|
United States47024 Posts
On October 05 2009 22:42 searcher wrote:
It rewards people who come up with innovative strategies and those who can analyze their opponent's play with limited information. It would ensure that whatever innovation you make is not nullified in a a matter of days.
No it doesn't. It lets a mediocre player ride a halfway-decent build to a much higher level than he should, for lack of a counter.
Lack of replays encourages complacency, as whoever is number 1 doesn't need to innovate until someone figures out his build. It also lets a lot more crappy builds float around, because of how long it takes to realize how fragile they might be. The way it is now, only the really versatile builds, like 5 hatch hydra, stick around.
|
So much whine against the No-replay function, fascinating.Having the ability to disable replays function is in the interest of the game itself. It adds longevity to its lifespan and makes it more interesting during its lifepsan.Just look at WC3. With every patch, the new strategies which came with balance changes were played out within a week or two. Rarely does one see innovation in a game besides with oddballs such as TH000. Ultimately making the game extremely repetitive (which obviously isn't the only reason I might add).
Even without a replay function people will figure out BUILDS rather quickly.There are only so many possible combinations out there. What is upsetting for a progamer is that a replay reveals exactly when he/she moves what unit to which location. Basically sharing every nuance of their game with the entire community. Every nice "move" they come up with can be used maybe twice. After that, everyone will have studied your replay already. Players just amass this library in their head where they don't even have to have played against it and already know what is coming where at which time. Obviously very good players will be able to anticipate unknown strats/unit movements, but replays really just make it that much easier for everyone else.
Only because you played against an opponent doesn't mean you deserve to know what he did when with which unit. Seriously, where did you get that idea from? If you scout properly and lose, you can put the pieces together yourself.
|
On October 06 2009 00:14 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2009 22:42 searcher wrote:
It rewards people who come up with innovative strategies and those who can analyze their opponent's play with limited information. It would ensure that whatever innovation you make is not nullified in a a matter of days.
No it doesn't. It lets a mediocre player ride a halfway-decent build to a much higher level than he should, for lack of a counter. Lack of replays encourages complacency, as whoever is number 1 doesn't need to innovate until someone figures out his build. It also lets a lot more crappy builds float around, because of how long it takes to realize how fragile they might be. The way it is now, only the really versatile builds, like 5 hatch hydra, stick around.
So you think it's a good thing all players do either 1 of a possible 3 things every game? Personally I like seeing crazy builds from pros a lot more. Nowadays it's either 2 hatch muta, 5 hatch hydra, 1fac into CC or klazart's bisu build for 80% of the time. Boxer used to do a lot of new stuff in important games, but it's a lot harder to do that now there are a couple of flexible builds everyone uses...
|
i think their quotes are taken completely out of context. i think they maybe mean reps during large tournaments where their next opponent may go watch the replay of their previously played game?
|
On October 06 2009 01:15 stanners wrote:
i think their quotes are taken completely out of context. i think they maybe mean reps during large tournaments where their next opponent may go watch the replay of their previously played game?
i have addressed that. But I was not aware of it when I first started the forum. So it deviated a little, but it's still relevant.
|
studying the opponent is a part of any sport out there
|
United States12235 Posts
On October 06 2009 01:46 DN2perfectionGM wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2009 01:15 stanners wrote:
i think their quotes are taken completely out of context. i think they maybe mean reps during large tournaments where their next opponent may go watch the replay of their previously played game? i have addressed that. But I was not aware of it when I first started the forum. So it deviated a little, but it's still relevant.
It's actually much more critical in the middle of a tournament, where you may have developed an exclusive strategy for that event. You would have a hard time using that strategy with any success again in the same tournament because it can be dissected so quickly and studied so effectively. It's less of a concern across different leagues because nobody expects to be able to ride one strategy to victory across an entire league, someone will have figured out a counter within a day or two. Replays can cut that counter-development time down to just a few minutes. They do have some cause for concern.
|
United States4796 Posts
I think that's how the game evolves.
By people being forced to come up with new strategies. I mean, isn't that where most good strats today come from? Because the old ones all got countered?
|
No it doesn't. It lets a mediocre player ride a halfway-decent build to a much higher level than he should, for lack of a counter. Who are you to determine how 'mediocre' a player is? If he's winning games, he's winning games. If the player has poor mechanics but is winning on the brilliance of his unorthodox play, then that's part of his strength as a player. Labeling him as 'undeserving' despite the fact that he's winning games with something he invented is absolutely silly.
The development of the competitive scene of Red Alert 2, for instance, was largely fueled by the fact that the build orders and tactics were all mysteries, and that it was fun to explore different openings and tactics instead of simply carbon copy a 'perfected' build.
|
I am ESL admin and have been admin to some of their professinal leagues like ESL Pro Series and WC3L. In all of these leagues replay uploading is a mandatory, you even get penalties (less prize money) if you don't.
Replays are needed because:
- they prove that the game has in fact been played
- they prove who the winner was
- they can be used to detect cheating
- they are needed in case you have a conflict like someone with a clear advantage disconnected
- they also provide a lot of entertainment 
You also have to keep in mind that people that host games often tend to fck up, so allowing them to chose if a replay is being created is a bad idea. From a semi-pro admins perspective, replays for every game are a MUST HAVE.
Besides, replays of the KeSpa tournaments barely get released anyways, so i don't really get what the big problem is.
|
I think that there should be the option to delete ur replay as soon as u get it 
|
So I guess football teams should also complain that everyone around the world can see and analyze their strats? They should totally ban live feed / video recording and only allow people who come to the stadium to view then.
Seriously though, it's a non-issue. Builds are builds. Yes, they can give you that competitive edge at the start, but the mark of a great player is his ability to innovate and adapt to his opponent's strat during the course of a match itself.
|
While I can understand where Boxer is coming from, I think that replays are something that's brings more benefit than harm. Having people analyze your strategy is just a reality of sports. Part of being a pro is knowing that everything you do will be taken apart piece by piece and studied intensively by the competition. But being able to watch how others play has a big role is developing the metagame and allowing players to learn and improve.
Besides, cookie-cutter strategies will get discovered regardless of replays being allowed or not. Allowing them to be disabled merely delays the inevitable. Balancing the game is a much better long-term solution than anything else.
|
On October 06 2009 03:17 Ziel wrote:
So I guess football teams should also complain that everyone around the world can see and analyze their strats? They should totally ban live feed / video recording and only allow people who come to the stadium to view then.
Seriously though, it's a non-issue. Builds are builds. Yes, they can give you that competitive edge at the start, but the mark of a great player is his ability to innovate and adapt to his opponent's strat during the course of a match itself.
What a dumb comparison.
And the whole point is that with replay analysis innovation gives less of an edge because every scenario will be played out and countered more quickly.
|
On October 06 2009 03:59 timmeh wrote:Show nested quote +On October 06 2009 03:17 Ziel wrote:
So I guess football teams should also complain that everyone around the world can see and analyze their strats? They should totally ban live feed / video recording and only allow people who come to the stadium to view then.
Seriously though, it's a non-issue. Builds are builds. Yes, they can give you that competitive edge at the start, but the mark of a great player is his ability to innovate and adapt to his opponent's strat during the course of a match itself. What a dumb comparison. And the whole point is that with replay analysis innovation gives less of an edge because every scenario will be played out and countered more quickly.
Because to play out those scenarios and counter an unorthodox build does not count as innovation?
No, innovation has more of an edge than ever because players will be forced to analyze builds and come up with new timings to exploit that much more. It could potentially mean that SC2 hits a point like modern BW where we have a good amount of staple versatile builds sooner, but that's inevitable. To remove replays would simply be artificially prolonging the period of time before such a state comes into being. Besides, the amount of variations during such a steady state would be one of the ways we can judge the merits and balance of the game.
|
Don't know about Boxer , but i've never watched a replay to analyze someone to beat him . If i lose once or twise to a strategic build i'll just be more prepared for the build next time . If i keep losing to it means i'm beeing outplayed . Creativity ends the moment you use the same build twise on the same person .
Watching the replay does give you a thorough analysis of the build , but even by watching the vod you can get the idea behind it . I doubt players even watch replays that much to analyze someone's build to beat it these days , but if you wan't to copy it thats the way .
That way thought July would have won a hell of a lot more games with just muta stacking and damn good micro until someone figured it out .
|
United States47024 Posts
On October 06 2009 00:58 aseq wrote:
So you think it's a good thing all players do either 1 of a possible 3 things every game? Personally I like seeing crazy builds from pros a lot more. Nowadays it's either 2 hatch muta, 5 hatch hydra, 1fac into CC or klazart's bisu build for 80% of the time. Boxer used to do a lot of new stuff in important games, but it's a lot harder to do that now there are a couple of flexible builds everyone uses...
On October 06 2009 02:12 L wrote:
Who are you to determine how 'mediocre' a player is? If he's winning games, he's winning games. If the player has poor mechanics but is winning on the brilliance of his unorthodox play, then that's part of his strength as a player. Labeling him as 'undeserving' despite the fact that he's winning games with something he invented is absolutely silly.
A lack of replays means that a player can get away using a single unorthodox build longer, even if it's crappy, and has a lot of holes, because it takes time for people to find the holes.
Having replays doesn't prevent the development of GOOD builds, and players who play unorthodox are encouraged to switch it up MORE often (players like UpMagic who regularly come up with varied, unorthodox builds still do just fine). What it does is prevent a player from sitting on ONE build and winning games with it just because no one can watch a replay in detail and notice the holes in its timing.
|
On October 05 2009 23:08 Sadist wrote:
bisu is a hypocrite because you know damn well he learned from replays himself.
Yeah otherwise Savior would have still owned him and probably own everybody else . Boxer learned from replays too more or less . Stable builds will still be invented even without replays .
It looks like Boxer and Bisu want more credit then there are already geting for their builds which have been invented by watching replays and practising with players who have more knowledge of their main races .
|
I feel like the game will reach a boring and stale state like what we have now with StarCraft 1 much faster with replays. 90% of games today play out in one of a few very established way. If you like that mechanical challenge, fine, but it takes the strategy out of an RTS when all you're doing is reacting. Even today, foreigners have trouble getting replays of top players and so it's difficult to mirror something exactly and we end up doing things our own ways.
Personally, I love replays, they help me become a much better player. Looking at the big picture, though, replays contribute greatly to the stagnancy of a game. The StarCraft of today is far more predictable and thus, to most, more boring than it could otherwise be. If StarCraft 2 reaches that point in 18 months, who will still be playing it 18 months later?
|
Can you really say that? Even when we said that ZvP has developed to a steady state where people invariably 3hatch lair into 5hatch hydra, we still ended up with a thread pointing out a dominance of Z in the ZvP matchup, long after the development of the build. The Bisu build was supposed to have been the PvZ killer that every P would do to the doom of Z, yet that didn't happen either. Without replays, we would see much longer reigns by particular builds, how is that any better than the situation that people are fearing?
People are too quick to claim that replays will create a state of stagnation when we don't see that even in the original SC. Not releasing replays is just a way to artificially slow down that progression, a path toward an end that we are not wholly sure of yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
