EPTPlease do more in the future!
[MLG] Summer Arena 2012 Wrap-up - Page 3
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
SgtSquiglz
United States668 Posts
Please do more in the future! | ||
|
captharlock
United States223 Posts
I would like to hear your thoughts on that one game Blaze lost to Curse. I'm maybe wrong but it looked like Curse was able to adjust that 2nd game to Blaze's game style. | ||
|
Parnage
United States7414 Posts
| ||
|
Navi
5286 Posts
a lot of things i felt that western league was lacking azubu showcased well at this MLG ( | ||
|
elementz
United States281 Posts
Actually my example can be seen in the CLG.eu vs WE games, WE plays the same style like Blaze (actually WE vs Blaze game in OGN's group A was a close game where WE looked to have secured in the game early, and Blaze made a come back). WE got ahead vs CLG, but CLG.eu played their own game without trying to emulate a game they were not comfortable playing, and they ended up winning with some very good team fight play, and keeping the game controlled in terms of towers falling. Blaze played well, but all the teams during the Arena thought they were ready to play Blaze's style without the need for any practice on that style. Also one thing you got to do is protect your mid tower, so a good wave clear champion mid is absolutely needed, possibly building a Chalice to keep clearing none stop. Idra said in an interview when asked about "creative plays" coming out of Koreans something to the effect: "They [Koreans] don't just make creative strategies on the fly during a game, their strategies is pre-meditated and practiced ahead of time", and that is what did it this Arena; Western teams saw the "push strategy" and they thought they could learn it on the fly (like with the m5 counter jungling a while back), and execute it better than Blaze, but they were misguided, and instead they were falling in trap of a gameplay they were not practiced well enough to play while Blaze knew how to play in that condition perfectly well. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
| ||
|
kane]deth[
Canada368 Posts
| ||
|
elementz
United States281 Posts
| ||
|
CeriseCherries
6170 Posts
| ||
|
Icysoul
Canada254 Posts
On August 08 2012 06:02 elementz wrote: TSM fell into the same hole as they did with m5; they tried to emulate m5's strategy when playing against them. Because like you said in your write up "teams copy thinking it is the best way to play the game", that didn't work then and it didn't work this time, m5 back then was much more practiced on that style than TSM, and this time Blaze was much more practiced than TSM on that style of gameplay. TSM should figured out a way to mitigate the early tower advantage, and kept the bottom towers in place. (ex: Blaze forced their style by going 2v1 top, TSM followed by taking bottom tower and then swapping to take top tower, hence playing the same game Blaze played, and just trading, Blaze a lot more practiced in this gameplay than TSM --as evident by CPT Jack having 30-40 more CS than Chaox while pushing the lanes. At this point TSM should have tried to delay top going down to about ~7min mark (with help from the jungler to clear waves when they got to tower) and take a dragon to counter the gold from tower and keep both bot towers and play the farm game bot lane 2v2, while Dyrus farms at his tier 2). Actually my example can be seen in the CLG.eu vs WE games, WE plays the same style like Blaze (actually WE vs Blaze game in OGN's group A was a close game where WE looked to have secured in the game early, and Blaze made a come back). WE got ahead vs CLG, but CLG.eu played their own game without trying to emulate a game they were not comfortable playing, and they ended up winning with some very good team fight play, and keeping the game controlled in terms of towers falling. Blaze played well, but all the teams during the Arena thought they were ready to play Blaze's style without the need for any practice on that style. Also one thing you got to do is protect your mid tower, so a good wave clear champion mid is absolutely needed, possibly building a Chalice to keep clearing none stop. Idra said in an interview when asked about "creative plays" coming out of Koreans something to the effect: "They [Koreans] don't just make creative strategies on the fly during a game, their strategies is pre-meditated and practiced ahead of time", and that is what did it this Arena; Western teams saw the "push strategy" and they thought they could learn it on the fly (like with the m5 counter jungling a while back), and execute it better than Blaze, but they were misguided, and instead they were falling in trap of a gameplay they were not practiced well enough to play while Blaze knew how to play in that condition perfectly well. That was exactly what i had thought when it was made clear that TSM was trying to copy blaze saying "blaze wouldnt of backed there". That was the wrong mentality to have, they can never be better than being Blaze than blaze themselves. TSM recovered from the mentality after they were destroyed by M5, and adapted aggressive counter jungling into their tactics. Perhaps thats part of the strength of TSM, they are very adaptable to these new styles and incorporating it into their gameplay. Mechanically, TSM held up against blaze very well, farming evenly and even up in farm in some situations. But its TSM playing Blaze's game, having no response against blazes fast and powerful pushes and coordinated counter aggression. The 5 man coordinated aggression from TSM against blaze, specifically with Dyrus teleporting from top, Regi tf from mid and odd one ganking bot, were spectacular to behold. But it is increasingly evident they did not think those through, what happens after we tower dive and kill the support? Do we have enough to handle and get away from the lightining fast responses of the Blaze counter did not go through their mind. Against lesser prepared and coordinated teams that gank would of been spectacular and yielded great results, but against similarly coordinated teams, we saw what happened: every gank became a 1-3, 1-2, 2-4 trade in blaze's favor. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
| ||
|
AsnSensation
Germany24009 Posts
On August 08 2012 06:08 elementz wrote: NO, NO, NO, made this long time before I played LoL....while I followed SC2. Now it makes me a sad panda, but I also don't want to change it. np bro there can only be one elements anyway, and hes not from curse.na | ||
|
Visas
Turkey119 Posts
| ||
|
obsKura
Ireland1061 Posts
Hope to see much more of this type of League coverage, love it. ♥ | ||
|
MinistryofPain
25 Posts
| ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On August 08 2012 06:39 Icysoul wrote: + Show Spoiler + On August 08 2012 06:02 elementz wrote: TSM fell into the same hole as they did with m5; they tried to emulate m5's strategy when playing against them. Because like you said in your write up "teams copy thinking it is the best way to play the game", that didn't work then and it didn't work this time, m5 back then was much more practiced on that style than TSM, and this time Blaze was much more practiced than TSM on that style of gameplay. TSM should figured out a way to mitigate the early tower advantage, and kept the bottom towers in place. (ex: Blaze forced their style by going 2v1 top, TSM followed by taking bottom tower and then swapping to take top tower, hence playing the same game Blaze played, and just trading, Blaze a lot more practiced in this gameplay than TSM --as evident by CPT Jack having 30-40 more CS than Chaox while pushing the lanes. At this point TSM should have tried to delay top going down to about ~7min mark (with help from the jungler to clear waves when they got to tower) and take a dragon to counter the gold from tower and keep both bot towers and play the farm game bot lane 2v2, while Dyrus farms at his tier 2). Actually my example can be seen in the CLG.eu vs WE games, WE plays the same style like Blaze (actually WE vs Blaze game in OGN's group A was a close game where WE looked to have secured in the game early, and Blaze made a come back). WE got ahead vs CLG, but CLG.eu played their own game without trying to emulate a game they were not comfortable playing, and they ended up winning with some very good team fight play, and keeping the game controlled in terms of towers falling. Blaze played well, but all the teams during the Arena thought they were ready to play Blaze's style without the need for any practice on that style. Also one thing you got to do is protect your mid tower, so a good wave clear champion mid is absolutely needed, possibly building a Chalice to keep clearing none stop. Idra said in an interview when asked about "creative plays" coming out of Koreans something to the effect: "They [Koreans] don't just make creative strategies on the fly during a game, their strategies is pre-meditated and practiced ahead of time", and that is what did it this Arena; Western teams saw the "push strategy" and they thought they could learn it on the fly (like with the m5 counter jungling a while back), and execute it better than Blaze, but they were misguided, and instead they were falling in trap of a gameplay they were not practiced well enough to play while Blaze knew how to play in that condition perfectly well. That was exactly what i had thought when it was made clear that TSM was trying to copy blaze saying "blaze wouldnt of backed there". That was the wrong mentality to have, they can never be better than being Blaze than blaze themselves. TSM recovered from the mentality after they were destroyed by M5, and adapted aggressive counter jungling into their tactics. Perhaps thats part of the strength of TSM, they are very adaptable to these new styles and incorporating it into their gameplay. Mechanically, TSM held up against blaze very well, farming evenly and even up in farm in some situations. But its TSM playing Blaze's game, having no response against blazes fast and powerful pushes and coordinated counter aggression. The 5 man coordinated aggression from TSM against blaze, specifically with Dyrus teleporting from top, Regi tf from mid and odd one ganking bot, were spectacular to behold. But it is increasingly evident they did not think those through, what happens after we tower dive and kill the support? Do we have enough to handle and get away from the lightining fast responses of the Blaze counter did not go through their mind. Against lesser prepared and coordinated teams that gank would of been spectacular and yielded great results, but against similarly coordinated teams, we saw what happened: every gank became a 1-3, 1-2, 2-4 trade in blaze's favor. It seemed to me that in Finals Games 2/3 TSM figured out what to do (sorta) but figured it out after picks/bans and essentially had already lost the game by that time. Those games were played more to TSM's style. Singed didn't have the DPS to kill Urgot, Ryze, Irelia, Alistar, or Maokai, TF's Burst was not enough to 100-0 anyone either. So, whenever an engage happened TSM had no targets to kill, just a bunch of Bruisers/Tanks with great CC and Chaox's damage wasn't good enough to make up for it. Maybe if they had won the game at lvl 6ish it would have worked, but that was always unlikely. I'm no expert, but that is what it looked like to me. | ||
|
King K. Rool
Canada4408 Posts
IMO TSM did ok, they've never been the best at adapting, and the only time I remember them beating some new strategy was when they just straight up banned Dignitas's triple support build. | ||
|
Rinrun
Canada3509 Posts
| ||
|
necrosed
Brazil885 Posts
| ||
|
Divine-Sneaker
Denmark1225 Posts
| ||
| ||
