|
On December 12 2010 00:13 Supah wrote:
Game 4: Cheese v Cheese, whatever. This is pretty much the only all in MC did.
In game 4, MC actually started a nexus at his expo before the Dark Shrine finished. I imagine he expected Jinro to do a standard rax or expo build, which he would have been safe from.
He wasn't safe from a banshee rush, and perhaps a reaper snipe (killing sentries), but that's about it. It's basically only cheese if you consider all builds without robo to be cheese.
|
Congratulations Jinro
You did a really great job over there
|
When is an all-in not an all-in? When you do enough damage where your inability to recover economically is matched by their inability to recover from your attack.
Jinro played well, but he seems to be very vulnerable to early game pressure if he tries to go for a late eco game, and that's what MC looked like he baned on.
|
Grats on getting so far Jinro! It was fun following you in the tourney
|
On December 12 2010 01:30 JinDesu wrote:
When is an all-in not an all-in? When you do enough damage where your inability to recover economically is matched by their inability to recover from your attack.
Jinro played well, but he seems to be very vulnerable to early game pressure if he tries to go for a late eco game, and that's what MC looked like he baned on.
Actually, yes. That's pretty much the definition. If you don't do enough damage with your attack, you will almost for sure lose unless the other person massively screws up. You need to do enough damage (not necessarily win) to either make his situation worse than yours, to make it equal to yours, or to kill him.
Doesn't even mean "economically equal" but maybe you sniped some major production buildings so he can't utilize his economic advantage and pressure you, so you can take advantage of that by expanding, etc. something liek that.
|
It was unfortunate that Jinro lost 0-4 in the round of 4 but he was amazing all his other games so he shouldn't be to sad. He made it further than any other foreigner so far and he still has next season in the new year. I want to see more of him and during this time he can improve dramatically like he already has with oGs helping him out. There's so much more to look forward to for Jinro and I give him my best of luck for the next GSL.
|
What is with this stupid 9 days between the semis and the finals. Even year-long professional sports leagues don't take that long. These finals were uninteresting enough- a week from now no one will care.
|
i really believe if RAIN copies the exact strategy marineking used in game1 against MC (rax/depot at the bottom walloff into fast expansion marine marauder) he can beat MC every time and turn it into a long macro game
in game1 of marineking vs MC, i noticed that marinekings build could definitely not be stopped and prevented by even perfect 1base play by MC, and the only reason MC won game1 is because marineking left his base and was vulnerable for a few seconds
if RAIN copies marinekings strategy but stays in his base for 70 seconds (while using a hellion to scout the map looking for double expos by MC) he will have a formula to get into the endgame against MC and not lose to any of those timing pushes
i dont believe any of those timing attack strategies MC used against Jinro could actually defeat that fast expo into mass bio ball that marineking used in game 1. not even mass force fields would work and marineking could easily add 1 thor into his mass bioball army by the time MC is knocking at the door
i think the only way MC would be able to beat marinekings expo build would be to use his own fast expansion build that sends 1 zealot + 2 probes to the enemy base or something and then sends the stalker so MC can scout and see exactly when the CC lands and if MC builds his nexus and starts chronoboosting out probes the moment the terrans CC lands then you can compete with the terran economically
|
On December 12 2010 00:08 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2010 02:16 KissBlade wrote:On December 11 2010 02:03 Sapphire.lux wrote:On December 11 2010 01:50 Logo wrote:On December 11 2010 01:49 Sapphire.lux wrote:On December 11 2010 01:06 cordlc wrote:On December 11 2010 00:24 Sapphire.lux wrote:On December 10 2010 23:46 {88}iNcontroL wrote:
How can you keep calling him "Jinro" and asking "why are people being so nice when he lost?" But then ignoring his clan tag... Liquid... he best damn well get gentle treatment... he is a friggin hero on his team's website and he just lost a top 4 match against the guy who will probably win. While trying to play macro games and his opponent one base all-ining no less.Congrats to Jinro! Very proud of you, the best showing of a foreigner by far in the GSL. Erm, this only applies to one game - the third, where MC went void rays. Game 1: Jinro dies to single gateway pressure (not proxy'd, not all-in) Game 2: MC expands early, long before the initial push (count: 2 base). Game 4: Jinro goes for a proxy thor rush (not exactly a macro build). 2 games out of 4 were all in/cheese by MC (game3 and 4). It is not a dig at him or anything, just did not expect him doing that. Going DTs is not all in, that's ridiculous to say. He has to do damage to stay in the game, but it's not all in. Even the VR play he could have transitioned out of if he dealt a reasonable amount of damage. If one base DT is not cheese and 3 gate stargate is not all in then what is? If you almost kill your opponent then yeh, you can transition out of it lol. So anytime you tech ... it's all in? Are you trolling or you genuinely think 3 gate stargate on one base is not all in? 4 gate, 3 gate stargate, 3 gate robo in to attack and NO EXPO IS ALL IN. They are great, legit, BOs that every player should do from time to time. Christ..Talk about fanboys rejecting reality...
LOL @ accusing someone else of trolling for that opinion and then posting what you did. Are you for real? Unless you send everything with those builds, none of those are all-in. All the builds have an excellent chance of killing the opponent's expo if he expanded early, and a very good chance of not killing the opponent outright. All those builds can be followed up by an expansion after the fact if necessary. It's simply aggressive play aimed to punish an econ-greedy opponent.
All-in means if you don't kill him with the attack, you lose the game. None of those qualify.
|
On December 12 2010 07:43 CrAzEdBaDgEr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2010 00:08 Sapphire.lux wrote:On December 11 2010 02:16 KissBlade wrote:On December 11 2010 02:03 Sapphire.lux wrote:On December 11 2010 01:50 Logo wrote:On December 11 2010 01:49 Sapphire.lux wrote:On December 11 2010 01:06 cordlc wrote:On December 11 2010 00:24 Sapphire.lux wrote:On December 10 2010 23:46 {88}iNcontroL wrote:
How can you keep calling him "Jinro" and asking "why are people being so nice when he lost?" But then ignoring his clan tag... Liquid... he best damn well get gentle treatment... he is a friggin hero on his team's website and he just lost a top 4 match against the guy who will probably win. While trying to play macro games and his opponent one base all-ining no less.Congrats to Jinro! Very proud of you, the best showing of a foreigner by far in the GSL. Erm, this only applies to one game - the third, where MC went void rays. Game 1: Jinro dies to single gateway pressure (not proxy'd, not all-in) Game 2: MC expands early, long before the initial push (count: 2 base). Game 4: Jinro goes for a proxy thor rush (not exactly a macro build). 2 games out of 4 were all in/cheese by MC (game3 and 4). It is not a dig at him or anything, just did not expect him doing that. Going DTs is not all in, that's ridiculous to say. He has to do damage to stay in the game, but it's not all in. Even the VR play he could have transitioned out of if he dealt a reasonable amount of damage. If one base DT is not cheese and 3 gate stargate is not all in then what is? If you almost kill your opponent then yeh, you can transition out of it lol. So anytime you tech ... it's all in? Are you trolling or you genuinely think 3 gate stargate on one base is not all in? 4 gate, 3 gate stargate, 3 gate robo in to attack and NO EXPO IS ALL IN. They are great, legit, BOs that every player should do from time to time. Christ..Talk about fanboys rejecting reality... LOL @ accusing someone else of trolling for that opinion and then posting what you did. Are you for real? Unless you send everything with those builds, none of those are all-in. All the builds have an excellent chance of killing the opponent's expo if he expanded early, and a very good chance of not killing the opponent outright. All those builds can be followed up by an expansion after the fact if necessary. It's simply aggressive play aimed to punish an econ-greedy opponent. All-in means if you don't kill him with the attack, you lose the game. None of those qualify.
it seems like you two disagree on the definition of all-in
im going to talk about 3gate stargate without ever using the term "all in" since many people have different definitions of the term "all in"
the 3gate stargate attack MC did against marineking in game 1 was an attack that did not get an expansion as fast as marineking (because marineking expanded pretty fast) and MC did not expand as he was attacking either because of the dynamics of the specific game he was playing
if MC expanded while attacking, it would have costed him the game because it would have made his attack weaker and the attack would not do enough damage to marineking to equal the playing field.
given the specifics of that game MC needed to attack while not expanding and if marineking made a mistake (like leaving his base) then MC would win. If marineking did not make a mistake and left his forces him, then MC's 3gate stargate attack would fail (with or without expanding during the attack)
if MC expanded while attacking, it probably would have made his attack so weak that marineking would have been able to defend it even with his mistake. MC had to attack while not expanding AND have marineking make a mistake in order for him to win that game (given that he went 3gate stargate)
MC had 3 options. Option 1 to expand while attacking and have a weaker attack that marineking would probably kill regardless, which would lead to MC being extremely behind in econ. Option 2 to not expand while attacking and have a stronger attack that would only succeed if marineking makes a mistake which would lead MC to victory. Option 3 do not attack and expand which would lead to MC being way behind and losing due to marineking having such a strong econ.
Given MC's options, only 1 of them had a chance of victory
in reality, MC's 3gate stargate build compared to marinekings fast expansion build was a BO disadvantage for MC clearly. If marineking stayed in his base he would have had a 100% chance at winning.
if marineking had used a strategy that did not expand so quickly and instead stayed on 1base longer, then MC's 3gate stargate build would probably have not been a disadvantage because at the time where MC attacks he would have had the option to expand and not be so economically behind if the attack fails. So MC's 3gate stargate build CAN work and i guess its viable, it definitely is not viable if your enemy uses marinekings faster expansion build which counters it pretty hard.
So why did MC use the 3gate stargate strategy knowing his enemy could have gone for a build that completely counters it? probably because not everyone understands the game absolutely complete yet and people dont know the really safe builds yet and ppl are still trying new things or what they think works
i explained it fairly well i think without ever using the term "all in". im sure many people might see the strategy as all in given my above description, and many might not consider it to be all in....
|
I like your explanation, nice post.
People throw around terms like "cheese" and "all-in" so much these days that anything other than a no-rush, 3+ base macro game is often called one of these two things. (And I'm not sure why people are complaining about these aggressive games being bad for spectators - I find those super long, passive games to be far less exciting. To each their own, I guess.)
|
On December 12 2010 06:22 greycubed wrote:
What is with this stupid 9 days between the semis and the finals. Even year-long professional sports leagues don't take that long. These finals were uninteresting enough- a week from now no one will care.
Well the WSOP main event final table takes places about 3 months later than the actual event so.. yeah but here i agree.
|
On December 12 2010 08:38 CrAzEdBaDgEr wrote:
I like your explanation, nice post.
People throw around terms like "cheese" and "all-in" so much these days that anything other than a no-rush, 3+ base macro game is often called one of these two things. (And I'm not sure why people are complaining about these aggressive games being bad for spectators - I find those super long, passive games to be far less exciting. To each their own, I guess.)
i probably should have worded my post better. it seems you dont get what i meant by it
i was trying to say that no one really knows the true definition of "all in"
if someones definition of "all in" is "any action point in a strategy that when done will give the user a 100% chance at victory if successful but if unsuccessful it will give the user no chance to recover and a 100% chance at defeat"
if that is someones definition of "all in" then that means when MC attacked with his void rays in game1 he was going "all in" because that action point in his strategy (the point where he attacks) would make him lose the game if he fails it but win the game if he succeeds with it
the point of my post wasnt trying to say that people throw the term all in around too much, i think having terms like cheese and all in are healthy for the entertainment value of a game for the commentators to use however i was just sayin these are heavily opinionated terms that the community can draw a general consensus definition for but in reality there is no real true definition yet
|
I understood what you meant. I meant that I liked how you avoided using the term at all, since everyone has a different definition of it, so why not just avoid ambiguous terminology?
My argument is that the way I see it, those strategies are not all-in. If someone chooses to use those builds, and THEN sends everything they have without retreating, regardless of what they see themselves up against when they reach the opponent's base, with no chance of transitioning out of it and no chance of economic recovery, then it's all-in. However, most players don't play that way - if they get to an opponent's base and find it too difficult to attack, they can back off and expand or try to do some hit-and-run damage. But a 1-base 3-gate stargate build on its own is not at all an all-in.
That said, I agree it's better to just not use those terms anymore if people have wildly different interpretations of what they mean.
|
Well after finally watching the games, I think Jinro might have to work on his early game some. His endgame is fucking amazing and I love to watch him. Just needed him to get to the end game a few more times this series.
Anyway - excellent work jinro - looking forward to you in 2011 tourneys.
|
On December 12 2010 00:08 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2010 02:16 KissBlade wrote:On December 11 2010 02:03 Sapphire.lux wrote:On December 11 2010 01:50 Logo wrote:On December 11 2010 01:49 Sapphire.lux wrote:On December 11 2010 01:06 cordlc wrote:On December 11 2010 00:24 Sapphire.lux wrote:On December 10 2010 23:46 {88}iNcontroL wrote:
How can you keep calling him "Jinro" and asking "why are people being so nice when he lost?" But then ignoring his clan tag... Liquid... he best damn well get gentle treatment... he is a friggin hero on his team's website and he just lost a top 4 match against the guy who will probably win. While trying to play macro games and his opponent one base all-ining no less.Congrats to Jinro! Very proud of you, the best showing of a foreigner by far in the GSL. Erm, this only applies to one game - the third, where MC went void rays. Game 1: Jinro dies to single gateway pressure (not proxy'd, not all-in) Game 2: MC expands early, long before the initial push (count: 2 base). Game 4: Jinro goes for a proxy thor rush (not exactly a macro build). 2 games out of 4 were all in/cheese by MC (game3 and 4). It is not a dig at him or anything, just did not expect him doing that. Going DTs is not all in, that's ridiculous to say. He has to do damage to stay in the game, but it's not all in. Even the VR play he could have transitioned out of if he dealt a reasonable amount of damage. If one base DT is not cheese and 3 gate stargate is not all in then what is? If you almost kill your opponent then yeh, you can transition out of it lol. So anytime you tech ... it's all in? Are you trolling or you genuinely think 3 gate stargate on one base is not all in? 4 gate, 3 gate stargate, 3 gate robo in to attack and NO EXPO IS ALL IN. They are great, legit, BOs that every player should do from time to time. Christ..Talk about fanboys rejecting reality...
~3 gate + Stargate pressure is not all-in. Your attack doesn't need to outright kill your opponent, merely force him to make turrets, halt mining, and overdo his army composition with AA so you can take map control and expo. I've done similar builds on multiple occasions. In game 3, Jinro just happened to roll over and die due to the poor positioning of his marines. Half of them were on top of the ramp when they should have been down below.
|
On December 12 2010 06:50 roymarthyup wrote:
i really believe if RAIN copies the exact strategy marineking used in game1 against MC (rax/depot at the bottom walloff into fast expansion marine marauder) he can beat MC every time and turn it into a long macro game
in game1 of marineking vs MC, i noticed that marinekings build could definitely not be stopped and prevented by even perfect 1base play by MC, and the only reason MC won game1 is because marineking left his base and was vulnerable for a few seconds
if RAIN copies marinekings strategy but stays in his base for 70 seconds (while using a hellion to scout the map looking for double expos by MC) he will have a formula to get into the endgame against MC and not lose to any of those timing pushes
i dont believe any of those timing attack strategies MC used against Jinro could actually defeat that fast expo into mass bio ball that marineking used in game 1. not even mass force fields would work and marineking could easily add 1 thor into his mass bioball army by the time MC is knocking at the door
i think the only way MC would be able to beat marinekings expo build would be to use his own fast expansion build that sends 1 zealot + 2 probes to the enemy base or something and then sends the stalker so MC can scout and see exactly when the CC lands and if MC builds his nexus and starts chronoboosting out probes the moment the terrans CC lands then you can compete with the terran economically
Even if Rain survives the early game by using MarineKing's build I'm pretty sure that MC's late game is better than Rain's. At least judging by what I've seen from both players this far I don't think Rain has a fair chance against MC regardless of what build he picks.
|
On December 11 2010 02:47 Logican wrote:
omg jinro just got jinROLLED. his face in game 4 was priceless when his baracks spotted mc's base. however, he shouldn't be sad about losing. MC is just a fkin beast at PvT. 11 wins out of 12 pvts, holy shit. Jinro will just get better, no shame in losing when you are playing how terran is supposed to be played - firm and solid. its much better than the other korean Ts who lose even after using cheap scv all-ins
u cant be serious.....jinro's first decent opponent was choya, who was horrible that night. rain had to work his ass off to get here. jinro's good because no one really stopped him from taking 6000 bases and get 40,000 seige tanks and with 40,000 vikings. u call that solid terran play?
u shldnt take artosis' word for anything.
|
On December 12 2010 09:04 Sanguinarius wrote:
Well after finally watching the games, I think Jinro might have to work on his early game some. His endgame is fucking amazing and I love to watch him. Just needed him to get to the end game a few more times this series.
Anyway - excellent work jinro - looking forward to you in 2011 tourneys.
it takes skill to make it to end game. tbh jinro's end game is nothing out of the ordinary. its how every western sc2 terran plays. sit on 5 bases mass seige and viking. impressive? sure, but not even close to what we'll see from terrans in the upcoming gsl's
|
Nice to see a good protoss in the finals. Hopefully he does well.
On another note. I have finally figured out what the Starcraft Community mostly agree on the definition of cheese.
It is any strategy that is used to beat you or a player you like.
Even 5 base macro Zerg is cheesing if he beats you/player you like.
Seriously, stop using that term.
u shldnt take artosis' word for anything.
I think this is especially true. While Tasteless and Artosis are great commentators, their commentary are heavily biased towards foreigners (for reasons we can understand). So you really should take their opinions with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
