On April 13 2011 05:18 WhiteDog wrote: That's funny. Yes it's a strategy game, but like everygame, we as viewers wants to see fair game that give credit to the one who takes risk / go deeper into thinking the build he will use / varies his plays. One cheese once in a while is good and give a lot of dynamics to the series, but damn on his 3-0 run MC does a 3 gate blink on xel naga, a 4gate on crevasse and a proxy gate on shakuras. Each time he tried to go robo he lost, each time he won it was a game with less than 10 minute with only t1 units, each time he made a nexus... ho no wait HE DID NOT MAKE ANY NEXUS IN ALL 5 GAME.
It does not feel fair, it does not feel like we are seeing the best players, it does not feel like it is the deepest starcraft 2 experience we can have.
Ok, blaming MC is bad, so we gotta blame the game ?
Making an early (first 10mins of the game) nexus in PvP usually ends in the expanding player losing. Hate the matchup, not the player.
All of this "anti-cheese whine" is getting old, it happens every single time a crowd favorite loses to it. Get a grip people.
Well said Halvorg. No offence Naz, I just think that both sides of this argument are represented well by this. MC did what he chose to to win and it worked and thats great, but I understand how one could be disappointed by that
The video show something that is illegal tactics. What did mc do that was illegal against the rule of the game?
Holy fuck did you just show me an example of cheating to compare the situations?
My IQ just dropped to 50 trying to understand your point. These situations are NOTHING alike. Trying to win and trying to win by cheating are two different worlds buddy.
Actually, it's not illegal. You get a red card and a penalty and that's it. In football if there is an attacker running alone and the last defender can't catch up, it's usually advisable to foul him. You get a red card, but they will just get a penalty kick. What he meant is that it's anti-climax I think, it would be "cheating" only if the ref hadn't seen it and even that would have been considered something you just have to use (as it can go both ways).
If it's not illegal then there would be no punishment for doing such acts. You basically proved that it was illegal. Just because the scope is limited to within the game and not always outside of the game(Red cards can affect participation in other games) you cannot say it's legal.
Just no. It's part of the game, if a player can prevent his team from getting eliminated from the world cup do you think he'd care about getting a red card? Also, partecipation for other games is only for bad behaviour (punching, spitting, hurting someone). That was just a technical "illegal" move which is completely contemplated in the game, it does not differ from cheese in any way. If your cheese gets spotted, you lose the game. If their penalty kick scores, you are in the same situation as before but with a player less. The example is more than valid in my opinion.
I'm sorry but I am battling to understand what you are trying to say. You say it's not illegal because it's "part of the game". Yet there is punishment for it and a player cannot do it without receiving this punishment(Unless ref/outside ref doesn't see). Nothing else matters. You stated that it wasn't illegal because it could be done but that isn't a valid line of reasoning. It is illegal. I never said your point of it being like cheese didn't stand, merely you were wrong about it being legal.
That being said it differs completely from being cheese. You cannot take such an arbitrary comparison and then state you have solved the mystery. That is just complete nonsense. Cheese is a concept within a strategy game. Hand balling and other illegal activities are confined within football. A direct comparison is impossible, you can make some kind of philosophical comparison but I find those rather pointless.
I'm not supporting the example, I was cheering for both. It's just that the way you think of "illegal action" is wrong, as I wrote
Again, they don't ban you from soccer for doing that. Every trainer would tell you that fouling the last man to prevent a goal is the best thing to do and they would fire you if you don't do that because it's against the rules. You get a red card but you prevent a goal, you cheese but if you fail you lose the game. The example works in my opinion.
Now you are merely talking about semantics here. Just because the punishment doesn't extend past the confines of the game doesn't mean it is legal. Let me give you a ludicrous analogy:
Cheating in junior school is legal because they just give you some form of one time punishment and remove your mark. You aren't banned from education forever.
You see how ridiculous it sounds?
The reasons it's stupid to consider that cheating is that every soccer player has fouled many times in his life, so if you follow that line of reasoning every player cheats. Basketball is the same. There are intentional fouls to stop a player from scoring in the last minutes.
Is it contemplated in the rules? Yes. Is it punished? Yes. Is it cheating? No.
Yes, every player that intentionally breaks the rules is cheating.
Well said Halvorg. No offence Naz, I just think that both sides of this argument are represented well by this. MC did what he chose to to win and it worked and thats great, but I understand how one could be disappointed by that
The video show something that is illegal tactics. What did mc do that was illegal against the rule of the game?
Holy fuck did you just show me an example of cheating to compare the situations?
My IQ just dropped to 50 trying to understand your point. These situations are NOTHING alike. Trying to win and trying to win by cheating are two different worlds buddy.
Actually, it's not illegal. You get a red card and a penalty and that's it. In football if there is an attacker running alone and the last defender can't catch up, it's usually advisable to foul him. You get a red card, but they will just get a penalty kick. What he meant is that it's anti-climax I think, it would be "cheating" only if the ref hadn't seen it and even that would have been considered something you just have to use (as it can go both ways).
If it's not illegal then there would be no punishment for doing such acts. You basically proved that it was illegal. Just because the scope is limited to within the game and not always outside of the game(Red cards can affect participation in other games) you cannot say it's legal.
Just no. It's part of the game, if a player can prevent his team from getting eliminated from the world cup do you think he'd care about getting a red card? Also, partecipation for other games is only for bad behaviour (punching, spitting, hurting someone). That was just a technical "illegal" move which is completely contemplated in the game, it does not differ from cheese in any way. If your cheese gets spotted, you lose the game. If their penalty kick scores, you are in the same situation as before but with a player less. The example is more than valid in my opinion.
I'm sorry but I am battling to understand what you are trying to say. You say it's not illegal because it's "part of the game". Yet there is punishment for it and a player cannot do it without receiving this punishment(Unless ref/outside ref doesn't see). Nothing else matters. You stated that it wasn't illegal because it could be done but that isn't a valid line of reasoning. It is illegal. I never said your point of it being like cheese didn't stand, merely you were wrong about it being legal.
That being said it differs completely from being cheese. You cannot take such an arbitrary comparison and then state you have solved the mystery. That is just complete nonsense. Cheese is a concept within a strategy game. Hand balling and other illegal activities are confined within football. A direct comparison is impossible, you can make some kind of philosophical comparison but I find those rather pointless.
I'm not supporting the example, I was cheering for both. It's just that the way you think of "illegal action" is wrong, as I wrote
Again, they don't ban you from soccer for doing that. Every trainer would tell you that fouling the last man to prevent a goal is the best thing to do and they would fire you if you don't do that because it's against the rules. You get a red card but you prevent a goal, you cheese but if you fail you lose the game. The example works in my opinion.
Now you are merely talking about semantics here. Just because the punishment doesn't extend past the confines of the game doesn't mean it is legal. Let me give you a ludicrous analogy:
Cheating in junior school is legal because they just give you some form of one time punishment and remove your mark. You aren't banned from education forever.
You see how ridiculous it sounds?
On April 13 2011 05:14 Yaotzin wrote: re: Uruguay, Suarez commited a foul, he did not cheat. They are very different things. Cheating is stuff like doping and calciopoli. Fouling OTOH is within the rules of the game (at a price, of course).
I think I should give up. Seems people have limited understanding of what rules are and what they are not. If there is punishment for an action it is against the rules of the game. There is no rule that states "you my hand ball as much as you like but there will be punishment!". The rule is "you may not hand ball. Different situations require different punishment"(Paraphrasing). I don't understand how people can say otherwise.
Anyway this point is going beyond Starcraft2 and the lovely dreamhack. Enough of this on my part
No. Cheating at school does 2 things, not 1:
If you, in plain sight of your teacher take the risk of looking at your neighbour's answers and blatantly copy them, then your analogy would be correct. However, generally cheaters do not merely cheat, they also hide this fact from the teacher. If you do that, you are attempting to subvert the rules: this is more similar to using doping.
I said the example was ridiculous. I was attempting to show how you cannot just make broad comparisons of different things then attempt to prove a point via this ludicrous comparison. So whatever meaning you take from that comparison is cool.
On April 13 2011 05:09 Spicy Pepper wrote: Some of the people bashing MC on Shakuras also cheered Dimaga against Nestea on Xelnaga. Both were calculated gambles by smart players, exploiting a weakness in their opponent.
This, foreigner goggles much? So now only foreigners are allowed to cheese? And when a korean cheeses its all "Aw he has no skill has to rely on cheese" Jeez, the amount of bias here is baffling.
Dimaga's was way better calculated then MC's. Dimaga knew from watching games from Nestea that he doesn't scout when he 14 hatches(wich he does in 90 percent of his games), so he just went for the all in and it worked.
On April 13 2011 05:18 WhiteDog wrote: That's funny. Yes it's a strategy game, but like everygame, we as viewers wants to see fair game that give credit to the one who takes risk / go deeper into thinking the build he will use / varies his plays. One cheese once in a while is good and give a lot of dynamics to the series, but damn on his 3-0 run MC does a 3 gate blink on xel naga, a 4gate on crevasse and a proxy gate on shakuras. Each time he tried to go robo he lost, each time he won it was a game with less than 10 minute with only t1 units, each time he made a nexus... ho no wait HE DID NOT MAKE ANY NEXUS IN ALL 5 GAME.
It does not feel fair, it does not feel like we are seeing the best players, it does not feel like it is the deepest starcraft 2 experience we can have.
Ok, blaming MC is bad, so we gotta blame the game ?
It's a mirror matchup how much fairer can it get buddy. What u smoking bro. U saying the last game wasn't risky? Troll.
On April 13 2011 05:00 Hot_Bid wrote:If we're ever at a point where players are just playing to entertain fans and not to win, then SC2 as an ESPORT will definitely fail.
A failure like WWE?
If the WWE was a sport then I would say it has failed. It is not a sport however it is entertainment and acting. And thus it does a good job. Saying WWE is an example of why you would rather see long macro games all the time is pretty much exactly the point people are trying to make. We want a sport not an act. As a sport we must succeed and not as an act.
MMA is a sport and there's plenty of fighters there who fight to win. As such a match that is exciting is actually exciting because you don't get to see it every single time.
THIS!!!
How often do you hear people who arnt super into MMA go "oh my god why do they lay down and hug each other i hate that. its so boring"
Yet for example, UFC, is a billion dollar company now.
Exactly. And guess what happens in the UFC?
Main event starts. Twenty seconds later, main event ends via a solid right hook to the jaw, a knee to the head, or a kick to the face causing a severe concussion.
Disappointing? You bet.
DEATH OF UFC AS WE KNOW IT? Not a chance.
This is why PPV events have several fights leading up to the main event. At least in Starcraft with a BO3 BO5 or BO7 you're guaranteed multiple games worth of content.
I don't think anyone has a problem with being disappointed at the final game. The problem is when people throw up the argument that "Cheese will be the death of SC2 E-sports!", when it's been a staple of the genre for over a decade. If you're a fan of SC2 or you've played SC2 in any competitive capacity, you know its a necessary and vital part of any arsenal.
You can't ask poker players to not go all in. You can't ask boxers to not throw haymakers in the first round of a fight. You can't ask UFC fighters to not throw hard strikes within the first 30 seconds of a fight.
On April 13 2011 05:07 Longshank wrote: Of course MC is allowed to cheese in a final game. Just as I as a spectator and fan is allowed to think less of him for doing so. I don't get what the fuss is about.
QFT
You think less of a player who's able to read his opponent correctly and respond accordingly? White Ra COULD have stopped the cheese. He didn't. It was the last thing in the world White Ra expected, which is why it was a brilliant play by MC.
Unless you honestly believe people should only be allowed to do 1 build and macro games only. It's ironic because that sounds a lot like Brood War, where foreigners didn't stand a chance against Koreans at all.
Hey, its the way i feel right now. Ofc, he did the right thing to win, and he deserves it. I dont have to be all glad about it do i? I just watch the game and express a feeling. So stop beeing all "noo you cant feel like that", thats like telling ppl to not be human.
On April 13 2011 05:18 WhiteDog wrote: That's funny. Yes it's a strategy game, but like everygame, we as viewers wants to see fair game that give credit to the one who takes risk / go deeper into thinking the build he will use / varies his plays. One cheese once in a while is good and give a lot of dynamics to the series, but damn on his 3-0 run MC does a 3 gate blink on xel naga, a 4gate on crevasse and a proxy gate on shakuras. Each time he tried to go robo he lost, each time he won it was a game with less than 10 minute with only t1 units, each time he made a nexus... ho no wait HE DID NOT MAKE ANY NEXUS IN ALL 5 GAME.
It does not feel fair, it does not feel like we are seeing the best players, it does not feel like it is the deepest starcraft 2 experience we can have.
Ok, blaming MC is bad, so we gotta blame the game ?
If you cannot understand the mind games involved with game 5, you simply aren't good/smart enough to appreciate the "deepest starcraft 2 experience we can have." That is all. Cheesing wasn't a last resort, desperate strategy in an attempt to beat a player he couldn't otherwise beat. It was a calculated move based on correctly reading his opponent.
Your correlation between macro games and interesting, skillful games is nothing but dumb. So you want tourney games to take place on the novice maps or something? Let's just say NR20 for tournament games? Would that be entertaining enough for you? SC2 is exciting to watch because of the constant threat of attack.
On April 13 2011 05:17 Hot_Bid wrote: One of the most epic games ever in BW was the one in the OSL finals where Boxer SCV+Marine rushed yellow. Crazy stuff happens.
This DH finals game 5 could have been awesome had WR not scouted a position where MC could not have spawned. He might have defended and turned the game into a really fun situation.
QFT! I never get why people in sc2 hate cheese THAT much in box tournament series. In bw lr threads their is so much hype if someone pulls out a well executed cheese and the defender tries to hang in their. In sc2 lr threads their's just hate.
I was actually pissed off for the first time watching a game tournament after all those years of doing so. I mean I probably shouldnt post here since this post is full of blind fanboyism but hey , here goes.
MC won fair and square. Cheese is part of the game and you play to win yada yada yada , totally agreed. However , this (last game) was not fun. Same way I wouldnt like IdrA to win MC by 6-pooling him I didnt enjoy MC proxy pyloning WR , especially not after those games. Granted , everyone was at the edge of their seats trying to see if WR scouts it , but thats mostly because they wanted him to scout it. I dont mind people liking this and cheering for it/him , but - for me - he didnt show the better player in those matches. I dont care what his record in PvP is , I dont care what his accomplishments are in GSL and the past , in this game we saw WR actually expand in PvP (!!!) and win , sneak probe into his enemies base with his whole army in there and win. Its just something different from the same old PvP 4g v 4g or 3g robo 3g blink etc.
Then again this is a strategy game and he clearly picked the best strategy in the 3 (maybe even 4) out of 5 games of the series. Its just kinda sad that this is what this matchup has turned into. Cut probes - win , expand - lose (most of the time) , basicly 1 base all-ins and cheese is what defines this matchup. Im a fan of blame blizzard not the player so thats excactly what Im doing: fix the god damn PvP matchup - its so damn annoying to watch!
Anyway thats just my oppinion on that feel free to disagree
On April 13 2011 05:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: After such an amazing tournament, I really can't believe how much whining we're getting about MC winning, especially since he was the huge favorite anyway. I love White-Ra, and he played incredibly well overall, but the fact that he was unable to scout his own base made him lose the game, and MC was just plain ballsy with that last move.
Cheesing isn't cheating, and you play to win. Period. If you don't like the fact that a player's top priority is to win instead of entertain you, then you probably shouldn't be watching any tournament with a prize pool. When money is on the line, players use strategies that they're comfortable with. You're not always going to see amazing games or crazy builds.
If you don't like the fact that MC tricked White-Ra in the last game, then just talk about something not related to MC. Or don't post at all. The QQ regarding MC's strategy doesn't need to be included. Post about how awesome White-Ra played overall, or how Dreamhack was an amazing tournament.
Don't post bullshit about how MC needs to cheese to win, or how he doesn't have real skill, because his achievements have already proven that he's one of the best SC2 players in the world.
so so true
Doesnt change the fact that White-Ra is the better player overall in my eyes and that MC didn't deserve the win imo.
Yep, didn't deserve the win for avoiding 4gate in the first game only to get 4gated in return. Then when they play the 4gate game, WR loses.
On April 13 2011 05:18 WhiteDog wrote: That's funny. Yes it's a strategy game, but like everygame, we as viewers wants to see fair game that give credit to the one who takes risk / go deeper into thinking the build he will use / varies his plays. One cheese once in a while is good and give a lot of dynamics to the series, but damn on his 3-0 run MC does a 3 gate blink on xel naga, a 4gate on crevasse and a proxy gate on shakuras. Each time he tried to go robo he lost, each time he won it was a game with less than 10 minute with only t1 units, each time he made a nexus... ho no wait HE DID NOT MAKE ANY NEXUS IN ALL 5 GAME.
It does not feel fair, it does not feel like we are seeing the best players, it does not feel like it is the deepest starcraft 2 experience we can have.
Ok, blaming MC is bad, so we gotta blame the game ?
The game was won the guy that took the risk and went as deep as it gets with his choice of build. There's no varied play in PvP, not gonna be until someone finds a way to hold an expo against a 4gate and stay even.
On April 13 2011 05:17 Hot_Bid wrote: One of the most epic games ever in BW was the one in the OSL finals where Boxer SCV+Marine rushed yellow. Crazy stuff happens.
This DH finals game 5 could have been awesome had WR not scouted a position where MC could not have spawned. He might have defended and turned the game into a really fun situation.
QFT! I never get why people in sc2 hate cheese THAT much in box tournament series. In bw lr threads their is so much hype if someone pulls out a well executed cheese and the defender tries to hang in their. In sc2 lr threads their's just hate.
Especially when it's a Bo5 with 0 practice/preparation time. There is almost certainly going to be at least one game where there's cheese.
On April 13 2011 05:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Don't post bullshit about how MC needs to cheese to win, or how he doesn't have real skill, because his achievements have already proven that he's one of the best SC2 players in the world.
the guy 4 gates and other all-ins like 50% of the matches. It's 6 months already and i still can't see what's the hype around him.
I think the hype surrounding him is partially due to the fact that his execution and mechanics are generally perfect, which is pretty much why he has such a high success rate when he does play a standard 4gate game like everyone else. He's able to dictate the entire game; he seems to be in charge at all times.
And obviously, plenty of other people play standard half the time too. But when you win most of your games by using any strategy, there's really no reason to change it up too often.
On April 12 2011 23:05 Sqq wrote: is 2gd the same guy that used to hoste that WoW show on esl ? Used to watch it every week til they removed his counter weight for reasons they wouldn't say.
Yep, and the "counter weight" would be matt "zalmah" or something like that.
On April 13 2011 05:09 Spicy Pepper wrote: Some of the people bashing MC on Shakuras also cheered Dimaga against Nestea on Xelnaga. Both were calculated gambles by smart players, exploiting a weakness in their opponent.
This, foreigner goggles much? So now only foreigners are allowed to cheese? And when a korean cheeses its all "Aw he has no skill has to rely on cheese" Jeez, the amount of bias here is baffling.
Dimaga's was way better calculated then MC's. Dimaga knew from watching games from Nestea that he doesn't scout when he 14 hatches(wich he does in 90 percent of his games), so he just went for the all in and it worked.
And MC knows that WR makes a 13 gateway and skips the initial zealot to get 2 stalkers later on. So apparently MC is smarter with his all-ins than Dimaga since he works off two pieces of info instead of one.
On April 13 2011 05:13 Teacher74 wrote: The whole game was about:
Whitera didn't know there were only 2 spawn positions.
Pretty much. He must have known, but I guess its easy to forget in such a high stakes game. Having played the same map tons of times before without fixed spawn positions problably doesnt help in these tense situations either. I've seen so many tournaments and cups lately were players is seemingly unaware of fixed positions on these customized standard ladder maps, but this is the first game I've seen where it seemingly directly effected the outcome.
This was the best tournament i have seen for sc2, but yet 50% of the posts are complaining about either protoss or MC. Just appreciate it, it was awesome. As for those whining about one base all-ins for PvP, i guess you dont play protoss.
On April 13 2011 05:14 Kreb wrote: I really respect Whitera seemingly not ever offensive 4gate, he do seem to think thats not how PvP is supposed to be played. But sometimes i cant stop growling a bit at his inability to switch up his style with a few cheeses or just go straight up offensive 4gates, even or clear 4gate maps such as crevasse.
But the bigger problem is that he often seems to expect the same behaviour from his opponent, and thusly he doesnt prepare enough for the other guy 4gating. We saw it against San in GSLWC and MC in TSL.
Really respect his style but i cant help feeling its a bit..... stubborn. Would really have loved to see him win. Even by cannon rushing or proxy gating.
What are you on about, one of his wins tonight was offensive 4gate.
It wasn't a straight up offensive 4gate tho. It came about 3 minutes later with more probes. I also feel tht White-ra should mix in offensive 4 gates in his play or a least a standard economic 4gate. His economic 4gate is almost a little too economic and wasn't able to hold off a well-executed 4gate from MC. An 8 probe lead is huge if he can defend, but i personally feel it's much safer to get 22 probes and than add two.
Overall the tournament was awesome, great production and great casting. However, Apollo and Demuslim seemed to lacking a bit of knowledge in PvP (which you can't really fault them for). They weren't able to pick up on certain chronoboosts of the nexus and where the 3rd pylon went down tht showed there wasn't going to be a standard offensive 4gate
EPT
