|
Balance whining will result in a ban |
On March 28 2011 21:11 Jarlax wrote:
To answer u question - i think its weak bcoz those giant-killers ain't rly that good in my opinion. They won best out of 2 which is quite random itself - it happens that better player fuck up something but overall he is still much better player. If those "giant-killers" were rly that good they would be considered giants as well. But if u check predictions most of games like fruitdeals, idra, mvp etc had predictions around 95+ (and thats not random voting)
Use ur brain now and think why? Maybe coz those players are considered severely better? Thats why its sad state of the game where unlike in BW its easier to cheese better players (morrow so good with baneling bust for example) or just hide ur tech due to limited scouting options in sc2.
But wtvr i dont wanna agro fanboys - just pretend that its perfectly normal that 80% of stars got knocked out and enjoy rest of games.
First of all, 95% of people predicting a person to win in a poll doesn't mean that people thought there was a 95% chance the person with the votes would win; it means 95% think there was at least a 51% chance of the player winning (or they were gaming the system, but that's the minority).
And second, it's fanboys that are most angered by upsets. If people truly enjoy good games they're not fanboys...just viewers. And there weren't really that many cheesy games-2base baneling bust isn't exactly a cheese and is pretty easy to scout as T considering you have scouts, reapers, and several other ways to spot the zergs composition. I haven't watched most of day 4 yet but on day 3 the giants lost to superior play, pure and simple.
|
On March 29 2011 01:23 Drazzzt wrote:
Watch better zerg players who will hopefully be seen/developed soon enough.
This is my problem with the community mass-think on the issues with Z...
SC2 has been played for about a year now, and ever since patch 12 in beta, Zergs have been losing for seemingly no reason, and the response has been "wait for the new players to figure out how to play Zerg."
Well here we are a year later... no new players have revolutionized ZvX. Ling/Bling/Muta is still the standard composition in every MU except ZvZ namely because nothing else works, and this miracle revolution that keeps getting talked about is nowhere to be seen.
If anything, there is only stagnation of an obviously broken race that can't even shoot up. The only thing keeping Zerg alive is these minor band-aids Blizzard applies to anything BUT the worthless Hydralisk, and people try to justify Zergs overall lack-luster results as poor play on the parts of the players.
The only time a ZvX ever excites me is when the Zerg wins, because often-time, I can't even comprehend how the hell that shit just happened.
I tried to stick it out and be inventive and all that good shit until about two weeks ago... eventually, it just gets disheartening...
|
- mod edit -
Just in case!
|
I just rewatched Idra versus Cruncher Game 1 and i can say:
Moon would have crushed Cruncher.
Mondragon would have crushed Cruncher.
|
On March 29 2011 01:35 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 01:23 Drazzzt wrote:
Watch better zerg players who will hopefully be seen/developed soon enough. This is my problem with the community mass-think on the issues with Z... SC2 has been played for about a year now, and ever since patch 12 in beta, Zergs have been losing for seemingly no reason, and the response has been "wait for the new players to figure out how to play Zerg." Well here we are a year later... no new players have revolutionized ZvX. Ling/Bling/Muta is still the standard composition in every MU except ZvZ namely because nothing else works, and this miracle revolution that keeps getting talked about is nowhere to be seen. If anything, there is only stagnation of an obviously broken race that can't even shoot up. The only thing keeping Zerg alive is these minor band-aids Blizzard applies to anything BUT the worthless Hydralisk, and people try to justify Zergs overall lack-luster results as poor play on the parts of the players. The only time a ZvX ever excites me is when the Zerg wins, because often-time, I can't even comprehend how the hell that shit just happened. I tried to stick it out and be inventive and all that good shit until about two weeks ago... eventually, it just gets disheartening...
I think the Zerg metastrategy is flawed. Mass drone pumping is not a winning strategy, basically because other races can compete in macroing well enough and there is the supply cap of 200.
Example: Usually a Z FE's, if the P/T also FE's (somewhat later) 90% of Z get a quick 3rd instead of attacking/denying the expansion. However that's bad because 2 expansions to 1 expansion is a much bigger advantage than 3 expansions to 2 or 4 to 3. Additionally Zerg T1 is very cost effective, so a Zerg does not necessary need a better economy in early game to build an attacking army. There is room for agressive play round 7..10, which should be used to agressively deny the expansion of a T/P. As long the opponent is on one base, his income is capped, regardless how many probes/scv's he is building. Does the Z then need to get double the income ? I'd say no, better sloowly add drones while keep building army to deny the expansion. In case the opponent gets his exp at least, he will be partially mined out at main and you can continue by denying the 3rd.
Only agressive Zergs will be able to compete IMHO.
Passive macro zerg style works as long your opponents are weaker, however it is not rocket science to maintain a good economy, so as soon P/T counter this by macroing and teching themself, they will be at an advantage once the big battle starts because of their strong and supply efficient late game units.
|
the first 2 GSL winners has been zerg.... ?
|
On March 29 2011 01:35 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 01:23 Drazzzt wrote:
Watch better zerg players who will hopefully be seen/developed soon enough. This is my problem with the community mass-think on the issues with Z... SC2 has been played for about a year now, and ever since patch 12 in beta, Zergs have been losing for seemingly no reason, and the response has been "wait for the new players to figure out how to play Zerg." Well here we are a year later... no new players have revolutionized ZvX. Ling/Bling/Muta is still the standard composition in every MU except ZvZ namely because nothing else works, and this miracle revolution that keeps getting talked about is nowhere to be seen. If anything, there is only stagnation of an obviously broken race that can't even shoot up. The only thing keeping Zerg alive is these minor band-aids Blizzard applies to anything BUT the worthless Hydralisk, and people try to justify Zergs overall lack-luster results as poor play on the parts of the players. The only time a ZvX ever excites me is when the Zerg wins, because often-time, I can't even comprehend how the hell that shit just happened. I tried to stick it out and be inventive and all that good shit until about two weeks ago... eventually, it just gets disheartening...
From the perspective of an observer of lots of high level play, Z has done pretty well. They won MLG D.C (IdrA), though they didn't get any silvers or bronzes at the other MLGs. They've won 2 GSLs, gotten one silver, and gotten one bronze. There were two Z in the finals of Assembly. Morrow finished second a billion times during the TLOpens. Moon got silver at Assembly, with mOOnGLaDE finishing fourth.
From a (slightly) lower level perspective, I know Catz has won the justin.tv invitational and I just recently watched Sheth slaughter four ROOT members (I think) in the Ascend invitational. Last Friday Vibe also went on a tear during the Thundertoss/Ascend King of the Hill. I'm not seeing the lack of results, really, beyond maybe the TLOpens and we'll see about TSL3. I have a feeling Morrow is going to go far, and Mondragon may surprise everyone. Sen's also a wildcard.
|
On March 29 2011 01:49 Schnullerbacke13 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 01:35 Jermstuddog wrote:On March 29 2011 01:23 Drazzzt wrote:
Watch better zerg players who will hopefully be seen/developed soon enough. This is my problem with the community mass-think on the issues with Z... SC2 has been played for about a year now, and ever since patch 12 in beta, Zergs have been losing for seemingly no reason, and the response has been "wait for the new players to figure out how to play Zerg." Well here we are a year later... no new players have revolutionized ZvX. Ling/Bling/Muta is still the standard composition in every MU except ZvZ namely because nothing else works, and this miracle revolution that keeps getting talked about is nowhere to be seen. If anything, there is only stagnation of an obviously broken race that can't even shoot up. The only thing keeping Zerg alive is these minor band-aids Blizzard applies to anything BUT the worthless Hydralisk, and people try to justify Zergs overall lack-luster results as poor play on the parts of the players. The only time a ZvX ever excites me is when the Zerg wins, because often-time, I can't even comprehend how the hell that shit just happened. I tried to stick it out and be inventive and all that good shit until about two weeks ago... eventually, it just gets disheartening... I think the Zerg metastrategy is flawed. Mass drone pumping is not a winning strategy, basically because other races can compete in macroing well enough and there is the supply cap of 200. Example: Usually a Z FE's, if the P/T also FE's (somewhat later) 90% of Z get a quick 3rd instead of attacking/denying the expansion. However that's bad because 2 expansions to 1 expansion is a much bigger advantage than 3 expansions to 2 or 4 to 3. Additionally Zerg T1 is very cost effective, so a Zerg does not necessary need a better economy in early game to build an attacking army. There is room for agressive play round 7..10, which should be used to agressively deny the expansion of a T/P. As long the opponent is on one base, his income is capped, regardless how many probes/scv's he is building. Does the Z then need to get double the income ? I'd say no, better sloowly add drones while keep building army to deny the expansion. In case the opponent gets his exp at least, he will be partially mined out at main and you can continue by denying the 3rd. Only agressive Zergs will be able to compete IMHO. Passive macro zerg style works as long your opponents are weaker, however it is not rocket science to maintain a good economy, so as soon P/T counter this by macroing and teching themself, they will be at an advantage once the big battle starts because of their strong and supply efficient late game units.
too true.
but i see what he's saying that people seem unable to adapt - but it goes the same for all races. look at the amount of fail terrans just massing marauder versus protoss throughout a 40 minute game.
the high level of competition and number of tournaments has undoubtedly had a knock-on effect on this evolution. people play to win, and feel that their best chance of winning is to stick with their solid, safe and standard style.
|
IdrA would have won game 1 if he'd attacked on multiple fronts. He wasn't aggressive enough and that allowed him to get rolled as soon as Cruncher was ready.
Is it really that hard to send 24 lings at the north expo and 24 lings at the front door at the same time and then air harass or something else? Come on. IdrA completely failed in that game. He was maxed for way too long and just built more hatches instead of doing wave after wave in true Zerg swarm style.
|
On March 28 2011 21:11 Jarlax wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2011 21:01 BasilPesto wrote:
Moar like sad state of viewer in your case.
How can a tournament be weak when the remaining composition of players are full of giant-killers? With MC, it sounds like you're only watching his interviews, and not his games. Nah i watch his games - he is very good player but i dont like his attitude - i hope he wont win the tournament tho i srsly doubt anyone other then Sen got chances against him. And yes sry i forgot about Sen who is rly good as well. To answer u question - i think its weak bcoz those giant-killers ain't rly that good in my opinion. They won best out of 2 which is quite random itself - it happens that better player fuck up something but overall he is still much better player. If those "giant-killers" were rly that good they would be considered giants as well. But if u check predictions most of games like fruitdeals, idra, mvp etc had predictions around 95+ (and thats not random voting) Use ur brain now and think why? Maybe coz those players are considered severely better? Thats why its sad state of the game where unlike in BW its easier to cheese better players (morrow so good with baneling bust for example) or just hide ur tech due to limited scouting options in sc2. But wtvr i dont wanna agro fanboys - just pretend that its perfectly normal that 80% of stars got knocked out and enjoy rest of games.
I fail to see your point. None of those "giant-killers" used all-in luck based builds to win their games, and if "the much better player" fucks up enough to loose 2 games in a Bo3 of an important tourney and his opponent doesn't, then common sense tells me he is not the "much better player", at least not when the games were played, and that he deserved to loose and cannot blame the metagame for that. Even blaming it all on lag is more credible than that.
Those "stars" actually never competed against their foreign counterparts so their "star" status was all based on the fact that Ace and Moon raped IEM and that they weren't the best kors, which is reasonnable speculation, but speculation nonetheless.
Last but not least, if you consider punishing a 1rax expand with late tanks "cheese" you're definitely watching the wrong games in both BW and SC2. Semi-all-in counter plays have always been part of the game but for some reason, SC2 fans like to bitch about that endlessly. It's especially weird considering we've seen like 80% of macro games since the beggining of TSL :/
|
On March 29 2011 02:11 artanis2 wrote:
IdrA would have won game 1 if he'd attacked on multiple fronts. He wasn't aggressive enough and that allowed him to get rolled as soon as Cruncher was ready.
Is it really that hard to send 24 lings at the north expo and 24 lings at the front door at the same time and then air harass or something else? Come on. IdrA completely failed in that game. He was maxed for way too long and just built more hatches instead of doing wave after wave in true Zerg swarm style.
G1
24 lings at the front = peace out its walled off
24 lings at the north = cannons and narrow choke + voids see ya lings
Air harass, a phoenix opening completely denies this
Moving into the north choke with colissi and voids out = FF and gg
The problem is the map Z vs P. There is no way to try and properly engage the enemy unless your opponent is making mistakes, something you cant count on at the level they play at.
Think about what your saying, obviously Idra would multi prong harass if he could as thats exactly what he did in game 2 when the map actually allowed it. If the game happened on the new shakuras it may have been a little different but that is purley speculation. You really dont think a professional with complaints specifically about this strat doesn't realize the need to attack early? Attacking into a choke an losing everything kind of defeats the purpose.
Sending wave after wave only works if the map permits it or your opponent is making mistakes (Zeerax vs mon TSL compared to ace vs idra IEM look at the difference in stargate control). the level of difference in skill from zeerax vs cruncher is very apparent and when a player does it right on a map like the old shak in ZvP 1.2. I dont see a very viable solution.
a < 1 year old game is not gonna be racially and map balanced perfectly especially with the meta game shifts that frequently occur
Gotta give it to cruncher he won the series and that is ALL that matters, however, game 1 really shows how a map can fuck up the match up if compared to game 2.
|
well at least we know now that the counter too Fenix/Void is Roaches/lings
|
I just watched the VODs, and the smile made me laugh soooo hard hahahaha
I still can't believe all the assumed-best players are going down (except for MC). It's like the GSL all over again.
|
On March 29 2011 02:40 ginnipig wrote:
well at least we know now that the counter too Fenix/Void is Roaches/lings
The counter to Phoenix/Void is Queen/Spore defend & drone with a Zergling counterattack to prevent Protoss expansions. I'm pretty sure the all-out roach play was effective because Zeerax teched very hard AND took an exposed third AND threw away too many of his early units, not because he opened air.
|
On March 29 2011 02:33 mapleleafs791 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 02:11 artanis2 wrote:
IdrA would have won game 1 if he'd attacked on multiple fronts. He wasn't aggressive enough and that allowed him to get rolled as soon as Cruncher was ready.
Is it really that hard to send 24 lings at the north expo and 24 lings at the front door at the same time and then air harass or something else? Come on. IdrA completely failed in that game. He was maxed for way too long and just built more hatches instead of doing wave after wave in true Zerg swarm style. G1 24 lings at the front = peace out its walled off 24 lings at the north = cannons and narrow choke + voids see ya lings Air harass, a phoenix opening completely denies this
Yeah, except cruncher moved his entire army at once. That is the point of a multi pronged attack. Force him to defend more than one attack rather than allow him to deathball. The nice thing about 24 lings getting wiped out is you have another wave at his door 30 seconds later. Don't stop. It's cheap, it's easy. And he doesn't defend everything.
|
On March 29 2011 03:06 artanis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 02:33 mapleleafs791 wrote:On March 29 2011 02:11 artanis2 wrote:
IdrA would have won game 1 if he'd attacked on multiple fronts. He wasn't aggressive enough and that allowed him to get rolled as soon as Cruncher was ready.
Is it really that hard to send 24 lings at the north expo and 24 lings at the front door at the same time and then air harass or something else? Come on. IdrA completely failed in that game. He was maxed for way too long and just built more hatches instead of doing wave after wave in true Zerg swarm style. G1 24 lings at the front = peace out its walled off 24 lings at the north = cannons and narrow choke + voids see ya lings Air harass, a phoenix opening completely denies this Yeah, except cruncher moved his entire army at once. That is the point of a multi pronged attack. Force him to defend more than one attack rather than allow him to deathball. The nice thing about 24 lings getting wiped out is you have another wave at his door 30 seconds later. Don't stop. It's cheap, it's easy. And he doesn't defend everything.
Idra would need better multi tasking for that. Which would be unfair, he's not a pro gamer doing this for a living or anything. He went into this game naturally expecting a walkover (who doesn't?), and found out that (OMFG¿) Blizzard now put this really nasty third race in there. Who knew any of this before the game???
|
On March 29 2011 00:03 Malhorn wrote:
Very classless of Cruncher in game 3. Really hope Karma catches up to him soon. Very BM...
Are you even serious? Idra's interview "I approach this as if it was a walkover", no GGs, constant BMing.
I'm actually amazed Cruncher just did a smiley face, I'd have said something like "You were right, it really is a walkover".
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 29 2011 03:06 artanis2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2011 02:33 mapleleafs791 wrote:On March 29 2011 02:11 artanis2 wrote:
IdrA would have won game 1 if he'd attacked on multiple fronts. He wasn't aggressive enough and that allowed him to get rolled as soon as Cruncher was ready.
Is it really that hard to send 24 lings at the north expo and 24 lings at the front door at the same time and then air harass or something else? Come on. IdrA completely failed in that game. He was maxed for way too long and just built more hatches instead of doing wave after wave in true Zerg swarm style. G1 24 lings at the front = peace out its walled off 24 lings at the north = cannons and narrow choke + voids see ya lings Air harass, a phoenix opening completely denies this Yeah, except cruncher moved his entire army at once. That is the point of a multi pronged attack. Force him to defend more than one attack rather than allow him to deathball. The nice thing about 24 lings getting wiped out is you have another wave at his door 30 seconds later. Don't stop. It's cheap, it's easy. And he doesn't defend everything.
Rewatching it, i gotta say, cruncher was definitely moving his entire army. Idra definitley could have capitalized at least 1 time before a sim city response vs runbys was establised.
Still however, to have to rely on your opponent not being able to multi task as well as you is pretty weak. when nothing can shoot up and colossi outranging everything you can do damage but enging the game is difficult. As that composition rolls over anything at 200/200 you either need to do irreparable damage or its over.
even if you do minor damage, if you do not end the game before a 200/200 army is reached its gg. And on a map like shak, i would definitely put it within reason for a player to be able to just turtle up while accepting inevitable losses.
Regardless this is purely theory craft so who cares. What's done is done and i dont care because im not a pro lol. Balance does not apply to me when i play my own games.
|
IdrA is very good at reacting to their opponents play... the problem is that he reacts one game later.
|
Does anyone know why the TSL dates are so far apart? Has it always been that way?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
