|
On December 14 2010 08:12 Kazzabiss wrote:Show nested quote +This series shows that NesTea is clearly better than Rain in decision making Wait, so going 14 Hatch every single game against a "cheeser" is a good decision? We can all agree that NesTea is better in macro, timings, and mechanics, but not decision making, at least not in that game.
It is when that's the only chance you have at holding off the cheese. Ret, Idra, et. al. have all stated unequivocally in the innumerable threads made about Nestea v Rain that 14hatch is the only way to have a chance against 2rax. It's like reaper rush pre-1.1 and I expect it'll be similarly nerfed - there is no way to effectively counter this build assuming it is well executed (which in this context means bring more scvs).
TL;DR - Rain is just another Bitbybit.prime who happened to make it to the finals, don't defend him because 'a wins a win loool'. In the 2 games he tried to play legit against Nestea he got roflstomped. If he didn't have the 2rax scv "allin" (quotes because it's not actually all-in with mules) crutch, I doubt he'd have qualified.
While it's nice to know MC will trash him, I don't think I've been less excited for a GSL's finale :/
|
Great writeup as per usual. Hoping to see Rain get DEMOLISHED by MC. As for the Jinro debate, it's almost like MC countered every single one of his builds(bo win) so we couldn't really see what he had planned. Let's not forget that's pure luck. B is acceptable.
|
I love how biased the majority of foreign fans are, Foxer takes a game off MC 1-3 and is bad and a C+ (Tastosis say the same things about him), while Jinro got destroyed three games in a row before having one close match but is still our savior and a B. It's like as long as you're not Korean you get a jump on everyone else and Koreans have to dominate to get any respect from the foreign crowd.
|
On December 14 2010 13:20 kefkaesque wrote:
I love how biased the majority of foreign fans are, Foxer takes a game off MC 1-3 and is bad and a C+ (Tastosis say the same things about him), while Jinro got destroyed three games in a row before having one close match but is still our savior and a B. It's like as long as you're not Korean you get a jump on everyone else and Koreans have to dominate to get any respect from the foreign crowd.
While this is definitely true, you can't be surprised as they do somewhat represent us. I definitely agree that Artosis shouldn't make it so obvious as it's quite unprofessional, but I'm sure he doesn't care. I think Jinro is an amazing player but I feel Foxer is still superior, even in macro, but I know many will disagree with me on that, which isn't a surprise.
|
rain and nestea's game doesn't show nestea is better.. it just shows nestea has better mid/late game.
If people do cheese, then people who have seen it should be able to stop it.
Clearly nestea's amazing decision making didn't make a good decision when he saw the cheese. Early hatch on xel naga, the guy insane? There's good moves and there's dumb ones, and rain deserved the last win due to nestea's dumb move ;P
|
On December 13 2010 21:27 Numy wrote:
I think people have to watch the games to really understand the rating system. For me the reason Rain got lower than Nestea was because Rain got utterly destroyed in the longer game and in the cheeses it was more Nestea doing 1/2 mistakes than Rain playing anything close to good. So for me it makes sense that Rain got a lower rating. People need to understand that the better player doesn't always win and likewise the person that wins isn't always the better player.
The Fruit vs Hongun games are similar. Fruit outplayed himself more than Hongun did anything. Then MC vs Jinro was such a short affair so really any rating for Jinro is going to be hard and there will be bias since there's not much to say on the matter. MC played amazing and Jinro was just a step behind. Is being a step behind amazing horrible or is it good?
Problem with that, is you're coming from a conclusion that NesTea is indeed the better player. But how do you define that? If the "better plays" do not win games, why are they better? Better for what? For you?
Ratings are biased, analysis and recap are good and welcomed.
I'm sad Jinro had to lose so brutally.
|
On December 13 2010 23:55 Xxio wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2010 23:24 RiceMuncher wrote:On December 13 2010 22:55 Xxio wrote:
Guys, the ratings are meant to be biased. They are ratings, how could they not be? If you want objectivity read the recaps themselves. Please tell me if you find those biased. If they are, then we have a problem I need to fix.
That said, I see I ranked some games based on entertainment value not the star system, so I'll change some 0 stars to 2 stars and whatever else needs tweaking.
Glad you guys uh, enjoyed it. We know ratings do have bias but they should be a rough guideline to how good the games were to watch. Kinda like the movie star rating system. 2 stars average, 3 stars above average/decent (Although your rating system has been stated in the OP and hence should be reasonably followed) Giving games 0 or 1 stars could potentially put off alot of people from watching those games - even though some might like watching cheese or uber pro walling or rushes. Infact most of these games with Tastosis's commentary should be at least 2 stars, if not more. But thankyou for somewhat bumping the stars. Although I still reckon Nestea v Rain game 5 should be higher than 1... By this logic every game should get a high rank - just to make sure someone who happens to like that style of play isn't deterred from watching it. That would make the rating system pointless. I thought it went without saying that these are biased rankings. I can't imagine someone seeing 1 star and thinking "this IS a horrible game". You say "should be given at least 2 stars". I don't agree. If our positions were reversed it would be me disagreeing because my feelings don't match yours. My point is that I can't rate games to reflect everyone's feelings, nor do I want to. This isn't some communal thing where I take an average. Yeah game 5 was a bit exciting I guess.
Well of course everyone is entitled to their own position/rating. But as a reviewer, shoudn't the score be made to reflect or be in line with the majority of readers? Now I don't have the right to judge who is the "majority" or what these "majority" give the games out of five, but judging from the responses it seems that the ratings aren't.
At the very least the ratings should be justified. They weren't in the write-up. Its hard to justify every score but giving 0 stars or close to it should be justified. Vice versa - giving a 5 stars or 4.5 should be too.
P.S I dont hate you Xxio, just giving my two cents
|
A "B" for Jinro is quite bias. He did not deserve that grade in a semi-final. Jinro got ROFLSTOMP, yes he didnt get to play "his game" which is why he lost yet he got a B. Yeah, a B for Bias!
Also as for Rain winning with cheese, get over it people, those are legit wins. If you can master the timing and micro of the push and if that can get you to the final of the GSL, I bet every single one of us would do it. Get off Rain's back, he deserves to be in the final.
|
Lol so much bias from the OP against Rain. If Rain becomes the next Flash, who also cheesed his way into the first OSL, I expect to see the opening poster eat his words publicly.
|
kinda laughable player grades
|
On December 13 2010 22:55 Xxio wrote:
Guys, the ratings are meant to be biased. They are ratings, how could they not be? If you want objectivity read the recaps themselves. Please tell me if you find those biased. If they are, then we have a problem I need to fix.
That said, I see I ranked some games based on entertainment value not the star system, so I'll change some 0 stars to 2 stars and whatever else needs tweaking.
Glad you guys uh, enjoyed it.
Really late to the party here, but I think most users, including me, aren't really annoyed that they're biased, just to the extent they're biased.
If you really want to say that bias is an excuse for giving any player rating, then we're gonna end up with the writer's favorite player in each write-up getting better grades than he deserves, and that's kinda... meh.
But thanks for the effort regardless.
|
Since the poster does not have clear categories for what makes up a good or poor game its hard to say the person is right or wrong. However, we can disagree. Personally i couldn't justify anyone getting blown out 4-0 a ranking of B despite the game play (game 4 wasn't too bad, but still doesn't make up for it.). While i do appreciate the hard work out the poster it probably would have saved a lot of argument to put down which of the players they liked better and style of games they enjoyed. While this review is more on the subjective side, i would be interested in creating a more objective review. If anyone is interested in getting some better data having an average of review scores, and perhaps if enough people are interested opinions from different game races as well. Everyone knows its pretty hard for one person to remain objective, thanks for the hard work posters.
Hope to hear from some people about the reviews.
|
The article was well-written, but I'm going to have to agree with most of the folks here... the ratings did not seem very appropriate. Not even mentioning the nestea/rain or jinro/mc debate, I can't believe you gave the jinro/choya match such a high rating. You call it one of the most interesting GSL matches ever? Just because the score was 3-2 and the games were rather long doesn't make it exciting.
It was boring and extremely frustrating to watch choya suck it up every single game. I haven't watched much of his play before, but I have no idea how he managed to get this far. I'm finally excited to see so many toss in the ro8, but honestly I'm embarrassed that a player like choya is representing toss. After early game-shenangians, he pretty much repeated the same strategy for all 5 games - mass a huge gateway army with some colossus off of 2 bases, and for some reason absolutely refuse to either expand or get upgrades (in every single game he either extremely delayed or never got thermal lance, charge, and forge upgrades).
It's one thing to forget an upgrade - stork is still a great player even though he forgot goon range, same for savior and adrenal glands - but at 20 minutes into a game, choya repeatedly watched his zealots WALK up to marines and his colossus shoot SIX range lasers. After you watch your army show off it's lack of upgrades MULTIPLE times, it's no longer an issue of nerves/forgetfulness - it's an issue of lack of skill/awareness.
His micro was pretty bad too for the caliber expected of a GSL player. His forcefields were garbage - did you see how much his forcefields overlapped with each other? He had to use 5 forcefields to accomplish what any high-level diamond player could have accomplished with 3.
Jinro played decently, but not great either. He should have won games 3 and 4, but lost them to poor decision making. He certainly deserved the win, but neither players nor the matchup itself deserved their ratings.
|
+ Show Spoiler +Playing "straight up" is such a starcraft way of saying "not cheap". Admit it OP, you were being a scrub in complaining about how Rain played. Rain playstyle countered nestea. Nestea even built two queens asap against a 2 rax marine play. Are you kidding me? Good decision making? Really?
|
For me personally i consider cheese to be utilizing a strategy to end the game early without scouting your opponent. For example; going 6 pool. You pretty much decided to end the game early regardless of what your opponent decided. On the other hand, killing an opponent early because of an opportunity is completely different. If you scout a protoss who went nexus first then you might decided to change your build order to get some troops out fast. I wouldn't really consider that to be cheese. Any thoughts?
|
On December 15 2010 05:20 Liquid_Adun wrote:
Since the poster does not have clear categories for what makes up a good or poor game its hard to say the person is right or wrong. However, we can disagree. Personally i couldn't justify anyone getting blown out 4-0 a ranking of B despite the game play (game 4 wasn't too bad, but still doesn't make up for it.). While i do appreciate the hard work out the poster it probably would have saved a lot of argument to put down which of the players they liked better and style of games they enjoyed. While this review is more on the subjective side, i would be interested in creating a more objective review. If anyone is interested in getting some better data having an average of review scores, and perhaps if enough people are interested opinions from different game races as well. Everyone knows its pretty hard for one person to remain objective, thanks for the hard work posters.
Hope to hear from some people about the reviews.
Uh, that's exactly what he has? The guidelines for the the ratings are right there for everyone to see.
|
On December 15 2010 07:10 Liquid_Adun wrote:
For me personally i consider cheese to be utilizing a strategy to end the game early without scouting your opponent. For example; going 6 pool. You pretty much decided to end the game early regardless of what your opponent decided. On the other hand, killing an opponent early because of an opportunity is completely different. If you scout a protoss who went nexus first then you might decided to change your build order to get some troops out fast. I wouldn't really consider that to be cheese. Any thoughts?
Completely agree. Don't worry, your arguments are sound. It's just that TLers tend to twist things into the favor of whoever they are supporting.
|
drlame Sweden. December 15 2010 07:21. Posts 377 PM Profile Quote #
On December 15 2010 05:20 Liquid_Adun wrote:
Since the poster does not have clear categories for what makes up a good or poor game its hard to say the person is right or wrong. However, we can disagree. Personally i couldn't justify anyone getting blown out 4-0 a ranking of B despite the game play (game 4 wasn't too bad, but still doesn't make up for it.). While i do appreciate the hard work out the poster it probably would have saved a lot of argument to put down which of the players they liked better and style of games they enjoyed. While this review is more on the subjective side, i would be interested in creating a more objective review. If anyone is interested in getting some better data having an average of review scores, and perhaps if enough people are interested opinions from different game races as well. Everyone knows its pretty hard for one person to remain objective, thanks for the hard work posters.
Hope to hear from some people about the reviews.
Uh, that's exactly what he has? The guidelines for the the ratings are right there for everyone to see.
Well let me try to explain something to you, using the same category system a game vs fruit dealer and bitbybitprime in the round of 16. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=175509 we can see that the game was rated 0 stars.
"Good Riddance." - No Stars
TSL_Fruitdealer < 2-0 > BitByBitPrime.WE
Game 1 @ Jungle Basin + Show Spoiler [Show Recap] +
Fruitdealer begins the series with a banana and two apples in a curious position on his desk, which turns out to be the best part of the series. To start the first game, Fruitdealer goes hatch-first, while BitByBit expands to his natural after his first marine pops, then throws down a quick second barracks. FD is diligent in scouting for proxy cheese, but once he scouts the expansion, he begins to pump drones safely, also producing a fairly early third queen. At a random timing, B3 moves out with a group of marines, and soon follows up with conga line of basically all his scvs. FD notices this and throws down two spine crawlers, but the attack comes before they can finish. As the sum total of the terran host moves up the ramp, FD gathers his queens and pulls drones to surround the marines, while his queens and zerglings take out the scvs in front. FD loses a ton of stuff but BitByBit, naturally, loses everything and gg's as zerglings hunt down his remaining marines.
No Stars - Awful game.
Game 2 @ Xel'Naga Caverns + Show Spoiler [Show Recap] +
Fruitdealer again goes for hatch-first play, while BitByBit walls in at the base of his ramp, then goes for 1-1-1 play. B3 moves out with the intention of pressuring the zerg natural with a marine and a few scvs, but retreats after being met by a couple drones. White Fruitdealer gets a baneling nest, BitByBit gets a cloaked banshee, and harasses, getting 11 drone kills at the zerg natural before barely escaping. Meanwhile, B3 moves out with several marines, and allows a zergling to run straight into his main, scouting two additional barracks with tech labs for upgrades. B3 next gets a single raven and two medivacs, and then, a little later at a mysterious timing presumably known only to the terran, pushes out with his army and...
You guessed it!
ALL HIS SCVS. Except this time around, Fruit has banelings, and with his scv mass bringing up the rear, BitByBit has nowhere to retreat his marines too. Oops. The terran push is demolished with plenty of room to spare. Fruidealer eats a banana to celebrate.
No Stars - Did I gain great satisfaction from watching these games? Yes. Are they worth watching for the average viewer? No.
Player Grades - Hide Spoiler [Show Player Grades] -
TSL_Fruitdealer - A-
FD didn't need to do a lot here; indeed, in his post-match interview, he confessed to remembering little of what occurred. But seeing as how B3's awful rushes had overcome two zergs in the previous round, I suppose some credit must be given to FD's management in being able to defend so easily. But more importantly, FD deserves a substantial vote of thanks for preserving the integrity of the GSL.
BitByBitPrime.WE - F
why wasnt the game rated 4 stars because it also meets the criteria for that as well?
4stars - Excellent play demonstrated by at least one of the players, and very likely both. A must watch.
Surely one of only very few people receiving an A is worthy of being watched? Unless, there is something wrong with the system as i have suggested.
Thanks for the feed back!
|
|
|
What, NestTea gets an F for decision making in this series. In other series and season 2, he did much better. July Zerg is a lot better for early game situations like this, and doesn't predictably hatch first every single time. An F goes for repeating it when it fails.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
