|
|
I expect Nani to completely throw the series... he tweeted earlier that he's in his hotel room ordering room service and playing League.
Btw how do I embed tweets in a Teamliquid post? I'm really bad at the internet
|
On March 14 2014 19:47 KoRStarvid wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2014 19:42 partydude89 wrote:On March 14 2014 19:35 vthree wrote:On March 14 2014 19:30 partydude89 wrote:On March 14 2014 19:22 Caihead wrote:On March 14 2014 19:09 partydude89 wrote:On March 14 2014 19:03 KoRStarvid wrote:On March 14 2014 18:54 Caihead wrote:On March 14 2014 18:51 Zealously wrote:On March 14 2014 18:47 Caihead wrote:
[quote]
That game was exciting because Rain made so many mistakes, I don't see how you can really debate that. Had he not made those mistakes he would have taken a 4th, gotten starports up, and had the ability to counter the muta follow up and won easily. You could easily make the argument that most players wouldn't have gotten lings into Rain's bases and that Rogue being pretty good at Starcraft is what allowed him to. But people prefer to call everything throws. I think people are very biased against PvZ because they've seen a bunch of terrible games and thus can't appreciate a game of PvZ when it's actually good. It's fine to think that the game wasn't good, but saying it was all about the lings and nothing else is selling it pretty short What? Are you being real right now, Rain didn't block the choke with a zealot properly, repeatedly even after he noticed it, no amount of Rogue being a good player would have made his lings magically pass through a pylon zealot wall. If a terran made a depot wall that wasn't ling proof and loses 20 scvs to just speedlings you would say the same thing that the terran made a mistake. I really have to +1 this. A zealot in wrong position can in no way be directly correlated to anything that Rogue did. Rogue is really good and jumped on the opportunity, but the blame is on Rain in this case. I really have to -1 this. What he's saying is that rouge chose to go in with lings at the correct moment. and i know that if i had just gotten lings into a protoss main then i would figure he would be prepared for the next time with a zealot. Rouge took the opportunity in assuming he wasn't ready. For example, how many times in PvT have you seen protoss players with an empty warp prism just sitting there while they turtle up with their deathball army. a lot of times, they don't take the opportunity to put a few extra HT into the warp prisms and go for storm drops. does that mean their opponent is bad if they can't defend it perfectly? no, it means that the protoss player was playing well and used the units he had to their fullest potential. It's all about perspective, you can choose to believe that one player played really well, or another played terribly. In a game like Starcraft, it's impossible to play an absolutely perfect game, so why not focus on what a player did well, then what another player did poorly? I'm not detracting from the fact that Rogue is a good player, I'm saying that the game was exciting because Rain made critical mistakes that "normally" don't occur because progamers usually don't make mistakes like that, where as the standard defensive play in PvZ usually gravitates towards in what people consider boring strategies (i.e. SH) due to the zerg being unable to capitalize on said mistakes. I think it's safe to say that people appreciate spectacle in competition the most if all parties are performing at their best and when there is no mental detraction in the back of your mind saying "wow this player made such uncharacteristic mistakes, I wish I could see these two play at their best". There is a valid complaint if players playing their best gravitates towards games with samey strategies like BL/Infestor or SH/viper/corrupter instead of a game with loads of base snipes, action all over the map, tech switches, etc. There will always be mistakes with players. i'm sure if i went through all the Rain Vods right now, i would find a few games where his zealot wasn't on hold postion/ in the correct postion. And i'm sure that in most of these Vods, it wasn't capitalized on by the zerg player, and had i not told you that this mistake was made, you would of told me he played great that game. In PvZ I see a lot of times where the Protoss player goes for an allin vs zerg, like immortal sentry or with other units. and sometimes, if you're watching very VERY carefully, you will see them forget a warp in cycle.. Now most people aren't watching that part, and if the protoss wins the game, you would say they still played well. Players will make mistakes, thats a natural part of playing this game. Whether it be with decsion making, macro or micro, it happens, by every player, in every game. So why not focus on the good, not the bad? rouge could of chose to poke in and out of the third trying to get a few probes, he could of kept them at home, but he made a great decsion. It was great on his part, not bad on rains. I disagree. Although all terrans pros have failed splitting vs banes at some points, when it happens in game, it is still a 'mistake' by that player. Same with things like losing oracles, failing forcefields. Yes, these mistakes will always happen but that shouldn't make us stop calling them as mistakes. Thats a difference in perspective, which is fine. Both sides have merits to them, and it really is just perspective. What really got me angry was people like Calihead saying "are you for real now" to zealously when he brought up a perfectly valid argument. it's fine to disagree, but you shouldn't try and invalidate someones argument because you personally don't agree with it. What? If you can rationally invalidate an argument, then why shouldn't you? Or are you saying that we shouldn't use such rethorics?
We are litterally talking about perspective here. you can't really argue how someone looks at specific senerios. You shouldn't say someone is wrong for how they look at situations. you can disagree personally, sure, but you shouldn't say they are wrong for how they approach the senerio.
|
Austria24422 Posts
On March 14 2014 19:49 Penguinator wrote:
I expect Nani to completely throw the series... he tweeted earlier that he's in his hotel room ordering room service and playing League.
Btw how do I embed tweets in a Teamliquid post? I'm really bad at the internet
You just post the twitter link like this:
|
|
|
Now he´s just beeing a drama queen... like "Look everyone how I do not care at all about SC 2". He wants to retire? Fine! But stop trying to ruin the game for everyone else.
|
Naniwa has always been a drama queen so no suprise there
|
The only moral thing for Nani to do is Probe Rush 2.0
|
On March 14 2014 19:58 JoeCool wrote:Now he´s just beeing a drama queen... like "Look everyone how I do not care at all about SC 2". He wants to retire? Fine! But stop trying to ruin the game for everyone else.
Ret agrees
|
Cant be Carmac atleast.
Looks like caster money made Ret speak the truth
|
On March 14 2014 20:00 Nirel wrote:
The only moral thing for Nani to do is Probe Rush 2.0
I really want this to happen. That kind of drama could save sc2.
|
|
|
Don't they know SC2 is a ded gaem though?
|
On March 14 2014 20:09 Penguinator wrote:Don't they know SC2 is a ded gaem though?
Yeah, they are there for CSGO
|
Austria24422 Posts
On March 14 2014 20:08 NovaMB wrote:![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BirrC3ZCcAAvWQI.jpg:large) The line outside Spodek arena
It looks much better if you don't know that there's LoL at IEM too
It's like that cute girl in a bar smiling and waving at you... only not really you but the handsome, rich guy behind you.
|
Sweden767 Posts
On March 14 2014 19:49 partydude89 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2014 19:47 KoRStarvid wrote:On March 14 2014 19:42 partydude89 wrote:On March 14 2014 19:35 vthree wrote:On March 14 2014 19:30 partydude89 wrote:On March 14 2014 19:22 Caihead wrote:On March 14 2014 19:09 partydude89 wrote:On March 14 2014 19:03 KoRStarvid wrote:On March 14 2014 18:54 Caihead wrote:On March 14 2014 18:51 Zealously wrote:
[quote]
You could easily make the argument that most players wouldn't have gotten lings into Rain's bases and that Rogue being pretty good at Starcraft is what allowed him to. But people prefer to call everything throws. I think people are very biased against PvZ because they've seen a bunch of terrible games and thus can't appreciate a game of PvZ when it's actually good. It's fine to think that the game wasn't good, but saying it was all about the lings and nothing else is selling it pretty short What? Are you being real right now, Rain didn't block the choke with a zealot properly, repeatedly even after he noticed it, no amount of Rogue being a good player would have made his lings magically pass through a pylon zealot wall. If a terran made a depot wall that wasn't ling proof and loses 20 scvs to just speedlings you would say the same thing that the terran made a mistake. I really have to +1 this. A zealot in wrong position can in no way be directly correlated to anything that Rogue did. Rogue is really good and jumped on the opportunity, but the blame is on Rain in this case. I really have to -1 this. What he's saying is that rouge chose to go in with lings at the correct moment. and i know that if i had just gotten lings into a protoss main then i would figure he would be prepared for the next time with a zealot. Rouge took the opportunity in assuming he wasn't ready. For example, how many times in PvT have you seen protoss players with an empty warp prism just sitting there while they turtle up with their deathball army. a lot of times, they don't take the opportunity to put a few extra HT into the warp prisms and go for storm drops. does that mean their opponent is bad if they can't defend it perfectly? no, it means that the protoss player was playing well and used the units he had to their fullest potential. It's all about perspective, you can choose to believe that one player played really well, or another played terribly. In a game like Starcraft, it's impossible to play an absolutely perfect game, so why not focus on what a player did well, then what another player did poorly? I'm not detracting from the fact that Rogue is a good player, I'm saying that the game was exciting because Rain made critical mistakes that "normally" don't occur because progamers usually don't make mistakes like that, where as the standard defensive play in PvZ usually gravitates towards in what people consider boring strategies (i.e. SH) due to the zerg being unable to capitalize on said mistakes. I think it's safe to say that people appreciate spectacle in competition the most if all parties are performing at their best and when there is no mental detraction in the back of your mind saying "wow this player made such uncharacteristic mistakes, I wish I could see these two play at their best". There is a valid complaint if players playing their best gravitates towards games with samey strategies like BL/Infestor or SH/viper/corrupter instead of a game with loads of base snipes, action all over the map, tech switches, etc. There will always be mistakes with players. i'm sure if i went through all the Rain Vods right now, i would find a few games where his zealot wasn't on hold postion/ in the correct postion. And i'm sure that in most of these Vods, it wasn't capitalized on by the zerg player, and had i not told you that this mistake was made, you would of told me he played great that game. In PvZ I see a lot of times where the Protoss player goes for an allin vs zerg, like immortal sentry or with other units. and sometimes, if you're watching very VERY carefully, you will see them forget a warp in cycle.. Now most people aren't watching that part, and if the protoss wins the game, you would say they still played well. Players will make mistakes, thats a natural part of playing this game. Whether it be with decsion making, macro or micro, it happens, by every player, in every game. So why not focus on the good, not the bad? rouge could of chose to poke in and out of the third trying to get a few probes, he could of kept them at home, but he made a great decsion. It was great on his part, not bad on rains. I disagree. Although all terrans pros have failed splitting vs banes at some points, when it happens in game, it is still a 'mistake' by that player. Same with things like losing oracles, failing forcefields. Yes, these mistakes will always happen but that shouldn't make us stop calling them as mistakes. Thats a difference in perspective, which is fine. Both sides have merits to them, and it really is just perspective. What really got me angry was people like Calihead saying "are you for real now" to zealously when he brought up a perfectly valid argument. it's fine to disagree, but you shouldn't try and invalidate someones argument because you personally don't agree with it. What? If you can rationally invalidate an argument, then why shouldn't you? Or are you saying that we shouldn't use such rethorics? We are litterally talking about perspective here. you can't really argue how someone looks at specific senerios. You shouldn't say someone is wrong for how they look at situations. you can disagree personally, sure, but you shouldn't say they are wrong for how they approach the senerio.
You are literally the only one talking about perspective here 
I would argue that having a zealot in the correct position is not so much a question of skill and that Rogue "outplayed" Rain in that little scenario, and because it was not done correctly must be considered a mistake on Rain's part. There are a couple of reasons why: Placing a Zealot in the correct position could be considered an easy task. The procedure is standardized, and is applicable at almost all levels of play. When the Zealot is placed, it remains passive, thus not taxing the Protoss player's abilities. Furthermore, the zealot is placed there to thwarth the exact kind of attack that Rogue did.
Rain theoretically made the correct play here, but for some reason he committed a practical error, or as some would call it, a mistake.
EDIT: However, this discussion is too far off topic now. Feel free to PM me if you want to continue the discussion, or whatever. Cheers.
|
|
|
(P)herO 3-0 (Z)HyuN
(P)San 3-1 (P)MC
(T)Polt 3-0 (P)NaNiwa
(P)Dear 3-1 (P)HerO
(Z)Revival 1-3 (T)jjakji
(P)Oz 1-3 (P)sOs
(T)TaeJa 2-3 (P)StarDust
(Z)Life 2-3 (Z)Rogue
|
On March 14 2014 20:10 DarkLordOlli wrote:It looks much better if you don't know that there's LoL at IEM too It's like that cute girl in a bar smiling and waving at you... only not really you but the handsome, rich guy behind you.
there there olli
|
Pretty hyped for this event. Half is for LoL and half for SC2 last year, how is it working now CS:GO is there?
|
Virtus.Pro, an all polish team( former Golden Five -Loord and kuben) will play on the main stage today.
They love those guys, I bet thats the majority of that line for
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
