EPTI sent to bed after Maru 2-1Dear and Elazer 1-1 Stats and the results are this ?
Is Stats shit now or Elazer good?
Altho it confirms that Elazer>LosirA as I Saïd in some GSL thread.
Pour Maru, I'm so disappointed
[IEM XII] Katowice - Qualifiers - Page 34
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
Poopi
France12904 Posts
I sent to bed after Maru 2-1Dear and Elazer 1-1 Stats and the results are this ? Is Stats shit now or Elazer good? Altho it confirms that Elazer>LosirA as I Saïd in some GSL thread. Pour Maru, I'm so disappointed | ||
|
Fango
United Kingdom8987 Posts
On January 24 2018 17:11 FrkFrJss wrote:In GSL, people have often lost 0-2 and then won 2-1 versus the same player in the loser's final. The fact that Maru won more games is not particularly relevant. Which is still one of the stupidest parts of group stages. My opinion has never changed on this. If someone has already won the inital match, they should have at least a bonus map score going into the final match. You shouldn't be able to beat someone in maps but still technically lose On January 24 2018 17:11 FrkFrJss wrote: Also, the nerfs that Protoss is getting along with the buffs Terran is getting wouldn't really have made much of a difference given that the games Dear won went past the early game, and stalkers get worse as time goes on. Also, the disruption matrix lasting a couple seconds longer would not have made Maru win. Are you serious? The stalker nerf is huge. It means they can no longer 3 shot marines/scvs. They will also take an extra shot to kill medivacs I belive. These things may sound small but they make a huge difference in game, when you consider how much damage is typically done with early stalker aggression, along with picking off medivacs and units moving across the map. Even the threat of stalkers in their current state forces terrans to play more conservatively. The buff to interference matrix would also have made a difference given how much emphasis maru put on using it. He was trying to use it to snipe warp prisms iirc. The ghost change also allows terran to react to templar and archons much faster. Just because Dear didn't win with blink stalker allins every game doesn't mean the balance had no effect on the outcome. Protoss gateway units being stronger gives them such an easy route to the lategame that terrans are forced to 2 base allin or die. | ||
|
FrkFrJss
Canada1205 Posts
On January 24 2018 17:32 Fango wrote: Which is still one of the stupidest parts of group stages. My opinion has never changed on this. If someone has already won the inital match, they should have at least a bonus map score going into the final match. You shouldn't be able to beat someone in maps but still technically lose Are you serious? The stalker nerf is huge. It means they can no longer 3 shot marines/scvs. They will also take an extra shot to kill medivacs I belive. These things may sound small but they make a huge difference in game, when you consider how much damage is typically done with early stalker aggression, along with picking off medivacs and units moving across the map. Even the threat of stalkers in their current state forces terrans to play more conservatively. The buff to interference matrix would also have made a difference given how much emphasis maru put on using it. He was trying to use it to snipe warp prisms iirc. The ghost change also allows terran to react to templar and archons much faster. Just because Dear didn't win with blink stalker allins every game doesn't mean the balance had no effect on the outcome. Protoss gateway units being so strong gives them such an easy route to the lategame that terrans are forced to 2 base allin or die. In a bo3, having a 1 game lead is massive. Given what we've seen from Korean TvP, which hasn't been extensive, I don't believe that the balance is as bad as people make it out to be. I agree that Protoss is favoured over Terran, but in a bo5, I don't think that Dear won due to balance. Balance helped, but it didn't make him win. I watched Maru, and he was fine in the mid game. In fact, game 4 highlighted just how bad stalkers are in a midgame context. | ||
|
Fango
United Kingdom8987 Posts
On January 24 2018 17:45 FrkFrJss wrote: In a bo3, having a 1 game lead is massive. Given what we've seen from Korean TvP, which hasn't been extensive, I don't believe that the balance is as bad as people make it out to be. I agree that Protoss is favoured over Terran, but in a bo5, I don't think that Dear won due to balance. Balance helped, but it didn't make him win. I watched Maru, and he was fine in the mid game. In fact, game 4 highlighted just how bad stalkers are in a midgame context. If you beat someone in a bo3 beforehand, you deserve a 1 game lead. Otherwise we get situations where you can go 3-2 against someone but lose. That's wrong if you ask me. I don't see how you can look at such a close series and say that serious balance changes wouldn't effect the result. The stalker change is much bigger than you think. Right now their utility is just too high. Hopefully after the patch terran won't be forced into 2 base allin every game | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On January 24 2018 17:45 FrkFrJss wrote: In a bo3, having a 1 game lead is massive. Given what we've seen from Korean TvP, which hasn't been extensive, I don't believe that the balance is as bad as people make it out to be. I agree that Protoss is favoured over Terran, but in a bo5, I don't think that Dear won due to balance. Balance helped, but it didn't make him win. I watched Maru, and he was fine in the mid game. In fact, game 4 highlighted just how bad stalkers are in a midgame context. I disagree. TvP balance is quite rubbish currently, and while Dear and Maru both showed pretty big weaknesses (namely poor macroing for Dear, and predictability from Maru stubbornly going for that 2-base all-in), post-patch I think Maru will be the strong favourite in any encounter between them. Claiming that Maru (or anyone one else who loses) "deserves to win" because of circumstance is just being butthurt though. On January 24 2018 17:53 Fango wrote: If you beat someone in a bo3 beforehand, you deserve a 1 game lead. Otherwise we get situations where you can go 3-2 against someone but lose. That's wrong if you ask me. I don't see how you can look at such a close series and say that serious balance changes wouldn't effect the result. The stalker change is much bigger than you think. Right now their utility is just too high. Hopefully after the patch terran won't be forced into 2 base allin every game Having a one game lead is dumb. If both players are playing each other again it means that they're both in the loser's bracket due to having lost to someone. Who they lost to initially is irrelevant--they're in the loser's bracket and should be on equal footing. | ||
|
Fango
United Kingdom8987 Posts
On January 24 2018 17:56 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I disagree. TvP balance is quite rubbish currently, and while Dear and Maru both showed pretty big weaknesses (namely poor macroing for Dear, and predictability from Maru stubbornly going for that 2-base all-in), post-patch I think Maru will be the strong favourite in any encounter between them. Claiming that Maru (or anyone one else who loses) "deserves to win" because of circumstance is just being butthurt though. I admit I'm being salty that my favourate players didn't make it, but I do think going 4-3 whilst having so many factors against you is deserving of a win. | ||
|
Poopi
France12904 Posts
On January 24 2018 17:56 ZigguratOfUr wrote: I disagree. TvP balance is quite rubbish currently, and while Dear and Maru both showed pretty big weaknesses (namely poor macroing for Dear, and predictability from Maru stubbornly going for that 2-base all-in), post-patch I think Maru will be the strong favourite in any encounter between them. Claiming that Maru (or anyone one else who loses) "deserves to win" because of circumstance is just being butthurt though. Predictability? Of course it's predictable but what else is he supposed to do in the current state? However, stalker nerf has also a buff to it, so while they are gonna need 4 shots against scv / marines, they'll shoot faster. | ||
|
Fango
United Kingdom8987 Posts
On January 24 2018 17:56 ZigguratOfUr wrote:Having a one game lead is dumb. If both players are playing each other again it means that they're both in the loser's bracket due to having lost to someone. Who they lost to initially is irrelevant--they're in the loser's bracket and should be on equal footing. Who they lost to should be relevent because it can be players from a vastly different skill range. Example, you beat someone 2-0 then lose to a god-tier player in the winners match, the player you beat initially then beats a low level player in the losers match. In the final match they win 2-1. Your performance in this case would be objectively superior, yet you'd lose to a player you went 3-2 against. On January 24 2018 18:03 Poopi wrote: However, stalker nerf has also a buff to it, so while they are gonna need 4 shots against scv / marines, they'll shoot faster. It's not a buff in most situations. Stalkers aren't a DPS unit, they're a "shoot and run" unit. Having them do less damage but shoot faster makes them worse in their role. The only exception is if they're target-firing down things like broodlords or battlecrusiers maybe. | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On January 24 2018 18:03 Poopi wrote: Predictability? Of course it's predictable but what else is he supposed to do in the current state? However, stalker nerf has also a buff to it, so while they are gonna need 4 shots against scv / marines, they'll shoot faster. He should've mixed up his builds more. There's more than one all-in he could have gone for, and going for a macro games isn't an awful idea against Dear of all people. Game 5 Dear was completely expecting that build, which is why he went for that composition and took the gold base. Maru can get too stubborn and tunnel vision on builds I think (like in his series against TIME he should've switched it up earlier). And the stalker nerf is just a nerf. I don't think think the stalker gets better in any situation that can arise in PvT. In PvZ you do kill zerglings faster, but I'm not sure if it's particularly relevant in practice. On January 24 2018 18:08 Fango wrote: Who they lost to should be relevent because it can be players from a vastly different skill range. Example, you beat someone 2-0 then lose to a god-tier player in the winners match, the player you beat initially then beats a low level player in the losers match. In the final match they win 2-1. Your performance in this case would be objectively superior, yet you'd lose to a player you went 3-2 against. The system isn't perfect, but giving the upper bracket winner an advantage in the rematch would be worse. Because while you can construct theoretical examples where the "reward" of winning and getting a shorter path to qualify is worth nothing, this isn't the case in practice. And everyone hated MLG extended series... | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On January 24 2018 18:09 ZigguratOfUr wrote: He should've mixed up his builds more. There's more than one all-in he could have gone for, and going for a macro games isn't an awful idea against Dear of all people. Game 5 Dear was completely expecting that build, which is why he went for that composition and took the gold base. Maru can get too stubborn and tunnel vision on builds I think (like in his series against TIME he should've switched it up earlier). And the stalker nerf is just a nerf. I don't think think the stalker gets better in any situation that can arise in PvT. In PvZ you do kill zerglings faster, but I'm not sure if it's particularly relevant in practice. The system isn't perfect, but giving the upper bracket winner an advantage in the rematch would be worse. Because while you can construct theoretical examples where the "reward" of winning and getting a shorter path to qualify is worth nothing, this isn't the case in practice. And everyone hated MLG extended series... So change the match into BO5 and give a map advantage. The worst case scenario is 1 game more than in bo3. The favored player has to win 2 to win while the "loser" has to win 3. I know they won't do it, but there are multiple solutions available(I just picked one). | ||
|
Fango
United Kingdom8987 Posts
On January 24 2018 18:09 ZigguratOfUr wrote:The system isn't perfect, but giving the upper bracket winner an advantage in the rematch would be worse. Because while you can construct theoretical examples where the "reward" of winning and getting a shorter path to qualify is worth nothing, this isn't the case in practice. And everyone hated MLG extended series... Other than everyone hating it, what reasons are there against it? Being able to beat someone 3-2 yet technically lose is a massive flaw if you ask me. Take this example from Maru at Shangai last year. He went 3-2 against ByuN and 1-2 against Inno. Byun went 2-3 against Maru and 2-0 against Trust. In terms of results, Maru's performance was better. Losing 1-2 to Inno is no worse than beating Trust 2-0. Did ByuN really deserve to move on here? | ||
|
ZigguratOfUr
Iraq16955 Posts
On January 24 2018 18:25 Fango wrote: Other than everyone hating it, what reasons are there against it? Being able to beat someone 3-2 yet technically lose is a massive flaw if you ask me. Take this example from Maru at Shangai last year. He went 3-2 against ByuN and 1-2 against Inno. Byun went 2-3 against Maru and 2-0 against Trust. In terms of results, Maru's performance was better. Losing 1-2 to Inno is no worse than beating Trust 2-0. Did ByuN really deserve to move on here? It penalizes those who the bracket system already penalizes. For beating Dear in the upper bracket, Maru got the reward of being able to try to qualify by beating GuMiho. For losing to Maru, Dear had to beat Zest, TY, and Stats to get to the same place as Maru again. | ||
|
Fango
United Kingdom8987 Posts
On January 24 2018 18:39 ZigguratOfUr wrote: It penalizes those who the bracket system already penalizes. For beating Dear in the upper bracket, Maru got the reward of being able to try to qualify by beating GuMiho. For losing to Maru, Dear had to beat Zest, TY, and Stats to get to the same place as Maru again. If you model things mathematically I'm pretty sure that giving some sort of advantage to the person who won the initial encounter reduces the chance of the best players advancing, but I'd have to run through the numbers to make sure. The purpose of the upper/lower bracket is to ensure that the best players gets out of each group, not making easier/harder routes for players. Every scenario is different. It could be very easy for a player to win the matches in the lower bracket, and harder to win in the upper bracket. Seeing how they play different opponent in the upper/lower brackets, the scores there should be irrelevent, in which case the best way to judge h2h score is to combine results from the first and final matches? You don't think it's at all wrong to have a 3-2 map score always be a win in the ro8, but potentially a loss in the ro16? | ||
|
Zephyp
238 Posts
Losers brackets are used in many situations and I don't see a problem with it. In GSL Ro32 a player can beat another player 2-0 in the first match, lose the winners match, end up playing the first player again in the last decider match, lose 2-1 and be out of the tournament. The map score vs that player would be 3-2 in favor of the one who ended up not qualifying for Ro16. Dear beat Scarlett, Zest, TY and Stats before meeting Maru again. Maru beat iAsonu, Scarlett and Dear. I fail to see why Dear doesn't deserve it, just because he lost to Maru initially. | ||
|
Vanillatoss
76 Posts
If thats the sole reason then its a big disappointment.. What kind of sportsmanship is that?? Of course he has all the rights to complain about the sudden change but he should have played the games first. Probably Gumiho had just as much preparation as Special.. In starcraft you have to play against all the races.. not just one that you pick.. If you prepare for only 1 matchup then you have NO rights to complain that you have to play someone else. You dont play to be the Champion of TvZ or ZvZ.. You play to win and if you win such big tournament as IEM then that means you are currently the best starcraft player. | ||
|
D-light
Finland7364 Posts
On January 24 2018 17:17 Poopi wrote: What the fuck happened? I sent to bed after Maru 2-1Dear and Elazer 1-1 Stats and the results are this ? Is Stats shit now or Elazer good? Altho it confirms that Elazer>LosirA as I Saïd in some GSL thread. Pour Maru, I'm so disappointed Stats has been pretty meh for a while now. | ||
|
AzAlexZ
Australia3303 Posts
Overall from all qualifiers 4P 3T 4Z #BALANCED | ||
|
Zephyp
238 Posts
On January 24 2018 22:38 AzAlexZ wrote: 1 race each Overall from all qualifiers 4P 3T 4Z #BALANCED And so far in GSL it's 4P, 4T, 4Z, with the possibility of the last two groups skewing it a bit. | ||
|
Kalera
United States338 Posts
On January 24 2018 21:57 Vanillatoss wrote: Did I understand it correctly.. Special forfeited because he prepared to play against zerg and he had to play against terran with like 2h notice from ESL? If thats the sole reason then its a big disappointment.. What kind of sportsmanship is that?? Of course he has all the rights to complain about the sudden change but he should have played the games first. Probably Gumiho had just as much preparation as Special.. In starcraft you have to play against all the races.. not just one that you pick.. If you prepare for only 1 matchup then you have NO rights to complain that you have to play someone else. You dont play to be the Champion of TvZ or ZvZ.. You play to win and if you win such big tournament as IEM then that means you are currently the best starcraft player. It seems like he was really unhappy with how the bracket was reseeded. I.e. the replacements were seeded at the bottom, so he felt got a raw deal as the #1 seed. Finding out late compounded it. | ||
|
Vanillatoss
76 Posts
On January 24 2018 23:07 Kalera wrote: It seems like he was really unhappy with how the bracket was reseeded. I.e. the replacements were seeded at the bottom, so he felt got a raw deal as the #1 seed. Finding out late compounded it. So I guess it would be better to remake whole bracket and screw everybody else right? Or maybe give him free win over Neeb or Kelazhur? | ||
| ||
