|
On February 13 2012 07:49 Squeegy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 07:40 lorkac wrote:On February 13 2012 07:27 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 07:24 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 06:58 Big J wrote:On February 13 2012 06:24 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 05:47 Longshank wrote:
This is amazing. So now dominating actually means(if I read your graphics right) being a step behind to top players? Code B/A-ish? And would this mean that Incontrol is in fact dominating the NA scene? As usual, you read it wrong. The upper line represents the 300 BW players that haven't switched. The line below shows where the current top SC2 players rank on that line. In other words, the current top SC2 players are on the same level as the top 300. But not on the same level as say the top 50 (right-hand side of the line). Point being that Intrigue, knowing the scene, was aware of this. This is why he made a distinction between dominating (doing as well as the current top players, who, quite literally, dominate the scene) and crushing (doing better than the current top players). proof/argumentation for this? And I mean one that is consistent with the OP, so not the "ex-BWs like MVP/Nestea are dominating SC2"-argument. Because the OP clearly says that those are bad players and I honestly can't think of a context in which you can say that bad players could compete on the same level as the top300 (= good) BW players. And I also don't take examples. You can not proof something with an example, you can only falsify something with a counterexample. (like you can falsify the "the top300 BW pros will instantly dominate SC2" with the one counterexample "Forgg/Fin was top300 before he switched; He is not dominating") They are bad players when compared to players like Flash. And not only to Flash but to players like Sea, players like every good A-teamer. They are, or were, at the same level as the top 300 of BW. That is the entire point. MVP was in that top 300. So was MC. So was MMA. There weren't 300 players better than them. There aren't 300 A-teamers. This is of course very obvious and clear to anyone who knows the context. But I guess it only shows that you don't, in which case you not being able to think of a context, well, that's not something to brag about. And you don't have to take my word for it. You can go search the BW ranking databases for yourself. You also don't want to put in quotes something you made up yourself. Intrigue talked about potential to dominate. He was not saying everyone will (instantly) dominate. Also, I think the example that there is absence of proof of a bomb explosion in my room is proof of absence. Don't you think? On February 13 2012 07:22 lorkac wrote:On February 13 2012 05:47 Longshank wrote:
This is amazing. So now dominating actually means(if I read your graphics right) being a step behind to top players? Code B/A-ish? And would this mean that Incontrol is in fact dominating the NA scene? Actually, he means only BW pro team members. Which means LiquidTyler is dominating the foreign scene according to him. Not scrubs like naniwa and huk. Oh, it's you again. Could you, for once, try to reply in an intelligent way to my rebuttals of your arguments? Or is it that you just can't. Tyler? The player who seems to be facing motivational and other personal issues? You should try harder, I'm not even breaking a sweat! I did actually. Several pages ago. I don't like reposting the same argument over and over when it's simply ignored. Article said top 300 would dominate. Top 100 is doing as well as low lever sc2 pros. MVP, MC and Nestea are slowly getting replaced by DRG, MVP and others. So far, by empiracle proof, there is no relation between skill rank in BW and skill rank in SC2. Do you have a non-theorycraft rebuttal? But I did reply to it. Why don't you reply to my rebuttal of it? Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 07:40 Longshank wrote:On February 13 2012 06:58 Big J wrote:On February 13 2012 06:24 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 05:47 Longshank wrote:
This is amazing. So now dominating actually means(if I read your graphics right) being a step behind to top players? Code B/A-ish? And would this mean that Incontrol is in fact dominating the NA scene? As usual, you read it wrong. The upper line represents the 300 BW players that haven't switched. The line below shows where the current top SC2 players rank on that line. In other words, the current top SC2 players are on the same level as the top 300. But not on the same level as say the top 50 (right-hand side of the line). Point being that Intrigue, knowing the scene, was aware of this. This is why he made a distinction between dominating (doing as well as the current top players, who, quite literally, dominate the scene) and crushing (doing better than the current top players). proof/argumentation for this? And I mean one that is consistent with the OP, so not the "ex-BWs like MVP/Nestea are dominating SC2"-argument. Because the OP clearly says that those are bad players and I honestly can't think of a context in which you can say that bad players could compete on the same level as the top300 (= good) BW players. And I also don't take examples. You can not proof something with an example, you can only falsify something with a counterexample. (like you can falsify the "the top300 BW pros will instantly dominate SC2" with the one counterexample "Forgg/Fin was top300 before he switched; He is not dominating") Oh alright, gotcha. Judging by the size of it, there still ought to be a good 50-100 players in that SC2 bracket though, which would mean Incontrol is indeed dominating the NA scene. Someone should tell him quick! What does Incontrol have to do with Korean BW players. You should try being right for a change. It's more useful than being wrong all the time.
Not much. It's about what you put in your home-made definition of the word dominating, I thought that was obvious.
Besides, a page ago you said it was the non-BW players, whoever they may be, they were supposed to dominate(or play at the same level as according to your definition), not the top SC2 players who are ex-BW players. By such flawless logic and use of the terms 'SC2 scene' and 'dominate', Inrigue was indeed correct. You win the argument.
|
I think the article was right, the competition was a farce at the time the author wrote it. But not for the reasons he gave. It was only because the game was new, you can't expect bw level play in 8 months of GSL. So it was a farce not because the players didn't train seriously or were inherently bad players as said in the OP, but just because you can't develop the kind of play he expected as a broodwar watcher less than one year after release. So the competition was a farce, the same farce as any competition in any new game or sport will be, one year after release.
In the current, high competitive and acceptable high level of play, even if you're a broodwar genius you won't dominate players that train 12 hours a day for nearly 2 years. Perhaps Flash could do it because he's not a normal human being.
|
I like this thread.
Let me see if I understood it right:
Most BW pros who switched to SC2 are doing pretty good in SC2
Therefore, better BW pros who have no reason to switch to SC2 anytime soon, would be doing even better in SC2 if they did switch.
Therefore, SC2 is uninteresting to watch.
I like your argumenting method.
Since you base yourself on the assumption that players who switch game while being at a downpoint in their BW career are encessarily worse in all aspects of SC2 than players who would switch while at the height of their careers, and since its incredibly unlikely that a pro would switch games at the hight of his career...
Your argument can not be disproved, ever.
So I like it.
Taking Jaedong and Flash, as long as they keep doing well in BW, they have 0 reason to switch games. If they start doing worse and switch, well then even if they do bad in SC2, that wouldnt disprove your argument, since they would have switched after bad stats.
|
On February 13 2012 08:21 Squeegy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 08:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Not sure why anyone bothers to argue with Squeegy. He's gone far beyond trying to rewrite the OP, and now he's trying to rewrite the english dictionary. You can just ask me to elaborate on points you don't understand as I suspect that is the case. It would be the polite thing to do. I don't think I am trying to rewrite anything though!
Trying to pretending that "dominate" and "crush" aren't contextual synonyms, for one.
And pretending that the OP didn't state, outright, that the current top SC2 players are utter trash.
|
Here is some food for thought MVP took 1 game of Flash in BW, MVP is an instant SC2 Bonjwa what does that make flash in SC2?
|
On February 13 2012 08:50 fox77 wrote:
Here is some food for thought MVP took 1 game of Flash in BW, MVP is an instant SC2 Bonjwa what does that make flash in SC2?
Uh oh. Someone unleashed the b-word....
FYI,
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On February 13 2012 08:50 fox77 wrote:
Here is some food for thought MVP took 1 game of Flash in BW, MVP is an instant SC2 Bonjwa what does that make flash in SC2?
I dont think you know what it actually means to be a Bonjwa. starcraft 2 is a long way from that.
|
The SC2 scene is ruled by weak ex-BW pros, and always has been. No, that doesn't prove that the players who stomped MVP, MC, Nestea, etc. in BW would also stomp them in SC2, but it's quite likely.
|
On February 13 2012 09:04 Severedevil wrote:
The SC2 scene is ruled by weak ex-BW pros, and always has been. No, that doesn't prove that the players who stomped MVP, MC, Nestea, etc. in BW would also stomp them in SC2, but it's quite likely.
Nada, July, and Boxer are all good sc2 players and amazing BW pros. They are not the tip top of sc2. The crap MVP, MC, and Nestea are better both in terms of skill and results.
Flash would be pro level at sc2 but there is zero evidence that suggest that being good a BW converts to the best at sc2.
|
On February 13 2012 09:04 Severedevil wrote:
The SC2 scene is ruled by weak ex-BW pros, and always has been. No, that doesn't prove that the players who stomped MVP, MC, Nestea, etc. in BW would also stomp them in SC2, but it's quite likely.
I doubt you find anyone who disagrees with that statement, people are just annoyed by the attitude and exaggeration of the main thread not to mention every time this thing gets bumped when it should have been closed for ages.
|
On February 13 2012 09:09 Parodoxx wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 09:04 Severedevil wrote:
The SC2 scene is ruled by weak ex-BW pros, and always has been. No, that doesn't prove that the players who stomped MVP, MC, Nestea, etc. in BW would also stomp them in SC2, but it's quite likely. Nada, July, and Boxer are all good sc2 players and amazing BW pros. They are not the tip top of sc2. The crap MVP, MC, and Nestea are better both in terms of skill and results. Flash would be pro level at sc2 but there is zero evidence that suggest that being good a BW converts to the best at sc2.
There is zero evidence to suggest Flash wouldn't be a SC2 Bonjwa as you have stated.
|
On February 13 2012 09:09 Parodoxx wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 09:04 Severedevil wrote:
The SC2 scene is ruled by weak ex-BW pros, and always has been. No, that doesn't prove that the players who stomped MVP, MC, Nestea, etc. in BW would also stomp them in SC2, but it's quite likely. Nada, July, and Boxer are all good sc2 players and amazing BW pros. They are not the tip top of sc2.
You didn't fully read the OP or ever follow their careers when they played BW, did you? Did you even ever follow pro-BW?
|
On February 13 2012 08:23 Longshank wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 07:49 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 07:40 lorkac wrote:On February 13 2012 07:27 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 07:24 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 06:58 Big J wrote:On February 13 2012 06:24 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 05:47 Longshank wrote:
This is amazing. So now dominating actually means(if I read your graphics right) being a step behind to top players? Code B/A-ish? And would this mean that Incontrol is in fact dominating the NA scene? As usual, you read it wrong. The upper line represents the 300 BW players that haven't switched. The line below shows where the current top SC2 players rank on that line. In other words, the current top SC2 players are on the same level as the top 300. But not on the same level as say the top 50 (right-hand side of the line). Point being that Intrigue, knowing the scene, was aware of this. This is why he made a distinction between dominating (doing as well as the current top players, who, quite literally, dominate the scene) and crushing (doing better than the current top players). proof/argumentation for this? And I mean one that is consistent with the OP, so not the "ex-BWs like MVP/Nestea are dominating SC2"-argument. Because the OP clearly says that those are bad players and I honestly can't think of a context in which you can say that bad players could compete on the same level as the top300 (= good) BW players. And I also don't take examples. You can not proof something with an example, you can only falsify something with a counterexample. (like you can falsify the "the top300 BW pros will instantly dominate SC2" with the one counterexample "Forgg/Fin was top300 before he switched; He is not dominating") They are bad players when compared to players like Flash. And not only to Flash but to players like Sea, players like every good A-teamer. They are, or were, at the same level as the top 300 of BW. That is the entire point. MVP was in that top 300. So was MC. So was MMA. There weren't 300 players better than them. There aren't 300 A-teamers. This is of course very obvious and clear to anyone who knows the context. But I guess it only shows that you don't, in which case you not being able to think of a context, well, that's not something to brag about. And you don't have to take my word for it. You can go search the BW ranking databases for yourself. You also don't want to put in quotes something you made up yourself. Intrigue talked about potential to dominate. He was not saying everyone will (instantly) dominate. Also, I think the example that there is absence of proof of a bomb explosion in my room is proof of absence. Don't you think? On February 13 2012 07:22 lorkac wrote:On February 13 2012 05:47 Longshank wrote:
This is amazing. So now dominating actually means(if I read your graphics right) being a step behind to top players? Code B/A-ish? And would this mean that Incontrol is in fact dominating the NA scene? Actually, he means only BW pro team members. Which means LiquidTyler is dominating the foreign scene according to him. Not scrubs like naniwa and huk. Oh, it's you again. Could you, for once, try to reply in an intelligent way to my rebuttals of your arguments? Or is it that you just can't. Tyler? The player who seems to be facing motivational and other personal issues? You should try harder, I'm not even breaking a sweat! I did actually. Several pages ago. I don't like reposting the same argument over and over when it's simply ignored. Article said top 300 would dominate. Top 100 is doing as well as low lever sc2 pros. MVP, MC and Nestea are slowly getting replaced by DRG, MVP and others. So far, by empiracle proof, there is no relation between skill rank in BW and skill rank in SC2. Do you have a non-theorycraft rebuttal? But I did reply to it. Why don't you reply to my rebuttal of it? On February 13 2012 07:40 Longshank wrote:On February 13 2012 06:58 Big J wrote:On February 13 2012 06:24 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 05:47 Longshank wrote:
This is amazing. So now dominating actually means(if I read your graphics right) being a step behind to top players? Code B/A-ish? And would this mean that Incontrol is in fact dominating the NA scene? As usual, you read it wrong. The upper line represents the 300 BW players that haven't switched. The line below shows where the current top SC2 players rank on that line. In other words, the current top SC2 players are on the same level as the top 300. But not on the same level as say the top 50 (right-hand side of the line). Point being that Intrigue, knowing the scene, was aware of this. This is why he made a distinction between dominating (doing as well as the current top players, who, quite literally, dominate the scene) and crushing (doing better than the current top players). proof/argumentation for this? And I mean one that is consistent with the OP, so not the "ex-BWs like MVP/Nestea are dominating SC2"-argument. Because the OP clearly says that those are bad players and I honestly can't think of a context in which you can say that bad players could compete on the same level as the top300 (= good) BW players. And I also don't take examples. You can not proof something with an example, you can only falsify something with a counterexample. (like you can falsify the "the top300 BW pros will instantly dominate SC2" with the one counterexample "Forgg/Fin was top300 before he switched; He is not dominating") Oh alright, gotcha. Judging by the size of it, there still ought to be a good 50-100 players in that SC2 bracket though, which would mean Incontrol is indeed dominating the NA scene. Someone should tell him quick! What does Incontrol have to do with Korean BW players. You should try being right for a change. It's more useful than being wrong all the time. Not much. It's about what you put in your home-made definition of the word dominating, I thought that was obvious. Besides, a page ago you said it was the non-BW players, whoever they may be, they were supposed to dominate(or play at the same level as according to your definition), not the top SC2 players who are ex-BW players. By such flawless logic and use of the terms 'SC2 scene' and 'dominate', Inrigue was indeed correct. You win the argument.
Ah, so it is yet another case of not understanding the argument! I see I was right again. The dictionary definition of dominate is not as important as what Intrigue meant by it. I'll explain it in very simple terms what I mean.
I use MVP only as an example to illustrate my point. He represents the top of SC2. I could use other players too but using MVP is much less controversial since his level was better established than most others.
1. Intrigue knows BW scene
2. MVP is a top 100 BW player
3. Intrigue knows MVP is a top 100 BW player
4. Intrigue argues that BW skill is (at least to an extent) proportional to SC2 skill
5. Intrigue argues that the best 300 BW players have the potential to dominate SC2
6. Intrigue claims that MVP dominates SC2
7. Intrigue's argument would not be internally consistent if he argued top 300 (excluding the top 100) had the potential to dominate the top 100*
8. Intrigue did not argue that the best 300 BW players (excluding the top 100) would dominate MVP
9. Intrigue meant something else than what you think by dominate
10. I claim Intrigue meant something else than what you think by dominate
11. I am correct
* I suppose in a way they do have the potential (anybody can beat anybody). But not in the way Intrigue means.
And as for the second part, you really have trouble understanding this, don't you? It is still the non-BW players who are being dominated by the BW players. It is the BW players who are dominating the scene now. The best 300 BW players who would switch would also dominate the scene, but they would not dominate those BW players (who are already dominating) as they are both part of the same group. MVP and MC are amongst the best 300 BW players. But once we are more specific and talk about the A-teamers and such we get from dominating to crushing. It was a very clear distinction made by Intrigue. I hope you don't analyze things for a job! What kind of misunderstandings would that lead to! You should try something like an assembly line. You might find it more suitable for your skills.
|
On February 13 2012 08:43 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 08:21 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 08:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Not sure why anyone bothers to argue with Squeegy. He's gone far beyond trying to rewrite the OP, and now he's trying to rewrite the english dictionary. You can just ask me to elaborate on points you don't understand as I suspect that is the case. It would be the polite thing to do. I don't think I am trying to rewrite anything though! Trying to pretending that "dominate" and "crush" aren't contextual synonyms, for one. And pretending that the OP didn't state, outright, that the current top SC2 players are utter trash.
They aren't. If they were, then either Intrigue doesn't know BW scene or his argument is internally (and obviously) inconsistent. He would then argue that Top 300 will beat Top 100. I think it is more likely that he made a distinction between dominating and crushing than that he failed to see the inconsistency.
They are. They were more or less to Flash what Hasuobs is to MVP. Trash. But they are only trash when compared to the A-teamers. They are not trash when compared to, say, non-BW players (as we can see).
|
On February 13 2012 09:26 Squeegy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 08:43 WolfintheSheep wrote:On February 13 2012 08:21 Squeegy wrote:On February 13 2012 08:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Not sure why anyone bothers to argue with Squeegy. He's gone far beyond trying to rewrite the OP, and now he's trying to rewrite the english dictionary. You can just ask me to elaborate on points you don't understand as I suspect that is the case. It would be the polite thing to do. I don't think I am trying to rewrite anything though! Trying to pretending that "dominate" and "crush" aren't contextual synonyms, for one. And pretending that the OP didn't state, outright, that the current top SC2 players are utter trash. They aren't. If they were, then either Intrigue doesn't know BW scene or his argument is internally (and obviously) inconsistent. He would then argue that Top 300 will beat Top 100. I think it is more likely that he made a distinction between dominating and crushing than that he failed to see the inconsistency. They are. They were more or less to Flash what Hasuobs is to MVP. Trash. But they are only trash when compared to the A-teamers. They are not trash when compared to, say, non-BW players (as we can see).
They are (or were, anyway, they'd be much worse now due to lack of practice) "trash" at BW, sure. That only extends to SC2 if they're functionally the same game (which they aren't) and if people never ever get better or worse (which they do).
|
On February 13 2012 08:50 fox77 wrote:
Here is some food for thought MVP took 1 game of Flash in BW, MVP is an instant SC2 Bonjwa what does that make flash in SC2?
You really sounded stupid there, you know that right?
It makes flash nothing in sc2 because he doesn't play it at all. Just as it makes any A-teamer, B-teamer, no-name, or anything at all that has experiance in another RTS game instantly do well in SC2.
|
On February 13 2012 08:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Not sure why anyone bothers to argue with Squeegy. He's gone far beyond trying to rewrite the OP, and now he's trying to rewrite the english dictionary.
This just says you have no rebuttals for him.
|
On February 13 2012 10:41 DemigodcelpH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 08:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Not sure why anyone bothers to argue with Squeegy. He's gone far beyond trying to rewrite the OP, and now he's trying to rewrite the english dictionary. This just says you have no rebuttals for him.
No, it just says he's one of those fanatic BW fanboys that refuses to listen to reason, plugs his ears with his fingers and goes "lalalala I'm right"
|
On February 13 2012 09:09 Parodoxx wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 09:04 Severedevil wrote:
The SC2 scene is ruled by weak ex-BW pros, and always has been. No, that doesn't prove that the players who stomped MVP, MC, Nestea, etc. in BW would also stomp them in SC2, but it's quite likely. Nada, July, and Boxer are all good sc2 players and amazing BW pros. They are not the tip top of sc2. The crap MVP, MC, and Nestea are better both in terms of skill and results. Flash would be pro level at sc2 but there is zero evidence that suggest that being good a BW converts to the best at sc2.
Do you realize MvP and MC were better at BW than Nada/july/ and definitely boxer at the time of their transition?
Too many SC2 crowd are confused about the term "legends".
|
Many people seems confused by the term "dominate".
As a lay-person reading the article, it would be very clear what intrigue meant by "dominate" would be to perform consistently on the upper-levels of Code S (i.e. top-16). Getting to Code A and beating a few people is not "dominating".
This line from Squeegy:
On February 13 2012 09:17 Squeegy wrote:
4. Intrigue argues that BW skill is (at least to an extent) proportional to SC2 skill
What the elephant-opponents are arguing against this assumption made by Intrigue. The evidence (forGG and Hyun) is showing that whilst BW skills are useful in SC2 (of course), there are SC2 specific skills and traits that need to be developed before people can dominate.
Intrigue goes on to say that 300 BW pros can dominate the SC2 scene - I hardly see proof of that - maybe if he considers forGG and Hyun's performances as dominating (lol!) then I'll agree with him!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
