|
On September 25 2013 07:12 Darkhoarse wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? In general. However, there have been some notable instances where one player is widely considered to have played better overall than their opponent and still loses. HerO vs. Leenock in the GSL in late 2012 comes to mind, as HerO was all over the map harassing, denying bases, etc, but his MS got Neuraled and he lost.
That's when the game was an imbalanced joke though, this is a mirror matchup.
On September 25 2013 07:11 FeyFey wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? There is always the won by disconnect !
MKP knows this well
|
United States23455 Posts
On September 25 2013 07:13 Dodgin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:12 Darkhoarse wrote:On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? In general. However, there have been some notable instances where one player is widely considered to have played better overall than their opponent and still loses. HerO vs. Leenock in the GSL in late 2012 comes to mind, as HerO was all over the map harassing, denying bases, etc, but his MS got Neuraled and he lost. That's when the game was an imbalanced joke though, this is a mirror matchup.
Truth. Like I said, I agree with you 
|
On September 25 2013 07:07 Darkhoarse wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:06 NovaMB wrote:On September 25 2013 07:03 Darkhoarse wrote:
You have to be kidding. Every time people's favored players lose they have to blame the group format. This is a good format, used by the best tournaments out there. There are problems with round robin that this format addresses. If the player you wanted to win deserved to win, they could win both series, not just the first one. Not saying blaming it on the format isnt wrong, but this system has its own issues and problems and you can see them in almost every group. But unless someone has a amazing new group format it'll be stuck on this Its just this is basically the only way to keep there from being any meaningless games for any player in group stages. That has to be considered.
There are competitions where "meaningless" matches are played and there is absolutely no problem. For example in football world cup, it happens that two teams already eliminated play even if they are both eliminated and they have zero material advantages to win. BUT they are professionals so there is absolutely no problem with that.
|
On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is?
In general, I believe one can outplay his opponent and still lose. There are times when a mistake from a player can lead to and advantage for him.
I believe it was a PvP with Squirtle and someone else where just that happened. Anyone remember? Think it was on Whirlwind, and it involved proxy stargate and failure to scout main base.
|
On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is?
By outplaying generally it is meant that one player (generally the winner) showed clearly across the board better play.
For example if you have a very close TvP, and the toss manages to sneak in two HTs with a flank and storms the entire Terran army, then that was clearly a good move by the protoss, but he didn't outplay the terran. Build order wins are also not outplaying. Outplaying is more like whatever you do, your opponent is doing it better.
|
United States23455 Posts
On September 25 2013 07:14 SkullZ9 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:07 Darkhoarse wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 NovaMB wrote:On September 25 2013 07:03 Darkhoarse wrote:
You have to be kidding. Every time people's favored players lose they have to blame the group format. This is a good format, used by the best tournaments out there. There are problems with round robin that this format addresses. If the player you wanted to win deserved to win, they could win both series, not just the first one. Not saying blaming it on the format isnt wrong, but this system has its own issues and problems and you can see them in almost every group. But unless someone has a amazing new group format it'll be stuck on this Its just this is basically the only way to keep there from being any meaningless games for any player in group stages. That has to be considered. There are competitions where "meaningless" matches are played and there is absolutely no problem. For example in football world cup, it happens that two teams already eliminated play even if they are both eliminated and they have zero material advantages to win. BUT they are professionals so there is absolutely no problem with that.
Well we've had bad situations arise when there have been meaningless matches played, that's all I'm saying. Naniwa probe rush is an example.
|
On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is?
Stardust outplayed his opponents, but by the slimmest of margins. He won half his games against Welmu and against Happy he went 1-1, then a draw, and finally beat him. This is pretty much the definition of evenly matched.
|
On September 25 2013 07:14 SkullZ9 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:07 Darkhoarse wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 NovaMB wrote:On September 25 2013 07:03 Darkhoarse wrote:
You have to be kidding. Every time people's favored players lose they have to blame the group format. This is a good format, used by the best tournaments out there. There are problems with round robin that this format addresses. If the player you wanted to win deserved to win, they could win both series, not just the first one. Not saying blaming it on the format isnt wrong, but this system has its own issues and problems and you can see them in almost every group. But unless someone has a amazing new group format it'll be stuck on this Its just this is basically the only way to keep there from being any meaningless games for any player in group stages. That has to be considered. There are competitions where "meaningless" matches are played and there is absolutely no problem. For example in football world cup, it happens that two teams already eliminated play even if they are both eliminated and they have zero material advantages to win. BUT they are professionals so there is absolutely no problem with that.
Those meaningless matches aren't a problem. However in football it is a huge problem when one team still has to qualify, and the other team is already certain to go through or is eliminated. It happens often enough that that team simply doesn't care anymore, or especially if they are already sure they go to the next round they will often use a B-team.
|
United States23455 Posts
On September 25 2013 07:14 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? By outplaying generally it is meant that one player (generally the winner) showed clearly across the board better play. For example if you have a very close TvP, and the toss manages to sneak in two HTs with a flank and storms the entire Terran army, then that was clearly a good move by the protoss, but he didn't outplay the terran. Build order wins are also not outplaying. Outplaying is more like whatever you do, your opponent is doing it better.
You just cited another game that Stardust won which leads me to believe your main concern is Stardust beating Europeans, and you wouldn't mind as much if the positions were reversed.
|
On September 25 2013 07:14 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? By outplaying generally it is meant that one player (generally the winner) showed clearly across the board better play. For example if you have a very close TvP, and the toss manages to sneak in two HTs with a flank and storms the entire Terran army, then that was clearly a good move by the protoss, but he didn't outplay the terran. Build order wins are also not outplaying. Outplaying is more like whatever you do, your opponent is doing it better.
this is just semantics, because it's a video game and there are things that are strong and can quickly turn a game around you will have these moments where one player messes up and the other takes advantage like with the storm example. Even if It's just for a moment it is playing better than your opponent because if your opponent was playing better they wouldn't have let it happen.
outplaying in your definition can't exist in this game unless two players of the same race do mirror builds
|
On September 25 2013 07:14 SkullZ9 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:07 Darkhoarse wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 NovaMB wrote:On September 25 2013 07:03 Darkhoarse wrote:
You have to be kidding. Every time people's favored players lose they have to blame the group format. This is a good format, used by the best tournaments out there. There are problems with round robin that this format addresses. If the player you wanted to win deserved to win, they could win both series, not just the first one. Not saying blaming it on the format isnt wrong, but this system has its own issues and problems and you can see them in almost every group. But unless someone has a amazing new group format it'll be stuck on this Its just this is basically the only way to keep there from being any meaningless games for any player in group stages. That has to be considered. There are competitions where "meaningless" matches are played and there is absolutely no problem. For example in football world cup, it happens that two teams already eliminated play even if they are both eliminated and they have zero material advantages to win. BUT they are professionals so there is absolutely no problem with that.
The real problem imo is when the match is meaningless for one player, but decides the fate of the other.
Say player A has to win vs player B, otherwise player C will advance (due to him wining vs player B earlier).
Even though both player A and C has to play versus B, and it should be as difficult, it probably isn't. Without motivation, player B will often play worse.
This makes the format unfair in another way. Also this brings up the potential of throwing games (even when teammates games are played first).
|
On September 25 2013 07:17 Darkhoarse wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:14 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? By outplaying generally it is meant that one player (generally the winner) showed clearly across the board better play. For example if you have a very close TvP, and the toss manages to sneak in two HTs with a flank and storms the entire Terran army, then that was clearly a good move by the protoss, but he didn't outplay the terran. Build order wins are also not outplaying. Outplaying is more like whatever you do, your opponent is doing it better. You just cited another game that Stardust won which leads me to believe your main concern is Stardust beating Europeans, and you wouldn't mind as much if the positions were reversed.
If positions were reversed I wouldn't have gone to the forums claiming he got outplayed. I would have been happier if he would have lost.
But did that HT flank happen? Well it happens often enough, but I don't really remember it from these games.
Anyway also fairly irrelevant, since that wasn't the topic.
|
On September 25 2013 07:15 Darkhoarse wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:14 SkullZ9 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Darkhoarse wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 NovaMB wrote:On September 25 2013 07:03 Darkhoarse wrote:
You have to be kidding. Every time people's favored players lose they have to blame the group format. This is a good format, used by the best tournaments out there. There are problems with round robin that this format addresses. If the player you wanted to win deserved to win, they could win both series, not just the first one. Not saying blaming it on the format isnt wrong, but this system has its own issues and problems and you can see them in almost every group. But unless someone has a amazing new group format it'll be stuck on this Its just this is basically the only way to keep there from being any meaningless games for any player in group stages. That has to be considered. There are competitions where "meaningless" matches are played and there is absolutely no problem. For example in football world cup, it happens that two teams already eliminated play even if they are both eliminated and they have zero material advantages to win. BUT they are professionals so there is absolutely no problem with that. Well we've had bad situations arise when there have been meaningless matches played, that's all I'm saying. Naniwa probe rush is an example.
Yea I think GSL style groups are the way to go. The only way full round robin can be maybe better is if you give cash prizes for each match, like NASL did in their last season. I think they gave like $100 per match, so even if both players were out they still had something to play for.
|
United States23455 Posts
On September 25 2013 07:18 DJHelium wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:14 SkullZ9 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Darkhoarse wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 NovaMB wrote:On September 25 2013 07:03 Darkhoarse wrote:
You have to be kidding. Every time people's favored players lose they have to blame the group format. This is a good format, used by the best tournaments out there. There are problems with round robin that this format addresses. If the player you wanted to win deserved to win, they could win both series, not just the first one. Not saying blaming it on the format isnt wrong, but this system has its own issues and problems and you can see them in almost every group. But unless someone has a amazing new group format it'll be stuck on this Its just this is basically the only way to keep there from being any meaningless games for any player in group stages. That has to be considered. There are competitions where "meaningless" matches are played and there is absolutely no problem. For example in football world cup, it happens that two teams already eliminated play even if they are both eliminated and they have zero material advantages to win. BUT they are professionals so there is absolutely no problem with that. The real problem imo is when the match is meaningless for one player, but decides the fate of the other. Say player A has to win vs player B, otherwise player C will advance (due to him wining vs player B earlier). Even though both player A and C has to play versus B, and it should be as difficult, it probably isn't. Without motivation, player B will often play worse. This makes the format unfair in another way. Also this brings up the potential of throwing games (even when teammates games are played first).
Agreed. Even if this does not happen, there are opportunities for accusations to arise against a player for playing poorly on purpose in a meaningless game.
FOR EXAMPLE just a few weeks ago at Dreamhack, Huk accused Life of "throwing" a series against Stardust that would allow him to advance because the game was meaningless for Life and only decided Huk's and SD's fate.
Life of course had no reason to know that he was already safe, but the idea that accusations can arise in round robin style group play is obvious.
|
On September 25 2013 07:18 Dodgin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:14 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? By outplaying generally it is meant that one player (generally the winner) showed clearly across the board better play. For example if you have a very close TvP, and the toss manages to sneak in two HTs with a flank and storms the entire Terran army, then that was clearly a good move by the protoss, but he didn't outplay the terran. Build order wins are also not outplaying. Outplaying is more like whatever you do, your opponent is doing it better. this is just semantics, because it's a video game and there are things that are strong and can quickly turn a game around you will have these moments where one player messes up and the other takes advantage like with the storm example. Even if It's just for a moment it is playing better than your opponent because if your opponent was playing better they wouldn't have let it happen. outplaying in your definition can't exist in this game unless two players of the same race do mirror builds
ZvT example:
You try to drop, he intercepts pretty much every drop. You attack, he flanks you. You try to deny one of his bases, you fail. Then you are being outplayed (assuming the zerg doesn't screw up his macro behind that). Really this isn't rocket science. And it is not my definition, it is the general definition used by everyone who doesn't randomly use the word...
|
United States23455 Posts
On September 25 2013 07:19 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:17 Darkhoarse wrote:On September 25 2013 07:14 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? By outplaying generally it is meant that one player (generally the winner) showed clearly across the board better play. For example if you have a very close TvP, and the toss manages to sneak in two HTs with a flank and storms the entire Terran army, then that was clearly a good move by the protoss, but he didn't outplay the terran. Build order wins are also not outplaying. Outplaying is more like whatever you do, your opponent is doing it better. You just cited another game that Stardust won which leads me to believe your main concern is Stardust beating Europeans, and you wouldn't mind as much if the positions were reversed. If positions were reversed I wouldn't have gone to the forums claiming he got outplayed. I would have been happier if he would have lost. But did that HT flank happen? Well it happens often enough, but I don't really remember it from these games. Anyway also fairly irrelevant, since that wasn't the topic.
SD won with a HT flank storming Kas's whole army to advance over Kas in the ro32, which sparked the same argument in the forum "Well Kas won the first series so GSL group system sucks". and "SD got lucky with the storm flank Kas was playing better".
|
On September 25 2013 07:22 Darkhoarse wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:19 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:17 Darkhoarse wrote:On September 25 2013 07:14 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:
[quote]
Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? By outplaying generally it is meant that one player (generally the winner) showed clearly across the board better play. For example if you have a very close TvP, and the toss manages to sneak in two HTs with a flank and storms the entire Terran army, then that was clearly a good move by the protoss, but he didn't outplay the terran. Build order wins are also not outplaying. Outplaying is more like whatever you do, your opponent is doing it better. You just cited another game that Stardust won which leads me to believe your main concern is Stardust beating Europeans, and you wouldn't mind as much if the positions were reversed. If positions were reversed I wouldn't have gone to the forums claiming he got outplayed. I would have been happier if he would have lost. But did that HT flank happen? Well it happens often enough, but I don't really remember it from these games. Anyway also fairly irrelevant, since that wasn't the topic. SD won with a HT flank storming Kas's whole army to advance over Kas in the ro32, which sparked the same argument in the forum "Well Kas won the first series so GSL group system sucks". and "SD got lucky with the storm flank Kas was playing better".
And how is that related to your accusation regarding these games?
|
United States23455 Posts
On September 25 2013 07:24 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:22 Darkhoarse wrote:On September 25 2013 07:19 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:17 Darkhoarse wrote:On September 25 2013 07:14 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:
[quote]
He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? By outplaying generally it is meant that one player (generally the winner) showed clearly across the board better play. For example if you have a very close TvP, and the toss manages to sneak in two HTs with a flank and storms the entire Terran army, then that was clearly a good move by the protoss, but he didn't outplay the terran. Build order wins are also not outplaying. Outplaying is more like whatever you do, your opponent is doing it better. You just cited another game that Stardust won which leads me to believe your main concern is Stardust beating Europeans, and you wouldn't mind as much if the positions were reversed. If positions were reversed I wouldn't have gone to the forums claiming he got outplayed. I would have been happier if he would have lost. But did that HT flank happen? Well it happens often enough, but I don't really remember it from these games. Anyway also fairly irrelevant, since that wasn't the topic. SD won with a HT flank storming Kas's whole army to advance over Kas in the ro32, which sparked the same argument in the forum "Well Kas won the first series so GSL group system sucks". and "SD got lucky with the storm flank Kas was playing better". And how is that related to your accusation regarding these games?
I believe you are the one making an accusation, which is that Stardust did not outplay his opponents in these games. I am not making any accusation. I'm just saying that SD did in fact outplay his opponents. He won.
|
On September 25 2013 07:21 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:18 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:14 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:01 jonich0n wrote:
gj Stardust def outplayed both Welmu and Happy today Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? By outplaying generally it is meant that one player (generally the winner) showed clearly across the board better play. For example if you have a very close TvP, and the toss manages to sneak in two HTs with a flank and storms the entire Terran army, then that was clearly a good move by the protoss, but he didn't outplay the terran. Build order wins are also not outplaying. Outplaying is more like whatever you do, your opponent is doing it better. this is just semantics, because it's a video game and there are things that are strong and can quickly turn a game around you will have these moments where one player messes up and the other takes advantage like with the storm example. Even if It's just for a moment it is playing better than your opponent because if your opponent was playing better they wouldn't have let it happen. outplaying in your definition can't exist in this game unless two players of the same race do mirror builds ZvT example: You try to drop, he intercepts pretty much every drop. You attack, he flanks you. You try to deny one of his bases, you fail. Then you are being outplayed (assuming the zerg doesn't screw up his macro behind that). Really this isn't rocket science. And it is not my definition, it is the general definition used by everyone who doesn't randomly use the word...
no It's just your subjective bias as to what constitutes as " outplaying "
|
On September 25 2013 07:28 Dodgin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2013 07:21 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:18 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:14 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:10 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:09 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:07 Dodgin wrote:On September 25 2013 07:06 Sissors wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 lolfail9001 wrote:On September 25 2013 07:04 Sissors wrote:
[quote]
Wait what? Are you serious here? He did in the end. And thats probably why he said 'today' and not 'in the end', right? And outplaying Happy? It was more Happy made a few critical mistakes with his bunkers, but I wouldn't call that outplaying from Stardust. Not to mention he came close enough to winning the tie. I'M PRETTY SURE if you won the game you outplayed your opponent pretty sure I mean I could be wrong Yeah better bet on that last one. With outplaying your opponent not the same as winning is meant. So yeah... But if you won the game you played better than your opponent did, isn't that what outplaying is? By outplaying generally it is meant that one player (generally the winner) showed clearly across the board better play. For example if you have a very close TvP, and the toss manages to sneak in two HTs with a flank and storms the entire Terran army, then that was clearly a good move by the protoss, but he didn't outplay the terran. Build order wins are also not outplaying. Outplaying is more like whatever you do, your opponent is doing it better. this is just semantics, because it's a video game and there are things that are strong and can quickly turn a game around you will have these moments where one player messes up and the other takes advantage like with the storm example. Even if It's just for a moment it is playing better than your opponent because if your opponent was playing better they wouldn't have let it happen. outplaying in your definition can't exist in this game unless two players of the same race do mirror builds ZvT example: You try to drop, he intercepts pretty much every drop. You attack, he flanks you. You try to deny one of his bases, you fail. Then you are being outplayed (assuming the zerg doesn't screw up his macro behind that). Really this isn't rocket science. And it is not my definition, it is the general definition used by everyone who doesn't randomly use the word... no It's just your subjective bias as to what constitutes as " outplaying "
Objectively, you would agree that Stardust tied for worst player in the group in a bo3?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
