|
On May 04 2011 15:51 Sephimos wrote:Also, people don't get to insert their pet meaning into Colbi's statement. "We invited Liquid, they chose not to attend" is a completely neutral statement. If someone can't process that, it's their own issue.
If someone can't process difference in wording evoking different connotations, it is an intellectual issue.
Imagine a scenario:
1) two people A and B
2) an issue arises
3) both of them do their best but fail to resolve it
Now a third party sees the outcome and asks: What happened?
There is a huge difference in saying
a) "We both did our best, but failed to resolve it."
b) Person A: "Well I did everything I could.."
Instead of
On May 02 2011 10:17 Colbi wrote:Liquid was invited, but chose not to participate.
let's say:
1) Liquid was invited, but certain issues couldn't be resolved.
2) Liquid was invited, but unfortunately certain issues couldn't be resolved.
3) Liquid was invited, but unfortunately certain issues couldn't be resolved. I am sure you will hear official word about their decision from the team themselves.
4) Liquid was invited, but issues regarding parts of their lineup playing from KR unfortunately couldn't be resolved.
5) Liquid was invited, but deemed themselves unable to compete due to two of their players being in KR.
As you can see, wording does make a difference in perception. Let it be clear, that playing the ball to TL is indeed considered fair and safe play in general PR business.
But in his role, Colbi should have had more sensitivity going about it. There is a difference in handing the ball and dropping it. Tyler didn't get mad because Colbi was "playing it safe" for EG. That is totally reasonable.
Colbi's response may have been sufficient for EG to be in the clear, but at the same time left TL with little to no graceful way to pick it up from there. At the very least, a sensible PR person should know the code of conduct between business partners.
|
On May 04 2011 15:57 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:54 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:48 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:43 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:34 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:29 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:26 Condor Hero wrote:On May 04 2011 15:24 walklightwhat wrote:On May 04 2011 15:22 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:18 walklightwhat wrote:
[quote]
What? Getting a hallucinated phoenix requires no tech-path commitment at all. What are you talking about? Le sigh. Getting a hallucinated phoenix requires you to research hallucination, which you either do before or after warp gate tech. If you do it before warp gate tech then you are delaying your warp gates => you are choosing not to go fast warp gate builds (ie 4 gate). Getting hallucination after warp gate tech means you've already committed to not doing a warp gate timing attack because you have to wait for hallucination to finish which is again a huge delay on your warp gate timing. By the time hallucination is researched in EITHER case you have already made significant tech commitments. Which requires less than it takes for Zerg to get Lair and Overlord Speed. 1. every zerg eventually needs to get lair 2. ovie speed has tons more uses than just scouting (drop play, save them from real phoenix, spread creep) 3. zergs have lots of overlords the state of hallucinate right now is just for scouting How can anyone argue the fact that Z has the same scouting oppurtunities as T or P? That blows my mind that people like you exist. Because they do. You have: 1. Speedlings - gives complete map control and proxy scouting if you choose to take it, whereas a Protoss or Terran has to scout around with an easily killable probe 2. Overlords - can be sacrificed to obtain a great deal of information on many maps, even if the opponent hides his tech (because you can tell a great deal about what a player is doing just by his SCV count, his gas count, his chronoboost energy, etc.) 3. Overseers - overlord with speed without overlord speed, and can drop down changelings 4. Creep tumors - scout virtually anywhere you have creep, complete information about enemy army movements until they are sniped 5. Overlords - did I mention overlords can be placed around the map to scout out incoming drops, attacks, etc.? Protoss has observers, hallucinated phoenixes, and real phoenixes for scouting. They can also drop pylons. How is that superior scouting? Terran has scans and sensor towers. And hellions if they can ever get in a base. That's it. 1. Speedlings - While you can get information from what units the protoss is making, a lot of guesswork is involved 2. Overlords - Look at Crossfire and tell me how the hell you can get an overlord in. 3. Too late. 4. If you scout with creep, I don't know how you exist. 5. That is not scouting.. Zerg has no definite way of scouting until Lair tech. To all the one base all-ins that currently happen, that is a huge problem. How the fuck is any of that an argument against Z having the same scouting opportunities as T and P? You think T and P can get in each other's base and know exactly what's going on? What applies to Z applies to everyone else. It's just that Z builds are currently more fragile than everyone else's builds. The point Idra is making is that this fragility requires Z to have perfect scouting. Which is exactly what I said. Observers? In PvT, a Protoss can know EXACTLY what a Terran is doing by the 7 minute mark. In PvZ, a Protoss can know EXACTLY what a Zerg is doing around the 8 minute mark. Terran has scans. While it has economic ramifications, it is still quite effective. Hilarious. You realize by the time a robo is down the Protoss has already committed to his tech path for the mid-game? And you realize a scan is a coin flip because only idiots hide their buildings at obvious scan locations? Any tactic used to deny overlord scouting can also be used to deny scan scouting.
I don't think you realize how staple a Robo is. You either need a forge or a Robo to just not INSTANTLY die from cloaked banshees. There is a reason why gate robo gate gate is the standard safe build against Terran. It's cute you think laying down a Robo is "committing to a tech path".
Scans are a bit hit or miss, I admit. I don't see how marines/stalkers patrolling the perimeter would prevent scan getting information though..
|
On May 04 2011 15:58 Namu wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:56 AKcommie wrote:On May 04 2011 15:48 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:43 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:34 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:29 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:26 Condor Hero wrote:On May 04 2011 15:24 walklightwhat wrote:On May 04 2011 15:22 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:18 walklightwhat wrote:
[quote]
What? Getting a hallucinated phoenix requires no tech-path commitment at all. What are you talking about? Le sigh. Getting a hallucinated phoenix requires you to research hallucination, which you either do before or after warp gate tech. If you do it before warp gate tech then you are delaying your warp gates => you are choosing not to go fast warp gate builds (ie 4 gate). Getting hallucination after warp gate tech means you've already committed to not doing a warp gate timing attack because you have to wait for hallucination to finish which is again a huge delay on your warp gate timing. By the time hallucination is researched in EITHER case you have already made significant tech commitments. Which requires less than it takes for Zerg to get Lair and Overlord Speed. 1. every zerg eventually needs to get lair 2. ovie speed has tons more uses than just scouting (drop play, save them from real phoenix, spread creep) 3. zergs have lots of overlords the state of hallucinate right now is just for scouting How can anyone argue the fact that Z has the same scouting oppurtunities as T or P? That blows my mind that people like you exist. Because they do. You have: 1. Speedlings - gives complete map control and proxy scouting if you choose to take it, whereas a Protoss or Terran has to scout around with an easily killable probe 2. Overlords - can be sacrificed to obtain a great deal of information on many maps, even if the opponent hides his tech (because you can tell a great deal about what a player is doing just by his SCV count, his gas count, his chronoboost energy, etc.) 3. Overseers - overlord with speed without overlord speed, and can drop down changelings 4. Creep tumors - scout virtually anywhere you have creep, complete information about enemy army movements until they are sniped 5. Overlords - did I mention overlords can be placed around the map to scout out incoming drops, attacks, etc.? Protoss has observers, hallucinated phoenixes, and real phoenixes for scouting. They can also drop pylons. How is that superior scouting? Terran has scans and sensor towers. And hellions if they can ever get in a base. That's it. 1. Speedlings - While you can get information from what units the protoss is making, a lot of guesswork is involved 2. Overlords - Look at Crossfire and tell me how the hell you can get an overlord in. 3. Too late. 4. If you scout with creep, I don't know how you exist. 5. That is not scouting.. Zerg has no definite way of scouting until Lair tech. To all the one base all-ins that currently happen, that is a huge problem. How the fuck is any of that an argument against Z having the same scouting opportunities as T and P? You think T and P can get in each other's base and know exactly what's going on? What applies to Z applies to everyone else. It's just that Z builds are currently more fragile than everyone else's builds. The point Idra is making is that this fragility requires Z to have perfect scouting. Which is exactly what I said. I'm sorry but that made me chuckle scan is literally exactly that. Protoss don't have a super great scouting option until halluc or obs. but they also have builds that pretty much hold up against everything, like Idra was saying. like what? i mean zerg also has builds that can hold up against anything, the problem at the hand is that they're very inefficient & put you behind far. To my knowledge toss builds that can hold anything are also inefficient & put you behind far if the expected strategies do not come in.. I can hold pretty much anything with limited scouting with 3 gate expo/2gate robo expo even if I don't see the all in coming i can generally do something about it and it dosent put me to far behind if no pressure is put on. If I was zerg and had been droning a push comes and your screwed if you don't see it.
Edit: lol my bad bold code is screwing all the posts up
|
On May 04 2011 15:49 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:47 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:42 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:39 L3g3nd_ wrote:
1. Speedlings arent going to tell you whats going on, you wont scout a 4gate or a starport or a stargate with speedlings, you cant get inside their base.
2. again, they are so slow that you will get denied by stalker/marine/sentry before seeing their tech path
3. overseers with speed come when its too late to prepare for a 4gate (and if you rush to them youre going to die because of the investment) they simply come too late for good early game scouting.
4. again, it wont scout inside their base, though its good for map control i agree, but still it wont scout inside their base.
5. yes, but again it wont be inside their base.
A good player can deny the zerg from knowning what they are doing inside their base. a terran could come out with a 7rax no gas build and could have completly denied a zergs scouting of it, while at the same time could have done a 1rax expand with an in base CC or a double starport build. you cant prepare for all of them! You're arguing a completely different point. Read what I was responding to. The guy was arguing that Zerg can't scout as well as Protoss and Terran. I'm sorry, but a Terran doing 7 rax can deny Protoss scouting as well as he can deny Zerg scouting. And while Terrans have scans, you can hide your buildings from scans just as you can hide them from overlords. It's the same story with scouting. The difference is that Idra believes that Zerg has to react perfectly whereas other races don't because Zerg is a reactive race. Protoss has observers and hallucination, and phnx. that is great for scouting, vs zerg hallicu is standard straight after warp gate. against terran an early robo build (such as what tyler loves) gets an obs in their base fairly early, before you need to make major decisions. and zerg is a reactive race...what idra "belives" is true Zerg needs to drone up when their opponent is macroing, and build units when they are doing pressure. With terran and protoss you are constantly building units and workers, as zerg you build drones until either about 70 or 80, or when your opponent is going to attack you. really then zerg scouting should be the best, not the worst. IdrA is 100% right and knows the game very well I, and others, have already addressed the hallucination point. And getting real phoenixes and observers are both "major" decisions. You don't just drop a robo and go back to 4 gating.
Why would you 4gate every game?
I'm pretty sure robo tech is standard for Protoss, isn't it? The only time I can think of when a Protoss DOESN'T make a robo against Z is when they do that Void Ray/Phoenix thing really early and go for the Queens. Even then, if that doesn't win you the game automatically (because the Zerg can't scout it unless they get lucky with their slow Overlords) you're going to have to make a robo eventually to get Colossus or Immortals or you are going to lose.
Robo is definitely NOT a major decision to get or not to get.
Hallucination maybe, but it's cheaper than sending two or three Overlords to die just so you can see whats in the Protoss base. You already have the Cyber, the only thing stopping you from getting Hallucination is that you don't want to spend 100/100 after you get Warpgates. Which is a pretty silly thing to say when you expect Zerg to suicide Overlords (which are also used for Supply, mind you) every time they want to see what you're making.
|
On May 04 2011 16:00 Elefanto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:54 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:48 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:43 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:34 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:29 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:26 Condor Hero wrote:On May 04 2011 15:24 walklightwhat wrote:On May 04 2011 15:22 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:18 walklightwhat wrote:
[quote]
What? Getting a hallucinated phoenix requires no tech-path commitment at all. What are you talking about? Le sigh. Getting a hallucinated phoenix requires you to research hallucination, which you either do before or after warp gate tech. If you do it before warp gate tech then you are delaying your warp gates => you are choosing not to go fast warp gate builds (ie 4 gate). Getting hallucination after warp gate tech means you've already committed to not doing a warp gate timing attack because you have to wait for hallucination to finish which is again a huge delay on your warp gate timing. By the time hallucination is researched in EITHER case you have already made significant tech commitments. Which requires less than it takes for Zerg to get Lair and Overlord Speed. 1. every zerg eventually needs to get lair 2. ovie speed has tons more uses than just scouting (drop play, save them from real phoenix, spread creep) 3. zergs have lots of overlords the state of hallucinate right now is just for scouting How can anyone argue the fact that Z has the same scouting oppurtunities as T or P? That blows my mind that people like you exist. Because they do. You have: 1. Speedlings - gives complete map control and proxy scouting if you choose to take it, whereas a Protoss or Terran has to scout around with an easily killable probe 2. Overlords - can be sacrificed to obtain a great deal of information on many maps, even if the opponent hides his tech (because you can tell a great deal about what a player is doing just by his SCV count, his gas count, his chronoboost energy, etc.) 3. Overseers - overlord with speed without overlord speed, and can drop down changelings 4. Creep tumors - scout virtually anywhere you have creep, complete information about enemy army movements until they are sniped 5. Overlords - did I mention overlords can be placed around the map to scout out incoming drops, attacks, etc.? Protoss has observers, hallucinated phoenixes, and real phoenixes for scouting. They can also drop pylons. How is that superior scouting? Terran has scans and sensor towers. And hellions if they can ever get in a base. That's it. 1. Speedlings - While you can get information from what units the protoss is making, a lot of guesswork is involved 2. Overlords - Look at Crossfire and tell me how the hell you can get an overlord in. 3. Too late. 4. If you scout with creep, I don't know how you exist. 5. That is not scouting.. Zerg has no definite way of scouting until Lair tech. To all the one base all-ins that currently happen, that is a huge problem. How the fuck is any of that an argument against Z having the same scouting opportunities as T and P? You think T and P can get in each other's base and know exactly what's going on? What applies to Z applies to everyone else. It's just that Z builds are currently more fragile than everyone else's builds. The point Idra is making is that this fragility requires Z to have perfect scouting. Which is exactly what I said. Observers? In PvT, a Protoss can know EXACTLY what a Terran is doing by the 7 minute mark. In PvZ, a Protoss can know EXACTLY what a Zerg is doing around the 8 minute mark. Terran has scans. While it has economic ramifications, it is still quite effective. And if terran opens for an economy greedy opening you are infinitely behind as protoss if you go for observers. You sacrified safety against economy. Zerg can surely do the same if they search for those options, 100%. In PvZ protoss has to do the same. 3 gate sentry expand is never on equal economy foot than a zerg going for hatch first for example or a greedy speedling opening. Protoss sacrified safety against economy. Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:52 Dfgj wrote:On May 04 2011 15:50 Elefanto wrote:On May 04 2011 15:47 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:42 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:39 L3g3nd_ wrote:
1. Speedlings arent going to tell you whats going on, you wont scout a 4gate or a starport or a stargate with speedlings, you cant get inside their base.
2. again, they are so slow that you will get denied by stalker/marine/sentry before seeing their tech path
3. overseers with speed come when its too late to prepare for a 4gate (and if you rush to them youre going to die because of the investment) they simply come too late for good early game scouting.
4. again, it wont scout inside their base, though its good for map control i agree, but still it wont scout inside their base.
5. yes, but again it wont be inside their base.
A good player can deny the zerg from knowning what they are doing inside their base. a terran could come out with a 7rax no gas build and could have completly denied a zergs scouting of it, while at the same time could have done a 1rax expand with an in base CC or a double starport build. you cant prepare for all of them! You're arguing a completely different point. Read what I was responding to. The guy was arguing that Zerg can't scout as well as Protoss and Terran. I'm sorry, but a Terran doing 7 rax can deny Protoss scouting as well as he can deny Zerg scouting. And while Terrans have scans, you can hide your buildings from scans just as you can hide them from overlords. It's the same story with scouting. The difference is that Idra believes that Zerg has to react perfectly whereas other races don't because Zerg is a reactive race. Protoss has observers and hallucination, and phnx. that is great for scouting, vs zerg hallicu is standard straight after warp gate. against terran an early robo build (such as what tyler loves) gets an obs in their base fairly early, before you need to make major decisions. and zerg is a reactive race...what idra "belives" is true Zerg needs to drone up when their opponent is macroing, and build units when they are doing pressure. With terran and protoss you are constantly building units and workers, as zerg you build drones until either about 70 or 80, or when your opponent is going to attack you. really then zerg scouting should be the best, not the worst. IdrA is 100% right and knows the game very well Yeah, but every protoss scouting option is a heavily investment, you get that? If zerg is the reactionary race as you say, maybe they should change their playstyle from "i need to know what my enemy is doing" to creating builds that make them safe from anything while not falling behind in economy? Protoss did the same with 3 gate sentry expand into hallucination. And LoL @ zerg should have the best scouting, how are you going to beat them? You can ask every high level zerg, if they know what coming they can deflect ANYTHING with ease and be so much ahead that it's impossible to lose if you're not a total noob. Yes, P scouting options also cost a lot and take investment, but P also requires less adjustment to adapt to situations, especially early on. If SC2 was about 'ways to instantly die to things that suddenly appeared', Z>P(>T) every day. Maybe zergs are using risky builds to get an edge in the economy. Maybe there are builds for zergs that let them gain more safety and sacrifice an edge in economy and let them be on equal footing or slightly behind? We can't say right now, but it may be possible. Spanishiwas style seems to hint at that. Zergs, especially idra, want everything at once. Starcraft is a game about limited information, learn to deal with the consequences.
Yes, it's a game about limited information, but games aren't either 'limited' or 'total' information. SCBW was also a game of limited information, but you were a lot less prone to instant death. The question is whether that is a good or bad thing.
Personally I think SC2 can be a little too knife-edged, it's too easy to just instantly win with one attack that wasn't perfectly prepared for, or one hidden building that wasn't scouted. I agree with a number of IdrA's points, and I agree with the points in your post, and don't think this is mutually exclusive - Z's a little weak in terms of being reactive in the earlygame because there's more to punish, but risky builds should give edges. How much of an edge is the issue.
I don't think any of that is necessarily in disagreement with day9's view, which is 'let's keep working at things and see what develops.'
|
On May 04 2011 15:49 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:47 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:42 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:39 L3g3nd_ wrote:
1. Speedlings arent going to tell you whats going on, you wont scout a 4gate or a starport or a stargate with speedlings, you cant get inside their base.
2. again, they are so slow that you will get denied by stalker/marine/sentry before seeing their tech path
3. overseers with speed come when its too late to prepare for a 4gate (and if you rush to them youre going to die because of the investment) they simply come too late for good early game scouting.
4. again, it wont scout inside their base, though its good for map control i agree, but still it wont scout inside their base.
5. yes, but again it wont be inside their base.
A good player can deny the zerg from knowning what they are doing inside their base. a terran could come out with a 7rax no gas build and could have completly denied a zergs scouting of it, while at the same time could have done a 1rax expand with an in base CC or a double starport build. you cant prepare for all of them! You're arguing a completely different point. Read what I was responding to. The guy was arguing that Zerg can't scout as well as Protoss and Terran. I'm sorry, but a Terran doing 7 rax can deny Protoss scouting as well as he can deny Zerg scouting. And while Terrans have scans, you can hide your buildings from scans just as you can hide them from overlords. It's the same story with scouting. The difference is that Idra believes that Zerg has to react perfectly whereas other races don't because Zerg is a reactive race. Protoss has observers and hallucination, and phnx. that is great for scouting, vs zerg hallicu is standard straight after warp gate. against terran an early robo build (such as what tyler loves) gets an obs in their base fairly early, before you need to make major decisions. and zerg is a reactive race...what idra "belives" is true Zerg needs to drone up when their opponent is macroing, and build units when they are doing pressure. With terran and protoss you are constantly building units and workers, as zerg you build drones until either about 70 or 80, or when your opponent is going to attack you. really then zerg scouting should be the best, not the worst. IdrA is 100% right and knows the game very well I, and others, have already addressed the hallucination point. And getting real phoenixes and observers are both "major" decisions. You don't just drop a robo and go back to 4 gating.
Are you telling me you need complete scouting info when you're doing an all-in?
|
On May 04 2011 16:00 Ihpares wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:49 Raiznhell wrote:On May 04 2011 15:34 Essentia wrote:On May 04 2011 15:28 Dfgj wrote:On May 04 2011 15:21 Sephimos wrote:
I'm SO glad that IdrA called Day9 out on his asinine balance stance.
"Zerg have no way to scout".
"I don't know that I agree"
"So, how can they scout?"
"Uhhh...welll..."
I love Day9 but his trolling was really retarded and IdrA panned him tonight. Well that's the issue right there - Zerg has some difficulty getting perfect information, but what race doesn't early on - and IdrA translates every weakness into an incapability that breaks the race. He focuses way too much on X isn't fair, so Zerg is shit, and not on specifically looking at X - the most productive part of the discussion was where they brought up the comparison between spines and sunkens, with spines being too slow to offer a strong reactive option. I don't blame Day9 for going straight to trolling when the only response that would fulfill what IdrA asks the rest of the time is to solve the Zerg race on the spot. Don't think either side really brought up their points in the greatest way. uhh terran can scan extremely early and toss has hallucination and/or obs pretty quick. But terran and toss dont have to have as early as a scout as zerg since zerg is the most vulnerable early game. So how does it make sense that the race that relies the most on early game scouting has the worst scouting abilities till lair. I don't really understand why Zergs feel they are so incredibly reactive. Want to stop Air tech blindly. build ONE Spore Crawler near the minerals lines of your main and Nat. Terran have to do the same thing practically every time they face a Zerg because GUARANTEED there's gunna be either Mutas, burrowed Infestors or if the Zerg is weird burrowed Roaches. Practically everything I do is reactive to Zerg in TvZ. I 2 rax because he's gunna 14 hatch. I bunker up and wallin with a crap load of buildings because of Zergling runbys and Baneling busts. I build crap loads of Turrets so I don't lose all my SCVs to Mutas. I make Tanks because he's gunna have a crap load more units than me so i need some sort of splash. Like I don't get how Zerg is the "reactive race" when pretty much everything you do in SCII regardless of the races is going to be a reaction to the action of your opponent even if it's on offensive reaction like say trying to rush a fast expander. Besides Terran scans are never wasted that early on because we need the MULES just to keep up with the other races in the early game. We scout the same way a Zerg should be able to scout with a worker looking all over the map for hidden things and doing pokes at the front. by the time we actually scan for tech a Zerg should probably have an overlord in the opponents base. =/ And saying that the overlord can be killed is poitnless because a scan can equally be fooled and wasted. Overlord costs 100 mins, MULE costs 300. Going to address this point by point. Zerg is considered the reactive race because their build is based off of your build. Mutas will not likely come out if a Terran goes mass Marine/No Tank, for example. Not all Zergs 14 hatch, Bunkers are free. Well, they won't be soon, but for now, still free. Spore crawlers require, effectively, four larva to create (Two drones, two drones to replace those two on the mineral line). Four larva can't be frittered away earlygame. Workers can't get past a wallin. Zerg physically cannot wallin until they're spreading creep. Doing this with anything but an excess queen means losing four larva, which again, is a terrible idea. Overlords die to marines easily, and quickly. Oh, and they can be fooled just as easily as a scan, but scans can't be killed. You're guaranteed a large field of vision. This field requires more than four overlords to attain, costing more minerals and more importantly, more larva. Oh, and this is paid upfront as opposed to over a period of mining time.
btw, bunkers aren't free, it takes scvs to build them which means loss of mining time
not that it's important but it seems every zerg forgets about that 
and I have no idea how a spore crawler takes 4 larva to create, unless you're including evo chamber as well... but that's like saying a turret takes 225 minerals + scvs not mining for the duration of building the ebay and turret. No, a turret costs 100 minerals + the mining time just for the turret. and zerg physically cannot wall in but once lings+queens are out all scouting by worker is cut off pretty. Not sure how you're equating 4 overlords sight to a scan. I'm not disagreeing entirely with what Idra was saying but your post just has a lot of wrong points...
|
On May 04 2011 16:02 rotegirte wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:51 Sephimos wrote:Also, people don't get to insert their pet meaning into Colbi's statement. "We invited Liquid, they chose not to attend" is a completely neutral statement. If someone can't process that, it's their own issue. If someone can't process difference in wording evoking different connotations, it is an intellectual issue. Imagine a scenario: 1) two people A and B 2) an issue arises 3) both of them do their best but fail to resolve it Now a third party sees the outcome and asks: What happened? There is a huge difference in saying a) "We both did our best, but failed to resolve it." b) Person A: "Well I everything I could.." Instead of Show nested quote +On May 02 2011 10:17 Colbi wrote:Liquid was invited, but chose not to participate. let's say: 1) Liquid was invited, but certain issues couldn't be resolved. 2) Liquid was invited, but unfortunately certain issues couldn't be resolved. 3) Liquid was invited, but unfortunately certain issues couldn't be resolved. I am sure you will hear official word about their decision from the team themselves. 4) Liquid was invited, but issues regarding parts of their lineup playing from KR unfortunately couldn't be resolved. 5) Liquid was invited, but deemed themselves unable to compete due to two of their players being in KR. As you can see, wording does make a difference in perception. Let it be clear, that playing the ball to TL is indeed considered fair and safe play in general PR business. But in his role, Colbi should have had more sensitivity going about it. There is a difference in handing the ball and dropping it. Tyler didn't get mad because Colbi was "playing it safe" for EG. That is totally reasonable. Colbi's response may have been sufficient for EG to be in the clear, but at the same time left TL with little to no graceful way to pick it up from there. At the very least, a sensible PR person should know the code of conduct between business partners.
This is an excellent summarization of the issue at hand. The first statement is completely true but its possible to clear both parties of responsibility while not putting words in anyones mouths, and thats what colbi should have done.
|
Great show guys, but fucking terrible debating. There were so many logical fallacies and poorly worded arguments.
Let's start with Day9 and Idra. Idra made a lot of good points, and gave very specific examples. Day9 did not give many examples which hurt him the debate. Ultimately, I chose that Idra won that debate in an earlier poll. That having been said, Idra completely ignored everything Day9 said and just talked over him so many times. Let's go over the logical fallacies first.
The biggest one to come to mind is Idra's idea of the "better" player. Day9 correctly pointed out that the better player is the one that wins. There is literally no other way to figure out who the better player is than to see the person who wins. Idra keeps on talking about how better players lose, but that statement makes no sense. You play the game you are given. Whether your mechanics or your strategy are more developed than your opponent, the better player is a fluid state that depends on results. As an example to this, MC is widely thought of as one of the best players in the world for winning two GSLs and dominating a number of smaller tournaments. When Tyler was commenting on his risky build, he wasn't suggesting that a bad player was beating better players, but merely that a good player was taking risks. According to Idra that situation never exists. For Idra, Nestea is always better than Naniwa, regardless of how many times Naniwa beats Nestea. There is then no logical way for Naniwa to be better than Nestea, an untenable position.
As for specific problems with Zerg, the biggest issue I see is Idra conflating ZvP and ZvT. As has been pointed out, the mechanics for scouting for both differ greatly. Azarkon has a great post I have put in a spoiler here about all the ways Zerg can scout.
+ Show Spoiler +On May 04 2011 15:34 Azarkon wrote:
You have:
1. Speedlings - gives complete map control and proxy scouting if you choose to take it, whereas a Protoss or Terran has to scout around with an easily killable probe
2. Overlords - can be sacrificed to obtain a great deal of information on many maps, even if the opponent hides his tech (because you can tell a great deal about what a player is doing just by his SCV count, his gas count, his chronoboost energy, etc.)
3. Overseers - overlord with speed without overlord speed, and can drop down changelings
4. Creep tumors - scout virtually anywhere you have creep, complete information about enemy army movements until they are sniped
5. Overlords - did I mention overlords can be placed around the map to scout out incoming drops, attacks, etc.?
Protoss has observers, hallucinated phoenixes, and real phoenixes for scouting. They can also drop pylons. How is that superior scouting?
Terran has scans and sensor towers. And hellions if they can ever get in a base. That's it.
Zerg has plenty of options in ZvP, although less in ZvT. Just as an example, a Zerg player can send an Overlord in early, either before a Stalker comes out, or for farther distances as a sacrifice, and find out how much energy there is on a Nexus, which can be crucial to figuring out what kind of a build a Protoss is doing. That would also allow, coming in from the back of the base, a probe count.
For a ZvT example, we have the recent Spanishiwa vs TLO best of 7. In games 2 and 3, they were long macro games, and I believe in one of them TLO fast expanded, which according to Idra should really hurt the Spanishiwa build. So what did Spanishiwa do? He scouted the FE with zerglings, and then expanded to a third base between the 5 and 6 minute mark (I believe, it was before 7 anyway). Spanishiwa had Hive tech before the 13 minute mark consistently. That is ridiculously good. Now I am not saying this will always work, but Idra just blindly saying that the Spanishiwa build is crap against FE due to no scouting is plainly false, as FEs are fairly easy to scout in the first place, as opposed to scouting specific tech.
Finally, Idra completely ignored Day9 when he said "I have to see the games". Day9 is basically saying that you cannot judge each game situation from a state of theorycrafting. If both players are making mistakes, then you cannot rightly say that the game is imbalanced. For example, in a game where the Zerg loses horribly, looking at it could provide you with a situation where you say "here when you poked with your zerglings, you misread this situation, which lead to you losing this way. It was avoidable." Similarly, a game where Protoss loses horrible could be "here you had the worst forcefield ever, and you got rolled with your weaker army, even though you were positioned better". Neither situation says anything about balanced; both say something about what those players need to work on. So while saying that he needs to see the games is dodging, it is a correct form of dodging since the nature of the debate Idra was having assumes that both players are playing well, which they very well might not be.
Moving on to the Tyler and Incontrol debate. Tyler worded himself in the worst way possible. He talked about having more posts, and other unrelated crap, and frankly hurt his argument by just being flustered. He also did not use the right words in describing his issues. I believe what he was going for was the idea of "Lying by Omission". Essentially there are two ways to lie. One is to tell a falsehood, which is malicious in nature (even if done for a good cause like saving someone, you are deceiving them). Lying by Omission is the other, and it is not malicious by nature. By not giving information to someone, it is still a form of lying, one that Colbie did, but not one that is in anyway malicious or on purpose (in most circumstances). No one is arguing that Colbie was trying to hurt Team Liquid with what he said. But he did leave out information, and Tyler correctly points out that that gives a particular viewpoint to those reading that are not privy to that information.
Incontrol also correctly points out that Tyler was being snide in the forum discussion. "Ah perspective" is not exactly a mannered way of talking about it. I can understand Tyler's annoyance at someone lying by omission, but his response certainly did not help the situation and was part of the reason it did turn out kind of ugly. Of course, Incontrol also did not help matters himself, since then in the forum and on Sotg they just talked past each other. Incontrol was talking about relationships to sponsors, which is unrelated to lying by omission. Everyone knows that Tyler is sponsored by Stride Gum. This means that everyone knows that Tyler is not being objective when discussing gum. It is open information for everyone. On the other hand, Colbie is addressing the situation from a standpoint of greater information and not giving that information. The two situations are not related at all.
I do not think people are being fair to Incontrol when they say that Tyler was right. I do agree that Tyler had the better point in that Colbie has information power and was abusing it, but Incontrol was right that the way Tyler went about pointing that out was not well done. Tyler has to recognize that because he is Liquid Tyler, his words do have an affect, so he cannot just be as cavalier as the rest of us can. He posted a little too quickly, with too little forethought, which made him post somewhat angry/annoyed on that thread. Even if he had the better point/higher moral ground, he somewhat sullied that by going about it in the wrong way.
TLDR Idra argued better, but made many logical fallacies. Day9 argued poorly, but was ignored when making good points. Incontrol made good points, and Tyler worded himself poorly. Tyler was right in his criticism of lack of information, but Incontrol was right that Tyler wasn't mannered enough in his position of power on the forum.
P.S. Again, great show. Loved Machine on there, first time I have heard him and he sounds like a super sweet guy. He looked kind of intimidating in the back of Idra's screen other times. Never would have guessed that he was so nice. :-).
|
On May 04 2011 15:54 Pebbz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:48 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:43 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:34 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:29 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:26 Condor Hero wrote:On May 04 2011 15:24 walklightwhat wrote:On May 04 2011 15:22 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:18 walklightwhat wrote:On May 04 2011 15:17 Azarkon wrote:
[quote]
Wrong. Idra's argument in a nutshell is that Z has to be able to react to every possible kind of build that T and P can do, because Z is a reactive race and if you don't react correctly then you die. To do that you need to be able to scout exactly what build they're doing. Otherwise it's a coin flip.
This is the heart of his argument. Not Z needs to be able to scout as well as T and P, because Z can already scout as well as T and P. Especially P, which has to either go hallucinated phoenixes or observers in order to make any meaningful scouting, and by the time you have those techs you have already made a significant commitment on tech path. What? Getting a hallucinated phoenix requires no tech-path commitment at all. What are you talking about? Le sigh. Getting a hallucinated phoenix requires you to research hallucination, which you either do before or after warp gate tech. If you do it before warp gate tech then you are delaying your warp gates => you are choosing not to go fast warp gate builds (ie 4 gate). Getting hallucination after warp gate tech means you've already committed to not doing a warp gate timing attack because you have to wait for hallucination to finish which is again a huge delay on your warp gate timing. By the time hallucination is researched in EITHER case you have already made significant tech commitments. Which requires less than it takes for Zerg to get Lair and Overlord Speed. 1. every zerg eventually needs to get lair 2. ovie speed has tons more uses than just scouting (drop play, save them from real phoenix, spread creep) 3. zergs have lots of overlords the state of hallucinate right now is just for scouting How can anyone argue the fact that Z has the same scouting oppurtunities as T or P? That blows my mind that people like you exist. Because they do. You have: 1. Speedlings - gives complete map control and proxy scouting if you choose to take it, whereas a Protoss or Terran has to scout around with an easily killable probe 2. Overlords - can be sacrificed to obtain a great deal of information on many maps, even if the opponent hides his tech (because you can tell a great deal about what a player is doing just by his SCV count, his gas count, his chronoboost energy, etc.) 3. Overseers - overlord with speed without overlord speed, and can drop down changelings 4. Creep tumors - scout virtually anywhere you have creep, complete information about enemy army movements until they are sniped 5. Overlords - did I mention overlords can be placed around the map to scout out incoming drops, attacks, etc.? Protoss has observers, hallucinated phoenixes, and real phoenixes for scouting. They can also drop pylons. How is that superior scouting? Terran has scans and sensor towers. And hellions if they can ever get in a base. That's it. 1. Speedlings - While you can get information from what units the protoss is making, a lot of guesswork is involved 2. Overlords - Look at Crossfire and tell me how the hell you can get an overlord in. 3. Too late. 4. If you scout with creep, I don't know how you exist. 5. That is not scouting.. Zerg has no definite way of scouting until Lair tech. To all the one base all-ins that currently happen, that is a huge problem. How the fuck is any of that an argument against Z having the same scouting opportunities as T and P? You think T and P can get in each other's base and know exactly what's going on? What applies to Z applies to everyone else. It's just that Z builds are currently more fragile than everyone else's builds. The point Idra is making is that this fragility requires Z to have perfect scouting. Which is exactly what I said. Observers? In PvT, a Protoss can know EXACTLY what a Terran is doing by the 7 minute mark. In PvZ, a Protoss can know EXACTLY what a Zerg is doing around the 8 minute mark. Terran has scans. While it has economic ramifications, it is still quite effective.
The good old scan.. at least you admit some 'economic ramifications' but you still seem to be under the impression that it covered the complete map. Scans are good to give you vision of a target area. In order to scout with a scan, you have to know where to look. So yes, it is great to scout if the lair is morphing to a hive or what tech the one base pre-lair zerg is using to cheese you with. Aside from that you have to rely on luck in order to scout with a scan and I have heard you Zergies have an aversion about relying on luck. Thank god, most master-level Zerg still build the majority of their tech buildings around their main hatch/lair/hive, so 1 scan indeed gives you vision, but after the first creep tumor or the latest after lair, you can hide your tech ANYWHERE.
Oh.. and did you know, that it's hardest to scout a Zerg? Because with creep he will see any scout - no matter how fast - coming miles away and - due to being really fast themselves - intercept before the scout sees anything.
|
Does anyone know where i can download the Mp3 of the latest episode?
Thanks
|
On May 04 2011 16:03 Creep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:49 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:47 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:42 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:39 L3g3nd_ wrote:
1. Speedlings arent going to tell you whats going on, you wont scout a 4gate or a starport or a stargate with speedlings, you cant get inside their base.
2. again, they are so slow that you will get denied by stalker/marine/sentry before seeing their tech path
3. overseers with speed come when its too late to prepare for a 4gate (and if you rush to them youre going to die because of the investment) they simply come too late for good early game scouting.
4. again, it wont scout inside their base, though its good for map control i agree, but still it wont scout inside their base.
5. yes, but again it wont be inside their base.
A good player can deny the zerg from knowning what they are doing inside their base. a terran could come out with a 7rax no gas build and could have completly denied a zergs scouting of it, while at the same time could have done a 1rax expand with an in base CC or a double starport build. you cant prepare for all of them! You're arguing a completely different point. Read what I was responding to. The guy was arguing that Zerg can't scout as well as Protoss and Terran. I'm sorry, but a Terran doing 7 rax can deny Protoss scouting as well as he can deny Zerg scouting. And while Terrans have scans, you can hide your buildings from scans just as you can hide them from overlords. It's the same story with scouting. The difference is that Idra believes that Zerg has to react perfectly whereas other races don't because Zerg is a reactive race. Protoss has observers and hallucination, and phnx. that is great for scouting, vs zerg hallicu is standard straight after warp gate. against terran an early robo build (such as what tyler loves) gets an obs in their base fairly early, before you need to make major decisions. and zerg is a reactive race...what idra "belives" is true Zerg needs to drone up when their opponent is macroing, and build units when they are doing pressure. With terran and protoss you are constantly building units and workers, as zerg you build drones until either about 70 or 80, or when your opponent is going to attack you. really then zerg scouting should be the best, not the worst. IdrA is 100% right and knows the game very well I, and others, have already addressed the hallucination point. And getting real phoenixes and observers are both "major" decisions. You don't just drop a robo and go back to 4 gating. Why would you 4gate every game? I'm pretty sure robo tech is standard for Protoss, isn't it? The only time I can think of when a Protoss DOESN'T make a robo against Z is when they do that Void Ray/Phoenix thing really early and go for the Queens. Even then, if that doesn't win you the game automatically (because the Zerg can't scout it unless they get lucky with their slow Overlords) you're going to have to make a robo eventually to get Colossus or Immortals or you are going to lose. Robo is definitely NOT a major decision to get or not to get. Hallucination maybe, but it's cheaper than sending two or three Overlords to die just so you can see whats in the Protoss base. You already have the Cyber, the only thing stopping you from getting Hallucination is that you don't want to spend 100/100 after you get Warpgates. Which is a pretty silly thing to say when you expect Zerg to suicide Overlords (which are also used for Supply, mind you) every time they want to see what you're making.
The bit about hallucination kinda applies to Zerg, too. 100/100 is exactly how much overlord speed costs, it researches faster than Hallucination (absent chrono boost, about the same with boost I think) and you don't have to suicide overlords if you have speed unless they have really good reaction and very high stalker numbers (which is worth 100 mins to find out, probably). It's also in a tech path you absolutely have to get.
|
On May 04 2011 16:02 Pebbz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:57 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:54 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:48 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:43 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:34 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:29 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 15:26 Condor Hero wrote:On May 04 2011 15:24 walklightwhat wrote:On May 04 2011 15:22 Azarkon wrote:
[quote]
Le sigh.
Getting a hallucinated phoenix requires you to research hallucination, which you either do before or after warp gate tech. If you do it before warp gate tech then you are delaying your warp gates => you are choosing not to go fast warp gate builds (ie 4 gate). Getting hallucination after warp gate tech means you've already committed to not doing a warp gate timing attack because you have to wait for hallucination to finish which is again a huge delay on your warp gate timing.
By the time hallucination is researched in EITHER case you have already made significant tech commitments. Which requires less than it takes for Zerg to get Lair and Overlord Speed. 1. every zerg eventually needs to get lair 2. ovie speed has tons more uses than just scouting (drop play, save them from real phoenix, spread creep) 3. zergs have lots of overlords the state of hallucinate right now is just for scouting How can anyone argue the fact that Z has the same scouting oppurtunities as T or P? That blows my mind that people like you exist. Because they do. You have: 1. Speedlings - gives complete map control and proxy scouting if you choose to take it, whereas a Protoss or Terran has to scout around with an easily killable probe 2. Overlords - can be sacrificed to obtain a great deal of information on many maps, even if the opponent hides his tech (because you can tell a great deal about what a player is doing just by his SCV count, his gas count, his chronoboost energy, etc.) 3. Overseers - overlord with speed without overlord speed, and can drop down changelings 4. Creep tumors - scout virtually anywhere you have creep, complete information about enemy army movements until they are sniped 5. Overlords - did I mention overlords can be placed around the map to scout out incoming drops, attacks, etc.? Protoss has observers, hallucinated phoenixes, and real phoenixes for scouting. They can also drop pylons. How is that superior scouting? Terran has scans and sensor towers. And hellions if they can ever get in a base. That's it. 1. Speedlings - While you can get information from what units the protoss is making, a lot of guesswork is involved 2. Overlords - Look at Crossfire and tell me how the hell you can get an overlord in. 3. Too late. 4. If you scout with creep, I don't know how you exist. 5. That is not scouting.. Zerg has no definite way of scouting until Lair tech. To all the one base all-ins that currently happen, that is a huge problem. How the fuck is any of that an argument against Z having the same scouting opportunities as T and P? You think T and P can get in each other's base and know exactly what's going on? What applies to Z applies to everyone else. It's just that Z builds are currently more fragile than everyone else's builds. The point Idra is making is that this fragility requires Z to have perfect scouting. Which is exactly what I said. Observers? In PvT, a Protoss can know EXACTLY what a Terran is doing by the 7 minute mark. In PvZ, a Protoss can know EXACTLY what a Zerg is doing around the 8 minute mark. Terran has scans. While it has economic ramifications, it is still quite effective. Hilarious. You realize by the time a robo is down the Protoss has already committed to his tech path for the mid-game? And you realize a scan is a coin flip because only idiots hide their buildings at obvious scan locations? Any tactic used to deny overlord scouting can also be used to deny scan scouting. I don't think you realize how staple a Robo is. You either need a forge or a Robo to just not INSTANTLY die from cloaked banshees. There is a reason why gate robo gate gate is the standard safe build against Terran. Scans are a bit hit or miss, I admit. I don't see how marines/stalkers patrolling the perimeter would prevent scan getting information though..
A robo is staple except it:
1. Isn't part of a 4 gate build.
2. Isn't part of any early star gate build.
3. Isn't part of a DT rush or DT expand build.
4. Isn't part of a blink stalker build.
5. Isn't part of a nexus first or forge expand until way after roach/marine-marauder timings.
And you deny overlord scouting by putting your buildings in different locations. An overlord has enough hps to see a region within the base even with patrolling marines, but cannot survive to see the entire base.
|
On May 04 2011 15:54 TreDawg wrote:
I think Tyler was completely right about the PR thing. Being a forum this is a place of discussion. If a discussion takes place based on incomplete information then its bullshit. What Colbi said was technically true but it was phrased in a negative manner and it was incomplete information. Without further qualifying Colbi's explanation it makes Liquid look like a bunch of stuck up pricks, which is absolutely not the case.
Actually... it was a neutral statement. It is only when people get upset over it that it looks negative. Am I seriously the only one here (regardless of which side you are on) that thinks it is ridiculous to react this much to a single sentence?
I'm no longer aloud to quote it as the topic was closed for whatever reason... but this was a direct quote from Tyler if you want to look it up.
"Liquid showed interest, but EG chose not to accommodate us.
Ah, perspective!" - Liquid Tyler
Now let me quote you. "If a discussion takes place based on incomplete information then its bullshit" "... but it was phrased in a negative manner and it was incomplete information." "Without further qualifying [Tyler's] explanation it makes [EG] look like a bunch of stuck up pricks, which is absolutely not the case."
I have a few things to say here... and I will start with the last part. So I switched the roles. Now based off Tyler's response it looks like EG are some snotty greedy group of guys who doesn't want TL taking their money, so they purposely chose not to accommodate TL (based off how you interpret things). Why are people not getting angry with Tyler? Well that's because of bias. I also don't feel that people should attack Tyler for that statement, but the same thing is being done to Colbi just because it was mentioned when a notable player said it while in an emotional state.
Also... the more obvious part is that what he (Tyler) said also lacked information... and if I were to look at it how you looked at Colbi's response... then I could argue that it is negative.
Here is the fact. It is a single... fucking... sentence. He clearly was not trying to be a dick. Many teams and players have declined from events in the past... and guess what... we often got a "they declined" response and it wasn't a big deal. The same thing happened here... except it got attention from a very notable person so people are blowing it out of proportion.
Please tell me where I am going wrong. I am not saying nit pick the small details, but address my overall argument that it is a single sentence that is being blown way out of proportion... and that he shouldn't be held so accountable for a single wording that can very easily be interpreted as neutral.
|
On May 04 2011 15:56 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:51 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:49 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:47 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:42 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:39 L3g3nd_ wrote:
1. Speedlings arent going to tell you whats going on, you wont scout a 4gate or a starport or a stargate with speedlings, you cant get inside their base.
2. again, they are so slow that you will get denied by stalker/marine/sentry before seeing their tech path
3. overseers with speed come when its too late to prepare for a 4gate (and if you rush to them youre going to die because of the investment) they simply come too late for good early game scouting.
4. again, it wont scout inside their base, though its good for map control i agree, but still it wont scout inside their base.
5. yes, but again it wont be inside their base.
A good player can deny the zerg from knowning what they are doing inside their base. a terran could come out with a 7rax no gas build and could have completly denied a zergs scouting of it, while at the same time could have done a 1rax expand with an in base CC or a double starport build. you cant prepare for all of them! You're arguing a completely different point. Read what I was responding to. The guy was arguing that Zerg can't scout as well as Protoss and Terran. I'm sorry, but a Terran doing 7 rax can deny Protoss scouting as well as he can deny Zerg scouting. And while Terrans have scans, you can hide your buildings from scans just as you can hide them from overlords. It's the same story with scouting. The difference is that Idra believes that Zerg has to react perfectly whereas other races don't because Zerg is a reactive race. Protoss has observers and hallucination, and phnx. that is great for scouting, vs zerg hallicu is standard straight after warp gate. against terran an early robo build (such as what tyler loves) gets an obs in their base fairly early, before you need to make major decisions. and zerg is a reactive race...what idra "belives" is true Zerg needs to drone up when their opponent is macroing, and build units when they are doing pressure. With terran and protoss you are constantly building units and workers, as zerg you build drones until either about 70 or 80, or when your opponent is going to attack you. really then zerg scouting should be the best, not the worst. IdrA is 100% right and knows the game very well I, and others, have already addressed the hallucination point. And getting real phoenixes and observers are both "major" decisions. You don't just drop a robo and go back to 4 gating. what scouting do you need to do when youre 4gating lol If you are 4gating the onus is on the other player to adapt to the aggression. you dont need to scout when you 4gate. No shit? Well guess what, 4 gate is a coin flip. Because if you 4 gate against someone who is prepared against it you basically lose. It's no different than a Zerg roach ling all-in that fails and then they lose. Idra is pissed that he can be beaten by coin flips which is the whole reason for his rant against Day9 on SOTG. But as Tyler pointed out, it's not just Zerg who has to deal with coin flips. 3 gate expand isn't safe against many builds - Idra simply refuses to acknowledge it because every time Protoss loses he just calls the player bad.
What you mean no shit? i had to state the obvious because whoever i was responding to didn't understand.
It depends how you 4gate. if you simply build 4gates then attack, sure its a bit of a coin toss. but top level players dont think like that. they will play mind games on their opponent. a good example was cruncher vs naniwa in the TSL. CrunCher gas stealed NaNiwa, which would make NaNiwa think he wasn't 4gating and consequently not be prepared for it, the same kind of things can be done in other match ups. maybe sacrficie your 4 gate timing by not chrono boosting the cyber at all vs zerg, and then doing an all in when he isnt expecting it. or the fake expand builds we see going on. These kind of possibilites turn the 4gate away from a coin flip and more into a clever tactic.
and what at your last point? a 3gate sentry expo is protoss's safe build against zerg, it can hold off any 1base all in or timing attack....
|
On May 04 2011 16:05 flowSthead wrote:Great show guys, but fucking terrible debating. There were so many logical fallacies and poorly worded arguments. Let's start with Day9 and Idra. Idra made a lot of good points, and gave very specific examples. Day9 did not give many examples which hurt him the debate. Ultimately, I chose that Idra won that debate in an earlier poll. That having been said, Idra completely ignored everything Day9 said and just talked over him so many times. Let's go over the logical fallacies first. The biggest one to come to mind is Idra's idea of the "better" player. Day9 correctly pointed out that the better player is the one that wins. There is literally no other way to figure out who the better player is than to see the person who wins. Idra keeps on talking about how better players lose, but that statement makes no sense. You play the game you are given. Whether your mechanics or your strategy are more developed than your opponent, the better player is a fluid state that depends on results. As an example to this, MC is widely thought of as one of the best players in the world for winning two GSLs and dominating a number of smaller tournaments. When Tyler was commenting on his risky build, he wasn't suggesting that a bad player was beating better players, but merely that a good player was taking risks. According to Idra that situation never exists. For Idra, Nestea is always better than Naniwa, regardless of how many times Naniwa beats Nestea. There is then no logical way for Naniwa to be better than Nestea, an untenable position. As for specific problems with Zerg, the biggest issue I see is Idra conflating ZvP and ZvT. As has been pointed out, the mechanics for scouting for both differ greatly. Azarkon has a great post I have put in a spoiler here about all the ways Zerg can scout. + Show Spoiler +On May 04 2011 15:34 Azarkon wrote:
You have:
1. Speedlings - gives complete map control and proxy scouting if you choose to take it, whereas a Protoss or Terran has to scout around with an easily killable probe
2. Overlords - can be sacrificed to obtain a great deal of information on many maps, even if the opponent hides his tech (because you can tell a great deal about what a player is doing just by his SCV count, his gas count, his chronoboost energy, etc.)
3. Overseers - overlord with speed without overlord speed, and can drop down changelings
4. Creep tumors - scout virtually anywhere you have creep, complete information about enemy army movements until they are sniped
5. Overlords - did I mention overlords can be placed around the map to scout out incoming drops, attacks, etc.?
Protoss has observers, hallucinated phoenixes, and real phoenixes for scouting. They can also drop pylons. How is that superior scouting?
Terran has scans and sensor towers. And hellions if they can ever get in a base. That's it.
Zerg has plenty of options in ZvP, although less in ZvT. Just as an example, a Zerg player can send an Overlord in early, either before a Stalker comes out, or for farther distances as a sacrifice, and find out how much energy there is on a Nexus, which can be crucial to figuring out what kind of a build a Protoss is doing. That would also allow, coming in from the back of the base, a probe count. For a ZvT example, we have the recent Spanishiwa vs TLO best of 7. In games 2 and 3, they were long macro games, and I believe in one of them TLO fast expanded, which according to Idra should really hurt the Spanishiwa build. So what did Spanishiwa do? He scouted the FE with zerglings, and then expanded to a third base between the 5 and 6 minute mark (I believe, it was before 7 anyway). Spanishiwa had Hive tech before the 13 minute mark consistently. That is ridiculously good. Now I am not saying this will always work, but Idra just blindly saying that the Spanishiwa build is crap against FE due to no scouting is plainly false, as FEs are fairly easy to scout in the first place, as opposed to scouting specific tech. Finally, Idra completely ignored Day9 when he said "I have to see the games". Day9 is basically saying that you cannot judge each game situation from a state of theorycrafting. If both players are making mistakes, then you cannot rightly say that the game is imbalanced. For example, in a game where the Zerg loses horribly, looking at it could provide you with a situation where you say "here when you poked with your zerglings, you misread this situation, which lead to you losing this way. It was avoidable." Similarly, a game where Protoss loses horrible could be "here you had the worst forcefield ever, and you got rolled with your weaker army, even though you were positioned better". Neither situation says anything about balanced; both say something about what those players need to work on. So while saying that he needs to see the games is dodging, it is a correct form of dodging since the nature of the debate Idra was having assumes that both players are playing well, which they very well might not be. Moving on to the Tyler and Incontrol debate. Tyler worded himself in the worst way possible. He talked about having more posts, and other unrelated crap, and frankly hurt his argument by just being flustered. He also did not use the right words in describing his issues. I believe what he was going for was the idea of "Lying by Omission". Essentially there are two ways to lie. One is to tell a falsehood, which is malicious in nature (even if done for a good cause like saving someone, you are deceiving them). Lying by Omission is the other, and it is not malicious by nature. By not giving information to someone, it is still a form of lying, one that Colbie did, but not one that is in anyway malicious or on purpose (in most circumstances). No one is arguing that Colbie was trying to hurt Team Liquid with what he said. But he did leave out information, and Tyler correctly points out that that gives a particular viewpoint to those reading that are not privy to that information. Incontrol also correctly points out that Tyler was being snide in the forum discussion. "Ah perspective" is not exactly a mannered way of talking about it. I can understand Tyler's annoyance at someone lying by omission, but his response certainly did not help the situation and was part of the reason it did turn out kind of ugly. Of course, Incontrol also did not help matters himself, since then in the forum and on Sotg they just talked past each other. Incontrol was talking about relationships to sponsors, which is unrelated to lying by omission. Everyone knows that Tyler is sponsored by Stride Gum. This means that everyone knows that Tyler is not being objective when discussing gum. It is open information for everyone. On the other hand, Colbie is addressing the situation from a standpoint of greater information and not giving that information. The two situations are not related at all. I do not think people are being fair to Incontrol when they say that Tyler was right. I do agree that Tyler had the better point in that Colbie has information power and was abusing it, but Incontrol was right that the way Tyler went about pointing that out was not well done. Tyler has to recognize that because he is Liquid Tyler, his words do have an affect, so he cannot just be as cavalier as the rest of us can. He posted a little too quickly, with too little forethought, which made him post somewhat angry/annoyed on that thread. Even if he had the better point/higher moral ground, he somewhat sullied that by going about it in the wrong way. TLDR Idra argued better, but made many logical fallacies. Day9 argued poorly, but was ignored when making good points. Incontrol made good points, and Tyler worded himself poorly. Tyler was right in his criticism of lack of information, but Incontrol was right that Tyler wasn't mannered enough in his position of power on the forum.P.S. Again, great show. Loved Machine on there, first time I have heard him and he sounds like a super sweet guy. He looked kind of intimidating in the back of Idra's screen other times. Never would have guessed that he was so nice. :-).
I agree with absolutely everything you said but would like to add that Tyler explained his view in the worst way possible because he explained what he was feeling when he formulated his posts (the defensive feeling of someone who is new and rustling things up perhaps) and that the post count comment was just a way of illustrating what Tyler was feeling at the time and in no way a remark about the statement and situation itself.
|
On May 04 2011 15:54 TreDawg wrote:
I think Tyler was completely right about the PR thing. Being a forum this is a place of discussion. If a discussion takes place based on incomplete information then its bullshit. What Colbi said was technically true but it was phrased in a negative manner and it was incomplete information. Without further qualifying Colbi's explanation it makes Liquid look like a bunch of stuck up pricks, which is absolutely not the case.
I don't agree it was phrased in a negativly manner. I read it as Team liquid had declined to participate for some unknown reason. How is that negative? It makes you wonder but it certainly doesn't make them look like stuck up pricks...
|
On May 04 2011 16:04 Pebbz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:49 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:47 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:42 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 15:39 L3g3nd_ wrote:
1. Speedlings arent going to tell you whats going on, you wont scout a 4gate or a starport or a stargate with speedlings, you cant get inside their base.
2. again, they are so slow that you will get denied by stalker/marine/sentry before seeing their tech path
3. overseers with speed come when its too late to prepare for a 4gate (and if you rush to them youre going to die because of the investment) they simply come too late for good early game scouting.
4. again, it wont scout inside their base, though its good for map control i agree, but still it wont scout inside their base.
5. yes, but again it wont be inside their base.
A good player can deny the zerg from knowning what they are doing inside their base. a terran could come out with a 7rax no gas build and could have completly denied a zergs scouting of it, while at the same time could have done a 1rax expand with an in base CC or a double starport build. you cant prepare for all of them! You're arguing a completely different point. Read what I was responding to. The guy was arguing that Zerg can't scout as well as Protoss and Terran. I'm sorry, but a Terran doing 7 rax can deny Protoss scouting as well as he can deny Zerg scouting. And while Terrans have scans, you can hide your buildings from scans just as you can hide them from overlords. It's the same story with scouting. The difference is that Idra believes that Zerg has to react perfectly whereas other races don't because Zerg is a reactive race. Protoss has observers and hallucination, and phnx. that is great for scouting, vs zerg hallicu is standard straight after warp gate. against terran an early robo build (such as what tyler loves) gets an obs in their base fairly early, before you need to make major decisions. and zerg is a reactive race...what idra "belives" is true Zerg needs to drone up when their opponent is macroing, and build units when they are doing pressure. With terran and protoss you are constantly building units and workers, as zerg you build drones until either about 70 or 80, or when your opponent is going to attack you. really then zerg scouting should be the best, not the worst. IdrA is 100% right and knows the game very well I, and others, have already addressed the hallucination point. And getting real phoenixes and observers are both "major" decisions. You don't just drop a robo and go back to 4 gating. Are you telling me you need complete scouting info when you're doing an all-in?
Isn't that what Idra is saying, at least partly? The correct response to many greed builds from Terran and Protoss is to do an all-in attack, but in order to do this Idra feels like he has to know that the opponent is going these greed builds, which is not what happens when a Protoss 4-gates or a Terran marine SCV all-ins. No, they're gambling. So is it unfair when Zerg has to do the same?
|
On May 04 2011 16:02 rotegirte wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 15:51 Sephimos wrote:Also, people don't get to insert their pet meaning into Colbi's statement. "We invited Liquid, they chose not to attend" is a completely neutral statement. If someone can't process that, it's their own issue. let's say: 1) Liquid was invited, but certain issues couldn't be resolved. 2) Liquid was invited, but unfortunately certain issues couldn't be resolved. 3) Liquid was invited, but unfortunately certain issues couldn't be resolved. I am sure you will hear official word about their decision from the team themselves. 4) Liquid was invited, but issues regarding parts of their lineup playing from KR unfortunately couldn't be resolved. 5) Liquid was invited, but deemed themselves unable to compete due to two of their players being in KR.
Maybe Liquid doesn't want the issue discussed at all. That would be Colbi being presumptuous to imply that they will respond or have any desire to share their side. All of these scenarios mean that he knows Liquid desire to discuss the issue in public. What if it's not the case?
The stance he took is the correct one. If Liquid wants to respond, then they're perfectly capable of doing so.
|
On May 04 2011 16:05 flowSthead wrote:
TLDR Idra argued better, but made many logical fallacies. Day9 argued poorly, but was ignored when making good points. Incontrol made good points, and Tyler worded himself poorly. Tyler was right in his criticism of lack of information, but Incontrol was right that Tyler wasn't mannered enough in his position of power on the forum.
P.S. Again, great show. Loved Machine on there, first time I have heard him and he sounds like a super sweet guy. He looked kind of intimidating in the back of Idra's screen other times. Never would have guessed that he was so nice. :-).
Wow, really well written post, I agree with almost everything you've said
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
