|
8751 Posts
On March 24 2011 03:30 Zlasher wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 03:12 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On March 24 2011 02:42 randplaty wrote:
Tyler's opinion on MC is based ALL on SCBW. The game is TOTALLY different. SC1 pros are enamored with macro, but SC2 is MUCH more based on timing attacks and one decisive battle with good positioning than it was in BW. Tyler's style is SO different from MC, but it's obviously that MC's style works much better in SC2. It's not about the game as much as it's about how long people have been playing it. Ever since beta we have been saying that all in plays and strategies focusing on one strong timing will tend to dominate and win a lot. Those types of builds are really really strong and like 10 times easier to develop than the safer and more well rounded builds. That just makes me think of a philosoraptor saying Is it really safer If it loses more often?
It doesn't lose more often at similar skill levels. That's essential to the point. It's easier to make and execute an all in build than a standard build.
So if we can break down everything into two different styles, one that's riskier and one that's safer, the riskier stuff will be easier to master and the safer stuff will be harder to master. Two players with equal potential start learning SC2. One guy pursues risky style, one guy pursues safe style. The riskier player will master the game first. He'll have a higher skill level than the guy playing safe. But when the safe player's skill level catches up, he'll win more.
There's nothing wrong with MC doing what he needs to do to win. Until he starts doing other styles, we can't say what he's capable of. I think people have some irrational faith in his ability to play every protoss style better than every protoss out there, and that he's playing this way only because it's dominating so much right now. Well, I don't believe that. He would have been better at SC1 if that were true. And he must know that he depends a lot on educated guesses rather than solid information. If he could win games by acting purely on solid information all the time, he would. Then he'd really be god protoss.
|
8751 Posts
On March 24 2011 03:47 Jiddra wrote:
Perhaps I have missed something, but where have day[9] gone? :-( Is he on some kind of break, quit the show or just to busy every week?
Wrapping up his thesis. He wanted to make a brief appearance but JP wouldn't allow it haha. I'm hoping we'll get full time Day[9] back soon. I'm missing him on the show so much!
|
but isnt all scouting an educated guess? i mean when im playing i see 4 gates and i make the assumption that this is.... a 4gate, not a FE or some kind of hidden tech. you can never know for sure what someone is doing unless you have observers covering the whole map, or 25 command centres spamming scan.
the fact hes able to accurately get a solid read on what someone is doing from a reasonable amount of scouting shows his understanding of the meta game is atleast solid?
|
Big props to iNcontrol for pointing out why exactly the removal of losses it so damn terrible! I wouldn't be able to explain it better myself!
And also big props to the SotG in general for being so informative and entertaining! Great work guys!
|
On March 24 2011 03:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 03:47 Jiddra wrote:
Perhaps I have missed something, but where have day[9] gone? :-( Is he on some kind of break, quit the show or just to busy every week? Wrapping up his thesis. He wanted to make a brief appearance but JP wouldn't allow it haha. I'm hoping we'll get full time Day[9] back soon. I'm missing him on the show so much!
Well, thats alright then, studys come first my mama told me ones! 
|
On March 24 2011 04:02 Terr wrote:
Big props to iNcontrol for pointing out why exactly the removal of losses it so damn terrible! I wouldn't be able to explain it better myself!
And also big props to the SotG in general for being so informative and entertaining! Great work guys!
How'd you do at MLG?
Oh I won 11 games.
Good for you man!
Such a funny example.
|
On March 24 2011 03:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 03:47 Jiddra wrote:
Perhaps I have missed something, but where have day[9] gone? :-( Is he on some kind of break, quit the show or just to busy every week? Wrapping up his thesis. He wanted to make a brief appearance but JP wouldn't allow it haha. I'm hoping we'll get full time Day[9] back soon. I'm missing him on the show so much!
The show still is fucking amazing without Sean but what is the a show without one of its 4 pillars! Either way NONY FIGHTING!
|
On March 24 2011 04:05 nvs. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 04:02 Terr wrote:
Big props to iNcontrol for pointing out why exactly the removal of losses it so damn terrible! I wouldn't be able to explain it better myself!
And also big props to the SotG in general for being so informative and entertaining! Great work guys! How'd you do at MLG? Oh I won 11 games. Good for you man! Such a funny example.
Fun, but not really relevant if you think about it You still have your placement on the ladder, as in the latest MLG. It would also be extremly strange to just talk about win/loss in a tournament and forget about placement.
|
I loved that Artosis dropped by in the pre-game show in yesterday's state of the game, try to get him on as a regular special guest . Guy is so insightful and smart when it comes to discussing starcraft that I could listen to him talk about the game for hours, I feel like I am learning something knew and getting a different look at things whenever he is talking about the game <3.
|
Thanks for making this show, fun to have it on while working .
|
On March 24 2011 04:01 turdburgler wrote:
but isnt all scouting an educated guess? i mean when im playing i see 4 gates and i make the assumption that this is.... a 4gate, not a FE or some kind of hidden tech. you can never know for sure what someone is doing unless you have observers covering the whole map, or 25 command centres spamming scan.
the fact hes able to accurately get a solid read on what someone is doing from a reasonable amount of scouting shows his understanding of the meta game is atleast solid?
What do you mean you assume its a 4gate when you SEE 4gates?
Tyler is right... not sure what people find hard to understand. He is not the only one who has said MC's play focuses a lot on allinish timing attacks, just go look at the GSL finals predictions where people say things like "MC because he abuses like no one else". It wins games, and you need to play like this in tournaments or it can hurt you (somewhat like IdrA) but i guess its more obvious if you followed brood war.
When you see someone like FlaSh crushing people in completely straightup games where it seems like it was impossible for the opponent to win, then you can say with complete confidence that this guy is an exceptional player and showing world class skill when he wins. The main reason people even advocate macro styles is because it is safer and focuses much more on outplaying your opponent than just saying making a shitload of units and saying "gee, i hope he isnt ready for this"
|
I only ended up catching the end where you they were talking about infestors. Its about time that Zerg got this sick sick buff. Everything they mentioned gets me stoked. I love spellcasters!
|
On March 24 2011 02:42 randplaty wrote:
Tyler's opinion on MC is based ALL on SCBW. The game is TOTALLY different. SC1 pros are enamored with macro, but SC2 is MUCH more based on timing attacks and one decisive battle with good positioning than it was in BW. Tyler's style is SO different from MC, but it's obviously that MC's style works much better in SC2.
You're only saying that the game is totally different because it plays out differently now, and MC's way of playing works better now. Can you be sure it will be the same in a year or two? I wouldn't be.
The games aren't totally different at all, they're just not figured out on the same level yet. The process of figuring out the game is exactly what's happening in SC2 right now - these timing attack strategies show up, then players need like a month or two to figure out how to defend it and come out ahead, making it obsolete except for a surprise build to pull out every now and then. Eventually all of those "I only need to design my strategy around one midgame attack" ideas are simply going to be rooted out of standard play.
It's not that it bothers me that MC is playing that way and winning tournaments, what bothers me somewhat is people being so impressed by it and thinking that it's somehow brilliant.
|
On March 24 2011 03:49 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 03:30 Zlasher wrote:On March 24 2011 03:12 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On March 24 2011 02:42 randplaty wrote:
Tyler's opinion on MC is based ALL on SCBW. The game is TOTALLY different. SC1 pros are enamored with macro, but SC2 is MUCH more based on timing attacks and one decisive battle with good positioning than it was in BW. Tyler's style is SO different from MC, but it's obviously that MC's style works much better in SC2. It's not about the game as much as it's about how long people have been playing it. Ever since beta we have been saying that all in plays and strategies focusing on one strong timing will tend to dominate and win a lot. Those types of builds are really really strong and like 10 times easier to develop than the safer and more well rounded builds. That just makes me think of a philosoraptor saying Is it really safer If it loses more often? It doesn't lose more often at similar skill levels. That's essential to the point. It's easier to make and execute an all in build than a standard build. So if we can break down everything into two different styles, one that's riskier and one that's safer, the riskier stuff will be easier to master and the safer stuff will be harder to master. Two players with equal potential start learning SC2. One guy pursues risky style, one guy pursues safe style. The riskier player will master the game first. He'll have a higher skill level than the guy playing safe. But when the safe player's skill level catches up, he'll win more. There's nothing wrong with MC doing what he needs to do to win. Until he starts doing other styles, we can't say what he's capable of. I think people have some irrational faith in his ability to play every protoss style better than every protoss out there, and that he's playing this way only because it's dominating so much right now. Well, I don't believe that. He would have been better at SC1 if that were true. And he must know that he depends a lot on educated guesses rather than solid information. If he could win games by acting purely on solid information all the time, he would. Then he'd really be god protoss.
We have all seen MC be jinrolled in the GSL, so he is no SC2 god. MC is just having the winning style, combined with his skill level, for the moment. Just look at MVP, god one month, code A the next. Looking at the teams in the teamleauge also shows that Code A/S is not balanced with the best players right now. Code B deserves much more attention from fans.
There is so much going on in SC2 and in a high speed, next year we might be talking about completly other players as the world greatest players ever in the "history" of SC2.
|
On March 24 2011 03:49 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 03:30 Zlasher wrote:On March 24 2011 03:12 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On March 24 2011 02:42 randplaty wrote:
Tyler's opinion on MC is based ALL on SCBW. The game is TOTALLY different. SC1 pros are enamored with macro, but SC2 is MUCH more based on timing attacks and one decisive battle with good positioning than it was in BW. Tyler's style is SO different from MC, but it's obviously that MC's style works much better in SC2. It's not about the game as much as it's about how long people have been playing it. Ever since beta we have been saying that all in plays and strategies focusing on one strong timing will tend to dominate and win a lot. Those types of builds are really really strong and like 10 times easier to develop than the safer and more well rounded builds. That just makes me think of a philosoraptor saying Is it really safer If it loses more often? It doesn't lose more often at similar skill levels. That's essential to the point. It's easier to make and execute an all in build than a standard build. So if we can break down everything into two different styles, one that's riskier and one that's safer, the riskier stuff will be easier to master and the safer stuff will be harder to master. Two players with equal potential start learning SC2. One guy pursues risky style, one guy pursues safe style. The riskier player will master the game first. He'll have a higher skill level than the guy playing safe. But when the safe player's skill level catches up, he'll win more. There's nothing wrong with MC doing what he needs to do to win. Until he starts doing other styles, we can't say what he's capable of. I think people have some irrational faith in his ability to play every protoss style better than every protoss out there, and that he's playing this way only because it's dominating so much right now. Well, I don't believe that. He would have been better at SC1 if that were true. And he must know that he depends a lot on educated guesses rather than solid information. If he could win games by acting purely on solid information all the time, he would. Then he'd really be god protoss.
You also have nothing to root your suspicions in his abilities then. You cannot say for a fact that Mc can or cannot play what some may proclaim as safer or standard. Why would he use other styles if he can win a boat load of money with it?
People project his abilities in the standard play style because of his talent at the game. He's a talented individual at the game, i doubt that his skills would magically slip away out of his body just because the game goes into standard mode. In my mind, it's easier to critic than emulating success. Every Protoss players try to play how Mc's playing and, they just can't. I'm not a big fan of Ming Chul, but theorizing on his talent of play style or whatnot seems absurd when the guy just won his second GSL title...
And any build takes a risk, because the opponent could always do the build that totally counters it.
|
People don't seem to understand that MC plays like this vs vastly inferior players too. If he CAN play safe macro games vs players like this then why doesn't he? he warpgate allin'd Ciara (off 3 gateways but he cut probes to do so) on cross position metal, this is a pretty risky strategy in itself which raises the question of why he decided to do this vs a relatively unknown player?
MC had this overly aggressive playstyle in brood war too. Thats where his nickname "Suicide Toss" came from, because he was often way too aggressive which was often to his own demise...this is pretty significant since it was much harder to attack in brood war than sc2, you really had to be sure that your attacks would deal damage or you would be significantly behind(and if you didn't cut workers it was hard to do this)
|
I apologize for disrupting the discussion, but is blip.tv down for anyone else? Can't listen to the last episode :/
|
On March 24 2011 04:22 zz_ wrote:
I apologize for disrupting the discussion, but is blip.tv down for anyone else? Can't listen to the last episode :/
same problem man so prolly down yeh
|
Yep, its down for me also. :/
|
On March 24 2011 04:18 HowSoOnIsNow wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 03:49 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On March 24 2011 03:30 Zlasher wrote:On March 24 2011 03:12 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On March 24 2011 02:42 randplaty wrote:
Tyler's opinion on MC is based ALL on SCBW. The game is TOTALLY different. SC1 pros are enamored with macro, but SC2 is MUCH more based on timing attacks and one decisive battle with good positioning than it was in BW. Tyler's style is SO different from MC, but it's obviously that MC's style works much better in SC2. It's not about the game as much as it's about how long people have been playing it. Ever since beta we have been saying that all in plays and strategies focusing on one strong timing will tend to dominate and win a lot. Those types of builds are really really strong and like 10 times easier to develop than the safer and more well rounded builds. That just makes me think of a philosoraptor saying Is it really safer If it loses more often? It doesn't lose more often at similar skill levels. That's essential to the point. It's easier to make and execute an all in build than a standard build. So if we can break down everything into two different styles, one that's riskier and one that's safer, the riskier stuff will be easier to master and the safer stuff will be harder to master. Two players with equal potential start learning SC2. One guy pursues risky style, one guy pursues safe style. The riskier player will master the game first. He'll have a higher skill level than the guy playing safe. But when the safe player's skill level catches up, he'll win more. There's nothing wrong with MC doing what he needs to do to win. Until he starts doing other styles, we can't say what he's capable of. I think people have some irrational faith in his ability to play every protoss style better than every protoss out there, and that he's playing this way only because it's dominating so much right now. Well, I don't believe that. He would have been better at SC1 if that were true. And he must know that he depends a lot on educated guesses rather than solid information. If he could win games by acting purely on solid information all the time, he would. Then he'd really be god protoss. You also have nothing to root your suspicions in his abilities then. You cannot say for a fact that Mc can or cannot play what some may proclaim as safer or standard. Why would he use other styles if he can win a boat load of money with it? People project his abilities in the standard play style because of his talent at the game. He's a talented individual at the game, i doubt that his skills would magically slip away out of his body just because the game goes into standard mode. In my mind, it's easier to critic than emulating success. Every Protoss players try to play how Mc's playing and, they just can't. I'm not a big fan of Ming Chul, but theorizing on his talent of play style or whatnot seems absurd when the guy just won his second GSL title... And any build takes a risk, because the opponent could always do the build that totally counters it.
I perhaps have gone blond over night, but I never thought that Tyler meant that. He was just not a fan of MCs style of play and a bit put of by his cooky manners in some games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
