|
Everybody is talking about lag or skill in regards to the Koreans being bounced...I actually think it is intel.
These Koreans are big names with tons of replays floating around that reveal their tech choices/expansion preferences/scouting habits/typical defenses/losses that expose weaknesses and more...this is HUGE. The Koreans on the other hand would have more difficult getting these replays on the 'foreigners' or just didn't make the effort to find them.
If this was a more GSL'ish scenario, I imagine the Koreans would have prepared a lot more, and they would have gotten more help from their coaches and teammates when it comes to doing intel on unfamiliar players and I think in those situations we would see a much stronger showing from the Koreans.
|
On March 27 2011 07:58 iExtrapolate wrote:
There were many moments in the game in which Naniwa repositioned his units to prepare for an attack at a non obvious position immediately before an attack occurred. Some people in this thread claim that this was purely intuition, but because the time at which the drop occurred and the time at which the stalkers were moved to position in which they could defend the drop was so close, if there were no map hacks, there was obviously a lot of luck involved. So the two explanations for the random preparedness of Naniwa are either that he has a great intuition and got lucky at several different times in the series or that he map hacked.
Considering that this is a tournament with a 5 figure prize pool and there is no way for the commentators to detect a map hacker, it is not without reason to assume that, in this tournament, they could exist. I think, for the sake of the legitimacy of this tournament, the replays from this series should be watched from Naniwa's vision to determine whether or not he map hacked. While I agree that it may be a little rash to outright accuse Naniwa of map hacking, it would be naive to just assume, that in all of those circumstances it was his intuition that prepared him for those non obvious attacks.
I'm sorry but pretty much all attacks were obvious and he scouted pretty much all of them with a zealot in game 1. In game two he saw a lot of overlords parked outside his base, In game 3 he split his army in two because a counter attack is very common after a failed attack like that.
|
On March 27 2011 07:58 iExtrapolate wrote:
There were many moments in the game in which Naniwa repositioned his units to prepare for an attack at a non obvious position immediately before an attack occurred. Some people in this thread claim that this was purely intuition, but because the time at which the drop occurred and the time at which the stalkers were moved to position in which they could defend the drop was so close, if there were no map hacks, there was obviously a lot of luck involved. So the two explanations for the random preparedness of Naniwa are either that he has a great intuition and got lucky at several different times in the series or that he map hacked.
Considering that this is a tournament with a 5 figure prize pool and there is no way for the commentators to detect a map hacker, it is not without reason to assume that, in this tournament, they could exist. I think, for the sake of the legitimacy of this tournament, the replays from this series should be watched from Naniwa's vision to determine whether or not he map hacked. While I agree that it may be a little rash to outright accuse Naniwa of map hacking, it would be naive to just assume, that in all of those circumstances it was his intuition that prepared him for those non obvious attacks.
Had a fan favorite like Idra, Jinro, TLO etc done what Nani did, nobody would raise a question. But because it is Naniwa lets stir up drama and try to pin point him as a maphacker?
That is such BS, the community does not need the replays, it is TSL tournament and they (and only they) will do this on their own if they feel there is a need for it.
Again if Idra did this you would say "Best Player Ever", but alas it was someone who is not as popular or beloved so lets accuse him of cheating.
|
On March 27 2011 07:58 iExtrapolate wrote:
There were many moments in the game in which Naniwa repositioned his units to prepare for an attack at a non obvious position immediately before an attack occurred. Some people in this thread claim that this was purely intuition, but because the time at which the drop occurred and the time at which the stalkers were moved to position in which they could defend the drop was so close, if there were no map hacks, there was obviously a lot of luck involved. So the two explanations for the random preparedness of Naniwa are either that he has a great intuition and got lucky at several different times in the series or that he map hacked.
Considering that this is a tournament with a 5 figure prize pool and there is no way for the commentators to detect a map hacker, it is not without reason to assume that, in this tournament, they could exist. I think, for the sake of the legitimacy of this tournament, the replays from this series should be watched from Naniwa's vision to determine whether or not he map hacked. While I agree that it may be a little rash to outright accuse Naniwa of map hacking, it would be naive to just assume, that in all of those circumstances it was his intuition that prepared him for those non obvious attacks.
well he had the watch tower with the zealot
|
Who's in control of the facebook fanpage? It's mistakenly saying that 3 GSL champions fell in one day
|
On March 27 2011 07:58 iExtrapolate wrote:
There were many moments in the game in which Naniwa repositioned his units to prepare for an attack at a non obvious position immediately before an attack occurred. Some people in this thread claim that this was purely intuition, but because the time at which the drop occurred and the time at which the stalkers were moved to position in which they could defend the drop was so close, if there were no map hacks, there was obviously a lot of luck involved. So the two explanations for the random preparedness of Naniwa are either that he has a great intuition and got lucky at several different times in the series or that he map hacked.
Considering that this is a tournament with a 5 figure prize pool and there is no way for the commentators to detect a map hacker, it is not without reason to assume that, in this tournament, they could exist. I think, for the sake of the legitimacy of this tournament, the replays from this series should be watched from Naniwa's vision to determine whether or not he map hacked. While I agree that it may be a little rash to outright accuse Naniwa of map hacking, it would be naive to just assume, that in all of those circumstances it was his intuition that prepared him for those non obvious attacks.
i literally honestly truely LOL´d
|
On March 27 2011 08:00 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2011 07:49 absalom86 wrote:On March 27 2011 07:44 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
Goodys TvZ gives me a lot of hope for SC2 - I hope he can show as nice timings TvP as well. It seems that when the right timing is hit, mech can actually have an SC1 like quality (game 3), where a small army can actually do something...
Surprised by the results but if we get more goody TvZ from it, Im not too disappointed. I have had to revise my opinion of goody lately (started with his games vs Dimaga a couple of weeks back in the finals of some tournament). Are you going to join up with Goody and become the second master of METAL of Europe ? Maybe catch some zergs in a triangle and choke them out with the applied pressure of tank shells and thor munitions ? Is it time to flying scissor heel hook a Protoss and twist until he begs to be roasted by blue flames? Hehe, Ive been trying to mech a little again (I mean, Ive never stopped meching completely vs zerg, but its not like how I used to play back in mid 2010 when I only meched), but Im not doing so well with it right now. Dont have any of the timings down, as is to be expected, and Im in terrible shape right now for a whole bunch of reasons.
PLZ PLZ PLZ work out on those timings sir, We LOVE that style of play, especially when coming from someone like you!
|
On March 27 2011 07:58 iExtrapolate wrote:
There were many moments in the game in which Naniwa repositioned his units to prepare for an attack at a non obvious position immediately before an attack occurred. Some people in this thread claim that this was purely intuition, but because the time at which the drop occurred and the time at which the stalkers were moved to position in which they could defend the drop was so close, if there were no map hacks, there was obviously a lot of luck involved. So the two explanations for the random preparedness of Naniwa are either that he has a great intuition and got lucky at several different times in the series or that he map hacked.
Considering that this is a tournament with a 5 figure prize pool and there is no way for the commentators to detect a map hacker, it is not without reason to assume that, in this tournament, they could exist. I think, for the sake of the legitimacy of this tournament, the replays from this series should be watched from Naniwa's vision to determine whether or not he map hacked. While I agree that it may be a little rash to outright accuse Naniwa of map hacking, it would be naive to just assume, that in all of those circumstances it was his intuition that prepared him for those non obvious attacks.
Ironic, because that's exactly what you just did. You are slandering a top level player with no real evidence whatsoever that he was actually map-hacking.
|
United States15275 Posts
On March 27 2011 07:58 iExtrapolate wrote:
There were many moments in the game in which Naniwa repositioned his units to prepare for an attack at a non obvious position immediately before an attack occurred. Some people in this thread claim that this was purely intuition, but because the time at which the drop occurred and the time at which the stalkers were moved to position in which they could defend the drop was so close, if there were no map hacks, there was obviously a lot of luck involved. So the two explanations for the random preparedness of Naniwa are either that he has a great intuition and got lucky at several different times in the series or that he map hacked.
Considering that this is a tournament with a 5 figure prize pool and there is no way for the commentators to detect a map hacker, it is not without reason to assume that, in this tournament, they could exist. I think, for the sake of the legitimacy of this tournament, the replays from this series should be watched from Naniwa's vision to determine whether or not he map hacked. While I agree that it may be a little rash to outright accuse Naniwa of map hacking, it would be naive to just assume, that in all of those circumstances it was his intuition that prepared him for those non obvious attacks.
First game: Nani had a zealot at the watchtower and saw the overlords moving across the map. He even positioned his stalkers for it although they were ultimately at the wrong spot.
Second game: Nani had an observer at 11 which (once again) saw the overlords. Plus the overlords were in sight of the pylon at the edge of his base and a sacrificed/mis-rallied immortal spotted the roaches waiting there.
Third game: A mixture of common sense and good unit control. There are only two spots where Ret could attack, through the rocks and at the natural.
|
So, many people have mentioned lag as a problem for the Koreans.
While it may be a problem, decision making is a significant factor. This is some of the decision making mistakes which I think contributed a far greater element to the losses for the Korean players.
QXC vs Genius on XNC:
QXC did some nice reaper harassing against Genius.
What did Genius do? He moved his entire army across the map multiple times to deal with 1~4 reapers. This isn't a lag issue. That's poor control and decision making.
Goody vs Nestea on TalDarim (iirc):
Nestea made a good decision: counter attack. Then he proceeded to take out few or zero production facilities. That meant Goody could make about 3 siege tanks while Nestea harassed his main mineral line and killed some supply depots. Then when the roaches tried to get his natural expo, he could deal with them using siege tanks.
Goody made the amazing, or lucky, decision to lift his siege and attack Nestea's main source of income where most of his drones were (something like 40 vs the 20 at his nearly mined otu main). This effectively allowed him to get an easy win. Nestea's counter was weak, and his decision to move his army allowed him to stop Nestea from making anything. Neither of these elements had anything to do with lag, but were strategic decisions.
On XNC:
96 drones. Enough said.
There were others in the other games I am sure, but this is just to start things off a bit, and point out that there were MAJOR factors which didn't relate to lag which had a significant impact on games, and could be argued to be the deciding factor (in Nestea vs Goody at least).
3/3 upgrades vs 1 or 2/0 upgrades (Adelscott vs MVP). That's not a lag issue. That's a decision making issue. I think it also applies to QXC vs Genius. No upgrades for the Korean, good upgrades for the non-Korean. Nothing to do with lag at all.
Similarly, Genius went for phoenix vs QXC. That is a fairly micro intensive strategy. IF, that's an IF, there was lag, then deciding to go for a fairly micro intensive strategy which requires a lot of control is a pretty poor idea if you are suffering from lag. If you know that it's a problem, then deciding to go for something which makes it potentially an even bigger problem is again a poor decision.
|
On March 27 2011 07:59 allowicious wrote:Can anyone post some of the recommended games to watch? I was unable to watch it today, and don't have time to go through them all to find the good ones  .
There were a *ton* of awesome games.
From what I remember, you should absolutely go watch Goody vs Nestea game 3. The MVP vs. Adelscott series was pretty awesome too -- not to spoil anything, but it shows why upgrades are sometimes a good thing to have. 
|
On March 27 2011 07:44 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
Goodys TvZ gives me a lot of hope for SC2 - I hope he can show as nice timings TvP as well. It seems that when the right timing is hit, mech can actually have an SC1 like quality (game 3), where a small army can actually do something...
Surprised by the results but if we get more goody TvZ from it, Im not too disappointed. I have had to revise my opinion of goody lately (started with his games vs Dimaga a couple of weeks back in the finals of some tournament).
It's nice to hear opinion on TvZ mech ^_^. Does this mean we will start seeing you use more mech on TvZ? =P
|
|
|
This page should be stickied as a lesson on not feeding trolls.
|
Czech Republic50 Posts
On March 27 2011 08:03 entropius wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2011 07:59 allowicious wrote:Can anyone post some of the recommended games to watch? I was unable to watch it today, and don't have time to go through them all to find the good ones . There were a *ton* of awesome games. From what I remember, you should absolutely go watch Goody vs Nestea game 3. The MVP vs. Adelscott series was pretty awesome too -- not to spoil anything, but it shows why upgrades are sometimes a good thing to have.
upgrades are really important 
|
Does anyone believe Mvp, Nestea, Genius played well today? And therefore lost straight up? Whatever about other issues. In a gaming sense, how do you account for Mvp losing a reaper and marine to probes after 15 nexus. Is that good play or bad play? Genius fighting sieged tanks and marines vs sentries. Is that good play or bad play?
Nestea banelings vs mech. Moving spinecrawlers into sieged tanks and marines? Is that good play or bad play?
Yeah to imply Goody would tear up the GSL when players like SlayersMin, Seed and Bomber aren't even in the GSL, well is that a smart statement or a stupid statement?
Grats to the winning players today but lets not go overboard. Also realise there's the GSL World Championship beginning in two days and some of the players playing today have their mind on that competition.
|
Today's results show, more than anything, that the Korean's who played today either underestimate foreign talent or overestimate their own. There is no such thing as a free win from a foreigner anymore. I hope MC realizes this when preparing for White-Ra...
|
can anyone tell me where the vods will be posted?
|
The thing I'm liking about Goody is the fact that he is the polar opposite of a lot of the players I see in the GSL (especially Code A), that were seemingly recruited for their excellent mechanics but end up using only stale, worn out plays ("Woohoo! Another 4-gate from the Toss and SCV all-in from the Terran!") to showcase them. Goody, on the other hand, has interesting play and absolutely awful mechanics.
It remains to be seen which deficiency is easier to correct.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On March 27 2011 07:58 Dingo22 wrote:
All this rage on today's victors is silly. To blame lag for MVP's loss is dumb (Adel is in France, MVP in Korea... both played on NA servers... equal lag). The same holds true in Nestea v. Goody.
Its not equal lag, the connection between EU and US is better... But its not like the lag is as bad as a lot of people are trying to make it out to be -_-;
Its gonna play a role sometimes, but if you actually practice enough on the server to get used to how the timings differ (because the timings at which you have to do certain things ARE going to differ), it can most likely become very minimal.
When people talk about latency, it always brings to mind an article or quote I read somewhere, about how what matters the most is really not absolute latency, but rather stability. As long as you can get used to it, its not gonna be too bad for your game I think.
If your first game on NA is your TSL games, then I would say its a pretty big disadvantage but its your own fault.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
