-wise BGH is a shallow map. Testie would need perhaps a day to deconstruct and assimilate all viable builds. Its easy as hell to learn BGH strategy, and I've said that repeatedly, so you've drawn a fallacious conclusion and have tried to counter it. Learning BGH BO's and when to add gates is easy as shit, so I don't quite get what you're trying to prove by hammering it in.
Testies mid and late game micro might be better than BGH players, but I wouldn't be so sure about early game micro. Players like koolam have very, very solid micro with zealots and goons, and in a PvP on BGH, zealots and goons and early game play a major role. Its also hard to accurately assess micro and macro by watching replays, unless its BoxeR or oov or someone like that and the micro is some uber fancy shit. But when you play them, you realize the strength and the skill. I know this by personal experience. I've seen testie max out in 14 minutes and wondered, what is so awesome about that? I've done it in less! And I've never seen a testie rep where he did some crazy control move that left me wowed. But when I played him a few times, I was completely blown away. There was this one game where Pickle and I managed to kill of testie's ally in a 2;2 and it was rendered a 1v2. Testie was a two base toss, pickle was a THREE base toss, I was a two base zerg. Thats 5 bases to 2. But when we met in our first big battle, it was - a draw. We all lost all our units. Testie had more mass than pickle, and his micro and storms were picture perfect. (Five bases meant we recovered faster so we did win)
Players like koolam have had 9 years of predominantly protoss practice. Testie, on the other hand, is a random player, which means roughly a third of his matches have given him protoss over the same amount of time. The OBVIOUS conclusion is that the ONLY way testie can have better control is IF he has GREATER INNATE TALENT. I fully agree that this is ENTIRELY possible, but you must also admit the possibility that it is NOT, and that koolam might actually have greater technical potential. Or are you going to state that there is no way in hell koolam could have better zealot/goon micro because testie is testie and is a low map player?
I'm not making any assumptions. I'm just trying to make everyone aware of the facts and all the possibilities. Or at least of what I feel is a just analysis.
On January 13 2007 03:21 BalloonFight wrote:
Oh c'mon now Chris. Testie is a great player, and could EASILY get to top "Bgh" status within a week. Do you really think it would be so difficult for him to adapt? All he needs to "learn" is at exactly what point to add the 3rd and 4th and so on gateway. I bet his micro is as good if not better than the best bghers 1v1 players, whoever they may be.. since there aren't that many.
All 1v1 BGH = is zealot micro early game, then late game goon production. The only difficult parts are knowing when to add gates, the constant micro/macro from 2-6 gates (which shouldn't be a problem for one of the best players) and transitioning to goons/dt tech. You make it sound like its the most difficult thing to learn for a ridiculously good player already.
On January 13 2007 02:52 Gandalf wrote:
I think a week is too little. You forget that top BGH players have played protoss and PvP far more then testie (since his being random means he plays all 9 match ups). Saying that testi'es PvP is better than any top BGHers PvP implies he is more "talented" than them. How can we make this assumption? Just because they play a different, less complicated map doesn't mean they're any less skilled.
The BGH elite have insanely good zealot/goon micro (and the other aspects of their game are very solid too), and they probably have had about 4x more practice at it than testie.
I think a week is too little. You forget that top BGH players have played protoss and PvP far more then testie (since his being random means he plays all 9 match ups). Saying that testi'es PvP is better than any top BGHers PvP implies he is more "talented" than them. How can we make this assumption? Just because they play a different, less complicated map doesn't mean they're any less skilled.
The BGH elite have insanely good zealot/goon micro (and the other aspects of their game are very solid too), and they probably have had about 4x more practice at it than testie.
Oh c'mon now Chris. Testie is a great player, and could EASILY get to top "Bgh" status within a week. Do you really think it would be so difficult for him to adapt? All he needs to "learn" is at exactly what point to add the 3rd and 4th and so on gateway. I bet his micro is as good if not better than the best bghers 1v1 players, whoever they may be.. since there aren't that many.
All 1v1 BGH = is zealot micro early game, then late game goon production. The only difficult parts are knowing when to add gates, the constant micro/macro from 2-6 gates (which shouldn't be a problem for one of the best players) and transitioning to goons/dt tech. You make it sound like its the most difficult thing to learn for a ridiculously good player already.
You've misinterpreted my post completely. I don't know why you're arguing about assimilating BGH strategies. I've clearly stated several times that strategy-wise BGH is a shallow map. Testie would need perhaps a day to deconstruct and assimilate all viable builds. Its easy as hell to learn BGH strategy, and I've said that repeatedly, so you've drawn a fallacious conclusion and have tried to counter it. Learning BGH BO's and when to add gates is easy as shit, so I don't quite get what you're trying to prove by hammering it in.
Testies mid and late game micro might be better than BGH players, but I wouldn't be so sure about early game micro. Players like koolam have very, very solid micro with zealots and goons, and in a PvP on BGH, zealots and goons and early game play a major role. Its also hard to accurately assess micro and macro by watching replays, unless its BoxeR or oov or someone like that and the micro is some uber fancy shit. But when you play them, you realize the strength and the skill. I know this by personal experience. I've seen testie max out in 14 minutes and wondered, what is so awesome about that? I've done it in less! And I've never seen a testie rep where he did some crazy control move that left me wowed. But when I played him a few times, I was completely blown away. There was this one game where Pickle and I managed to kill of testie's ally in a 2;2 and it was rendered a 1v2. Testie was a two base toss, pickle was a THREE base toss, I was a two base zerg. Thats 5 bases to 2. But when we met in our first big battle, it was - a draw. We all lost all our units. Testie had more mass than pickle, and his micro and storms were picture perfect. (Five bases meant we recovered faster so we did win)
Players like koolam have had 9 years of predominantly protoss practice. Testie, on the other hand, is a random player, which means roughly a third of his matches have given him protoss over the same amount of time. The OBVIOUS conclusion is that the ONLY way testie can have better control is IF he has GREATER INNATE TALENT. I fully agree that this is ENTIRELY possible, but you must also admit the possibility that it is NOT, and that koolam might actually have greater technical potential. Or are you going to state that there is no way in hell koolam could have better zealot/goon micro because testie is testie and is a low map player?
I'm not making any assumptions. I'm just trying to make everyone aware of the facts and all the possibilities. Or at least of what I feel is a just analysis.
(Even though I'm pages late..)
You didn't need to make such a long post for this Chris, it's pretty simple to argue. If testies micro is as good as koolams, which I would bet my money on it, thats all there is to it. Nothing further.
Well after you completely misinterpreted my relatively succinctly stated arguments, what was I to do? I felt compelled to make a full blown example-assisted explanation!
Your current argument I can agree with because it doesn't make any outrageous assessments

Now I wont have to kill you! Or, I can kill you, but then I'd have to tell you.
There have been no outrageous statements that I have said. BGH 1v1 focuses completely on what I have previously said (PvP). It's micro, macroing while you micro (off of 2-6 or whatever gates if the game lasts really long), knowing when to add more gates, and knowing when to transition to a higher tech.. meaning goons/dt. It's very simple when you think about it.
For 1v1, z is basically out of the running. A good terran could do really well on bgher 1v1.. it's just that no one has really stepped up to the plate to prove that. ;p
I worded it wrong, but I was mainly focusing on the Testie vs Koolam theory.. since I would assume that both would pick P.