|
On January 17 2011 22:42 oneofthem wrote:
im has losira who is pretty good by his ladder stats.
This means IdrA could practice against him. So could NesTea of course, but quoting his ladder success suggests (whether correct or not) that he would make a better ladder practice partner than an in house partner.
On January 17 2011 22:50 DizzyDrone wrote:
Both oGs and IM have several zergs that qualified for a GSL, which means they are outstanding enough for practice games. Compare that to IdrA who had no choice but to ladder and hit zerg one out of ten times.
On January 17 2011 22:48 MrCon wrote:
Yeah, and Ogs has plenty of good zergs, thewind, cezanne, jookto...
jookto wasn't in oGs during the time in question. Furthermore, when you're that good, I don't believe simply qualifying for a GSL makes you an outstanding practice partner. I think we can all agree that after a certain skill differential, simply qualifying for a GSL doesn't really cut it anymore. I will admit TheWind is someone who would make a great partner for Zenio, but my main point wasn't that Zenio and NesTea had NO one to practice with, but rather that the difference in displayed skill in season two was so great that it could not be attributed to just simple practice. Even this was just a supporting point to the idea that the relative amounts of practice NesTea and IdrA have had since season two will be relatively the same. All of these supporting points and statements support the claim that NesTea's ZvZ is better than IdrA's ZvZ.
|
On January 17 2011 22:18 Dente wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 21:39 [Eternal]Phoenix wrote:
The MvP vs Tester games were simply an example of an already well-known problem with PvT. You cannot expand if T plays 1/1/1. You simply have to either allin and kill him early or get an obs and react to his army (which 99% of the time involves going colossus).
Ad you forgot to add: T can not expand when protoss builds goes 4gate / 3gate robo.
1rax reactor FE into more bio holds off both of these easily with a couple of bunkers.
|
On January 17 2011 23:12 syllogism wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 23:04 Providence wrote:On January 17 2011 22:41 syllogism wrote:On January 17 2011 22:36 Providence wrote:On January 17 2011 22:29 syllogism wrote:
It's also hilarious to draw conclusions based on one ZvZ BO3 that occured months ago It's even more hilarious to infer that people are drawing conclusions on one ZvZ BO3 that occurred months ago. Really? Because that's the only evidence so far that has been presented to support the claim Idra's ZvZ isn't that great True, but then again you're the only one who claimed IdrA's ZvZ isn't that great. The rest of us are talking about how NesTea's ZvZ is better than IdrA's. There's plenty of reasons to believe Nestea's ZvZ is better than Idra's, but little reason to believe Idra can't beat him
There's plenty of reasons to believe NesTea's ZvZ is far better than IdrA's, but no one claimed (at least from the posts that I saw) that IdrA can't beat him. Just that the general consensus of NesTea being the favorite, followed by possible explanations as to why it's the case. Would you argue that IdrA is in fact the favorite in the match?
|
+ Show Spoiler +its like protoss players turned on retard mode for tournament... trying weird strats, taking unnecessary risks... im really dissapointed in tester's and genius's performance. And i have yet to see the games between jinro and mc but i suppose thats some weird shit too.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On January 17 2011 23:17 Providence wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 22:42 oneofthem wrote:
im has losira who is pretty good by his ladder stats. This means IdrA could practice against him. So could NesTea of course, but quoting his ladder success suggests (whether correct or not) that he would make a better ladder practice partner than an in house partner.
i agree with you that idra's zvz isn't all that great. however, the training partner argument isn't totally out of line. even if losira plays on the ladder, he would obviously train with his own teammate more seriously. on the other hand, idra would be pretty stupid to seriously train with nestea's teammate, since losira would totally keep idra's builds a secret from nestea, totally.
|
On January 17 2011 21:39 [Eternal]Phoenix wrote:
The MvP vs Tester games were simply an example of an already well-known problem with PvT. You cannot expand if T plays 1/1/1. You simply have to either allin and kill him early or get an obs and react to his army (which 99% of the time involves going colossus).
The problem with the marine/raven/banshee pushes is not just 1 problem, but a culmination of all of protoss' shortcomings and terrans' strength.
-Protoss has no capability of scouting a terran without getting a robo and and obs.
-Stalkers are really bad units in direct combat but you need them to stop any air, harass, or early pressure.
-The necessary counters to different units require teching in completely opposite directions, which is not possible while maintaining any sort of reasonable army.
-Mules allow terran to "supersaturate" and support more production on 1 base than they're supposed to be able to support
-Marines are ridiculously strong earlygame and are only dealt with by colossi and storm
-Banshee/marine kills equal costs of stalkers easily
-SCVs tank shots for zealots while allowing the ranged T army to dish out full damage from safety.
-T can literally make any combo of bio/factory/starport units and as long as they push on a good timing window and pull scvs protoss has little way to live if they expanded.
It's not just 1 specific allin that kills P FE's - it's any random assortment of units. It's difficult to scout from early on where, as a protoss, you have to decide whether to allin, play defensive 1 base, or FE.
SC2 TvP is stupid build order poker.
I actually don't agree with your conclusion. I have the same idea as tester. If you suspect these kinds of builds, just rush for an expo as soon as you can. But you can't go robo, stargate and 4-5 gates like tester did. In both games 1 and 2 cannons would've been better. Just skip robo and stargate completely.
Third game shows a clear flaw in game design if there ever was one. Terran can expand and attack and do massive damage like 4-5 minutes into the game. I'm really surprised Tasteless was so surprised by that and called it embarassing. It wasn't. It was totally expected.
Edit:
Just have to comment about the third game. I removed the word "imbalance" and replaced it with "flaw in game design" just because I know that it's just not that simple. It never is. It's just that I've been in the exact same situation and you feel so desperately sad and... just betrayed somehow :D! I mean, both of you make an expansion and he is able to walk all over you without too much effort. It's not supposed to be like that. I know that there's ways around it but... It's just stupid that's all.
|
On January 17 2011 23:23 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 23:17 Providence wrote:On January 17 2011 22:42 oneofthem wrote:
im has losira who is pretty good by his ladder stats. This means IdrA could practice against him. So could NesTea of course, but quoting his ladder success suggests (whether correct or not) that he would make a better ladder practice partner than an in house partner. i agree with you that idra's zvz isn't all that great. however, the training partner argument isn't totally out of line. even if losira plays on the ladder, he would obviously train with his own teammate more seriously. on the other hand, idra would be pretty stupid to seriously train with nestea's teammate, since losira would totally keep idra's builds a secret from nestea, totally.
I never said it was out of line. I said it was a small argument in the grand flow of logic that I had pointed out in my post that you decided not to include in your quote.
|
And I don't think old-school starcraft 1 players such as myself really have a big problem with the concept of all-ins. It's a part of the game and it was a part of brood war as well. It's just that, in brood war it was never this easy... And that's a mistake in the game design of sc2.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 17 2011 22:33 Providence wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 22:28 DizzyDrone wrote:On January 17 2011 22:23 Providence wrote:On January 17 2011 22:21 DizzyDrone wrote:On January 17 2011 22:07 Providence wrote:On January 17 2011 22:02 syllogism wrote:On January 17 2011 21:52 MrCon wrote:On January 17 2011 21:41 syllogism wrote:On January 17 2011 21:38 MrCon wrote:On January 17 2011 21:34 .kv wrote:
[quote]
or EGIdrA? If by miracle he beats MKP (idra will beat nada if nada wins MKP), he'll never beat MVP or Nestea in the finals. And he still has to beat Jinro, who has a winning record against him. The path is still long for idra =) But bitbybit, GSLbyGSL, he goes farer each time. Nestea loses plenty of ZvZs so Idra definitely would have a chance against him. ZvT is hopeless though against someone like MVP. Also haha@Jinro's "winning record" against Idra Nestea loses plenty of ZvZ ? Where ? He's 8-0 in ZvZ vZ: 8-0 (100.00%) | Last 10 (old -> recent): W W W W W W W W http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-korean/players/29_ZergBong No one can have that high winrate in ZvZ; the sample size isn't large enough and it's against only 3 players. Obviously he is the favourite probably against anyone currently in ZvZ, but it's extremely unlikely he wins more than 60-70% of his ZvZs against top opponents and he could have a bad day. I would definitely say NesTea's ZvZ far outclasses IdrA's ZvZ. Yes it's a small sample size, but it's quite a convincing one. Let's also not forget that NesTea also 3-0 Zenio who 2-0 IdrA. Obviously it's not 100% that he'll beat IdrA, but it would be hard-pressed to say the odds are in IdrA's favor. When IdrA played Zenio he had no real practice with ZvZ. I think he has a very good shot at taking out NesTea now, since he is practicing with FruitDealer and Ret. I think neither IdrA nor NesTea will make it to the finals though. I'm not sure this is true--IdrA definitely had his builds prepared, which certainly suggests he had practiced them. I don't remember anywhere IdrA even claiming he had no real practice in ZvZ. http://twitter.com/#!/idrajit/status/28874560477as far as I know there just weren't enough top zergs for him to practice his zvz on the ladder Yes I understand that, but IdrA, Zenio, and NesTea play on the same ladder. Neither oGs or IM have outstanding zergs either, apart from Zenio and NesTea of course. Perhaps it could be argued that since IdrA v Zenio was first, NesTea was able to learn from Zenio's games to beat him, but Zenio's defeat of IdrA and NesTea's defeat of Zenio seemed too convincing to be just that. In addition, their relative amounts of practice in ZvZ can't have changed that much. It's not as if NesTea was not allowed to practice ZvZ while IdrA trained for it.
Ok, people gotta realize that GSL results are not the be all end all in skill measuring. My record vs Cezanne, Zenio, JookTo, Luvsic is very similiar - they are all really solid zergs and you couldnt ask for much better when you need to practice vs Zerg.
Theres a lot of people outside the GSL, who havent made it in yet or who for some reason did poorly in their GSL appearance, that can play really high level in practice.
On January 17 2011 23:28 ParasitJonte wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 21:39 [Eternal]Phoenix wrote:
The MvP vs Tester games were simply an example of an already well-known problem with PvT. You cannot expand if T plays 1/1/1. You simply have to either allin and kill him early or get an obs and react to his army (which 99% of the time involves going colossus).
The problem with the marine/raven/banshee pushes is not just 1 problem, but a culmination of all of protoss' shortcomings and terrans' strength.
-Protoss has no capability of scouting a terran without getting a robo and and obs.
-Stalkers are really bad units in direct combat but you need them to stop any air, harass, or early pressure.
-The necessary counters to different units require teching in completely opposite directions, which is not possible while maintaining any sort of reasonable army.
-Mules allow terran to "supersaturate" and support more production on 1 base than they're supposed to be able to support
-Marines are ridiculously strong earlygame and are only dealt with by colossi and storm
-Banshee/marine kills equal costs of stalkers easily
-SCVs tank shots for zealots while allowing the ranged T army to dish out full damage from safety.
-T can literally make any combo of bio/factory/starport units and as long as they push on a good timing window and pull scvs protoss has little way to live if they expanded.
It's not just 1 specific allin that kills P FE's - it's any random assortment of units. It's difficult to scout from early on where, as a protoss, you have to decide whether to allin, play defensive 1 base, or FE.
SC2 TvP is stupid build order poker. I actually don't agree with your conclusion. I have the same idea as tester. If you suspect these kinds of builds, just rush for an expo as soon as you can. But you can't go robo, stargate and 4-5 gates like tester did. In both games 1 and 2 cannons would've been better. Just skip robo and stargate completely. Third game shows a clear imbalance if there ever was one. Terran can expand and attack and do massive damage like 4-5 minutes into the game. I'm really surprised Tasteless was so surprised by that and called it embarassing. It wasn't. It was totally expected.
I agree about cannons, best way to stop that allin. But losing to 1 rax marauder/marine attack when hes making a CC... that IS a little embarassing. Not that it cant happen its just.. Im pretty sure Tester is embarassed about it.
|
On January 17 2011 23:28 ParasitJonte wrote:
Third game shows a clear imbalance if there ever was one. Terran can expand and attack and do massive damage like 4-5 minutes into the game. I'm really surprised Tasteless was so surprised by that and called it embarassing. It wasn't. It was totally expected.
If this were the case, every TvP would be a marauder FE. The reason if worked so well in that game was because it was a marine, marauder, and bunker against a sentry and stalker that got off maybe a shot each before running away. The reason marauder expands aren't the go-to build in TvZ is because a zealot and a stalker beat a marine and a marauder, and usually your units are near your building expo so a bunker doesn't go up while the marine and marauder giggle that the protoss is clueless this is occurring like 4 hexes away.
|
I'm glad that ZergBong advanced and Tester got at least this far (better than nothing *again*).
It's too bad there weren't more games. So many aren't even recommended (via polls).
|
This thread is such fucking garbage. So much protoss whine and underinformed nonsense about balance and MVP 'only using allin'. Jesus christ I thought we outgrew this.
|
On January 17 2011 23:22 Providence wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 23:12 syllogism wrote:On January 17 2011 23:04 Providence wrote:On January 17 2011 22:41 syllogism wrote:On January 17 2011 22:36 Providence wrote:On January 17 2011 22:29 syllogism wrote:
It's also hilarious to draw conclusions based on one ZvZ BO3 that occured months ago It's even more hilarious to infer that people are drawing conclusions on one ZvZ BO3 that occurred months ago. Really? Because that's the only evidence so far that has been presented to support the claim Idra's ZvZ isn't that great True, but then again you're the only one who claimed IdrA's ZvZ isn't that great. The rest of us are talking about how NesTea's ZvZ is better than IdrA's. There's plenty of reasons to believe Nestea's ZvZ is better than Idra's, but little reason to believe Idra can't beat him There's plenty of reasons to believe NesTea's ZvZ is far better than IdrA's, but no one claimed (at least from the posts that I saw) that IdrA can't beat him. Just that the general consensus of NesTea being the favorite, followed by possible explanations as to why it's the case. Would you argue that IdrA is in fact the favorite in the match?
You realize this is the reason I even started debating the topic?
If by miracle he beats MKP (idra will beat nada if nada wins MKP), he'll never beat MVP or Nestea in the finals.
And I already stated in a previous post it's likely, based on the evidence we have, that Nestea's ZvZ is better than Idra's and only said Idra can beat him, not that he is the favorite
|
On January 17 2011 23:34 Providence wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 23:28 ParasitJonte wrote:
Third game shows a clear imbalance if there ever was one. Terran can expand and attack and do massive damage like 4-5 minutes into the game. I'm really surprised Tasteless was so surprised by that and called it embarassing. It wasn't. It was totally expected. If this were the case, every TvP would be a marauder FE. The reason if worked so well in that game was because it was a marine, marauder, and bunker against a sentry and stalker that got off maybe a shot each before running away. The reason marauder expands aren't the go-to build in TvZ is because a zealot and a stalker beat a marine and a marauder, and usually your units are near your building expo so a bunker doesn't go up while the marine and marauder giggle that the protoss is clueless this is occurring like 4 hexes away.
Edited my post. I just didn't feel like elaborating the first time I wrote it.
Main point is just that PvT is weird that way and it's less enjoyable because of it. The flow of the game is weird somehow... It's hard to explain.
|
On January 17 2011 21:06 supersoft wrote:ah it's so embarassing to see the stupidity of so so many posts in here. MVP played brilliant, he responded perfectly to Testers builds an won convincingly. Why on earth shouldn't MVP play the same build 100 times in a row if it is the perfect counter to the build his enemy goes for 100 times in a row. There is also no way you can compare MVP to bitbybitPrime. MVP attacked with 6 different type of units. And he wiped out testers forces with losing 50% while Tester lost 100%. His build was a counterplay to what Tester did. It wasn't just a blind all in without looking what the enemy was doing. compared to chessplayers: One chessplayers plays very risky, moving his pawns very far his opponents half etc.etc. The other chessplayer saw that if he sacrifices a couple of his pieces, he will archieve a quick checkmate. would you call him a cheesy player because he didn't go for a long exciting game? Well obviously not. Why should he do that. The game is about winning._____________ + Show Spoiler +On January 17 2011 20:56 Elefanto wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 20:38 Providence wrote:On January 17 2011 20:36 Elefanto wrote:On January 17 2011 20:33 Providence wrote:On January 17 2011 20:25 2l84that wrote:
I am not going to say MVP is a bad player (or thrash him like some other posters here), but I would have respected him more, if he showed us a macro game like the one he had against that zerg opponent in Ro16.(which was a sick match)
MVP is a good player with lots of skill, but neither rushin (ie 3 rd game), or all-ins (1st and 2nd ones) are barely skillful. I was expecting much more than this. IMHO this series was as lame as it gets.
And don't get me started on the skill issue by saying, "but he kited."
Half-decent plats can kite with stimmed MM balls, Oh god.
Actually, it takes a lot of skill to know when to all-in and when to not. In the first game Tester goes Nexus off of one gate before cyber core and MVP scouted it. Why would you not time an all in right as the expo finishes? Third game MVP macro'd way better than tester. I'm not sure what you're basing your comments off of Lol? Skill to know when to all-in? You wait until you got enough units and your wanted mix, a-click into enemy with scvs, if he was too greedy you'll win handily, if he has a big army, your chances are still fucking huge? Since all-ins seem to be so strong, we'll be seeing you in next season's GSL amiright? So if you encounter someone who disagrees with your opinion you just say "go and do it better"? Pretty sick debatting skills you got there. But just to point some things out for you. Game 2 on Xel'Naga. That's a Build EVERY FUCKING DIAMOND CAN EXECUTE. He opted for a blue-flame hellion drop after seeing tester going fast expand. Legit response, it might win him the game right there if he gets 2/3 shots off. It fails through fantastic defense by tester. So you would assume tester is ahead, got his expansion running, deflected a teched harass off of 1-base. What is MVP doing so marvelous? He sits in his base, builds his army consisting of ravens and banshees and marines / marauder with, pulls scvs and a-clicks into his enemy and still manages to CRUSH him. What's tester supposed to do? Get Colossi out asap and die even harder? Get Storm after he had to go Robo for Observer? I don't want to whine about TvP, i want to fucking point out how fucking ridiculous it is in this game to get an expansion and beeing able to defend it. There are easy to execute builds that demolish faster expansions when your enemy isn't playing ten times better than you. If you want to congratulate MVP for his "fantastic stratecial play", to go all-in with a push you know has a fucking huge winning chance without you playing better, just simply a-clicking, you have no clue about stracraft hahaha one short remark I want to add: PvT isn't imbalanced. If I go for a quick exp. as a Terran and Protoss 4gates - it's also nearly impossible to stop, if he places some FF behind my bunkers and kills my shit of. Think about it you fools before you cry about the imba Terran PDD and whatever.
You know, we just had NEXByun talk about how 1rax FE is the best build vP because it gives a macro lead and he's confident he can hold off any 1-base aggression with it, because 'terran units are just better'. And he did just that (with questionable play from SangHo).
Back to some other posts, expanding at 5 minutes does not mean you're 'still paying for it' when an attack comes at 10. It's more that the income you've received from expanding has to be weighed against a Terran base, which has more income than a Protoss base can produce - and thus T onebasing doesn't give them as hefty a disadvantage versus twobase. That alone is certainly helping a lot of these all-ins, and they are getting a little silly - you shouldn't have to play chicken with who expands first for more than ten minutes in starcraft.
Tester didn't defend well though, game 3 was a joke.
|
On January 17 2011 23:32 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
I agree about cannons, best way to stop that allin. But losing to 1 rax marauder/marine attack when hes making a CC... that IS a little embarassing. Not that it cant happen its just.. Im pretty sure Tester is embarassed about it.
Definitely agree that Tester should NOT have lost the game to the 1 rax marine/marauder-pressure....I'm not sure why he got caught so off-guard, shakuras is the perfect map to defend against something like that. I know this may sound stupid coming from a low-level player like me, but every time when I see toss players going for zealot/stalker/stalker in case of an FE they end up in a way better situation compared to early sentry play.
Even if you have to pull "some" probes, you just have to use them to absorb a couple of marauder-hits so the stalkers (or remaining stalker) can finish the job. I feel the classic zealot/stalker/sentry is better suited to allow a quick robotics + second gate while chrono-boosting probes, while zealot/stalker/stalker (with chrono-boosts on the gateway) is needed to defend this marine/marauder early game aggression. I was very surprised to see Tester screwed this up so badly, because - no offense to MVP - there was nothing special about this 1 rax aggression at all, just a standard move many terrans do when they expo fast.
|
On January 17 2011 23:32 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
Ok, people gotta realize that GSL results are not the be all end all in skill measuring. My record vs Cezanne, Zenio, JookTo, Luvsic is very similiar - they are all really solid zergs and you couldnt ask for much better when you need to practice vs Zerg.
Theres a lot of people outside the GSL, who havent made it in yet or who for some reason did poorly in their GSL appearance, that can play really high level in practice.
This is a fair point, but as I had mentioned earlier, it was a small portion of the grander argument that NesTea's ZvZ is stronger than IdrA's ZvZ. It was perhaps poor choice for me to imply that those individuals wouldn't give an edge in terms of practice against ladder practice, but there is still evidence to the conclusion that NesTea is better than IdrA at ZvZ. Not just GSL records, though that is a part of it. These things, in addition to their understandings of this matchup, the relative pressure that the two individuals are under to win, the psychological effects of the players' confidence all suggest that NesTea is the favorite to win that match should it happen.
PS - Good luck on Wednesday!
|
On January 17 2011 23:39 syllogism wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 22:29 syllogism wrote:
It's also hilarious to draw conclusions based on one ZvZ BO3 that occured months ago You realize this is the reason I even started debating the topic?
That sounds more like flaming than debating.
|
On January 17 2011 21:19 ftd.rain wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 21:07 Silfurstar wrote:
A game has rules. As long as you're playing within the rules of the game, it's fair play.
I understand the frustration of getting destroyed by what seems to be a easily pulled off all-in.
But I also understand why Terran would not react otherwise, if he knows his opponent offers him an opportunity to win. What would you want him to do ?
Scout the FE and lay back peacefully while his opponent gets an economic advantage ? Wait for the oh so dreadful mid-game Protoss ball of death ?
It's a game of risk vs reward (as must every good game be, in my opinion). MVP risked it, and got rewarded. I'm not calling it a great inspiring play by any means, but who says it should be ? I could careless about meaningless victories(all-ins) like this one, the important thing to me as an spectator is that the players show impressive play, which didnt happen( this guy got 2-0'ed by choya in gsl3, just so you know he ain't that good).
I totally understand your point of view as a spectator, and I share it with all my heart.
I was just making a point as a competitor point of view.
If the rules of the game make for uninteresting play, then the game is to blame, not the competitors. That's why most popular sports (hockey, football/soccer, us football, etc.) go through major rule changes. Often to make it more interesting.
I'm pretty sure that, once more, the map pool is probably to blame for the actual situation. Bring some bigger maps, and you'll see all-ins like this reduced to dust by timely reactions.
|
On January 17 2011 23:48 Providence wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2011 23:39 syllogism wrote:On January 17 2011 22:29 syllogism wrote:
It's also hilarious to draw conclusions based on one ZvZ BO3 that occured months ago You realize this is the reason I even started debating the topic? That sounds more like flaming than debating.
Excuse me? Can you quote the post where I was "flaming"
e: that post? Really?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
