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.
User was banned for this post.
i assure you i do not maphack.
If you where, i bet you would have reacted different to metalopolis
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.
User was banned for this post.
i assure you i do not maphack.
ofc u don't, i mean his arguments are just completely BAD, you had that hero zealot at the tower
While I don't think Nani was cheating, given that this is not a controlled environment (like GSL/MLG) and there is a lot of money at hand, it would be prudent to make ALL replays public, so they can be 'audited' for cheating. There is quite a bit that you can tell from the player cam from a replay and one can make a reasonable argument regarding map hacks if they were cheating with this information available.
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.
Are you serious?
I asked a similar question a few days ago... and you asked this same question? "Are you serious?"
Yes, people are serious about this. Why are you so sure this doesn't happen? Or are you just trying to shame skeptics from asking questions?
You should follow up with......
"The reason I/we are sure that map hacking does not occur is because......."
please fill in the blank..seriously!
Way to interpret the post incorrectly. Read that ridiculous posts again and tell me it's a serious hacking accusation.
It's a mild, ridiculous hacking accusation by someone who either didn't watch the games or knows little about how the game works.
Err... it's written pretty seriously isn't it?
I don't like how mods read posts and automatically assume troll... although in this case I'm giving everyone the benefit of the doubt because I'm horrible at reading into things online.
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.
Problem from korea is that they seem to have higher latency but also more jitter. Jitter is when packets are sent/arrive in clumps instead of a steady rate, a high ping is playable but with jitter and packet loss it's more or less impossible.
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.
User was banned for this post.
i assure you i do not maphack.
Congratulations on your win. I must say I was rooting for Ret, but you played better. /tips hat
On March 27 2011 08:04 Logo2010 wrote: 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.
Didnt see MVPs games, but he does seem to have a tough time v Ps lately (1-2 alica, 0-2 genius to drop down to Code A)....
Only saw the last game for Genius vs QXC, but it seemed to me like Genius hadnt really adapted to the new patch very well (I think upgrades are a lot more important than they ever were, having a shit-ton of gas saved up for templars isnt really as good now for obvious reasons).
Missed most of game 2 of nestea vs goody, but well... He did seem to waste an awful lot of stuff, but I dont think he played so bad that you need to take anything away from Goody - Nestea doesnt play flawlessly in other games either.
As for dominating GSL, no I dont think Goody would do that - if he wins this TSL, yes we can start thinking about it but he has a lot of rounds left to go.
I mean, these are all good players that are losing, really big ones actually but... Come on, last GSL results for players in TSL: Me: Ro16 Boxer: Out in groups, down to code A Nestea: Out in groups, retained code S MVP: Out in groups, down to code A Fruitdealer: Out in groups, retained code S Genius: Out in groups, retained code S NaDa: RO8 MC: Won last GSL HuK: Made code S
I think all we can take from this is that 1) SC2 is currently really volatile in terms of players form changing really quickly from day to day, and the game is perhaps not as well figured out as we sometimes like to think. 2) The guys that won played good.
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.
Problem from korea is that they seem to have higher latency but also more jitter. Jitter is when packets are sent/arrive in clumps instead of a steady rate, a high ping is playable but with jitter and packet loss it's more or less impossible.
Ive had days where this happens (ie the game will freeze for a second), but not lately...
On March 27 2011 08:03 Lonyo wrote: 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).
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.
I agree with all of the things you have said, yet still believe lag played some part in determining the outcome of some games.
It seemed like it was the bad decision making of the Korean pros that allowed for lag to be an issue.
After holding Adelscott's push beautifully, MVP had the choice to counter or hold his gold comfortably. He chose to counter, and was held. However, if you watch his counter attack, he doesn't even bother to micro his marauders. I 100% believe that to be because of lag (MC in his interview said he chose to use 1a strategies because he didn't want to try to micro with lag. BoxeR said he will only use non-micro intensive strategies as well.
In the same game, MVP allows his reaper to be surrounded by probes. How many times have we seen him in a similar (or less advantageous) position in the GSL slaughter someone for their error? Instead, he kills one probes, uberfails at kiting, and is surrounded by probes. The same happens with an SCV. Pro players in Korea simply don't make those mistakes, especially not of MVP's level. After the reaper fail, I imagine that discourage MVP from even attempting to micro his marauders in later fights (he didn't, and it's something he's well known for in Korea). MVP lost this game for bad decisions, but in a lag free environment, I don't think it beyond reason to say they wouldn't have bitten him in the ass.
In game 1, MVP stimmed all of his bio (late, after the Protoss had already pulled his army back), and got them all caught by the forcefields. Sure, you could chalk that up to bad play. But given how well MVP fought back for the rest of the game (and, like in game 2, avoiding microing his units intensely), I don't think a player like MVP made that awful of a timing mistake.
Straight up, QXC outplayed Genius in the late game. That is undeniable. However, with better latency (especially on XNC with some early forcefields) Genius would not have let it get to that point. Most notably, that hideous forcefield at the natural which not only failed to defend his nexus and trap units, but stopped him from defending it. Again, you could say that's bad play, but the hilariously terrible forcefields that littered the rest of the game lead me to believe otherwise.
QXC won just about every single HT vs Ghost battle in that game. QXC is good, but the odds of winning every single one, as handily as he did? Again, unlikely.
NesTea had some ugly micro mistakes, which I doubt weren't even slightly lag influenced, but quite frankly he lost because of terrible decision making in game 3.
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).
He has been playing very well and been a top euro since release, i don't know how people can underrate him so much.
Unfortunately, Goody's mechanics are truly sub-par, barely diamond league level if you ask me (he spent most of game 3 supply blocked at 110 with units queue'd), but he has truly top terran decision making.
As many of the pros have said, StarCraft 2 is a much less mechanically based game, and allows for strategy to beat out mechanics. Goody is solid proof of that statement, as he has shown through his results (like it or not, qualifying alone for the TSL counts as some results- plus check his other tournaments) that his decision making beats out the better mechanics of other players. + Show Spoiler +
and conversely, NesTea threw the series away with BAD decision making
I'd love to see the accepted best players in the world adapt to try his style. HINT JINRO <33333333
Goodys strength lies within his pushing skills with his tanks, weakness is definatly his mutlitasking. His precision and thought throughness of his positioning make up for it, mostly, which i think is awesome.
Goody's precision and thought thoroughness equals my SC BW precision and thought thoroughness when playing BGH and pushing with 200 battlecruisers.
Disregarding his macro and multitasking, his gameplan is non-existent, his decision making is god-awful and generally speaking his overall gameplay is coarse to say the least.
I like how you are actually trying to compare yourself with goody.
Come back when you have even close to as an impressive resume as goody: + Show Spoiler +
Achievements:
# 1st place CraftCup #24 | # 3rd place Close Combat #27 | # 1st place Close Combat #26 | # 1st place Competo Cup #20 | # 2nd place Competo Cup #19 # 1st place Craft Cup #23 | # 1st place Puchar Raynora #2 # 4th place EPS Germany Season 17 | # 2nd place Cerberus 3D Cup #1 | # 2nd place Go4SC2 November Finals # 1st place DreamHack Winter 2010 BYOC Qualifier #4 | # 2nd place Go4SC2 Cup #57 # 4th place Close Combat #23 # 1st place ZOTAC Cup #30 | # 1st place Craft Cup #17 | # 1st place Close Combat #20 | # 1st place SC2-inside Cyborg Cup #2 | # 3rd place Close Combat #18 | # 4th place 4players.de ESET Cup # 2nd place Close Combat #17 | # 3rd place 4players.de Close Combat #16 # 2nd place 4players.de Close Combat #15 # 1st place Close Combat #14 | # 1st place Close Combat #12 | # 1st place Close Combat #10 | # 1st place Close Combat #9 | # 3rd place Close Combat #3 | # 1st place Go4SC2 Cup #47 | # 2nd place Go4SC2 Cup #46 # 3rd place 4players.de SC 1on1 CC tournament # 2nd place EU CraftCup #6 # 1st place Competo Cup #2 | # 1st place ESL Ger PC Games #1 # 2nd place ESL Late Night Cup #1 (BETA) # 1st place Competo Cup #1 (BETA) # 3rd place Go4SC2 Cup #12 (BETA) # 1st place ZOTAC Cup #6 (BETA) # 1st place CSN Euro Summer Rush # 1st place 4players.de Close Combat #2
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.
User was banned for this post.
i assure you i do not maphack.
Do you think its possible that someone could maphack and get away with it in an online tourney? Is a question worth discussing? Or are people just paranoid?
I went 3/4 on my liquidbet tonight. Only missed on qxc's game, he has obviously improved by playing in europe.
You are somehow proud you called goody vs nestea, fluke of the century. Go watch some of Goody's matches on gosugamers, and then come back and seriously tell me he is at half the level nestea is.
What? How is he proud for one, and two, whaaaaaat? I also "called" GoOdy over NesTea because I'm smart
No that is called luck, Goody would lose first round in Code A 9 out of 10 times.
You seriously underestimate him. As most of his opponents do if they have never played him before.
I've watched many of his games on gosugamers, I thought he was a low tier amateur then, and I still think he is now. You say under estimated, I say many people watch his games and realize hes bad. I agree with that majority.
You are wrong. Goody has many flaws in his game, but he still defeats players who macro perfectly. No one cares if you think that someone is bad, if the one is winning tournaments left and right and defeating all top players (especially in TvT). I would bet on Goody in every TvT in the GSL, because you can't drop him and you can't play with mass marines against him and that's what all Koreans are doing right now. He also showed that he can take down the best Zerg players.
Goody. Beating "all top players". in GSL. Look at this statistically, he has accomplished next to nothing before this tournament. He has yet to prove that he's not just some outlying statistic. Quick to jump on the bandwagon much.
Wtf, next to nothing? He won by far the most tournaments in Europe this month and no Terran is able to stop him.
I think Goody's playstyle is successful because of
1st: Its safe, low risk, so he can deliver constant results, that's why he is performing that well in tourneys. On the ladder you may play with high risk and still get a decent winrate. In a tourney you have to play consistent and safe (because if you loose 1 of 3 games (=66% winrate!) you are out).
2cnd: Its static and positional, so he is rather immune against lag, misclicks and human failure.
Goody's style does not depend on luck and chance as most of the build played out there.
This had me laughing so much when he zoomed in on the scv's and tanks producing. At first he has 3 on cue and then he adds 2 more cause you can never be sure if you might become alzheimers and forget to macro for 5 minutes
On March 27 2011 08:05 Liquid`Jinro wrote: 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.
This should be posted at the top of every live report thread for the TSL, just so the threads aren't full of 400 pages of lag complaints.
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).
He has been playing very well and been a top euro since release, i don't know how people can underrate him so much.
Unfortunately, Goody's mechanics are truly sub-par, barely diamond league level if you ask me (he spent most of game 3 supply blocked at 110 with units queue'd), but he has truly top terran decision making.
As many of the pros have said, StarCraft 2 is a much less mechanically based game, and allows for strategy to beat out mechanics. Goody is solid proof of that statement, as he has shown through his results (like it or not, qualifying alone for the TSL counts as some results- plus check his other tournaments) that his decision making beats out the better mechanics of other players. + Show Spoiler +
and conversely, NesTea threw the series away with BAD decision making
I'd love to see the accepted best players in the world adapt to try his style. HINT JINRO <33333333
Goodys strength lies within his pushing skills with his tanks, weakness is definatly his mutlitasking. His precision and thought throughness of his positioning make up for it, mostly, which i think is awesome.
Goody's precision and thought thoroughness equals my SC BW precision and thought thoroughness when playing BGH and pushing with 200 battlecruisers.
Disregarding his macro and multitasking, his gameplan is non-existent, his decision making is god-awful and generally speaking his overall gameplay is coarse to say the least.
I'm ashamed people on TL actually give him credit for winning.
I somehow didn't like Goody either, because of him getting supply blocked a lot and queuing units to no end. Yet he seems to win a lot of games. I doubt it is all based on luck. And if Goody is such a bad player and so easy to beat, then his opponents are just worse than him.
Yeah, there is a lot to dislike and critisize about him - but you got to admit that he knows how to win games.
EPT
