EPT[GSL] July Code S ro32 Day 3 - Page 104
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
Scrandom
Canada2819 Posts
| ||
|
Clog
United States950 Posts
On July 06 2011 01:55 Toadvine wrote: This is something a lot of people who watch the game more than they play it believe, which is very understandable, because it justifies their ability to participate in threads like this. Everyone likes to believe they are informed, but that doesn't make it true. Since you seem to focus on execution, let's throw that out of the equation. Let's take chess, a game which requires no execution whatsoever, just strategy (in SC2 terms). Do you really think someone could become good at chess just by watching professionals play? Because that's what your statement implies. If watching can give you a "high understanding" of a game, then you can learn chess by watching others play. But it doesn't really work that way. Not for chess, not for anything else. Humans learn through experience first and foremost. Watching high-level SC2 games can give you a good idea as to what is good, but it won't help you understand why. You can watch Protoss players throw down a cannon after 3 gate expanding, and you can theorycraft why they do such a thing, and then you watch one of them not build the cannon, and be fine anyways - and you have no idea what the thought process is behind this decision, and it could be a plethora of different things. However, someone who plays Protoss at a high masters/GM level, and has 3 gate expanded hunderds of times against Zerg, will almost always know why, because he has experienced all the different ways the game can play out from that point. Watching SC2 only lets you know how a particular game has played out, it give you no indication of how it could have played out, and how that influences the decisions players make. It's always painful for me to read LR threads after a particularly stupid loss, because you have all these Bronze level theorycrafters smugly declaring how terrible a player's strategy was, and how he didn't use the very obvious and easy winning strategy. Pro players aren't fucking stupid, seriously. They can be wrong, and their execution can be bad, but they don't just do shit randomly, there's almost always a good reason. So, if you don't play the game at a decently high level, think your understanding of it is "good" because you watch it a lot, and you think someone just made an exceptionally stupid decision in a GSL game - then it's most likely you not understanding the game at all, rather than the pro being bad. I don't really agree with this. On a strategic level, playing the game out, and watching another person play the game out, is the same in my eyes. It's not really that hard to apply some basic laws of starcraft that become ingrained after watching so many games to the strategies the pros do. The decision making of pros isn't really something that requires some higher knowledge. It's usually pretty straightforward stuff like "Hey I'm going to get a pretty fast expansion and then bunker up to make sure I don't die." And then if tries to pressure the opponent after doing a 1 rax expand or something, you can be like "Hey, that's kind of a stupid idea. Your build doesn't allow for that." Starcraft isn't "rocket science" lol. The difficulty comes in trying to keep up with all your mechanics and multitasking while still trying to think strategically. We as observers only have to strategize which isn't hard. Of course if someone is bronze they either literally don't play or don't have that high of an understanding. But someone around diamond or so can have a better understanding than people higher ranked than them or people in masters (as an example). | ||
|
rysecake
United States2632 Posts
On July 06 2011 02:06 s4life wrote: Not really everyone, but I guess they are the most hyped players nowadays, the ones that get more invites and have longer coattails.. the problem is many new players currently in code S, A and B could kill them in any BoX. A few months from now, none will think of them as even being top 10 imho. Tides change very quickly, believe nada said that himself. At this point in time almost anyone can take a series off anyone. It's just how the game works. Though mvp, nestea, mc, mkp, bomber etc. are almost always the players whom we consider the "best" when we talk sc2. The first 3 are obvious since they're the only players with 2x titles. The rest are either very consistent (like nada), runner ups (like mkp), or very hyped through ladder (like bomber). Zenio, while very underrated, has never been considered a top tier player (cept for zvz maybe). | ||
|
snafoo
New Zealand1615 Posts
| ||
|
AsnSensation
Germany24009 Posts
MVP and Sc have been very disappointing, although sc's pick was very ballsy he should have made it through as second as everyone expected instead zenio played surprisingly well and Byun simply outplayed 2 terran considered among top 5 in the world. I guess we're still far away from a sc2 bonjwa because only regarding code, it seems soo stacked that (almost) everybody could beat anyone. tomorrow's games gonna be sick huk&MC hwaiting! | ||
|
Cel.erity
United States4890 Posts
On July 06 2011 01:51 lunchforthesky wrote: Everyone accepts that the best players in the world are MVP, Nestea, MC, MKP, Bomber.. What a ridiculous statement, of course not everybody accepts that. MC, Nestea, MVP, and MKP are the players with the best results, but not necessarily the best players at this exact moment. MVP especially is easily the most overrated player in the world; he has been losing everything and still everyone acts like he's the best Terran in the world. Bomber? He hasn't done anything besides win code A, in basically nothing but TvTs. Anyway, valid arguments can be had, but don't go speaking for everyone in the world in your posts.  | ||
|
shockaslim
United States1105 Posts
| ||
|
PartyBiscuit
Canada4525 Posts
On July 06 2011 02:32 shockaslim wrote: I don't know why people think Byun is so bad. Byun was one of my favourite players from long ago, but he has shown nothing except for a middle of the road Terran play for quite some time (Code A S1 was a joke and his Code S run has always put him as basically 3rd in his group, he only advanced in Season 2 because Idra left). Byun is/should have been considered bad relative to sC and Mvp. | ||
|
rysecake
United States2632 Posts
On July 06 2011 02:26 Cel.erity wrote: What a ridiculous statement, of course not everybody accepts that. MC, Nestea, MVP, and MKP are the players with the best results, but not necessarily the best players at this exact moment. MVP especially is easily the most overrated player in the world; he has been losing everything and still everyone acts like he's the best Terran in the world. Bomber? He hasn't done anything besides win code A, in basically nothing but TvTs. Anyway, valid arguments can be had, but don't go speaking for everyone in the world in your posts. It's nearly impossible to say who's the best player at this exact moment, thus we rely on past results. Only tangible info we have. | ||
|
Zeroxk
Norway1244 Posts
On July 06 2011 02:32 shockaslim wrote: I don't know why people think Byun is so bad. Because anyone that isn't cream of the crop is considered "bad". See TOP, Clide, Killer, Zenio etc etc | ||
|
TUski
United States1258 Posts
| ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On July 06 2011 02:13 Clog wrote: I don't really agree with this. On a strategic level, playing the game out, and watching another person play the game out, is the same in my eyes. It's not really that hard to apply some basic laws of starcraft that become ingrained after watching so many games to the strategies the pros do. The decision making of pros isn't really something that requires some higher knowledge. It's usually pretty straightforward stuff like "Hey I'm going to get a pretty fast expansion and then bunker up to make sure I don't die." And then if tries to pressure the opponent after doing a 1 rax expand or something, you can be like "Hey, that's kind of a stupid idea. Your build doesn't allow for that." Starcraft isn't "rocket science" lol. The difficulty comes in trying to keep up with all your mechanics and multitasking while still trying to think strategically. We as observers only have to strategize which isn't hard. Of course if someone is bronze they either literally don't play or don't have that high of an understanding. But someone around diamond or so can have a better understanding than people higher ranked than them or people in masters (as an example). No, just no. The fact that you believe this is a testament to the fact that you don't understand the game at all. Starcraft isn't rocket science, but it's not checkers either. There's an immense amount of builds out there, with all manner of weird or unusual key timings, and all of these interact with each other in ways which are often not intuitive at all. There is a huge amount of small, subtle differences which have a huge impact at the highest level of play. Watch something like MrBitter's 12 weeks, or Idra's commented games on his stream, and then tell me that the decision making of pros is basic SC2 logic, just pretty straightforward stuff. If you're right, then how does a player like Goody, with relatively crappy mechanics and multitasking, enjoy so much success with his mech play? If it's so easy, why can't a player with better mechanics pick up the style and do better with it? That aside, observing the game and playing it is wildly different, even if you exclude execution. For one, observing never gets the feeling of playing with limited information across. Casters sometimes discuss what a player has scouted, and what he can make of that information, but it's still wildly different. Furthermore, a casted game will never get across the entirety of a person's gameplay, it's just not possible. The main points and ideas can be grasped, but only by trying it yourself, can you begin to see the finer details. And really, it's these details that often decide the winner. Of course, a diamond player can have a better understanding of the game than a masters' player. Still, most of the time, a diamond player's opinion on the play of top pros will either be uninformed or just plain wrong. | ||
|
Contagious
United States1319 Posts
"wow.." | ||
|
DystopiaX
United States16236 Posts
| ||
|
holycrapitsTony
United States330 Posts
| ||
|
usethis2
2164 Posts
| ||
|
StarscreamG1
Portugal1653 Posts
 It's always "bad from player x" never "good from x player" | ||
|
usethis2
2164 Posts
On July 06 2011 03:26 StarscreamG1 wrote: I just saw Byun - Zenio and I'm sad about tasteless quotes It's always "bad from player x" never "good from x player"Yep. It's their "Know-it-all" attitude that bothers me most. They have zero humility despite calling themselves "professional SC2 players". And sadly they get the pass all the time whether they're right or wrong, rude or nasty. They need an open/humble mind to look at the games and strategies, executions, instead of some predetermined bias. | ||
|
QTIP.
United States2113 Posts
| ||
|
naventus
United States1337 Posts
On July 06 2011 02:13 Clog wrote: I don't really agree with this. On a strategic level, playing the game out, and watching another person play the game out, is the same in my eyes. It's not really that hard to apply some basic laws of starcraft that become ingrained after watching so many games to the strategies the pros do. The decision making of pros isn't really something that requires some higher knowledge. It's usually pretty straightforward stuff like "Hey I'm going to get a pretty fast expansion and then bunker up to make sure I don't die." And then if tries to pressure the opponent after doing a 1 rax expand or something, you can be like "Hey, that's kind of a stupid idea. Your build doesn't allow for that." Starcraft isn't "rocket science" lol. The difficulty comes in trying to keep up with all your mechanics and multitasking while still trying to think strategically. We as observers only have to strategize which isn't hard. Of course if someone is bronze they either literally don't play or don't have that high of an understanding. But someone around diamond or so can have a better understanding than people higher ranked than them or people in masters (as an example). No, you are utterly clueless. The difference is the precision of thought. When a trashcan theorycrafter like you thinks about the game, you think of it in vague heuristics like "oh I should build a bunker after expo". Or stuff like "I need to pressure him". Those ideas are garbage. They don't mean anything, they're just bullshit. But that's exactly what Toadvine was explaining, you don't actually understand the game well enough to know WHY and WHEN the bunker went up. An excellent player understands the game precisely. It's not about throwing up the bunker, but knowing the exact timings of builds. What builds do you expect off of 2 gas? Did he already show a reaper, so his timing is now adjusted? If I adjust my build, when do the medivacs come out? How does that stack up against his viking timing. Will he have 2 vikings or 1? It's the very specifics that influence how top players make decisions. It's the difference between how competitive chess you memorize precise movesets, vs mediocre players that know how pieces move and the general "idea" of a strategy (set up forks etc.) Precision wins, heuristics are the training wheels you use when you try to wrap your mind around something new. | ||
| ||
