The Truth About Diamond League - Page 16

On August 25 2010 05:31 dTox wrote:


Nail.

Head.

On.

On August 25 2010 02:19 Saracen wrote:
You see, there's a huge difference between how much you win and how much you understand the game. Points and ranking are a good indicator of how much you win, but they do jack shit when it comes to reflecting your game knowledge.

On August 25 2010 05:40 Tenryu wrote:


Micro and Macro is a form of experience and practice. Of course he will win.

Edit: Which is what Saracen is arguing about. "Nothing can replace experience"

On August 25 2010 05:42 NihiloZero wrote:
Perhaps you might also recognize that strong analysis can come from people with much lower rating as wells. Let's compare it to another game... A young pitcher in baseball may throw 105mph strikes, and such a player would be an elite all star -- but it doesn't mean that this pitcher would truly have a deep understanding of the game simply due to an ability to execute. Think of the movie Bull Durham with Tim Robbins as the rookie phenom and Kevin Costner as the more knowledgabIe, experienced, and less talented catcher. My point is that even the highest levels of execution might have some flaws that could be criticized by those who actually don't have the APM or practice time to perfect certain tactics or strategies. I freely admit that I am a weak player in terms of my win rate (partly owing to some early technical difficulties)... but I study the game, watch the commentaries, and feel I have enough sense (game & common) to make an occasional contribution to this thread that is worthwhile. And dismissing people because of their rank (or number of posts) is just cheap, weak, and intellectually dishonest. Obviously fools are going to post foolish things, but just because someone isn't a pro or recognized expert doesn't mean that they won't have incredibly profound thoughts to contribute to any given discussion.

On August 25 2010 05:36 Tenryu wrote:


Uh, i dont think he's saying its impossible. He's saying that there are too many people that obs and study the game rather then playing and learning by experience, which in my opinion, is much more effective then just studying. Thats where the whole "They don't know timings. They dont know production capabilities. They don't know about responding to situations given limited information." come in play.

And obviously, if your a top gamer, you have those experiences down and it becomes second nature and you react instinctively to certain situations. I would much rather get tips and help from those people than the ones who think they know everything because they read forums and obs 1000 SC2 games.

On August 25 2010 05:30 Scorcher2k wrote:


So you're saying that it is impossible to study a game in order to understand it? You really need to get the elitism in check. Why are you trying to single out players who by normal standards are good at this game and actually do understand it much better than the vast majority of the population to feel like shit instead of simply focusing on the know-it-alls who assert their opinions as fact.

On August 25 2010 05:44 Zato-1 wrote:

Thank you. Thank you so much. Arguing about who's right and who's wrong based on who has the bigger Diamond e-peen cannot end well.

The best way to tell someone who knows what he's talking about from someone who doesn't, sadly, requires the reader to know a good deal about the game himself, so he can discriminate between promising ideas, facts, and complete bull.

On August 25 2010 05:52 Saracen wrote:

You know, the people crying "boo hoo elitism" are getting even more annoying than the alleged elitists. Yes, I am saying you have to play the damn game in order to understand it. Is it really so hard to come to terms with this concept? Is it really so hard to see that if you don't macro and micro properly, you're not going to be able to comment well on the viability of certain strategies since there are going to be flaws in your experience that dilute your perception of what works and what doesn't? Is it so hard to believe that no matter how many Day[9] dailies or HD/Husky commentaries you watch, you'll never have valuable insight to give unless you actually play the game? Here's I'll give you a little analogy to help you out. Let's say you love computer programming. You read every single book you can get your hands on about it. But you've never touched a computer in your life. Do you honestly think you're going to be able to write good code? Absolutely not.
I promise you if you spend one ounce of the time you dedicate to theorycrafting and then whining when your ideas get shot down and complaining about elitism to actually sitting down and playing the game, you would understand what I'm saying. I really hate to break it to you, but there's no such thing as "strategizing on a diamond level" when your mechanics are stuck in silver. Believe it or not, these things go hand in hand. With experience, you gain both, not just one or the other. There's no such thing as mindless macrobots who just pump out units and win but don't understand what they're doing. Nor is there such a thing as a master strategist who is only held back by a lack of fundamentals. You would realize this if you actually played the game.
Let me tell you something. I respect bronze, silver, and gold players who work hard to get better at the game. I respect platinum and diamond players who put in an effort. But I absolutely do not respect people who think they can sit back, watch a few "super-in-depth HD/Husky commentaries," and think they're veritable authorities at the game.

On August 25 2010 05:28 gdroxor wrote:
My issue is the need for the old guard to constantly revalidate their superiority ad-nauseum. Yes, many have been on the site forever, followed hundreds of BW games, seen the game evolve time and time again. I understand and respect that. What I don't understand is the recurring compulsion to put new members in their place. If you truly believe yourselves to be better, more seasoned players, then why do these threads keep popping up? One would wonder if some of the older members feel threatened by SC2 and its playerbase.

On August 25 2010 05:14 Saracen wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
This is not true at all (especially the comparison you made). It's one of the more common sentiments that's floating around these forums, and it's only there to make less-successful players feel better about themselves. But it's really not true. In this game, there's nothing that can replace experience. Not by watching Day[9], not by watching replays, not by watching livestreams. I really don't know what else I can say to convince you of this. All of the top players know this, and its people who believe otherwise that keep them from posting on these forums. Teamliquid is all about promoting open discussion and getting viewpoints from lots of different people. But it's people who believe they are master strategists but who put zero effort into the game that kill discussions. Because even though they think they know what's going on, the truth is they don't. They don't know timings. They don't know production capabilities. They don't know about responding to situations given limited information. The game's a lot different when you're playing it than when you're watching it.

On August 25 2010 05:53 FarbrorAbavna wrote:
I like qxc's proposition of having threads that are only available to players of a certain status. I would change one thing though. Have it available to everyone to read but only certain people to post in. I don't know, for someone who just visits the forum for the first time maybe this will come off as being elitist but having some general info(regarding these kind of threads) that they are requiered to read, just like forum rules etc, should remedy it and open their eyes to why it is as it is.

Of course there needs to be some sort of way to enlighten people about the thread and it's status but that can be solved in a bunch of different ways. One easy way would be to just colorcode it, or have an icon next to the thread title. Just to name a few different options.

How would one come about attaining said status? through a poll where everyone can vote, certain staff @ tl voting etc etc. There are many ways to go about it.

This way you would get the discussion of pro's but everyone can see how it unfolds and take pointers on how to go about such a discussion.