|
On May 04 2011 16:19 jmbthirteen wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:15 thedz wrote:On May 04 2011 16:10 Falcor wrote:On May 04 2011 16:02 rotegirte wrote: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. 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. i agree with your post and said the similar thing a page or 2 back. But also remember colbi is probably a sensible pr person. They are competing brands. So using wording to promote his brand is very smart. Because look at the outcome tyler looks like ass, tyler is a representative of tl so it makes tl look bad(partly), and he comes off scott free(for the most part). EG definitely could have been more forthcoming, but Tyler's response brought it to a new level of negativity. The first was a neutral PR response that omitted some information in a way that some view as shady. Tyler's response pushed his frustration and anger overtly into the spotlight, and explicitly made EG's statement seem like it was a premeditated post to make TL look bad. All in all, it mostly looks like a bunch of people got up on the wrong side of the bed several mornings in a row. Let me start by saying I don't mean to target this at you. If people took Colbi's first response as negative and shady, they need to stop living in a fucking fairy world. This is the real world.
Hmm. His comment wasn't particularly negative but it was not as neutral as it could have been and left TL's end of the story open which is mildly unsettling when all he had to say was "TL declined because of unresolvable server issue" that has completely fine neutrality and clears EG and TL of responsibility while what he actually said cleared EG of responsibility but left TL open for either neutral or negative reasons.
|
On May 04 2011 16:16 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:08 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:56 Azarkon wrote: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.... Lol what. I brought up robo after 4 gate to make a point about Protoss committing to a strategy before he is able to scout and you respond with "why of course you can't scout before you 4 gate!" and expect the conversation to proceed logically forward? You just proved my point. Protoss can't scout before he commits to a mid game strategy.
4gate is not a midgame strategy..
|
On May 04 2011 16:14 L3g3nd_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:09 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 16:04 Pebbz 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. 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? ummmm what? no. just no. The correct response, or at least one correct response (sometimes an all in is an option but but by no means a necessity), to a greed build (i assume you mean an eco build) Also a zerg can scout a greed/eco build, speedlings will be able to see when an expo is taken etc. Its when a player walls in and you dont know what tech or build he is doing that you are in trouble. i dont think thats what idra was saying, even partly, at all.
Greed builds aren't limited to expand-based greed builds. They can also be tech greed builds or worker greed builds. A greed build is, practically speaking, any build that leaves obvious holes in its defenses - for example when a Protoss cuts army production to get out lots of probes early on. All-ins are correct responses in many of these cases because by the time you find them it's already too late to play catch up. All-ins aren't simply an option. They're often the best choice.
|
On May 04 2011 16:19 AndAgain wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:11 mahnini wrote:On May 04 2011 15:52 riboflavin wrote:On May 04 2011 15:40 VIB wrote:
- Idra was right about imbalance, but wasn't able to put his thoughts into words as well as he wanted
- Day9 is afraid to admit to himself that the game just might not be perfect
- Nony knows he's wrong, but is too cocky to admit it in public
- InControl was perfect and gets me gayer each time I watch him In a single post you managed to capture 100 percent of what I completely disagree with. It is like you are trolling me specifically! Bravo to you sir. - In a way, Idra is right, but it turns out he wasn't actually talking about imbalance he was talking about game design. I thought most people were of the opinion that we don't know enough to make definitive balance statements, yet IdrA believes he can (rather he thinks it should be discussed as fact rather than be up for debate). Time will prove out on this, so I think all one can do here is wait and see. "Seek first to understand before you try to be understood."
idra wasn't right at all and day9 responded correctly. i believe tyler made a post somewhere about how idra's train of thought is flawed (the whole door analogy). day9 was flustered because idra's response made no sense to his own. he was basically saying it will take time to decide whether zerg is underpowered or not and talking about balance issues now doesn't help the race progress. to which idra responds yeah but zerg is underpowered right now, you have no solution therefore it will always be underpowered. and day9 goes yeah but if it really is underpowered the progression of the game will show it aka his whole balancing metagame thing. idra responds that it is underpowered NOW and day9 has no solution NOW therefore it is imbalanced. If Idra was right with his point about zerg not having either a single build that is solid against anything or a reliable scouting ability, then one must concede that zerg is broken. I think that was a legitimate issue and Day9 seemed to avoid discussing it. That's why I wasn't satisfied with Day9's response.
But how do you define solid against anything? Giving you an even chance against even the riskiest of openers, like 14nexus or (at the other end of the spectrum) proxy 2gate? The issue with having that single, perfect, solid opener that never gives you a disadvantage is a stagnant metagame for Z.
This also forces other players to do their risky openings or suffer disadvantages themselves, since anything that can hold all-ins 100% and be on equal footing with FE economically has to be better in both ways than a "standard" risk-less build.
|
On May 04 2011 16:20 flowSthead wrote:
If you stopped reading, then you have no right to judge what I wrote.
Actually, I do.
You made a statement of fact - "Day9 is correct". Whatever your reasoning is doesn't matter to me - it's incorrect.
Again, in non-equal environments, winning != better. It's that simple. Nothing you can say can ever change that fact. There's a million examples of why I'm right in the real world that have nothing to do with game design - social castes, business/finance, environment, welfare policy, etc.
If you can't grasp this single concept, the rest of your reasoning is based on faulty logic and thus can be ignored.
|
On May 04 2011 16:24 Pebbz wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:16 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 16:08 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:56 Azarkon wrote: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.... Lol what. I brought up robo after 4 gate to make a point about Protoss committing to a strategy before he is able to scout and you respond with "why of course you can't scout before you 4 gate!" and expect the conversation to proceed logically forward? You just proved my point. Protoss can't scout before he commits to a mid game strategy. 4gate is not a midgame strategy..
Stop mincing words. 4 gate is not an all-in in PvP, it's standard.
|
On May 04 2011 16:20 rotegirte wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:09 I_Love_Bacon wrote:+ Show Spoiler +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. You do realize that these examples are not to be taken literally, but showcasing the impact of wording? You taking it out of context is in fact a perfect exhibit how omitting information works.
The point I'm making is that anything that goes into detail on the issue can be perceived as airing out business perhaps TL doesn't want to discuss. Anything other than the most basic answer gives some sort of additional information that perhaps shouldn't be given. Just because in this case TL was willing to discuss the issue doesn't mean that's always the case.
Let's say we take the example that a lot of people are talking about with the idea of "unresolvable server issues." Well, without further context that sounds more like Teamliquid is complaining than anything. That particular statement is not only more insulting, but it, once again, talks about business TL might not want to discuss at all.
|
On May 04 2011 16:22 Zeri wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:19 jmbthirteen wrote:On May 04 2011 16:15 thedz wrote:On May 04 2011 16:10 Falcor wrote:On May 04 2011 16:02 rotegirte wrote: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. 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. i agree with your post and said the similar thing a page or 2 back. But also remember colbi is probably a sensible pr person. They are competing brands. So using wording to promote his brand is very smart. Because look at the outcome tyler looks like ass, tyler is a representative of tl so it makes tl look bad(partly), and he comes off scott free(for the most part). EG definitely could have been more forthcoming, but Tyler's response brought it to a new level of negativity. The first was a neutral PR response that omitted some information in a way that some view as shady. Tyler's response pushed his frustration and anger overtly into the spotlight, and explicitly made EG's statement seem like it was a premeditated post to make TL look bad. All in all, it mostly looks like a bunch of people got up on the wrong side of the bed several mornings in a row. Let me start by saying I don't mean to target this at you. If people took Colbi's first response as negative and shady, they need to stop living in a fucking fairy world. This is the real world. Hmm. His comment wasn't particularly negative but it was not as neutral as it could have been and left TL's end of the story open which is mildly unsettling when all he had to say was "TL declined because of unresolvable server issue" that has completely fine neutrality and clears EG and TL of responsibility while what he actually said cleared EG of responsibility but left TL open for either neutral or negative reasons.
Thats where it being an open thread comes into factor. Liquid members can say why they declined
|
Tasteless is hilarious btw, its a shame he was on in the middle of such carnage haha but he should come back
The look on Tasteless's face the first 10 minutes or so of the argument betwee Tyler and Geoff was priceless. "What the fuck am I doing here?"
|
On May 04 2011 16:10 Ihpares wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:05 Namu wrote:On May 04 2011 16:00 Ihpares wrote: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... I was ignoring mining time as that could be taken out of all three races (Less so for Protoss, but I'll give them a break). Evo chamber that early in the game is just going to sit and be wasted, and thus should not be built UNLESS it's absolutely needed. By the time the EBay is actually needed (For muta harass), one should be out to start working on upgrades anyway as you're already in the mid-late game. Lings can be outrun before speed, and by the time speed is out, scan is available. The potential to scout is present. Scans radius is humongous, all I'm saying there. In order to get that coverage, you'd need 3-4 overlords.
Lings can be outrun before speed? Slow lings are faster than workers off creep and MUCH faster on creep. Probes may be different, because they might regen shields inbetween hits, but SCVs are done for once lings are out, if they don't have a head start going home or the Zerg gets juked and allows the SCV in. Scan has a radius of 13. Overlords have a sight range of 11. You can place buildings to hide from overlords and you can place buildings to make it really really unlikely that they get scanned (read: anywhere that is not near your hatches). Creep allows you to see any physical scout approaching and as a Zerg you have the speed to intercept a scout. So we both have to play partially in the dark. I have no clue, if you go roaches or bane, spire or infestors, ultras or broods, without either investing massively or getting lucky or you making an error and permitting me to see crucial tech. Zerg at the other had has faster and cheaper scouts and speed overseers and mutas will give you vision or most of the map at one point. Add to the fact that especially Terran needs to erect half a city in order to create mass amounts of a unit...
|
On May 04 2011 16:22 Zeri wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:19 jmbthirteen wrote:On May 04 2011 16:15 thedz wrote:On May 04 2011 16:10 Falcor wrote:On May 04 2011 16:02 rotegirte wrote: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. 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. i agree with your post and said the similar thing a page or 2 back. But also remember colbi is probably a sensible pr person. They are competing brands. So using wording to promote his brand is very smart. Because look at the outcome tyler looks like ass, tyler is a representative of tl so it makes tl look bad(partly), and he comes off scott free(for the most part). EG definitely could have been more forthcoming, but Tyler's response brought it to a new level of negativity. The first was a neutral PR response that omitted some information in a way that some view as shady. Tyler's response pushed his frustration and anger overtly into the spotlight, and explicitly made EG's statement seem like it was a premeditated post to make TL look bad. All in all, it mostly looks like a bunch of people got up on the wrong side of the bed several mornings in a row. Let me start by saying I don't mean to target this at you. If people took Colbi's first response as negative and shady, they need to stop living in a fucking fairy world. This is the real world. Hmm. His comment wasn't particularly negative but it was not as neutral as it could have been and left TL's end of the story open which is mildly unsettling when all he had to say was "TL declined because of unresolvable server issue" that has completely fine neutrality and clears EG and TL of responsibility while what he actually said cleared EG of responsibility but left TL open for either neutral or negative reasons.
Are we really going to split hairs now, and start imagining how Colbi's original neutral, benign response could even be more perfectly neutral and benign?
It's like trying to figure out how to make a white shirt even whiter. Colbi's original response wasn't inflammatory at all.
|
On May 04 2011 16:11 Raiznhell wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:00 Ihpares wrote: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. Going to address this point by point. So what's the reaction involved in the 14 hatch builds? Also all Terran and Protoss builds are in there own right a reaction to whatever Zerg may be doing. So you'd rather lose the game instead of losing 4 larva? The mining time of 2 workers I don't think means that much considering Zerg is always ahead in workers anyways besides building a Turret that early costs us Terrans 200-400 minerals = 8 Marines, 4 supply depots, 2 barracks, a command centre and a bunch of other costs for the gain of safety. A scans field of vision of not equivalent to 4 overlords so that entire point is not even a point. And 100 minerals is still more than 300. Zerg pretty much gets not very much less scouting options than the other two races and with a unit like the Zergling that you get for 25 minerals and half a larva. Zerg has no excuse to not poke the front and see what the other player might have.
Last post, as I need sleep. Class in the morning.
14 Hatch builds are, admittedly, not reactionary. I have no means to address this, and must concede this point.
Terran and Protoss builds don't work quite the same way. Think of it this way - A protoss "Deathball" consists of the same units against all three races, Terran can MMM against all three races, and Zerg has no consistent build that works consistently against all three races. They MUST respond to the other races, moreso than the other races must respond to them.
Losing 4 larva earlygame actually DOES mean losing the game if you haven't scouted, and are wrong. Lets say you build that evochamber and that spore crawler, and lo and behold, the protoss 4gates, or the terran 3-gate allins. Congratulations, those four lings/roaches/banelings you lost probably lost you the game, all because air didn't actually come.
Worker mining wasn't brought up, as I agree that it's negligible. Being ahead and workers is only for the early-early game. Notice how, despite this lead, the economies of the races, when it comes to building units, tends to be the same. Mules and Chrono make up for any earlygame gap quickly enough.
There's no situation (At least against zerg) that requires a particularly early Turret. Your point of it's opportunity cost is, therefore, moot. Poking the front with a single zergling is not only common practice, but necessary practice. Given a mildly intelligent opponent, the zergling will see nothing but the wall.
As for the Scan Versus Overlord numbers, I know ovies have an 11-radius sight. I don't know scans radius by heart, and google yields no results, therefore, the point can't be accurately argued.
Edit: Right, I was wrong about scans, I'll concede the point. Additionally, remember, the discussion is on EARLY-GAME scouting. Any talk of Creep spread, etc, is moot. This doesn't start happening until midgame.
|
On May 04 2011 16:25 hagrin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:20 flowSthead wrote:
If you stopped reading, then you have no right to judge what I wrote. Actually, I do. You made a statement of fact - "Day9 is correct". Whatever your reasoning is doesn't matter to me - it's incorrect. Again, in non-equal environments, winning != better. It's that simple. Nothing you can say can ever change that fact. There's a million examples of why I'm right in the real world that have nothing to do with game design - social castes, business/finance, environment, welfare policy, etc. If you can't grasp this single concept, the rest of your reasoning is based on faulty logic and thus can be ignored.
See again, you did not read what I wrote, so you again assume I said that winning equals better. I never said that. Stop misquoting me.
What the hell is your problem? At least finish three sentences and see what I was trying to say. Perhaps I am wrong, but just saying that you have the right to ignore what I wrote is a bullshit stance.
|
On May 04 2011 16:21 Chicane wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:10 Falcor wrote:On May 04 2011 16:02 rotegirte wrote: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. 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. i agree with your post and said the similar thing a page or 2 back. But also remember colbi is probably a sensible pr person. They are competing brands. So using wording to promote his brand is very smart. Because look at the outcome tyler looks like ass, tyler is a representative of tl so it makes tl look bad(partly), and he comes off scott free(for the most part). Which is why im not a fan of eg, they're shady and do alot of shaddy shit to push their brand. When other brands are actually about the community Oh my god I actually can't stop responding to posts like this. It is actually incredible. "Because look a the outcome" Do you think Colbi planned this reaction out? You know what... let me take this from a more basic perspective. Lets say that Tyler responded to him and said "Yes, we declined as we did not with to have all our players play on the NA server." Do you think the outcome would have been the same? Do you think TL would "look bad" as you say? The answer is no. What would look bad about plainly saying why they wished not to play? Nothing. It was Tyler's decision to take it to this personal level... and that's completely fine that is his choice... but why are you spinning things like Colbi is some mastermind planner looking to screw TL. I actually can't believe you are posting such a thing. I have so ways I want to respond to this... but at the same time I am so confused... all I know is you are incredibly biased and I am VERY sure that you are a TL fan. Wow...
1 im not a tl fan, not really a fan of any na teams. I prefer IM 2 great zerg players ftw. First off i dont think he planned tyler flying off the handle. I agree that was unexpected. the reaction he wanted was for the community to be like " wtf why arent they attending thats dumb blah blah blah"
i also want to point out. ive said it in previous posts. tyler should shut his fucking mouth when it comes to things regarding his team. Responding to posts about the game or anythign else is fine people will see it as his opinion. But as soon as he opens his mouth about things that involve his team, they're going to take it as TL's response. and it shouldnt be, they pay epople to do that.
|
On May 04 2011 16:20 L3g3nd_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:16 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 16:08 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:56 Azarkon wrote: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.... Lol what. I brought up robo after 4 gate to make a point about Protoss committing to a strategy before he is able to scout and you respond with "why of course you can't scout before you 4 gate!" and expect the conversation to proceed logically forward? You just proved my point. Protoss can't scout before he commits to a mid game strategy. what? good lord its like banging your head against a wall, oh wait thats what im doing. Its pretty clear you know nothing about this game, so im not going to bother trying to explain these basic concepts to you. all the best
Same to you. Seriously, this is the most useless discussion ever - if Idra wants to argue this point he can do so himself. He doesn't need guys like you to defend him.
|
On May 04 2011 16:21 mahnini wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:16 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 16:11 mahnini wrote:On May 04 2011 15:52 riboflavin wrote:On May 04 2011 15:40 VIB wrote:
- Idra was right about imbalance, but wasn't able to put his thoughts into words as well as he wanted
- Day9 is afraid to admit to himself that the game just might not be perfect
- Nony knows he's wrong, but is too cocky to admit it in public
- InControl was perfect and gets me gayer each time I watch him In a single post you managed to capture 100 percent of what I completely disagree with. It is like you are trolling me specifically! Bravo to you sir. - In a way, Idra is right, but it turns out he wasn't actually talking about imbalance he was talking about game design. I thought most people were of the opinion that we don't know enough to make definitive balance statements, yet IdrA believes he can (rather he thinks it should be discussed as fact rather than be up for debate). Time will prove out on this, so I think all one can do here is wait and see. "Seek first to understand before you try to be understood."
idra wasn't right at all and day9 responded correctly. i believe tyler made a post somewhere about how idra's train of thought is flawed (the whole door analogy). day9 was flustered because idra's response made no sense to his own. he was basically saying it will take time to decide whether zerg is underpowered or not and talking about balance issues now doesn't help the race progress. to which idra responds yeah but zerg is underpowered right now, you have no solution therefore it will always be underpowered. and day9 goes yeah but if it really is underpowered the progression of the game will show it aka his whole balancing metagame thing. idra responds that it is underpowered NOW and day9 has no solution NOW therefore it is imbalanced. I don't see it that way. I see it that IdrA's current frustrations have no visible solution. While there is that process of opening doors as Tyler so eloquently put, but IdrA says that the Zergs have a fundamental problem, which is scouting. He claims that there should either be a way for Zerg to obtain good scouting information or have a super safe, efficient opening (like 3gate expand) that can keep them alive and push it to the midgame. IdrA sees the former option to be impossible, he only turns to the other option and that is why I believe he asked Day9 for a suggestion. But who's anyone kidding? IdrA knew Day9 had no response for that question because, quite simply, Day9 doesn't play SC2 enough. a long time ago in bw in PvZ protoss was considered to have a fundamental flaw against zerg. there was no way to scout lurker or muta so you had to prepare for both which prepared you for neither and put you behind. we see today though that pvz in bw is still alive and kicking. the idea that idra somehow possesses the ability to see EVERY possible variation in builds and game evolution EVER is pretty ridiculous.
I agree. I just find it a bit silly to dismiss Idra's struggles and either respond with trolling or deflections. Although I admit that may be a bit hard due to Idra's outspoken personality.
|
Another way of putting it: IdrA wants to play the game like chess. But the truth is it's more like Poker, and now that he's taking more risks, it's actually making him a much less predictable, and stronger player.
I agree with this completely. This is not a game where the better player win 100 percent of the time. Never have been, never will. Not in BW, Not in SC2. Flash, Jaedong,Nada,Oov, / MC, MVP wins 60-70 percent of the time. Meaning that when they play 10 games , they lose 3 or 4. That is a lot.
Coin flipping happens all the time. Does not mean that the better player do not win majority of the time.
|
On May 04 2011 16:26 Azarkon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 16:24 Pebbz wrote:On May 04 2011 16:16 Azarkon wrote:On May 04 2011 16:08 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 04 2011 15:56 Azarkon wrote: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.... Lol what. I brought up robo after 4 gate to make a point about Protoss committing to a strategy before he is able to scout and you respond with "why of course you can't scout before you 4 gate!" and expect the conversation to proceed logically forward? You just proved my point. Protoss can't scout before he commits to a mid game strategy. 4gate is not a midgame strategy.. Stop mincing words. 4 gate is not an all-in in PvP, it's standard.
Oh, we're talking about PvP? Hell yea, that matchup is a huge cointoss. It's a mirror match where a simple tech path decision can get you an advantage. But guess what? It's the same races that are facing each other.
|
On May 04 2011 16:28 dtz wrote:Show nested quote +Another way of putting it: IdrA wants to play the game like chess. But the truth is it's more like Poker, and now that he's taking more risks, it's actually making him a much less predictable, and stronger player. I agree with this completely. This is not a game where the better player win 100 percent of the time. Never have been, never will. Not in BW, Not in SC2. Flash, Jaedong,Nada,Oov, / MC, MVP wins 60-70 percent of the time. Meaning that when they play 10 games , they lose 3 or 4. That is a lot. Coin flipping happens all the time. Does not mean that the better player do not win majority of the time.
Thank you for reading my long-ass post. <3
It took a long time to write!
|
On May 04 2011 16:20 Defacer wrote:
IdrA versus all non-Zergs. I think Day9, surprisingly, had a difficult time articulating his position, but both Geoff and Tyler touched on a couple of potentially salient points.
Geoff's chagrin towards IdrA was in light of IdrA's outright dismissal of his own impressive win against Kiwikaki. And I share the sentiment.
It's absolutely adorable that a championship match in which IdrA perceived his own play to be risky, and Kiwi's play to be sloppy, can be perceived by many -- including his peers -- to be some of the best ZvP of his career.
As an IdrA fan, it was the first time I've seen IdrA take full advantage of the metagame and his reputation for an entire series. He played his opponent and not just the match-up. If anything, it's that 'eye of the tiger' or killer instinct that was always lacking in his game, but is finally starting to develop.
An example of what I consider 'killer instinct' was Dimaga's 7-pool against Nestea in the GSL World Championship. That wasn't a 'cheese build', that was Dimaga executing a perfect counter to Nestea's build on Crevasse the day before in the World vs. GSL series,
It's not unlike poker, where a player adjusts his own style radically after playing 50 hands to take advantage of his reputation at the table. Up until the IPL match, IdrA has always approached SC2 similar to the way Phil Helmuth plays poker -- he wants to play SC2 'the perfect way' and bases his decisions on his opponents playing perfectly as well. This philosophy actually inhibits his play, because he makes assumptions and generalizations about his opponent, their mental toughness and capability.
So I think Geoff's chagrin during this discussion is actually a sign of respect. He thinks IdrA should give himself way more credit for playing the series masterfully. You could argue that Kiwi played poorly, and threw away his army in the deciding match. Or, you could argue that IdrA played so unpredictably the first three games, that he actually induced poor decisions from Kiwikaki.
This idea of embracing the benefits of risky play is related to Tyler's point. IdrA has been assuming for a long time that the game can or should be played without risk, or that Protosses aren't taking significant risks with some of their timings during the early stages.
But the truth is, as the game is currently designed, there are no infallible or 'perfect' builds. You could argue that Tosses are sacrificing their mid-game economy when four-gating, or map control with fast expanding.
There's nothing stopping Zerg's from taking a risks of their own to gain significant economic or tactical advantage. And while this isn't necessarily ideal game design, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's 'imbalanced'.
Another way of putting it: IdrA wants to play the game like chess. But the truth is it's more like Poker, and now that he's taking more risks, it's actually making him a much less predictable, and stronger player.
Great post and I couldn't agree more. I wasn't an idra fan not too long ago. He always felt so one dimensional to me and it was disappointing because I know he is a great player. But then he started to change up his style more and more to where he is today. I do think his series against Kiwi is some of his best ZvP. It was incredibly creative out of him. It was incredibly creative from any Zerg. It was refreshing to watch. He has made a lot of headway on his ZvP since he has changed his style.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
