|
Seriously. There must be a science to this. Why is it, that in any single tournament, any player can take sets and even Bo3/5s from any other player. Take the GSL. How many big names in this Code S so far (may 2011) have we seen take the long fall to Code A?
Poll: Why is this game getting so tight?The game is so young (55) 79% Complacency of higher ups (7) 10% The skill ceiling is nearing the max (6) 9% other (specify) (2) 3% 70 total votes Your vote: Why is this game getting so tight? (Vote): Complacency of higher ups
(Vote): The skill ceiling is nearing the max
(Vote): The game is so young
(Vote): other (specify)
Is this that the other players are just focused more and less complacent?
Is it that the skill ceiling has been hit and the difference between top players in Code S and the top players in Code A is like 2-3% increased skill?
It just feels, especially this season of GSL alone, that NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE can look at their group in GSL and say they are guaranteed to make it, let alone fight off the up and down matches.
Even in Code A. SlayerS_boxer won against a very good toss in the end, but how close was he to getting thrown into Code B? Personally this is my reasoning behind his "lack of form" lately. Its not him lacking, its others catching him, fast.
So whats everyone elses thoughts? I mean, this is insane for a viewership esport because it makes for some intense pressure in every single game.
Sidenote: Do you think blizzard specifically knew the game would be swings and roundabouts like this? Or do u think its just the insane theorycrafting/build testing from high skilled players thats forcing this insanely tight season of GSL?
|
Voted other. Imo the game is still far to young to have the big difference in skill level that older games do. Give it like 5 years and i bet you the top players will be utterly dominant.
|
On April 26 2011 23:24 Rabbitmaster wrote:
Voted other. Imo the game is still far to young to have the big difference in skill level that older games do. Give it like 5 years and i bet you the top players will be utterly dominant.
tbh im going to add that as an option. Was completely over my head how young this game is.
|
This game is so incredibly young and new and no one is anywhere close to the skill ceiling. Even the greatest players have a lot of weaknesses that can often times be countered hard by a 'no name' player doing something a little weird or strange that they haven't seen before. Also, 1 small mistake is often enough to cost a player the game they otherwise would have won. It will probably be this way for several more years before things start to settle as they did in BW.
|
As long there are so many strategies viable that nobody has ever seen there will be many upsets.
|
On April 26 2011 23:25 Charger wrote:
This game is so incredibly young and new and no one is anywhere close to the skill ceiling. Even the greatest players have a lot of weaknesses that can often times be countered hard by a 'no name' player doing something a little weird or strange that they haven't seen before. Also, 1 small mistake is often enough to cost a player the game they otherwise would have won. It will probably be this way for several more years before things start to settle as they did in BW.
yeah, I was thinking the same thing. I suppose until all the wierd and wonderful (seemingly) on the spot tactics are well worn, then we will see the wheat seperate itself from the chaff.
|
if the expansions are going up, new builds etc are going to join the game and more variety will be granted. I think with the release of expansions the true skills of the players will be determined (adabtability and so on)
voted for others , game too young + expansions are going to come
|
thats pretty interesting. I mean, should we take the game in its "as is" form, or is it EVENTUALLY going to be balanced at the end of its life (similar to BW)
|
Seriously. There must be a science to this. Why is it, that in any single tournament, any player can take sets and even Bo3/5s from any other player.
I'm not really sure from where comes the idea that this shouldn't be happening. It's normal. Perhaps it seems like it's happening a lot simply because there are a ton of games being played these days. So it can seem like MC is getting upset a lot, even when he's winning tournaments at his normal pace, and maintaining his outstanding win %.
Of course, there is also the fact that as the game is young, it is easy for a player to lose to some strange shit they've never seen. Look at MC's poor response to Thorzain on Crossfire. He clearly simply didn't know how to respond to that build. In a more "solved" game, this is unlikely to happen as he would know the correct response and the better player would win (not saying this is MC for sure).
The "everyones near the skill ceiling" option is a bit comical to be honest. The number of terribad mistakes in the GSL has been unbelievable. Pros amoving their infestors into the deathballs, Rain's game against Inca....
|
The game's incredibly volatile. The pace is much faster than brood war (sped up by the macro mechanics), so it's pretty easy to lose games you shouldn't be losing. Errors are more costly now because of the increased pace; one mismicro can just outright kill you, as it has many times in ZvT where you mis control your banelings and whatnot. On top of that the game favors rush strategies more. Warpgate mechanic reduces rush distance, mules allow for a surge in income that can facilitate a timing push or all in or w/e u wanna call it, and spawn larva mechanic allows for a sudden and unexpected surge in units. The scouting in Sc2, however, isn't that much better and in Terran's case its actually more costly than it was. So while the game caters more to rushes than brood war did, it doesn't really give you better scouting options. Yes in brood war you got observers and overlord speed at roughly the same time you do now, but it's much harder to scout all ins because they can come so much earlier.
Also easier mechanics make it harder for a player to win from a disadvantage just by being better and outplaying the opponent. If you get caught of guard by a 2 fact push in PvT in brood war, the room to outmicro is so large the better player can still win a lot of the time. If you overdrone in Sc2, no fancy roach ling drone queen transfuse w/e micro is gonna save you from a 4 warpgating protoss clicking 1a and throwing some decent forcefields. Obviously these are exaggerated examples but the point still stands; its much harder for a better player to play from a disadvantage or build order loss and still come out on top.
I don't really get the whole "the game is young option". If anything its often the opposite. In brood war the earlier days had people who completely smashed everyone (boxer, yellow, garmito, kingdom, etc), and as the skill level gradually increased it was harder to set yourself apart from people. With the obvious exception of Flash, who is just godmode, its incredibly hard to stay at the top in brood war and players like Jaedong, Bisu, and Stork can still have an offday and lose to any1 (just 2 days ago Jaedong lost to great and Stork lost to a crappy Zerg, killer or princess i think)
|
A few thoughts:
1) It's somewhat safe to say that the players who are truly "talented" at RTS (if there is such a thing) are still s-class BW progamers and that we can't really pass judgment on whether it's possible to dominate in SC2 until some of those people move over.
2) I voted for "complacency of higher-ups" because it's pretty obvious that the GSL winner goes into the RO32 thinking he's gonna walkover every season. They're coming in under-prepared and paying for it. MVP and MC both went out because of overly cocky builds/unforced errors (depot wall!).
3) Be patient! As game balance and maps get ironed out, players will almost certainly get more dominant. We've got two expansions to go before the game settles fully, anyway.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
More time is needed and there are still weakness in some player's games so they can be exploited 
|
On April 26 2011 23:30 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +
Seriously. There must be a science to this. Why is it, that in any single tournament, any player can take sets and even Bo3/5s from any other player.
I'm not really sure from where comes the idea that this shouldn't be happening. It's normal. Perhaps it seems like it's happening a lot simply because there are a ton of games being played these days. So it can seem like MC is getting upset a lot, even when he's winning tournaments at his normal pace, and maintaining his outstanding win %. Of course, there is also the fact that as the game is young, it is easy for a player to lose to some strange shit they've never seen. Look at MC's poor response to Thorzain on Crossfire. He clearly simply didn't know how to respond to that build. In a more "solved" game, this is unlikely to happen as he would know the correct response and the better player would win (not saying this is MC for sure). The "everyones near the skill ceiling" option is a bit comical to be honest. The number of terribad mistakes in the GSL has been unbelievable. Pros amoving their infestors into the deathballs, Rain's game against Inca....
dont get me wrong, its not my personal opinion, i can just see how someone probably COULD make a semi decent arguement to suggest that that is possible
|
8750 Posts
Some players don't really belong in Code S and others don't really belong in Code A so there will always be "upsets" going on.
It's really the nature of a healthy competitive SC scene that anyone can beat anyone. Being significantly better than someone means you win ~60% of your games against them and dominating them means you win ~70% of your games against them. Single game matches and best of three games matches can easily go either way. And even if you're better than an opponent in general, you might be bad against the one thing they do best, so you have a tough time winning. Every match has the potential to be a roadblock.
It's the same for SC1. You can be the champion of MSL and fail to get through the offline qualifiers of OSL. It's incredibly rare for a player to be doing well in both leagues at once. You'd need to give your top 5 players outrageously high chances to win each game in order to get them to consistently be at the top of every league they play.
For people who aren't familiar with SC1 and OSL and MSL: Imagine that aside from GomTV's GSL, there was a 2nd league that was run in essentially the same manner, HomTV's HSL. Everyone plays in both leagues and tries equally hard in both of them. They each have rough equivalents to Code S, Code A, and Code B. Then what we saw in SC1 was that it's not uncommon for someone to be the champion, or top 4 or top 8 of Code S of GSL, while being unable to make it out of Code B of HSL. Of course, it wasn't always so extreme. But there's no magical barrier between players that GSL has somehow detected and drawn a line upon. Being #1 in the world doesn't mean you win 99% of the time against #50 in the world, especially not when #50 could possibly play you with any race and on any map and in any context.
|
On April 26 2011 23:31 theqat wrote:
They're coming in under-prepared and paying for it. MVP and MC both went out because of overly cocky builds/unforced errors (depot wall!)
amen, nexus first is the safest build.... right? 
|
just added a bold to the next talking point. Is it blizzards genious, or just the hilariously insane amount of players hammering this game our for like dozen's of hours a day?
|
On April 26 2011 23:34 Aleski wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2011 23:31 theqat wrote:
They're coming in under-prepared and paying for it. MVP and MC both went out because of overly cocky builds/unforced errors (depot wall!) amen, nexus first is the safest build.... right?
Exactly. it's not like the games with the latest champ are going to 200/200 and the champ is losing because his army was slightly out of position or he let the other guy get a unit combo of questionable balance. The champs are legitimately losing through faults of their own
|
On April 26 2011 23:32 Aleski wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2011 23:30 Yaotzin wrote:
Seriously. There must be a science to this. Why is it, that in any single tournament, any player can take sets and even Bo3/5s from any other player.
I'm not really sure from where comes the idea that this shouldn't be happening. It's normal. Perhaps it seems like it's happening a lot simply because there are a ton of games being played these days. So it can seem like MC is getting upset a lot, even when he's winning tournaments at his normal pace, and maintaining his outstanding win %. Of course, there is also the fact that as the game is young, it is easy for a player to lose to some strange shit they've never seen. Look at MC's poor response to Thorzain on Crossfire. He clearly simply didn't know how to respond to that build. In a more "solved" game, this is unlikely to happen as he would know the correct response and the better player would win (not saying this is MC for sure). The "everyones near the skill ceiling" option is a bit comical to be honest. The number of terribad mistakes in the GSL has been unbelievable. Pros amoving their infestors into the deathballs, Rain's game against Inca.... dont get me wrong, its not my personal opinion, i can just see how someone probably COULD make a semi decent arguement to suggest that that is possible
Responding to the last point? I'm not sure how you could. If it was a case of the games skill ceiling being hit, everyone would be playing really well, with games decided by small things. Instead we have even the best players making a laundry list of errors - big and small - in every single game they play. It's nowhere near perfect play, and that's even with our still limited understanding of what perfect play in SC2 actually is.
|
8750 Posts
By the way, the fuck is "meta meta meta mode?"
|
On April 26 2011 23:37 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
By the way, the fuck is "meta meta meta mode?"
volatile lol.
|
On April 26 2011 23:36 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2011 23:32 Aleski wrote:On April 26 2011 23:30 Yaotzin wrote:
Seriously. There must be a science to this. Why is it, that in any single tournament, any player can take sets and even Bo3/5s from any other player.
I'm not really sure from where comes the idea that this shouldn't be happening. It's normal. Perhaps it seems like it's happening a lot simply because there are a ton of games being played these days. So it can seem like MC is getting upset a lot, even when he's winning tournaments at his normal pace, and maintaining his outstanding win %. Of course, there is also the fact that as the game is young, it is easy for a player to lose to some strange shit they've never seen. Look at MC's poor response to Thorzain on Crossfire. He clearly simply didn't know how to respond to that build. In a more "solved" game, this is unlikely to happen as he would know the correct response and the better player would win (not saying this is MC for sure). The "everyones near the skill ceiling" option is a bit comical to be honest. The number of terribad mistakes in the GSL has been unbelievable. Pros amoving their infestors into the deathballs, Rain's game against Inca.... dont get me wrong, its not my personal opinion, i can just see how someone probably COULD make a semi decent arguement to suggest that that is possible Responding to the last point? I'm not sure how you could. If it was a case of the games skill ceiling being hit, everyone would be playing really well, with games decided by small things. Instead we have even the best players making a laundry list of errors - big and small - in every single game they play. It's nowhere near perfect play, and that's even with our still limited understanding of what perfect play in SC2 actually is.
Well, perhaps ceiling is the wrong word. I kind of meant the pace that people are increasing in skill, has slowed to the point where the slower gamers or the late arrivals have managed to get right in the mix. I didnt mean that games are bieng knocked out flawlessly, but yeah, ceiling is clearly not the word i was thinking of reading it back.
|
On April 26 2011 23:37 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
By the way, the fuck is "meta meta meta mode?"
Well wiki defined Metagaming is kind of what i mean, but i see sc2 as a more hyper mode version, so i figured it was meta, meta, META
|
8750 Posts
On April 26 2011 23:42 Aleski wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2011 23:37 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
By the way, the fuck is "meta meta meta mode?" Well wiki defined Metagaming is kind of what i mean, but i see sc2 as a more hyper mode version, so i figured it was meta, meta, META
That players watch previous games that their opponents have played and then blindly counter those strategies rather than responding to what they're seeing in the game?
|
Well yeah, that falls into the category of meta gaming, but it isnt the entirety of metagaming. Its things like going hellions to force roaches then go banshees, but the other guy out meta's your ass and sees your hellions, goes queens and cancels out your banshees before they are even out.
BUT THEN
you out meta him by meta meta gaming and saying "i know he's gonna go queens, so ill just go hellions into a tank marine push" knowing he hasnt got anything bar lings and queens.
BUT THEN
he out meta's you again, by just seeing the hellions and making banelings anyway. Casters screaming saying "what is he doing!" but then they realise he is countering the counter to the counter that was going to be used as a counter.
Yeah, thats meta meta meta gaming and thats sc2
|
On April 26 2011 23:52 Aleski wrote:Well yeah, that falls into the category of meta gaming, but it isnt the entirety of metagaming. Its things like going hellions to force roaches then go banshees, but the other guy out meta's your ass and sees your hellions, goes queens and cancels out your banshees before they are even out. BUT THEN you out meta him by meta meta gaming and saying "i know he's gonna go queens, so ill just go hellions into a tank marine push" knowing he hasnt got anything bar lings and queens. BUT THEN he out meta's you again, by just seeing the hellions and making banelings anyway. Casters screaming saying "what is he doing!" but then they realise he is countering the counter to the counter that was going to be used as a counter. Yeah, thats meta meta meta gaming and thats sc2
This Is so unbelievably wrong... Top players aren't gonna have that train of thought. What is more likely is they scout and deduce the most likely strategy and attempt to counter it. They will notice much more than you will and therefore have a better idea of how to counter play.
|
On April 26 2011 23:33 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Some players don't really belong in Code S and others don't really belong in Code A so there will always be "upsets" going on.
It's really the nature of a healthy competitive SC scene that anyone can beat anyone. Being significantly better than someone means you win ~60% of your games against them and dominating them means you win ~70% of your games against them. Single game matches and best of three games matches can easily go either way. And even if you're better than an opponent in general, you might be bad against the one thing they do best, so you have a tough time winning. Every match has the potential to be a roadblock.
It's the same for SC1. You can be the champion of MSL and fail to get through the offline qualifiers of OSL. It's incredibly rare for a player to be doing well in both leagues at once. You'd need to give your top 5 players outrageously high chances to win each game in order to get them to consistently be at the top of every league they play.
For people who aren't familiar with SC1 and OSL and MSL: Imagine that aside from GomTV's GSL, there was a 2nd league that was run in essentially the same manner, HomTV's HSL. Everyone plays in both leagues and tries equally hard in both of them. They each have rough equivalents to Code S, Code A, and Code B. Then what we saw in SC1 was that it's not uncommon for someone to be the champion, or top 4 or top 8 of Code S of GSL, while being unable to make it out of Code B of HSL. Of course, it wasn't always so extreme. But there's no magical barrier between players that GSL has somehow detected and drawn a line upon. Being #1 in the world doesn't mean you win 99% of the time against #50 in the world, especially not when #50 could possibly play you with any race and on any map and in any context.
Holy shit, I'm gonna save this quote for whenever someone comes around to claiming the game's volatility. This is absolutely right on target and crystal clear. Epic quote is epic.
I really think there should be more Korean tournaments to follow besides GSL. Having to judge players based off of one tournament can lead to some extremely flawed thinking. A lot of players start dominating or slumping in other lesser-known tournaments before being judged via GSL results.
|
On April 26 2011 23:58 Pokebunny wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2011 23:52 Aleski wrote:Well yeah, that falls into the category of meta gaming, but it isnt the entirety of metagaming. Its things like going hellions to force roaches then go banshees, but the other guy out meta's your ass and sees your hellions, goes queens and cancels out your banshees before they are even out. BUT THEN you out meta him by meta meta gaming and saying "i know he's gonna go queens, so ill just go hellions into a tank marine push" knowing he hasnt got anything bar lings and queens. BUT THEN he out meta's you again, by just seeing the hellions and making banelings anyway. Casters screaming saying "what is he doing!" but then they realise he is countering the counter to the counter that was going to be used as a counter. Yeah, thats meta meta meta gaming and thats sc2 This Is so unbelievably wrong... Top players aren't gonna have that train of thought. What is more likely is they scout and deduce the most likely strategy and attempt to counter it. They will notice much more than you will and therefore have a better idea of how to counter play.
hey, i didnt say this is exactly waht happens. Ofcourse not. But a lot of "blind countering" is just evaluating what they can see, to make a judgement on what they WILL see. which is still meta gaming. What are you trying to do? prove my point?
|
I voted other. For reference, refer to the "What is starcraft 2 missing" thread, and read the majority of posts there, along side with Lalush's comments. I think some features of starcraft 2 are just made to please noobs, forcefields, concussive shells, and fungal growth all negate the ability to micro and have fun with your units (unless your the executer xD)
All that aside the game is still young, things have yet to develop fully. I think however the skill is definitlly starting to even out, I mean, compare this gsl, with gsl seaons 1, 2 or 3. This season it is very hard to distinguish who is the best, where as with previous seasons we were all thinking the same thing.
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
Complacency of pros. MC for example just did what Tyler predicted, a risky strategy and was punished for it. Nothing to do with the meta game or skill ceilings.
And, as has been pointed out, sometimes players just loose.
If you have a 70% competitive win ratio (i.e. you are really good) you will still loose 30% of the time, some times in the first round, some times in the final. That's just the way it works.
|
Calgary25981 Posts
This title and OP make my head fucking explode.
|
Calgary25981 Posts
For clarity, look: You can't just ask a bold question and then offer potential solutions without going through the analysis yourself.
Is the SC2 proscene volatile? Yes. Is it more volatile than BW? No. Case closed. No further analysis needed.
|
Calgary25981 Posts
Bump. I hate your thread title with every fiber of my being.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
