EPTand the terran was gumiho..
The Scarlett Fan Club - Page 107
| Forum Index > Fan Clubs |
|
ETisME
12698 Posts
and the terran was gumiho.. | ||
|
plogamer
Canada3132 Posts
/edit @_@ indeed lol | ||
|
Prof
Canada60 Posts
 . | ||
|
Prof
Canada60 Posts
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xmehe4_millenium-tv_videogames?start=21#.UMpByG_AeSq (French Commentary) | ||
|
partouf
Netherlands405 Posts
To everyone who plays SC2, I challenge you to use Dec 14th as one of the few days we like to call "Zerg Appreciation Day". The goal of this day is to have fun off-racing as Zerg on B.Net, whether it be 1v1 ladder, team ladder or anything and maybe stream it as well. Please, join us in the fun on IRC! | ||
|
TheDougler
Canada8306 Posts
| ||
|
nettleberry
United States201 Posts
On December 14 2012 09:12 partouf wrote: Almost happy birthday! ^^ To everyone who plays SC2, I challenge you to use Dec 14th as one of the few days we like to call "Zerg Appreciation Day". The goal of this day is to have fun off-racing as Zerg on B.Net, whether it be 1v1 ladder, team ladder or anything and maybe stream it as well. Please, join us in the fun on IRC! "Off-racing as zerg"? You can't be a true follower of the queen!  Streaming a bunch of me laddering might be fun though lol silver league | ||
|
MetalPanda
Canada1152 Posts
Nice all-kill against Fnatic! | ||
|
partouf
Netherlands405 Posts
On December 14 2012 10:28 nettleberry wrote: "Off-racing as zerg"? You can't be a true follower of the queen! Streaming a bunch of me laddering might be fun though lol silver league I'm bad at zerg | ||
|
ASoo
2865 Posts
. | ||
|
AnachronisticAnarchy
United States2957 Posts
On December 13 2012 13:01 askmc70 wrote: she just struggles with early zvz, outclassed in ipl5 zvz what? I'm talking about the way she handles tactics like harass. I'm not saying that she was outclassed in ZvZ, I'm saying she was outclassed in that specific area of ZvZ. Basically, DRG and Life (and maybe some other top Koreans) used 3 roach and zergling runbys to trade effectively again and again and again. Of course, for most of those matches, it didn't really matter in the end, but it was still odd seeing such a high tier player getting ripped to shreds so easily in the mechanics department. In particular, I believe there was a lategame against... Life, maybe(?) where he basically beat the tar out of her with burrowed roach shenanigans. She was completely incapable of dealing with that. It's just sort of odd seeing a high-end player look inferior all the way up to the end, where suddenly you realize why said high-end player is where she is. It's like watching a boxer take dozens of hits straight to the face for several rounds and then suddenly launch a one-two punch that knocks his opponent out on the spot. Really unusual to watch, at least for me. | ||
|
corpuscle
United States1967 Posts
On December 14 2012 12:01 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote: I'm talking about the way she handles tactics like harass. I'm not saying that she was outclassed in ZvZ, I'm saying she was outclassed in that specific area of ZvZ. Basically, DRG and Life (and maybe some other top Koreans) used 3 roach and zergling runbys to trade effectively again and again and again. Of course, for most of those matches, it didn't really matter in the end, but it was still odd seeing such a high tier player getting ripped to shreds so easily in the mechanics department. In particular, I believe there was a lategame against... Life, maybe(?) where he basically beat the tar out of her with burrowed roach shenanigans. She was completely incapable of dealing with that. It's just sort of odd seeing a high-end player look inferior all the way up to the end, where suddenly you realize why said high-end player is where she is. It's like watching a boxer take dozens of hits straight to the face for several rounds and then suddenly launch a one-two punch that knocks his opponent out on the spot. Really unusual to watch, at least for me. You have to remember that Life and DRG are generally accepted as being the very best Zergs in the world mechanically, they're pretty hard to keep up with. | ||
|
Relentless`
United States151 Posts
On December 14 2012 12:01 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote: I'm talking about the way she handles tactics like harass. I'm not saying that she was outclassed in ZvZ, I'm saying she was outclassed in that specific area of ZvZ. Basically, DRG and Life (and maybe some other top Koreans) used 3 roach and zergling runbys to trade effectively again and again and again. Of course, for most of those matches, it didn't really matter in the end, but it was still odd seeing such a high tier player getting ripped to shreds so easily in the mechanics department. In particular, I believe there was a lategame against... Life, maybe(?) where he basically beat the tar out of her with burrowed roach shenanigans. She was completely incapable of dealing with that. It's just sort of odd seeing a high-end player look inferior all the way up to the end, where suddenly you realize why said high-end player is where she is. It's like watching a boxer take dozens of hits straight to the face for several rounds and then suddenly launch a one-two punch that knocks his opponent out on the spot. Really unusual to watch, at least for me. I don't even understand the purpose of these posts... She has already proven she can compete with and beat those among the best in the world. Why is it then difficult for you to determine her skill level? | ||
|
Scisyhp
United States200 Posts
| ||
|
AnachronisticAnarchy
United States2957 Posts
On December 14 2012 12:37 Relentless` wrote: I don't even understand the purpose of these posts... She has already proven she can compete with and beat those among the best in the world. Why is it then difficult for you to determine her skill level? I can determine her skill level through her results, but not much else, and that's my point. Most players I see show obvious skill in several different aspects of their game at several different stages of the game. Scarlett, on the other hand, seems to have a different skillset from a lot of other players at her level. She fares worse in certain areas, but makes up for it with amazing skill in other areas. Basically, I view Starcraft as having three different types of actions: mistakes, neutral actions that result from not making said mistake, and beneficial actions. The beneficial actions aren't necessarily not making a mistake so much as not missing an opportunity, one that you don't necessarily even have to know exists. Good examples would be Stephano's surrounds, or drop harass. Not dropping or surrounding isn't damaging, per se, but it's a lost opportunity, it's something you could be doing that would be beneficial. I always find it harder to spot beneficial actions than mistakes, especially since they could be really subtle, like minor positioning tweaks before a big fight that end up snowballing into a 40 supply advantage, or a small twitch in harassing mutas that lets the zerg pick off one more SCV. I guess you could say I'm used to watching players who simply focus on not making mistakes, who are an entirely different breed of players than the ones who do make mistakes but compensate with beneficial actions. Of course, I'm not a very good player, so I was wondering if better players than I got the same feeling from watching her. | ||
|
corpuscle
United States1967 Posts
On December 14 2012 12:57 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote: I can determine her skill level through her results, but not much else, and that's my point. Most players I see show obvious skill in several different aspects of their game at several different stages of the game. Scarlett, on the other hand, seems to have a different skillset from a lot of other players at her level. She fares worse in certain areas, but makes up for it with amazing skill in other areas. Basically, I view Starcraft as having three different types of actions: mistakes, neutral actions that result from not making said mistake, and beneficial actions. The beneficial actions aren't necessarily not making a mistake so much as not missing an opportunity, one that you don't necessarily even have to know exists. Good examples would be Stephano's surrounds, or drop harass. Not dropping or surrounding isn't damaging, per se, but it's a lost opportunity, it's something you could be doing that would be beneficial. I always find it harder to spot beneficial actions than mistakes, especially since they could be really subtle, like minor positioning tweaks before a big fight that end up snowballing into a 40 supply advantage, or a small twitch in harassing mutas that lets the zerg pick off one more SCV. I guess you could say I'm used to watching players who simply focus on not making mistakes, who are an entirely different breed of players than the ones who do make mistakes but compensate with beneficial actions. Of course, I'm not a very good player, so I was wondering if better players than I got the same feeling from watching her. Her engagements (particularly with large armies) are exceptional, and her macro is really good. It's harder to see that with Zerg armies because it's not as eye-catching as Terran or Protoss unit control, but if you pay close attention, you'll see that she puts a lot of care into getting a good concave/surround, and rarely picks bad fights (unless she's already behind and doesn't really have a choice). Other people (including casters and pros) have definitely pointed out/exploited the fact that her harass defense is probably her weakest point (or maybe early-game defense), so you're not wrong in that assessment. What's important to remember, though, is that if you have a known weaker aspect of your play, opponents who have done their research will try to exploit it. Scarlett generally loses more games to multitask/harass heavy styles and early aggression than most pros, that is true. What you have to keep in mind, though, is that it's not necessarily because she's worse at defending it than others. An intelligent player will watch her play and say "I really don't want to try to beat her by just playing a straight-up macro game and hoping to win a big fight through better control and positioning, because that would just be me playing directly to her strengths. I'm going to do whatever I can to avoid large late-game engagements, so I'm going to cheese and try to force lots of small skirmishes instead." Basically, if anything, the fact that opponents try to exploit that "weakness" in her play is more indicative of them respecting her than anything else. Tons of players (DRG included) have said in interviews about thinking she's really good/scary, so obviously since she has very clear strengths, they're going to play in such a way that she can't put them to use as well. You could also argue that since she does most of her practice on NA ladder, she just doesn't face opponents with the mechanics to pull something like that off very often, which I think is fair to keep in mind. edit: also if you're trying to determine a player's "skill level" to an accurate degree, I'd just give up. there's no rational way to gauge relative skill in a game this complicated, a lot of the conclusions you draw will be subjective and poorly informed no matter how much you know about the game. there are simply too many variables to be taken into account. there are very clear gaps in skill between some players (ex. Scarlett is definitely better than iNcontroL and nobody will disagree), but when you're trying to compare two players on a similar level, there is simply no way to do it. at all. | ||
|
Relentless`
United States151 Posts
| ||
|
Crayfish1
Korea (North)16 Posts
| ||
|
Crayfish1
Korea (North)16 Posts
User was banned for this post. | ||
|
partouf
Netherlands405 Posts
| ||
| ||
