|
Seems like herO also attended 9 premier finals (5 IEMs) and already won 6 out of them. If sOs win this GSL he will tie with herO in premier event result perfectly, otherwise herO > sOs in terms of efficiency 
Afreeca TV you need to show some respect to herO, at least say he is tied with sOs for this record
|
On September 07 2017 07:54 Alarak89 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 07:21 Poopi wrote:On September 07 2017 03:07 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 01:24 LTCM wrote:On September 06 2017 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I am no sOs fan, not at all. I still think these "anti sOs" comments are unreasonable tbh, every time this guy gets far in GSL people still imply he is bad. Sure you might get lucky here and there but sOs does it again and again.
Wouldn't even be surprised if he wins the finals now even though i think Inno and Dark are favored. But Stats should have been as well. I mean the guy has been to two GSL finals and an additional round of 4 in LOTV...in what, six GSLs total? But hey, he's lucky, so he makes 50% of GSL semi-finals right? Lolz. He's been in 2/5 GSL finals in LoTV, and has more top 4 finshes than anyone else. Definitely not bad for someone who was collectively disregarded as a strong contender by people on here :D To be honest the problem with sOs is that he often looks like shit, or disappoints against foreigners (see nation wars), he manages to go far in GSL with relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver... It's kinda annoying because he just never beats people when you expect him to. But should we trust his offline winrates, champion titles and other result wise data, or should we trust these "looks like shit", "disappoints against foreigners", "relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver" things over five years? If "he just never beats people when you expect him to", then maybe you can explain why he has such a high offline winrates career wise or all the wins are illusion? Anyway, did you expect him to win anyone or be a champion at any given time?
I like sOs, personally. But I think his playstyle is one where he either wins and looks like a genius or loses and makes you wonder how he's even a pro. I know there are some exceptions here, and sometimes he has a brilliant idea that you can see and it doesn't pan out, but quite often when he loses he really just looks straight-up bad. That doesn't mean I think "he's bad", but it's easy to understand how a person could get the impression that he's bad unless he's lucky.
On a slightly different topic, it's interesting for me to see people hating on his playstyle for being so protoss-bullshitty, because I like to think of myself as someone who hates protoss bullshit (though I'm a long-time fan of the game, I really dislike some of their core design decisions for sc2 protoss). Yet, I really like watching sOs, and also herO and yep, even myungsik when he was on-point. Myungsik is an interesting example, because in my mind he was the absolute epitome of protoss bullshit. But he did it SO WELL that I had to respect him and I liked seeing how he pulled it off. He was kind of the Shine of sc2 protoss. The thing for me that gets under my skin is when protoss players win and it looks 100% like it was because of bullshit and had very little to do with skill. This happens from time to time for me with almost all protoss players. But I don't generally feel that way when I watch even these players: sOs has great creative strategic play -- nobody else does it like him. herO again is very skilled, and I think it shows every time he plays. Myungsik, however annoying a person might find it, played mind-games really well, and he had really good execution -- again, nobody else was doing it like him, and it didn't feel like a coin-flip to me.
|
On September 07 2017 12:15 neutralrobot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 07:54 Alarak89 wrote:On September 07 2017 07:21 Poopi wrote:On September 07 2017 03:07 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 01:24 LTCM wrote:On September 06 2017 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I am no sOs fan, not at all. I still think these "anti sOs" comments are unreasonable tbh, every time this guy gets far in GSL people still imply he is bad. Sure you might get lucky here and there but sOs does it again and again.
Wouldn't even be surprised if he wins the finals now even though i think Inno and Dark are favored. But Stats should have been as well. I mean the guy has been to two GSL finals and an additional round of 4 in LOTV...in what, six GSLs total? But hey, he's lucky, so he makes 50% of GSL semi-finals right? Lolz. He's been in 2/5 GSL finals in LoTV, and has more top 4 finshes than anyone else. Definitely not bad for someone who was collectively disregarded as a strong contender by people on here :D To be honest the problem with sOs is that he often looks like shit, or disappoints against foreigners (see nation wars), he manages to go far in GSL with relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver... It's kinda annoying because he just never beats people when you expect him to. But should we trust his offline winrates, champion titles and other result wise data, or should we trust these "looks like shit", "disappoints against foreigners", "relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver" things over five years? If "he just never beats people when you expect him to", then maybe you can explain why he has such a high offline winrates career wise or all the wins are illusion? Anyway, did you expect him to win anyone or be a champion at any given time? I like sOs, personally. But I think his playstyle is one where he either wins and looks like a genius or loses and makes you wonder how he's even a pro. I know there are some exceptions here, and sometimes he has a brilliant idea that you can see and it doesn't pan out, but quite often when he loses he really just looks straight-up bad. That doesn't mean I think "he's bad", but it's easy to understand how a person could get the impression that he's bad unless he's lucky. On a slightly different topic, it's interesting for me to see people hating on his playstyle for being so protoss-bullshitty, because I like to think of myself as someone who hates protoss bullshit (though I'm a long-time fan of the game, I really dislike some of their core design decisions for sc2 protoss). Yet, I really like watching sOs, and also herO and yep, even myungsik when he was on-point. Myungsik is an interesting example, because in my mind he was the absolute epitome of protoss bullshit. But he did it SO WELL that I had to respect him and I liked seeing how he pulled it off. He was kind of the Shine of sc2 protoss. The thing for me that gets under my skin is when protoss players win and it looks 100% like it was because of bullshit and had very little to do with skill. This happens from time to time for me with almost all protoss players. But I don't generally feel that way when I watch even these players: sOs has great creative strategic play -- nobody else does it like him. herO again is very skilled, and I think it shows every time he plays. Myungsik, however annoying a person might find it, played mind-games really well, and he had really good execution -- again, nobody else was doing it like him, and it didn't feel like a coin-flip to me.
Even though sOs and Myungsik tend to play dirtier than herO, I always disliked herO more when he won because of some Protoss bullshit. I think it's because herO is actually a damn good macro player when he wants to be, but for whatever reason he doesn't do that too much.
Like herO could be clean and still succeed (unlike sOs or Myungsik) but he chooses to be dirty anyhow.
|
Stats never had a chance... sOs just blew him out of this world
|
On September 07 2017 12:15 neutralrobot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 07:54 Alarak89 wrote:On September 07 2017 07:21 Poopi wrote:On September 07 2017 03:07 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 01:24 LTCM wrote:On September 06 2017 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I am no sOs fan, not at all. I still think these "anti sOs" comments are unreasonable tbh, every time this guy gets far in GSL people still imply he is bad. Sure you might get lucky here and there but sOs does it again and again.
Wouldn't even be surprised if he wins the finals now even though i think Inno and Dark are favored. But Stats should have been as well. I mean the guy has been to two GSL finals and an additional round of 4 in LOTV...in what, six GSLs total? But hey, he's lucky, so he makes 50% of GSL semi-finals right? Lolz. He's been in 2/5 GSL finals in LoTV, and has more top 4 finshes than anyone else. Definitely not bad for someone who was collectively disregarded as a strong contender by people on here :D To be honest the problem with sOs is that he often looks like shit, or disappoints against foreigners (see nation wars), he manages to go far in GSL with relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver... It's kinda annoying because he just never beats people when you expect him to. But should we trust his offline winrates, champion titles and other result wise data, or should we trust these "looks like shit", "disappoints against foreigners", "relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver" things over five years? If "he just never beats people when you expect him to", then maybe you can explain why he has such a high offline winrates career wise or all the wins are illusion? Anyway, did you expect him to win anyone or be a champion at any given time? I like sOs, personally. But I think his playstyle is one where he either wins and looks like a genius or loses and makes you wonder how he's even a pro. I know there are some exceptions here, and sometimes he has a brilliant idea that you can see and it doesn't pan out, but quite often when he loses he really just looks straight-up bad. That doesn't mean I think "he's bad", but it's easy to understand how a person could get the impression that he's bad unless he's lucky. On a slightly different topic, it's interesting for me to see people hating on his playstyle for being so protoss-bullshitty, because I like to think of myself as someone who hates protoss bullshit (though I'm a long-time fan of the game, I really dislike some of their core design decisions for sc2 protoss). Yet, I really like watching sOs, and also herO and yep, even myungsik when he was on-point. Myungsik is an interesting example, because in my mind he was the absolute epitome of protoss bullshit. But he did it SO WELL that I had to respect him and I liked seeing how he pulled it off. He was kind of the Shine of sc2 protoss. The thing for me that gets under my skin is when protoss players win and it looks 100% like it was because of bullshit and had very little to do with skill. This happens from time to time for me with almost all protoss players. But I don't generally feel that way when I watch even these players: sOs has great creative strategic play -- nobody else does it like him. herO again is very skilled, and I think it shows every time he plays. Myungsik, however annoying a person might find it, played mind-games really well, and he had really good execution -- again, nobody else was doing it like him, and it didn't feel like a coin-flip to me.
I think you didn't get my point though, like Tastosis said in the stream, the most important thing for a pro-gamer is to win, no matter how dirty you play or how shaky you looks like during a game, you need to come on top at the end as long as you don't cheat. So I'll simply look at their past offline results as my reference instead of their "current form", if a player has a offline winrates over 60%, ofc he is doing fine regardless of play style in games.
And because of this, I think Myungsik is nowhere near sOs and herO career wise, even his play style is similar to sOs in a sense, he lost way more games than sOs or herO, and their offline title numbers just explained everything.
|
On September 07 2017 05:46 DieuCure wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 04:25 Diabolique wrote:On September 07 2017 03:10 DieuCure wrote:On September 07 2017 01:24 LTCM wrote:On September 06 2017 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I am no sOs fan, not at all. I still think these "anti sOs" comments are unreasonable tbh, every time this guy gets far in GSL people still imply he is bad. Sure you might get lucky here and there but sOs does it again and again.
Wouldn't even be surprised if he wins the finals now even though i think Inno and Dark are favored. But Stats should have been as well. I mean the guy has been to two GSL finals and an additional round of 4 in LOTV...in what, six GSLs total? But hey, he's lucky, so he makes 50% of GSL semi-finals right? Lolz. He isn't lucky, but he is an awful gsl finalist macro/micro wise. He is the proof that builds can bring you to gsl finals, even with bad mechanics if you compare with others gsl players. He wins without being impressive, every time, like an inverted(?) TY. Special mention to his reaction time ... Well, I do not think that his victories have anything to do with "builds". It has a lot to do with stellar decision making under pressure, willingness to take risk and changing strategies on the go. Yes sure I agree, he isn't a random top 100 gm spamming random builds, but I think you got the idea, he is not a conventional top Starcraft player, so it's a little weird when you watch him win the best players mechanically wise without being great himself ( about mechanics ). A little unfair to me because only protoss players can do that, and then they say "nono" when people says it's the least mechanics demanding race, into -150 reddit s karma points. But i prefer him to players like Myungsik and herO because you know..
He ain't that bad at mechanics, it's not like Zest who always has 1000/1000 banked. I agree overall that Protoss is a race where mechanics matter less than Terran and especially Zerg. Generally Protoss have been more about strategical choices (and to some degree micro) than the other races, and conversely these have been less about that. That's also why I don't like to watch another Terran do a two medivac push into a third but prefer watching a novel strategy. Some other people prefer the Terran way of mechanics and micro. We can hopefully all find something to cheer for in sc2.
And also sc2 is so much about playing a specific race and builds and thus understanding the difficulties or cleverness of what a pro player does.
|
On September 07 2017 12:50 Alarak89 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 12:15 neutralrobot wrote:On September 07 2017 07:54 Alarak89 wrote:On September 07 2017 07:21 Poopi wrote:On September 07 2017 03:07 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 01:24 LTCM wrote:On September 06 2017 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I am no sOs fan, not at all. I still think these "anti sOs" comments are unreasonable tbh, every time this guy gets far in GSL people still imply he is bad. Sure you might get lucky here and there but sOs does it again and again.
Wouldn't even be surprised if he wins the finals now even though i think Inno and Dark are favored. But Stats should have been as well. I mean the guy has been to two GSL finals and an additional round of 4 in LOTV...in what, six GSLs total? But hey, he's lucky, so he makes 50% of GSL semi-finals right? Lolz. He's been in 2/5 GSL finals in LoTV, and has more top 4 finshes than anyone else. Definitely not bad for someone who was collectively disregarded as a strong contender by people on here :D To be honest the problem with sOs is that he often looks like shit, or disappoints against foreigners (see nation wars), he manages to go far in GSL with relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver... It's kinda annoying because he just never beats people when you expect him to. But should we trust his offline winrates, champion titles and other result wise data, or should we trust these "looks like shit", "disappoints against foreigners", "relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver" things over five years? If "he just never beats people when you expect him to", then maybe you can explain why he has such a high offline winrates career wise or all the wins are illusion? Anyway, did you expect him to win anyone or be a champion at any given time? I like sOs, personally. But I think his playstyle is one where he either wins and looks like a genius or loses and makes you wonder how he's even a pro. I know there are some exceptions here, and sometimes he has a brilliant idea that you can see and it doesn't pan out, but quite often when he loses he really just looks straight-up bad. That doesn't mean I think "he's bad", but it's easy to understand how a person could get the impression that he's bad unless he's lucky. On a slightly different topic, it's interesting for me to see people hating on his playstyle for being so protoss-bullshitty, because I like to think of myself as someone who hates protoss bullshit (though I'm a long-time fan of the game, I really dislike some of their core design decisions for sc2 protoss). Yet, I really like watching sOs, and also herO and yep, even myungsik when he was on-point. Myungsik is an interesting example, because in my mind he was the absolute epitome of protoss bullshit. But he did it SO WELL that I had to respect him and I liked seeing how he pulled it off. He was kind of the Shine of sc2 protoss. The thing for me that gets under my skin is when protoss players win and it looks 100% like it was because of bullshit and had very little to do with skill. This happens from time to time for me with almost all protoss players. But I don't generally feel that way when I watch even these players: sOs has great creative strategic play -- nobody else does it like him. herO again is very skilled, and I think it shows every time he plays. Myungsik, however annoying a person might find it, played mind-games really well, and he had really good execution -- again, nobody else was doing it like him, and it didn't feel like a coin-flip to me. I think you didn't get my point though, like Tastosis said in the stream, the most important thing for a pro-gamer is to win, no matter how dirty you play or how shaky you looks like during a game, you need to come on top at the end as long as you don't cheat. So I'll simply look at their past offline results as my reference instead of their "current form", if a player has a offline winrates over 60%, ofc he is doing fine regardless of play style in games. And because of this, I think Myungsik is nowhere near sOs and herO career wise, even his play style is similar to sOs in a sense, he lost way more games than sOs or herO, and their offline title numbers just explained everything.
While it's always possible there's something I'm missing here, I think I understand what you're saying. I'm not even disagreeing with you. I guess I'm just saying that I think it's pretty understandable that people would feel that way even though sOs has pretty great overall results over the years. Understandable, if perhaps a little irrational.
|
On September 07 2017 12:19 pvsnp wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 12:15 neutralrobot wrote:On September 07 2017 07:54 Alarak89 wrote:On September 07 2017 07:21 Poopi wrote:On September 07 2017 03:07 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 01:24 LTCM wrote:On September 06 2017 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I am no sOs fan, not at all. I still think these "anti sOs" comments are unreasonable tbh, every time this guy gets far in GSL people still imply he is bad. Sure you might get lucky here and there but sOs does it again and again.
Wouldn't even be surprised if he wins the finals now even though i think Inno and Dark are favored. But Stats should have been as well. I mean the guy has been to two GSL finals and an additional round of 4 in LOTV...in what, six GSLs total? But hey, he's lucky, so he makes 50% of GSL semi-finals right? Lolz. He's been in 2/5 GSL finals in LoTV, and has more top 4 finshes than anyone else. Definitely not bad for someone who was collectively disregarded as a strong contender by people on here :D To be honest the problem with sOs is that he often looks like shit, or disappoints against foreigners (see nation wars), he manages to go far in GSL with relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver... It's kinda annoying because he just never beats people when you expect him to. But should we trust his offline winrates, champion titles and other result wise data, or should we trust these "looks like shit", "disappoints against foreigners", "relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver" things over five years? If "he just never beats people when you expect him to", then maybe you can explain why he has such a high offline winrates career wise or all the wins are illusion? Anyway, did you expect him to win anyone or be a champion at any given time? I like sOs, personally. But I think his playstyle is one where he either wins and looks like a genius or loses and makes you wonder how he's even a pro. I know there are some exceptions here, and sometimes he has a brilliant idea that you can see and it doesn't pan out, but quite often when he loses he really just looks straight-up bad. That doesn't mean I think "he's bad", but it's easy to understand how a person could get the impression that he's bad unless he's lucky. On a slightly different topic, it's interesting for me to see people hating on his playstyle for being so protoss-bullshitty, because I like to think of myself as someone who hates protoss bullshit (though I'm a long-time fan of the game, I really dislike some of their core design decisions for sc2 protoss). Yet, I really like watching sOs, and also herO and yep, even myungsik when he was on-point. Myungsik is an interesting example, because in my mind he was the absolute epitome of protoss bullshit. But he did it SO WELL that I had to respect him and I liked seeing how he pulled it off. He was kind of the Shine of sc2 protoss. The thing for me that gets under my skin is when protoss players win and it looks 100% like it was because of bullshit and had very little to do with skill. This happens from time to time for me with almost all protoss players. But I don't generally feel that way when I watch even these players: sOs has great creative strategic play -- nobody else does it like him. herO again is very skilled, and I think it shows every time he plays. Myungsik, however annoying a person might find it, played mind-games really well, and he had really good execution -- again, nobody else was doing it like him, and it didn't feel like a coin-flip to me. Even though sOs and Myungsik tend to play dirtier than herO, I always disliked herO more when he won because of some Protoss bullshit. I think it's because herO is actually a damn good macro player when he wants to be, but for whatever reason he doesn't do that too much. Like herO could be clean and still succeed (unlike sOs or Myungsik) but he chooses to be dirty anyhow.
I disliked herO because he always seemed to win when protoss was imbalanced (like blink stalkers in HoTS, adept pheonix in LoTV etc). sOs and myungsik came with a lot of unexpected and creative builds, not necessarily imbalanced ones. The fact herO normally lost in PvP against sOs/zest/classic etc also supports the idea that he's not as mechanically strong as the other protoss. In fact, I would say that herO's best talent is choosing what builds to play. Other protoss players win via smart tactics/macro/positioning etc. But herO tends to just have the right build for each map that wins the game for him.
That and losing $100K to multiple proxy gates is just laughable. He could win GSL and I'd still remember him for that
|
On September 07 2017 21:50 Fango wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 12:19 pvsnp wrote:On September 07 2017 12:15 neutralrobot wrote:On September 07 2017 07:54 Alarak89 wrote:On September 07 2017 07:21 Poopi wrote:On September 07 2017 03:07 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 01:24 LTCM wrote:On September 06 2017 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I am no sOs fan, not at all. I still think these "anti sOs" comments are unreasonable tbh, every time this guy gets far in GSL people still imply he is bad. Sure you might get lucky here and there but sOs does it again and again.
Wouldn't even be surprised if he wins the finals now even though i think Inno and Dark are favored. But Stats should have been as well. I mean the guy has been to two GSL finals and an additional round of 4 in LOTV...in what, six GSLs total? But hey, he's lucky, so he makes 50% of GSL semi-finals right? Lolz. He's been in 2/5 GSL finals in LoTV, and has more top 4 finshes than anyone else. Definitely not bad for someone who was collectively disregarded as a strong contender by people on here :D To be honest the problem with sOs is that he often looks like shit, or disappoints against foreigners (see nation wars), he manages to go far in GSL with relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver... It's kinda annoying because he just never beats people when you expect him to. But should we trust his offline winrates, champion titles and other result wise data, or should we trust these "looks like shit", "disappoints against foreigners", "relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver" things over five years? If "he just never beats people when you expect him to", then maybe you can explain why he has such a high offline winrates career wise or all the wins are illusion? Anyway, did you expect him to win anyone or be a champion at any given time? I like sOs, personally. But I think his playstyle is one where he either wins and looks like a genius or loses and makes you wonder how he's even a pro. I know there are some exceptions here, and sometimes he has a brilliant idea that you can see and it doesn't pan out, but quite often when he loses he really just looks straight-up bad. That doesn't mean I think "he's bad", but it's easy to understand how a person could get the impression that he's bad unless he's lucky. On a slightly different topic, it's interesting for me to see people hating on his playstyle for being so protoss-bullshitty, because I like to think of myself as someone who hates protoss bullshit (though I'm a long-time fan of the game, I really dislike some of their core design decisions for sc2 protoss). Yet, I really like watching sOs, and also herO and yep, even myungsik when he was on-point. Myungsik is an interesting example, because in my mind he was the absolute epitome of protoss bullshit. But he did it SO WELL that I had to respect him and I liked seeing how he pulled it off. He was kind of the Shine of sc2 protoss. The thing for me that gets under my skin is when protoss players win and it looks 100% like it was because of bullshit and had very little to do with skill. This happens from time to time for me with almost all protoss players. But I don't generally feel that way when I watch even these players: sOs has great creative strategic play -- nobody else does it like him. herO again is very skilled, and I think it shows every time he plays. Myungsik, however annoying a person might find it, played mind-games really well, and he had really good execution -- again, nobody else was doing it like him, and it didn't feel like a coin-flip to me. Even though sOs and Myungsik tend to play dirtier than herO, I always disliked herO more when he won because of some Protoss bullshit. I think it's because herO is actually a damn good macro player when he wants to be, but for whatever reason he doesn't do that too much. Like herO could be clean and still succeed (unlike sOs or Myungsik) but he chooses to be dirty anyhow. I disliked herO because he always seemed to win when protoss was imbalanced (like blink stalkers in HoTS, adept pheonix in LoTV etc). sOs and myungsik came with a lot of unexpected and creative builds, not necessarily imbalanced ones. The fact herO normally lost in PvP against sOs/zest/classic etc also supports the idea that he's not as mechanically strong as the other protoss.In fact, I would say that herO's best talent is choosing what builds to play. Other protoss players win via smart tactics/macro/positioning etc. But herO tends to just have the right build for each map that wins the game for him. That and losing $100K to multiple proxy gates is just laughable. He could win GSL and I'd still remember him for that
PvP really isn't a matchup where mechanics are that important.
|
So, based on his impressive premier league record, sOs is the new Taeja.
TL writers rejoice! You have a new hero! Ding ding!
|
On September 07 2017 22:16 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 21:50 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 12:19 pvsnp wrote:On September 07 2017 12:15 neutralrobot wrote:On September 07 2017 07:54 Alarak89 wrote:On September 07 2017 07:21 Poopi wrote:On September 07 2017 03:07 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 01:24 LTCM wrote:On September 06 2017 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I am no sOs fan, not at all. I still think these "anti sOs" comments are unreasonable tbh, every time this guy gets far in GSL people still imply he is bad. Sure you might get lucky here and there but sOs does it again and again.
Wouldn't even be surprised if he wins the finals now even though i think Inno and Dark are favored. But Stats should have been as well. I mean the guy has been to two GSL finals and an additional round of 4 in LOTV...in what, six GSLs total? But hey, he's lucky, so he makes 50% of GSL semi-finals right? Lolz. He's been in 2/5 GSL finals in LoTV, and has more top 4 finshes than anyone else. Definitely not bad for someone who was collectively disregarded as a strong contender by people on here :D To be honest the problem with sOs is that he often looks like shit, or disappoints against foreigners (see nation wars), he manages to go far in GSL with relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver... It's kinda annoying because he just never beats people when you expect him to. But should we trust his offline winrates, champion titles and other result wise data, or should we trust these "looks like shit", "disappoints against foreigners", "relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver" things over five years? If "he just never beats people when you expect him to", then maybe you can explain why he has such a high offline winrates career wise or all the wins are illusion? Anyway, did you expect him to win anyone or be a champion at any given time? I like sOs, personally. But I think his playstyle is one where he either wins and looks like a genius or loses and makes you wonder how he's even a pro. I know there are some exceptions here, and sometimes he has a brilliant idea that you can see and it doesn't pan out, but quite often when he loses he really just looks straight-up bad. That doesn't mean I think "he's bad", but it's easy to understand how a person could get the impression that he's bad unless he's lucky. On a slightly different topic, it's interesting for me to see people hating on his playstyle for being so protoss-bullshitty, because I like to think of myself as someone who hates protoss bullshit (though I'm a long-time fan of the game, I really dislike some of their core design decisions for sc2 protoss). Yet, I really like watching sOs, and also herO and yep, even myungsik when he was on-point. Myungsik is an interesting example, because in my mind he was the absolute epitome of protoss bullshit. But he did it SO WELL that I had to respect him and I liked seeing how he pulled it off. He was kind of the Shine of sc2 protoss. The thing for me that gets under my skin is when protoss players win and it looks 100% like it was because of bullshit and had very little to do with skill. This happens from time to time for me with almost all protoss players. But I don't generally feel that way when I watch even these players: sOs has great creative strategic play -- nobody else does it like him. herO again is very skilled, and I think it shows every time he plays. Myungsik, however annoying a person might find it, played mind-games really well, and he had really good execution -- again, nobody else was doing it like him, and it didn't feel like a coin-flip to me. Even though sOs and Myungsik tend to play dirtier than herO, I always disliked herO more when he won because of some Protoss bullshit. I think it's because herO is actually a damn good macro player when he wants to be, but for whatever reason he doesn't do that too much. Like herO could be clean and still succeed (unlike sOs or Myungsik) but he chooses to be dirty anyhow. I disliked herO because he always seemed to win when protoss was imbalanced (like blink stalkers in HoTS, adept pheonix in LoTV etc). sOs and myungsik came with a lot of unexpected and creative builds, not necessarily imbalanced ones. The fact herO normally lost in PvP against sOs/zest/classic etc also supports the idea that he's not as mechanically strong as the other protoss.In fact, I would say that herO's best talent is choosing what builds to play. Other protoss players win via smart tactics/macro/positioning etc. But herO tends to just have the right build for each map that wins the game for him. That and losing $100K to multiple proxy gates is just laughable. He could win GSL and I'd still remember him for that PvP really isn't a matchup where mechanics are that important.
I barely play toss, but surely mirrors are where mechanics are most important? In non mirror matchups there's interactions between different units that can be exploited. In PvP/TvT/ZvZ you mostly have the same stuff, and whoever can use it better usually wins
|
On September 08 2017 00:34 Fango wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2017 22:16 Charoisaur wrote:On September 07 2017 21:50 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 12:19 pvsnp wrote:On September 07 2017 12:15 neutralrobot wrote:On September 07 2017 07:54 Alarak89 wrote:On September 07 2017 07:21 Poopi wrote:On September 07 2017 03:07 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 01:24 LTCM wrote:On September 06 2017 23:54 The_Red_Viper wrote:
I am no sOs fan, not at all. I still think these "anti sOs" comments are unreasonable tbh, every time this guy gets far in GSL people still imply he is bad. Sure you might get lucky here and there but sOs does it again and again.
Wouldn't even be surprised if he wins the finals now even though i think Inno and Dark are favored. But Stats should have been as well. I mean the guy has been to two GSL finals and an additional round of 4 in LOTV...in what, six GSLs total? But hey, he's lucky, so he makes 50% of GSL semi-finals right? Lolz. He's been in 2/5 GSL finals in LoTV, and has more top 4 finshes than anyone else. Definitely not bad for someone who was collectively disregarded as a strong contender by people on here :D To be honest the problem with sOs is that he often looks like shit, or disappoints against foreigners (see nation wars), he manages to go far in GSL with relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver... It's kinda annoying because he just never beats people when you expect him to. But should we trust his offline winrates, champion titles and other result wise data, or should we trust these "looks like shit", "disappoints against foreigners", "relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver" things over five years? If "he just never beats people when you expect him to", then maybe you can explain why he has such a high offline winrates career wise or all the wins are illusion? Anyway, did you expect him to win anyone or be a champion at any given time? I like sOs, personally. But I think his playstyle is one where he either wins and looks like a genius or loses and makes you wonder how he's even a pro. I know there are some exceptions here, and sometimes he has a brilliant idea that you can see and it doesn't pan out, but quite often when he loses he really just looks straight-up bad. That doesn't mean I think "he's bad", but it's easy to understand how a person could get the impression that he's bad unless he's lucky. On a slightly different topic, it's interesting for me to see people hating on his playstyle for being so protoss-bullshitty, because I like to think of myself as someone who hates protoss bullshit (though I'm a long-time fan of the game, I really dislike some of their core design decisions for sc2 protoss). Yet, I really like watching sOs, and also herO and yep, even myungsik when he was on-point. Myungsik is an interesting example, because in my mind he was the absolute epitome of protoss bullshit. But he did it SO WELL that I had to respect him and I liked seeing how he pulled it off. He was kind of the Shine of sc2 protoss. The thing for me that gets under my skin is when protoss players win and it looks 100% like it was because of bullshit and had very little to do with skill. This happens from time to time for me with almost all protoss players. But I don't generally feel that way when I watch even these players: sOs has great creative strategic play -- nobody else does it like him. herO again is very skilled, and I think it shows every time he plays. Myungsik, however annoying a person might find it, played mind-games really well, and he had really good execution -- again, nobody else was doing it like him, and it didn't feel like a coin-flip to me. Even though sOs and Myungsik tend to play dirtier than herO, I always disliked herO more when he won because of some Protoss bullshit. I think it's because herO is actually a damn good macro player when he wants to be, but for whatever reason he doesn't do that too much. Like herO could be clean and still succeed (unlike sOs or Myungsik) but he chooses to be dirty anyhow. I disliked herO because he always seemed to win when protoss was imbalanced (like blink stalkers in HoTS, adept pheonix in LoTV etc). sOs and myungsik came with a lot of unexpected and creative builds, not necessarily imbalanced ones. The fact herO normally lost in PvP against sOs/zest/classic etc also supports the idea that he's not as mechanically strong as the other protoss.In fact, I would say that herO's best talent is choosing what builds to play. Other protoss players win via smart tactics/macro/positioning etc. But herO tends to just have the right build for each map that wins the game for him. That and losing $100K to multiple proxy gates is just laughable. He could win GSL and I'd still remember him for that PvP really isn't a matchup where mechanics are that important. I barely play toss, but surely mirrors are where mechanics are most important? In non mirror matchups there's interactions between different units that can be exploited. In PvP/TvT/ZvZ you mostly have the same stuff, and whoever can use it better usually wins
Using it better is different from mechanics, it's more strategic. How often is it actually the in-fight micro that decides big fights? Not a clever flank, a better engagement angle, better upgrades or just a better composition or bigger army. There are small micro battles that can be deciding early on in every mirror, but past the mid-game, when do raw micro mechanics make the difference? In mirrors I'd be inclined to say rarely. Good marine splits will help your TvZ winrate more than your TvT. (Macro mechanics are a different story)
For example, herO always has had some of the best blink stalker control in the scene (arguably the best after PartinG stopped playing), but PvP was always an Achilles' heel. He's mechanically sound, definitely better than for instance sOs (and sOs would agree with me saying this, he says himself that his mechanics are lacking and his hands are slow), but strategically and from his understanding, he couldn't hold a candle to some of the other Protoss greats.
|
On September 08 2017 03:26 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2017 00:34 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 22:16 Charoisaur wrote:On September 07 2017 21:50 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 12:19 pvsnp wrote:On September 07 2017 12:15 neutralrobot wrote:On September 07 2017 07:54 Alarak89 wrote:On September 07 2017 07:21 Poopi wrote:On September 07 2017 03:07 Fango wrote:On September 07 2017 01:24 LTCM wrote:
[quote]
I mean the guy has been to two GSL finals and an additional round of 4 in LOTV...in what, six GSLs total? But hey, he's lucky, so he makes 50% of GSL semi-finals right? Lolz. He's been in 2/5 GSL finals in LoTV, and has more top 4 finshes than anyone else. Definitely not bad for someone who was collectively disregarded as a strong contender by people on here :D To be honest the problem with sOs is that he often looks like shit, or disappoints against foreigners (see nation wars), he manages to go far in GSL with relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver... It's kinda annoying because he just never beats people when you expect him to. But should we trust his offline winrates, champion titles and other result wise data, or should we trust these "looks like shit", "disappoints against foreigners", "relatively lucky brackets but doesn't really deliver" things over five years? If "he just never beats people when you expect him to", then maybe you can explain why he has such a high offline winrates career wise or all the wins are illusion? Anyway, did you expect him to win anyone or be a champion at any given time? I like sOs, personally. But I think his playstyle is one where he either wins and looks like a genius or loses and makes you wonder how he's even a pro. I know there are some exceptions here, and sometimes he has a brilliant idea that you can see and it doesn't pan out, but quite often when he loses he really just looks straight-up bad. That doesn't mean I think "he's bad", but it's easy to understand how a person could get the impression that he's bad unless he's lucky. On a slightly different topic, it's interesting for me to see people hating on his playstyle for being so protoss-bullshitty, because I like to think of myself as someone who hates protoss bullshit (though I'm a long-time fan of the game, I really dislike some of their core design decisions for sc2 protoss). Yet, I really like watching sOs, and also herO and yep, even myungsik when he was on-point. Myungsik is an interesting example, because in my mind he was the absolute epitome of protoss bullshit. But he did it SO WELL that I had to respect him and I liked seeing how he pulled it off. He was kind of the Shine of sc2 protoss. The thing for me that gets under my skin is when protoss players win and it looks 100% like it was because of bullshit and had very little to do with skill. This happens from time to time for me with almost all protoss players. But I don't generally feel that way when I watch even these players: sOs has great creative strategic play -- nobody else does it like him. herO again is very skilled, and I think it shows every time he plays. Myungsik, however annoying a person might find it, played mind-games really well, and he had really good execution -- again, nobody else was doing it like him, and it didn't feel like a coin-flip to me. Even though sOs and Myungsik tend to play dirtier than herO, I always disliked herO more when he won because of some Protoss bullshit. I think it's because herO is actually a damn good macro player when he wants to be, but for whatever reason he doesn't do that too much. Like herO could be clean and still succeed (unlike sOs or Myungsik) but he chooses to be dirty anyhow. I disliked herO because he always seemed to win when protoss was imbalanced (like blink stalkers in HoTS, adept pheonix in LoTV etc). sOs and myungsik came with a lot of unexpected and creative builds, not necessarily imbalanced ones. The fact herO normally lost in PvP against sOs/zest/classic etc also supports the idea that he's not as mechanically strong as the other protoss.In fact, I would say that herO's best talent is choosing what builds to play. Other protoss players win via smart tactics/macro/positioning etc. But herO tends to just have the right build for each map that wins the game for him. That and losing $100K to multiple proxy gates is just laughable. He could win GSL and I'd still remember him for that PvP really isn't a matchup where mechanics are that important. I barely play toss, but surely mirrors are where mechanics are most important? In non mirror matchups there's interactions between different units that can be exploited. In PvP/TvT/ZvZ you mostly have the same stuff, and whoever can use it better usually wins Using it better is different from mechanics, it's more strategic. How often is it actually the in-fight micro that decides big fights? Not a clever flank, a better engagement angle, better upgrades or just a better composition or bigger army. There are small micro battles that can be deciding early on in every mirror, but past the mid-game, when do raw micro mechanics make the difference? In mirrors I'd be inclined to say rarely. Good marine splits will help your TvZ winrate more than your TvT. (Macro mechanics are a different story) For example, herO always has had some of the best blink stalker control in the scene (arguably the best after PartinG stopped playing), but PvP was always an Achilles' heel. He's mechanically sound, definitely better than for instance sOs (and sOs would agree with me saying this, he says himself that his mechanics are lacking and his hands are slow), but strategically and from his understanding, he couldn't hold a candle to some of the other Protoss greats.
A bit off topic, but I have a different perspective. It's not the micro part that sOs is bad. We've seen sOs micro in battles up to the top Korean level protosses or better since 2015. It's more like the multitaking that's lacking. So sOs would typically miss a widow mine or would not have the "time" to do cool tricks while macroing like hero and byun would do.
sOs also has the potential for good macro as he has consistently shown to win fights decisively with an extra warp in of zealots during Hots era (sOs vs Stats and sOs vs zest from proleague playoffs comes to mind).
Therefore, I would like to say that sOs does not lose to hero bc in PvP the multitasking aspect is not as strenuous as in PvT. While strategic play plays a huge part of PvP, I believe other protosses would have had an easier time dealing with sOs if he had lacked the macro or the micro side of mechanics instead of the multitasking one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
