| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
Bairemuth
United States404 Posts
On July 19 2010 12:59 nihlon wrote: In most peoples eyes an entertaining game = a good game. I think that would be obvious. For me a good game means a close game. The game can still be entertaining without it being close though. I thought the game was very entertaining, but it was very one sided. | ||
|
sevia
United States954 Posts
Anyways, such fantastic games on both players' parts. In game one HuK really took advantage of TLO's early game turtle-harass style, using the map to completely overwhelm him in a pretty one-sided game. While it appears to be a run-of-the-mill 5 gate all-in, doing something like that against such a solid player was really risky. I was impressed. Game two was amazing. Some **intense** action when the DTs arrived, this is the sort of scene where the seconds really matter. The archons really would have been a solid choice if it weren't for TLO's crazy decision to go BC. I think after this game we're going to see a lot more of them in the metagame of TvP; if you get sufficient number of them with Yamato there's not a lot that toss can do. Going mass stalkers just wouldn't work when the rest of his army is marauders and tanks. 'Innovation' and 'creativity' are the definitely most overused words to describe TLO, but this is why he deserves them. 'Harass to death' is the only way to describe game three. TLO showing how if you just keep it going, relentlessly assaulting his base one unit after the next, he wont stand a chance when it's finally time to push out. Most players do their first harass within the first 5-7 minutes, and when it's over, they figure "well, guess I did my damage, time to turtle up until I have a 150 supply army." This game is the best example of why that mindset makes your game a lot harder than it needs to be. Now, I think that HuK's big mistake that really cost him the game is the lack of Photon Cannons. Seriously, killing just one or two hellions at key moments would have saved dozens of probes, and the cloaked Banshees could abuse the main<->natural walk distance so easily while the Stalkers chased them down. Spending 600 minerals on cannons could've saved him thousands down the line. | ||
|
figq
12519 Posts
On July 19 2010 12:53 reza wrote: If we paraphrase Day9's joke with TLO and probes: "Reza hates fanboys, they are ruining his life".Its not the players i have a problem with..but with the fanboys. On July 19 2010 12:57 reza wrote: I see the problem, but micro in SC2 is just different. There were some good micro tricks today. The pathing is smoother in SC2, so those don't look as crisp and sharp as in BW (i'd agree this is a problem). And people are so crazy about seeing archons and BCs, because in top-tier SC2 games that has almost never happened; those units are in a very different balance spot than in BW; they are completely non-standard units in SC2 so far.Creativity was boxer and his amazing micro in his prime.. The first 3 short games are also not bad games for SC2, and the current map pool. The usual SC2 does not go into a big macro game off of multiple bases. That's how the game is for the moment, sadly, and I was suggesting increasing the food cap to invite larger maps in the standard pool, and more complex games on average. (main reason: SC2 gets to the same mining rate with fewer bases and more workers) | ||
|
Telcontar
United Kingdom16710 Posts
On July 19 2010 12:57 reza wrote: People like to throw down the word 'creativity' around too easily. Creativity was boxer and his amazing micro in his prime.. not a tech switch to battlecruisers while turtling with tanks at your choke point. Oh how i miss those days.. sigh... there will always be one of these 'critics' who acts like he's seen everything before. ok so how many BCs have you seen in pro SC2 games so far? of course TLO has to turtle you putz its called competent strategy. you kind of need it to win high level games? anyways 'creative' doesnt mean flashy micro or crazy all ins. it means trying new BOs and trying to make them work for you. those 2 games were perfect examples of ultra defensive/harass and HuK was simply not prepared for TLO's tactics. you need to chillax and stop being so negative. | ||
|
chieftan
United States62 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:01 reza wrote: read the first line and I decided to stop. I never said i didn't enjoy the game..re read what i wrote. I said the game was entertaining but they weren't good games by any measure. What is your definition of a 'good game'? I agree the game on blistering and the game on temple weren't all that great, but the game on steppes was as epic a game as we have seen in the beta. if that wasn't a 'good game', you need to rethink your standards. or maybe you are a korean pro broodwar player, but something tells me that isn't the case. | ||
|
reza
Canada213 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:02 SiguR wrote: Yes, it is always true. In >MOST< people's eyes an entertaining game = a good game. If you don't think an entertaining game is a good one, you are one of those that fall outside of >MOST<. No, its not always true because i can say: In >MOST< people's eyes an entertaining game= not always a good game. Thus if you think an entertaining game is always a good one, than you are one of those that fall outside of >MOST< assuming that most entertaining games are not always good games. | ||
|
Mattes
Germany1116 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:02 Bairemuth wrote: For me a good game means a close game. The game can still be entertaining without it being close though. I thought the game was very entertaining, but it was very one sided. I guess it's kind of how you want to define words. Hummmm...dont quite agree, but like you said. personal preference and definition. Even a steamroll one-sided domination could be a good game, if it is entertaining the way you afterwards say "whoa xy sure played near perfect, that was just pure education". On the other side, sure, close games, back and forth, mostly got a very high entertainment value, but on the other hand, a close game does not imply that is was really "good" in any kind. It just says "player a = player b with a slightly advantage for a/b" | ||
|
reza
Canada213 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:04 Telcontar wrote: sigh... there will always be one of these 'critics' who acts like he's seen everything before. ok so how many BCs have you seen in pro SC2 games so far? of course TLO has to turtle you putz its called competent strategy. you kind of need it to win high level games? anyways 'creative' doesnt mean flashy micro or crazy all ins. it means trying new BOs and trying to make them work for you. those 2 games were perfect examples of ultra defensive/harass and HuK was simply not prepared for TLO's tactics. you need to chillax and stop being so negative. By your logic your wrong because essentially 'crazy all ins' are alterations of BOs. You just said that TLO had to turtle..WHERE i ask you is there any creativeness in that? If you are going to argue that his tech switch to BC's WHILE turtling was creative than i suggest you just stop now. | ||
|
reza
Canada213 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:05 chieftan wrote: What is your definition of a 'good game'? I agree the game on blistering and the game on temple weren't all that great, but the game on steppes was as epic a game as we have seen in the beta. if that wasn't a 'good game', you need to rethink your standards. or maybe you are a korean pro broodwar player, but something tells me that isn't the case. O please.. do you really consider that game on steppes as one of the most EPIC games we have seen in the beta? The battles were one-sided, there was a lot of mistakes and bad plays from both sides, and the game was just dragged on for way to long. I think you need to reconsider YOUR standards because that definitely was NOT one of the most epic games we have seen in the beta thus far. | ||
|
Mattes
Germany1116 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:10 reza wrote: By your logic your wrong because essentially 'crazy all ins' are alterations of BOs. You just said that TLO had to turtle..WHERE i ask you is there any creativeness in that? If you are going to argue that his tech switch to BC's WHILE turtling was creative than i suggest you just stop now. I see your point. Ones conception of creativity may vary. What kind of options does did he had? Sitting there, turtling his way towards his 2nd expo. HuK patrolling outside with a counter/army of immortal/archons etc. BCs, okay, one way. Ghosts with emp sure would have been another one. Agree that people use that "CREATIVITY" too often, but otherwise, if someone does things you dont see often, what you call that? When will someone be creative again, or what must someone do to be called "creative player" again? | ||
|
Bairemuth
United States404 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:06 Mattes wrote: Hummmm...dont quite agree, but like you said. personal preference and definition. Even a steamroll one-sided domination could be a good game, if it is entertaining the way you afterwards say "whoa xy sure played near perfect, that was just pure education". On the other side, sure, close games, back and forth, mostly got a very high entertainment value, but on the other hand, a close game does not imply that is was really "good" in any kind. It just says "player a = player b with a slightly advantage for a/b" yeah it just comes down to definition. I feel that a good game means each player played very well. There were very few mistakes made and it was anything but sloppy. I feel that in Game 2 (and game 3), HuK simply made a couple of cruitial mistakes. Thus the games were quite one sided. I think a game should be evaluated from two different standpoints. How well was the game played and how entertaining was the game? As you said, just because it's a close game, doesn't mean it's entertaining. I always consider good game = how well each player played. These differing evaluations are also important to viewers. Some people watch games to learn from while others are there for pure entertainment. I'm sure most of us are here for both, though. Anyways, again, it's just definition of words. I understand what you are saying. edit: I think I will just avoid the phrase "good game." I will just say something like...that game was very well played by both players and was highly entertaining. Yeah sounds like a plan. | ||
|
reza
Canada213 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:16 Mattes wrote: I see your point. Ones conception of creativity may vary. What kind of options does did he had? Sitting there, turtling his way towards his 2nd expo. HuK patrolling outside with a counter/army of immortal/archons etc. BCs, okay, one way. Ghosts with emp sure would have been another one. Agree that people use that "CREATIVITY" too often, but otherwise, if someone does things you dont see often, what you call that? When will someone be creative again, or what must someone do to be called "creative player" again? I'm not questioning his options in that situation, i'm questioning the fanboys that called that transition to BC's 'creative'. Maybe our conception of creativity differs because the game is way to early in its stages for any play to be concreted as 'standard'. It just irks me that people throw around the word creativity around so freely. | ||
|
SkysLa
Canada84 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:10 reza wrote: By your logic your wrong because essentially 'crazy all ins' are alterations of BOs. You just said that TLO had to turtle..WHERE i ask you is there any creativeness in that? If you are going to argue that his tech switch to BC's WHILE turtling was creative than i suggest you just stop now. Theres lots of creativeness in turtling, especially with Terran. To use starcraft 1 examples, double armory build by Flash where he turtles until he has the sufficient upgrades to beat a carrier build. What about the start of mech in TvZ? That wasnt creative? Effort using a nydus canal in a zvz where I would say the battles were pretty lopsided anyways. | ||
|
shlomo
258 Posts
I'm rooting for whichever P or Z can eliminate these boring Terran. I think PvZ was voted most entertaining MU to watch recently wasnt it? Probably because it doesn't include Terran. | ||
|
Bairemuth
United States404 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:22 reza wrote: I'm not questioning his options in that situation, i'm questioning the fanboys that called that transition to BC's 'creative'. Maybe our conception of creativity differs because the game is way to early in its stages for any play to be concreted as 'standard'. It just irks me that people throw around the word creativity around so freely. I think being creative is just coming up with something that the opponent doesn't quite expect. In a sense, any type of cheese is creative. The first person who decided to do a double gate proxy rush had a creative aspect to his plan. It caught the opponent off guard because it was unorthidox aka creative. Eventually, every tactic and strategy will be seen, but you can still be creative by continually trying to trick your opponent and catching him off guard. Doing something your opponent least expects is creative. Edit: TLO is creative because when you play against him you have pretty much no clue what to expect. On the otherhand, Idra is on the complete opposite side of the spectrum. You know more of what to expect from Idra. He is more predictable. Are both of them very tough to beat? Well of course, but TLO is simply more creative (not necessarily better). | ||
|
Mattes
Germany1116 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:17 Bairemuth wrote: edit: I think I will just avoid the phrase "good game." I will just say something like...that game was very well played by both players and was highly entertaining. Yeah sounds like a plan. *g* i dont think i could stop saying "well lets see, this was a good game". Its not like i'm saying "this game was good and thats the only truth, whoever does not agree for sure has no clue".  Dont let others dictate your way of commenting ^^ On July 19 2010 13:22 reza wrote: I'm not questioning his options in that situation, i'm questioning the fanboys that called that transition to BC's 'creative'. Maybe our conception of creativity differs because the game is way to early in its stages for any play to be concreted as 'standard'. It just irks me that people throw around the word creativity around so freely. Agreed. Way to early to objectively say "this is creative", "this is just boring standard". Just because its not used that often doesnt make it creative. But on the other hand, like someone above pointed out, that has not been the reason you got banned from the chat. (which frankly, i didnt even saw because of full screen  ) | ||
|
Sfydjklm
United States9218 Posts
| ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
"Huk let five hellions into his base and then built ground units against anti-ground units" is not a good game. | ||
|
Mattes
Germany1116 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:32 Sfydjklm wrote: i think the notion that close game is a good game is the most accurate one, since in most cases it is hard for a casual to comprehend whether a game was educational or not if its just a one sided rape.` Like said above, that boils down to your own definition of good. If good is any indicator of quality than that is often incorrect. I had so many close games, and the were _by far_ not remotely good games. :D I'd say: A close game = an entertaining game (that far i think we all agree) Entertainment = good (in a way of beeing entertained and having a good time) Really good players = good (in a way of seeing high class play that does not necessary has to be close) I think a game can be entertaining even if its one-sided, if it has some highly educational character, or just some perfect execution of strategy abc (which essentially comes down to educational value again). For casuals, of youre, close and with lots of "bang bumm *explode*" is mosty considered: Good Game //edit: @that idra-notion: Sure, you have you picture of idrA in your head, but i think in the HDH Semifinals, when he "doomdropped" NonY, that wasn't expected. Was that creative because its something you wouldn't think of, hearing "idrA" ? | ||
|
SiguR
Canada2039 Posts
It was accurate, it was professional, and it was articulate. I haven't had a ton of exposure to Day9's casting, and i've gotta say, he is one of the best casters i've had the pleasure to listen to. | ||
| ||
|
|
Monday Night Weeklies
Map Test Tournament
PiGosaur Monday
Map Test Tournament
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
Map Test Tournament
Map Test Tournament
OSC
Korean StarCraft League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
