|
United States22883 Posts
On May 05 2011 11:02 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 10:47 windsupernova wrote:
Just one question for the BW guys as I never played it competitively. Since many people are saying that the larvae mechanic in SC2 is just too risk based how did BW Zerg players managed?Were the Sunken Colonies that good? The other little wrinkle was that you could preemptively put down creep colonies and then morph them to sunkens at the first sign of aggression; they'd be done by the time the enemy marine/protoss force arrived (though it was much more common in ZvT, though). If they retreated, you could usually cancel. Note that, as far as I can remember, the best players were the ones who toed the line of putting up creep colonies as late as possible and morphed the sunkens as late as possible.
Yeah, the number of sunkens/creeps in BW ZvT for the first timing pushes was only usually 1-2 higher, if that. I think early lings fared better, though. It's hard to compare them since you had 3 extra drones (1 less gas, but you put 4 on it) but larva production was worse.
|
On May 05 2011 11:05 PJA wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 10:56 rO_Or wrote:On May 05 2011 10:14 Sae wrote:On May 05 2011 09:46 rO_Or wrote:
Day9 was just trying to sound smart in loss of a valid counter-argument to IdrA by bringing this up. You actually believe this? Lol.. Day9 repeating "I don't understand" and "I just don't agree" over and over again until he decided to be quiet is a pretty clear indication that he had nothing legitimate to say. When asked for any solution to the problem or a specific game or player to look to, Day9 was at a loss for words. Day9 admitted that he has been busy lately and hasn't watched IdrA's games. What more can I say? I'm a huge Day9 fan and I watch his dailies because I respect his analysis, knowledge and experience but yesterday on SOTG it was painfully obvious that he didn't know what he was talking about. Or maybe he is just being humble? Obviously day[9] does not have as much SC2 experience, and hence would get completely destroyed in any live debate about balance. But also, IdrA tends to speak as if he understands everything, and that everything about zerg in SC2 has been explored. It's impossible to win a live public debate when you show humility against someone who portrays nothing but certainty and confidence, even if you are correct.
It's also impossible to win a live debate if you don't say anything or have an arguable point. Day9 basically sidestepped the issues IdrA was bringing up, saying that IdrA was too emotional and that he didn't understand.
|
On May 05 2011 11:01 Tabbris wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 10:41 Jibba wrote:On May 05 2011 10:17 rpgalon wrote:
day 9 plays random, idra is zerg and very well known for complaining since BW I don't think it's because Day9 plays random, I think it's because he (and iNc) were top American Zergs in BW and they completely understand the problem of limited and slow Zerg scouting options. The main difference is that more BW maps had small ledges/walls around bases specifically designed for OL's and the T options were slightly more limited. But IdrA pretending like it's only a SC2 issue is ridiculous and they know it. Someone should load up Destination or one of the other BW maps and compare them. I dont think it has to do with map at all. Ts just have so many aggressive options because of the mule and the Reactor. Lets look at bw. The only real timing from my limited experience in bw was A 9 minute 1 base push, 2 port wraith and maybe a vulture rush? But Zergs could preemptively make colonys and then make a sunken if they needed it. Spines however take way to long to rely on to stop a marine marauder/Hellion marauder pushes. 2 port wraith was pretty easy to deal with since Hydras didnt require a lair. And sure we have queens but we still need freaking detection if its cloak because ovis dont have detection anymore. It is almost like a complete guessing game. And if the T isnt good enough to kill the overlord before it gets into a good position you still hope to god that the 4 marines don kill it before it sees anything, I may be totally wrong but i dont think ledges are the issue here. And i do feel that its just sometimes a guessing game
I think it'll depend on how the ledges are placed.
I mean, if in every main base, there was a ledge, coming from outside the main to the centre in the main, then the Zerg could just fly and park an overlord there. As long as the overlord is flying on the ledge, no stalkers or marines will see it. Then they'll have constant vision over the base until T/P gets an air unit out or use a scan to spot. Depending on the design of the ledge, it might even be overpowered for the Zerg.
|
On May 05 2011 11:06 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 10:56 rO_Or wrote:On May 05 2011 10:14 Sae wrote:On May 05 2011 09:46 rO_Or wrote:
Day9 was just trying to sound smart in loss of a valid counter-argument to IdrA by bringing this up. You actually believe this? Lol.. Day9 repeating "I don't understand" and "I just don't agree" over and over again until he decided to be quiet is a pretty clear indication that he had nothing legitimate to say. When asked for any solution to the problem or a specific game or player to look to, Day9 was at a loss for words. Day9 admitted that he has been busy lately and hasn't watched IdrA's games. What more can I say? I'm a huge Day9 fan and I watch his dailies because I respect his analysis, knowledge and experience but yesterday on SOTG it was painfully obvious that he didn't know what he was talking about. You don't understand how logic works, do you? IdrA was, as Day9 said, venting. He was complaining about the issues as he sees it, which is fine, for venting. To have a balance discussion, you need to sit down and examine all aspects of the game as a whole, not just mention a few problems, something that they didn't have time for, and Day9 knows that to address the issues IdrA brought up would require a far deeper analysis, and that there are possible solutions, tactics and strategies that players haven't invented yet. IdrA's complaints are isolated, not holistic. IdrA's complaints basically come down to "I can't get always get an advantage over my opponent no matter what just by having better mechanics than they do, and I don't like that." Well, yeah, players take risks to gain advantages, if you refuse to take such risks, you fall behind. What do you want, to be perfectly safe against any form of early aggression AND to be greedy enough to keep up/surpass a fast expanding enemy?
You don't understand what IdrA was saying, do you?
I'm gonna take the Day9 approach and just say, "I don't agree".
You completely twisted what IdrA was saying and it's impossible to debate this with you if you're going to tailor people's words to fit your argument. Go rewatch SOTG, IdrA's points obviously flew over your head.
|
For me, you can summarize most of their discussion with what they say around 53:30, which goes like this: (actual transcript)
IdrA: You either have to be able to scout or you have to be able to defend without scouting. Otherwise, it's just a guessing game.
Day[9]: I just don't agree with that statement and it would take so long to actually go in-depth with that.
Two minutes later, Day[9] explains how Terran is limited in their choices once they go down a tech path and mentions moving out with a Banshee, to which IdrA responds that if Terran moves out with (a) Banshee(s) and he didn't prepare for it, he's already dead.
Then Tasteless comes in and drops some knowledge bombs.
|
On May 05 2011 09:01 Reptarem wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 07:02 Warrior Madness wrote:
I always face palm when people say Idra's zvp is 10x better than it was 2 months ago. So he's been doing risky hydra builds, roach ling all ins, playing risky drop plays and he's 10x better now?... Yeah right. A solid build is a build that results in you being slightly behind, even, or slighty ahead despite what the opponent is doing, and even if he sees it coming.
The reason why this roach, hydra, early drop build is not solid is because you have to make a HUGE invesment (drop), and you MUST do damage to the protoss economy or you lose. And it's easily counterable when they see it coming. Sure you can drop 1 ovie full of roaches at his main mineral line, and at his nat while at the same time pushing towards his third. It works, if the toss doesn't know how to defend. A smart toss never ever makes zealots, he makes cannons... One cannon will make it really hard to drop. Two cannons will make it impossible to drop. So let's say that happens, the toss pulls his probes quickly enough (though he won't need to with 2 cannons), he expects it so he drops some cannons i.e. He's playing on terminus TE. The zerg's spire becomes late, the toss has secured his third, and he's got 3 collosus out now. You lose.
It is not a solid strategy. such stupid theory crafting. can we keep this out of the damn thread? yah drop is a huge investment for zerg when they already have the overlords to drop... 300/300 huge investment. keep fucking crying.
Its like saying early DT or early banshee isn't solid because it has to do damage
|
To go at another topic entirely: in the preshow Idra specifically mentioned an immortal/templar style of PvZ, which he said he thought was better as a deathball than the traditional Colossus one. Some mention was made of immortal/stalker/templar by Plexa in his PvZ overview, but I'm still unclear on both the specific composition a Protoss aims for with this (i.e. is it pure stalker + some sentries or something different?) and whether or not its something one can do "straight up" (i.e. can you just skip colossus entirely) or a transition out of colossus when hydras start to fade from the field.
Thanks in advance for any enlightenment ^_^
|
On May 05 2011 11:57 Lotar wrote:For me, you can summarize most of their discussion with what they say around 53:30, which goes like this: (actual transcript)Show nested quote +IdrA: You either have to be able to scout or you have to be able to defend without scouting. Otherwise, it's just a guessing game.
Day[9]: I just don't agree with that statement and it would take so long to actually go in-depth with that. Two minutes later, Day[9] explains how Terran is limited in their choices once they go down a tech path and mentions moving out with a Banshee, to which IdrA responds that if Terran moves out with (a) Banshee(s) and he didn't prepare for it, he's already dead. Then Tasteless comes in and drops some knowledge bombs.
Exactly...
It's hard to refute what Day9 said because he didn't actually say anything...
You could tell Tasteless knew IdrA was right but it was hard for him to elaborate any further because the argument was so one sided in favor of IdrA and by the time he got back on the call Day9 didn't give him anything to refute.
|
At what time in the VOD was inNcontrol and Tyler fighting....I have watched 45 minutes ish of the vod and I wanna skip right to the argument.
|
On May 05 2011 12:23 rO_Or wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 11:57 Lotar wrote:For me, you can summarize most of their discussion with what they say around 53:30, which goes like this: (actual transcript)IdrA: You either have to be able to scout or you have to be able to defend without scouting. Otherwise, it's just a guessing game.
Day[9]: I just don't agree with that statement and it would take so long to actually go in-depth with that. Two minutes later, Day[9] explains how Terran is limited in their choices once they go down a tech path and mentions moving out with a Banshee, to which IdrA responds that if Terran moves out with (a) Banshee(s) and he didn't prepare for it, he's already dead. Then Tasteless comes in and drops some knowledge bombs. Exactly... It's hard to refute what Day9 said because he didn't actually say anything... You could tell Tasteless knew IdrA was right but it was hard for him to elaborate any further because the argument was so one sided in favor of IdrA and by the time he got back on the call Day9 didn't give him anything to refute.
you could tell that they were arguing completely different ideas based on wildly different views on the game.
its like there was a debate between an american and a french man and most of team liquid is siding with the american because they understood the words
|
On May 05 2011 12:35 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 12:23 rO_Or wrote:On May 05 2011 11:57 Lotar wrote:For me, you can summarize most of their discussion with what they say around 53:30, which goes like this: (actual transcript)IdrA: You either have to be able to scout or you have to be able to defend without scouting. Otherwise, it's just a guessing game.
Day[9]: I just don't agree with that statement and it would take so long to actually go in-depth with that. Two minutes later, Day[9] explains how Terran is limited in their choices once they go down a tech path and mentions moving out with a Banshee, to which IdrA responds that if Terran moves out with (a) Banshee(s) and he didn't prepare for it, he's already dead. Then Tasteless comes in and drops some knowledge bombs. Exactly... It's hard to refute what Day9 said because he didn't actually say anything... You could tell Tasteless knew IdrA was right but it was hard for him to elaborate any further because the argument was so one sided in favor of IdrA and by the time he got back on the call Day9 didn't give him anything to refute. you could tell that they were arguing completely different ideas based on wildly different views on the game. its like there was a debate between an american and a french man and most of team liquid is siding with the american because they understood the words
The thing is though that IdrA was the one who presented his side first then Day9 responded with completely irrelevant points. Even if what Day9 says is true, IdrA wasn't talking about balance as a whole. All I'm saying is Day9 didn't provide any answers or rebuttals to IdrA... so he shouldn't have so stubbornly tried to argue with him.
|
Day9 was talking about balance while IdrA was complaining about ZvX being a guessing game. He didn't actually make any points about balance. He alluded to it by saying that T and P have safe builds whereas Z does not, and that late-game he thinks P has an advantage. But even then neither of these factors violate Day9's definition of balance.
Tyler already went over this.
|
Listen....
What also should be mentioned is the fact that Idra believed the weakest race in BW was Terran (when in fact it is the race with the most major tournament wins and the most bonjwas). Idra also said that the fact that zergs aren't winning tournaments is because they are underpowered. He said this while they were discussing his recent IPL tournament win. When zerg players scream imbalance it just sounds angry and irrational. Day9 just stopped talking cause it was the most productive thing to do in that situation.
|
Well basically idra's main point is "theres no strategies left to explore" and Day9's is "theres still builds unchecked" and i have to agree with day9's
|
On May 05 2011 09:58 Joeyz1 wrote:
My question is, what is wrong with going an early lair, like the Protoss would normally go early Robotics, and then continuing the game on like normal otherwise?
Zerg doesn't have force fields to delay.
|
On May 05 2011 12:49 Canadium wrote:
Listen....
What also should be mentioned is the fact that Idra believed the weakest race in BW was Terran (when in fact it is the race with the most major tournament wins and the most bonjwas). Idra also said that the fact that zergs aren't winning tournaments is because they are underpowered. He said this while they were discussing his recent IPL tournament win. When zerg players scream imbalance it just sounds angry and irrational. Day9 just stopped talking cause it was the most productive thing to do in that situation.
No, Idra clarified himself in this SOTG. He's arguing Terran is the hardest race to play, as opposed to the weakest. From this perspective it doesn't matter if Terran wins the most tournaments - it's simply because they're better.
I think it's pretty obvious that Idra has a particular definition of what constitutes good game design that he abides by, regardless of tournament results. He doesn't want win:loss parity. He wants the ability to be solid at every stage of the game, such that a player who is better than another player will always win or just about. When a match up falls outside of this framework, he thinks it's bullshit.
The race in SC 2 that best suits this attitude towards game design is probably Terran (I'd say Protoss, except PvP is still quite coin flippy), and the irony is that Idra originally chose against Terran because he thought Terran was SC 2's version of a gimmicky race (ala BW Protoss, at least in Idra's mind). It turns out that this isn't true, and Terran would have suited Idra quite well, though I think he would've still complained about Protoss.
|
I just want to make this clear for State Of The Game; THIS EPISODE IS WHAT IT SHOULD BE ABOUT! Heated discussions, no bullshit giggeling around the topic and actually taking them head on. Look at what we got, Day9 and IdrA, two of the most influential people in Starcraft discussing balance. InControl and Tyler, two other giants discussing the community site, tournaments and code of conduct.
This is a great episode.
|
On May 05 2011 12:56 raf3776 wrote:
Well basically idra's main point is "theres no strategies left to explore" and Day9's is "theres still builds unchecked" and i have to agree with day9's
This is pretty much the center of it all I think. Day9's main point is that you can hardly claim a game is imbalanced when he metagame isn't thoroughly explored. Just because Idra's ego states he's the best player outside Korea (and even then there isn't many Korean's he considers may be better then him, at best they're more equals) and therefore in his mind whatever he thinks of the game is the end of the metagame.
It's not a style in which you can debate someone. Especially not when they're highly emotional and venting about it. Day9 is fairly obviously trained in critical thinking, and approached a subject such as imabalance from that viewpoint. Idra wasn't.
|
On May 05 2011 13:09 Krehlmar wrote:
I just want to make this clear for State Of The Game; THIS EPISODE IS WHAT IT SHOULD BE ABOUT! Heated discussions, no bullshit giggeling around the topic and actually taking them head on. Look at what we got, Day9 and IdrA, two of the most influential people in Starcraft discussing balance. InControl and Tyler, two other giants discussing the community site, tournaments and code of conduct.
This is a great episode.
Agreeed. And look at all the heated debate its sparked... Regardless of who is right or wrong, last night's SOTG was actually interesting and I'd wish that in the future they wouldn't side step the issue of balance so much. Alot of times it is alot of inside jokes and reminiscing between these guys because obviously they are all good friends who have known each other a while.
|
United States7483 Posts
On May 05 2011 11:21 rO_Or wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 11:06 Whitewing wrote:On May 05 2011 10:56 rO_Or wrote:On May 05 2011 10:14 Sae wrote:On May 05 2011 09:46 rO_Or wrote:
Day9 was just trying to sound smart in loss of a valid counter-argument to IdrA by bringing this up. You actually believe this? Lol.. Day9 repeating "I don't understand" and "I just don't agree" over and over again until he decided to be quiet is a pretty clear indication that he had nothing legitimate to say. When asked for any solution to the problem or a specific game or player to look to, Day9 was at a loss for words. Day9 admitted that he has been busy lately and hasn't watched IdrA's games. What more can I say? I'm a huge Day9 fan and I watch his dailies because I respect his analysis, knowledge and experience but yesterday on SOTG it was painfully obvious that he didn't know what he was talking about. You don't understand how logic works, do you? IdrA was, as Day9 said, venting. He was complaining about the issues as he sees it, which is fine, for venting. To have a balance discussion, you need to sit down and examine all aspects of the game as a whole, not just mention a few problems, something that they didn't have time for, and Day9 knows that to address the issues IdrA brought up would require a far deeper analysis, and that there are possible solutions, tactics and strategies that players haven't invented yet. IdrA's complaints are isolated, not holistic. IdrA's complaints basically come down to "I can't get always get an advantage over my opponent no matter what just by having better mechanics than they do, and I don't like that." Well, yeah, players take risks to gain advantages, if you refuse to take such risks, you fall behind. What do you want, to be perfectly safe against any form of early aggression AND to be greedy enough to keep up/surpass a fast expanding enemy? You don't understand what IdrA was saying, do you? I'm gonna take the Day9 approach and just say, "I don't agree". You completely twisted what IdrA was saying and it's impossible to debate this with you if you're going to tailor people's words to fit your argument. Go rewatch SOTG, IdrA's points obviously flew over your head.
IdrA's complaints:
-Zerg can't scout early, zerglings can't get past the wall-ins, and overlords can't get past marines/stalkers.
-Zerg doesn't have a defensive build that counters everything and stays even.
-Therefore, zerg's ability to do well is chance at best.
That's basically what he said, quite literally. I don't see how there's any room for any other form of interpretation here. Again, these aren't holistic complaints.
He also threw in the fact that you don't have time to get spine crawlers up after the enemy pushes out, which has been shown in this thread to be inaccurate if you're quick on the uptake on a lot of the maps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
