|
On January 11 2011 02:55 iamke55 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 00:58 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 11 2011 00:16 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 23:41 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 10 2011 23:25 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 13:26 alphafuzard wrote:On January 10 2011 13:18 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 11:16 FrayzZeUsher wrote:
excuse me... but why would your promote such a strat.
One basing is the WRONG way to play the game, remember that. Really? How is that the wrong way to play the game. I don't see any, "no 1 base all-ins" in Blizzard's ToS. Does it win games? Yes. Then it is a right way to play the game. Me speaking personally, I hate big macro games. i feel like it reduces games to pure unit composition and macro, instead of fun micro, and amazing tactical play. I enjoy a crisp 4 gate win where I FF 4 of his zealots into a corner and waste them with stalker/sentry, and that great play winning the game for me. Macroing inot a giant Toss death ball, and A-moving over a my enemies army, losing most of it but doing damage, re-macroing up, and slowly pushing him into oblivion? Not so fun. 30 minute game, and half of it is just managing your economy. imo the most beautiful tactics are in the late game the ball of death players are usually much easier to beat than players with a competent and confident late game also it shows off the real skill of the players in many more aspects than 8 minutes build order wins ANNNNNNDD we're done here. I prefer short micro based games. You prefer long macro based games. We couldn't both be right could we? Amazingly enough, we are both right. And so we do the things in the game we play for FUN, in a way that is FUN for us. Radical concept, I know, but as far as I know, one base micro gamers win just as many games as multiple base macro gamers. And if 1 basing is "nerfed" then going 4 gate all-in will be a lot less fun due to losing, and hence, I'll stop doing it, because it won't be as fun any more. Until then, if you see my name come up while laddering, scout your base for proxy warpgates at all times, and prepare for 4-gate/3 gate robo/ DTs etc, because they are coming. In other words you aren't really that good at the game. besides, if you think doing a 4gate or auto winning with DTs against people that are working hard to get better is fun or exciting. I sincerely wish you check your mental state. ROFL? YOU need your mental state checked. I'm having fun. You are working hard and practicing a video game that in all likelihood will never return you a profit. And if I'm bad at the game, then I wouldn't be beating other people's 4 gates or other "micro" based openings. My small group micro and tactical play is pretty solid, and getting better. Your macro and general micro is probably better than mine. So what? I am still winning. If you can't hold off a 4-gate, then get better. SC2 is obviously not a pure macro based game. So why is that the "correct" way to play? The correct way to play is the way that wins and is fun for you. You like macro. I like micro and hate "macro". So if you play me, by god, you're going to have to micro better than me to get to the macro portion of the game, where you will start having fun, and will beat me. If not, I'll have loads of fun baiting your units down your ramp, FF them away from it, and then running up with my units up and raping your base. You'll rage and quit and harass me in chat telling me I suck, and I'll just keep playing the way I like, and keep beating you because I obviously don't know how to play the game. I wouldnt say so, im 16 and improving steadily through constant practice. oh nvm ur an fps player - id expect your standards of 'excitement' to be low enough to enjoy 4gating. Why are you even on this site? This is a forum for Starcraft 2 players, not fastest map nr20 players. If someone can win in 10 minutes when you don't know how to end the game in under 30 minutes, you are hardly in a position to claim the other guy is less skilled. 4 gating is an important skill for high level play, and if you can't do it then you're not good at Protoss.
You're wrong.
On January 10 2011 12:02 RHMVNovus wrote:
No, it doesn't mean you're playing the game wrong at all.
It does mean, however, that less skilled players are reaching high levels, making the ladder system not particularly indicative of skill.
This is the whole point. And it's true. If you think it's wrong, then you are just not a good enough player to understand it.
|
many people here start to forget a little detail.
this is a computer GAME. the main goal of it is: HAVING FUN.
if he has reached his goal by 4 gateing. Nice for him.
if other reach this goal by playing long macro games. Nice for them.
if you failed your goal of have fun at the game and rage about playstyles of other or feel bad by playing than perhaps you should search for something else that brings you fun.
|
|
|
On January 11 2011 03:03 skeldark wrote:
many people here start to forget a little detail.
this is a computer GAME. the main goal of it is: HAVING FUN.
if he has reached his goal by 4 gateing. Nice for him.
if other reach this goal by playing long macro games. Nice for them.
if you failed your goal of have fun at the game and rage about playstyles of other or feel bad by playing than perhaps you should search for something else that brings you fun.
I completly agree with skeledark. I think making fun out of the game is most important thing. If u feel like playing macro game (and u are good enough..) then do it and be happy u can stop such a strat as 4 gate ^^.
|
On January 11 2011 03:05 stormtemplar wrote:
Guys, cool the hell down. This is the stupidest argument I've ever heard. The pro-macro people are right in that macro is the best way to get to the VERY top, however, all in play is something that all good players should know well, so as to defend it and to have some variety. As this guy is not trying to be at the tip top, but just trying to have fun, than four-gate is fine. I personally get immense satisfaction from warping in 12 units off 3 bases and rolling my opponent with masses of 3/3/3 protoss units. Others don't. Fine. Don't care.
One last note. 4 gate is not really all-in in PvP as pretty much everybody either 4 gates or 3 gate robo's
The "pro-macro" people are not right at all. Believe it or not, it's much easier to win against someone who only knows how to macro than someone who is good with a variety of builds. The latter puts much more pressure on his opponents to scout well and practice against everything. In the end, a tournament level Protoss player should excel at all aspects of the game, and someone's choice to learn the early game before learning the late game does not make him any worse of a player.
|
Just wondering about 4-gate on PvT. My friend opens with 3 rax typically (2 tech, 1 reactor) and once conc shells finishes I feel like 4-gate is just running in units to their slaughter. I am very very new, so I realize there are a number of things that may be my issue. I probably didn't break his wall soon enough for starters. Just wondering though, if 4-gate is a good idea vs a walled off T with 3 rax, and what composition I should go for when I make my first push against him?
Was also considering 3 gate + stargate to help break down the wall (would i push at 1 or 2 VRs?)
Thanks for any help.
|
On January 11 2011 02:59 Chise wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 02:55 iamke55 wrote:On January 11 2011 00:58 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 11 2011 00:16 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 23:41 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 10 2011 23:25 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 13:26 alphafuzard wrote:On January 10 2011 13:18 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 11:16 FrayzZeUsher wrote:
excuse me... but why would your promote such a strat.
One basing is the WRONG way to play the game, remember that. Really? How is that the wrong way to play the game. I don't see any, "no 1 base all-ins" in Blizzard's ToS. Does it win games? Yes. Then it is a right way to play the game. Me speaking personally, I hate big macro games. i feel like it reduces games to pure unit composition and macro, instead of fun micro, and amazing tactical play. I enjoy a crisp 4 gate win where I FF 4 of his zealots into a corner and waste them with stalker/sentry, and that great play winning the game for me. Macroing inot a giant Toss death ball, and A-moving over a my enemies army, losing most of it but doing damage, re-macroing up, and slowly pushing him into oblivion? Not so fun. 30 minute game, and half of it is just managing your economy. imo the most beautiful tactics are in the late game the ball of death players are usually much easier to beat than players with a competent and confident late game also it shows off the real skill of the players in many more aspects than 8 minutes build order wins ANNNNNNDD we're done here. I prefer short micro based games. You prefer long macro based games. We couldn't both be right could we? Amazingly enough, we are both right. And so we do the things in the game we play for FUN, in a way that is FUN for us. Radical concept, I know, but as far as I know, one base micro gamers win just as many games as multiple base macro gamers. And if 1 basing is "nerfed" then going 4 gate all-in will be a lot less fun due to losing, and hence, I'll stop doing it, because it won't be as fun any more. Until then, if you see my name come up while laddering, scout your base for proxy warpgates at all times, and prepare for 4-gate/3 gate robo/ DTs etc, because they are coming. In other words you aren't really that good at the game. besides, if you think doing a 4gate or auto winning with DTs against people that are working hard to get better is fun or exciting. I sincerely wish you check your mental state. ROFL? YOU need your mental state checked. I'm having fun. You are working hard and practicing a video game that in all likelihood will never return you a profit. And if I'm bad at the game, then I wouldn't be beating other people's 4 gates or other "micro" based openings. My small group micro and tactical play is pretty solid, and getting better. Your macro and general micro is probably better than mine. So what? I am still winning. If you can't hold off a 4-gate, then get better. SC2 is obviously not a pure macro based game. So why is that the "correct" way to play? The correct way to play is the way that wins and is fun for you. You like macro. I like micro and hate "macro". So if you play me, by god, you're going to have to micro better than me to get to the macro portion of the game, where you will start having fun, and will beat me. If not, I'll have loads of fun baiting your units down your ramp, FF them away from it, and then running up with my units up and raping your base. You'll rage and quit and harass me in chat telling me I suck, and I'll just keep playing the way I like, and keep beating you because I obviously don't know how to play the game. I wouldnt say so, im 16 and improving steadily through constant practice. oh nvm ur an fps player - id expect your standards of 'excitement' to be low enough to enjoy 4gating. Why are you even on this site? This is a forum for Starcraft 2 players, not fastest map nr20 players. If someone can win in 10 minutes when you don't know how to end the game in under 30 minutes, you are hardly in a position to claim the other guy is less skilled. 4 gating is an important skill for high level play, and if you can't do it then you're not good at Protoss. You're wrong. Show nested quote +On January 10 2011 12:02 RHMVNovus wrote:
No, it doesn't mean you're playing the game wrong at all.
It does mean, however, that less skilled players are reaching high levels, making the ladder system not particularly indicative of skill. This is the whole point. And it's true. If you think it's wrong, then you are just not a good enough player to understand it.
Nope you are wrong. I watch pros streams all the time. And they rush and early game cheese/all-in almost more than they do macro games. if you can't 4 gate or defend a 4 gate then you aren't good. It's the most basic protoss build known to man. If it beats you time and time again...don't whine about noobs that can't macro.
|
On January 11 2011 02:59 Chise wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2011 12:02 RHMVNovus wrote:
No, it doesn't mean you're playing the game wrong at all.
It does mean, however, that less skilled players are reaching high levels, making the ladder system not particularly indicative of skill. This is the whole point. And it's true. If you think it's wrong, then you are just not a good enough player to understand it.
This makes no sense whatsoever. Why would people getting high ratings from 4 gating invalidate the ladder system?
Is 4 gating somehow cheating? No, clearly not since there is no rule inside or outsider the game against it.
Is 4 gate overpowered? Well, if you think it is, protosses should be 4 gating even more so that Blizzard gets aware of the issue and can do something to fix it.
If you don't think 4 gate is cheating or overpowered, then why are you complaining?
Wouldn't it invalidate the rating system even more if players refused to do a strong strategy out of some misplaced sense of honour?
|
On January 11 2011 03:21 Boozie wrote:
Just wondering about 4-gate on PvT. My friend opens with 3 rax typically (2 tech, 1 reactor) and once conc shells finishes I feel like 4-gate is just running in units to their slaughter. I am very very new, so I realize there are a number of things that may be my issue. I probably didn't break his wall soon enough for starters. Just wondering though, if 4-gate is a good idea vs a walled off T with 3 rax, and what composition I should go for when I make my first push against him?
Was also considering 3 gate + stargate to help break down the wall (would i push at 1 or 2 VRs?)
Thanks for any help.
3gate robo, a 3rax early stim by terran is a hard counter to the 4gate it crushes it. But if.you get an immortal or two by the time he pushes you should have a way better chance and it sets you up for an easy expo once you his first push, just be careful about getting contained and it almost forces 1 base colossus.
|
On January 11 2011 01:10 Sm3agol wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 00:48 annul wrote:
people like macro games because they prefer to play starcraft 2 for its mental elements, not its physical elements. they prefer a game that is NOT predicated on who can click their mouse faster. macro games are cerebral, defending a 4 gate is not. that is the distinction. I'll answer with an FPS example. I am not a strategist. I have good aim and reaction times that I worked on to improve. So I use these to my advantage. When I'm playing CT in counterstrike(defense) I liked to push. Why? I'm not that good at the strategic/positioning part of the game, i mostly preferred to out-aim them. So instead of sitting and waiting for some perfectly timed and executed smoke and flash strategy to come and hit me, I just waited for about the time when they were setting up, then I'd just push out and use my (sometimes) superior aim to completely nullify their strategic and tactical advantages. Same thing in SC2. I use what I'm good at to win me games.
I think the main difference here is, if you have a tactic that relies on having a better aim then your opponent in counterstrike, that means you are better then your opponent.
If you 4gate your opponent, it doesn't neccesarily mean you are better then him, it simply means he wasn't able to scout it in time to respond. Not so much outplaying your opponent, rather hoping he didn't scout. It's more a game of chance then a game of skill, the aggresive all-inning player simply has the advantage 90% of the time, one way or another.
While I actually do agree on your point though, it's not fun only waiting untill you are 200/200 and then trading army's. However this is a choice you make yourself, there's alot of things you can do to be aggresive during the entire game. You could push out with your first zealot/stalker, get your expansion up, do some poking with a sentry/stalker or sentry/zealot force. Be aggresive with either your first 2-3 collosus or a few void rays, and lategame you can actually harras all over the map by using DT's, Storm Drops, flying a speed warp prism with a collosus over your opponents mineral lines (I advise toss players to try this sometimes, if the player doesn't have mass turrets around his bases it can be incredibly annoying to catch a speed warp prism, and micro loading up/unloading a 9 range collosus to harras buildings or workers lines is really fun). And these are only examples from protoss, I actually think terran and zerg have alot more ways to harras or be aggresive in general.
|
On January 11 2011 03:28 Sm3agol wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 02:59 Chise wrote:On January 11 2011 02:55 iamke55 wrote:On January 11 2011 00:58 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 11 2011 00:16 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 23:41 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 10 2011 23:25 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 13:26 alphafuzard wrote:On January 10 2011 13:18 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 11:16 FrayzZeUsher wrote:
excuse me... but why would your promote such a strat.
One basing is the WRONG way to play the game, remember that. Really? How is that the wrong way to play the game. I don't see any, "no 1 base all-ins" in Blizzard's ToS. Does it win games? Yes. Then it is a right way to play the game. Me speaking personally, I hate big macro games. i feel like it reduces games to pure unit composition and macro, instead of fun micro, and amazing tactical play. I enjoy a crisp 4 gate win where I FF 4 of his zealots into a corner and waste them with stalker/sentry, and that great play winning the game for me. Macroing inot a giant Toss death ball, and A-moving over a my enemies army, losing most of it but doing damage, re-macroing up, and slowly pushing him into oblivion? Not so fun. 30 minute game, and half of it is just managing your economy. imo the most beautiful tactics are in the late game the ball of death players are usually much easier to beat than players with a competent and confident late game also it shows off the real skill of the players in many more aspects than 8 minutes build order wins ANNNNNNDD we're done here. I prefer short micro based games. You prefer long macro based games. We couldn't both be right could we? Amazingly enough, we are both right. And so we do the things in the game we play for FUN, in a way that is FUN for us. Radical concept, I know, but as far as I know, one base micro gamers win just as many games as multiple base macro gamers. And if 1 basing is "nerfed" then going 4 gate all-in will be a lot less fun due to losing, and hence, I'll stop doing it, because it won't be as fun any more. Until then, if you see my name come up while laddering, scout your base for proxy warpgates at all times, and prepare for 4-gate/3 gate robo/ DTs etc, because they are coming. In other words you aren't really that good at the game. besides, if you think doing a 4gate or auto winning with DTs against people that are working hard to get better is fun or exciting. I sincerely wish you check your mental state. ROFL? YOU need your mental state checked. I'm having fun. You are working hard and practicing a video game that in all likelihood will never return you a profit. And if I'm bad at the game, then I wouldn't be beating other people's 4 gates or other "micro" based openings. My small group micro and tactical play is pretty solid, and getting better. Your macro and general micro is probably better than mine. So what? I am still winning. If you can't hold off a 4-gate, then get better. SC2 is obviously not a pure macro based game. So why is that the "correct" way to play? The correct way to play is the way that wins and is fun for you. You like macro. I like micro and hate "macro". So if you play me, by god, you're going to have to micro better than me to get to the macro portion of the game, where you will start having fun, and will beat me. If not, I'll have loads of fun baiting your units down your ramp, FF them away from it, and then running up with my units up and raping your base. You'll rage and quit and harass me in chat telling me I suck, and I'll just keep playing the way I like, and keep beating you because I obviously don't know how to play the game. I wouldnt say so, im 16 and improving steadily through constant practice. oh nvm ur an fps player - id expect your standards of 'excitement' to be low enough to enjoy 4gating. Why are you even on this site? This is a forum for Starcraft 2 players, not fastest map nr20 players. If someone can win in 10 minutes when you don't know how to end the game in under 30 minutes, you are hardly in a position to claim the other guy is less skilled. 4 gating is an important skill for high level play, and if you can't do it then you're not good at Protoss. You're wrong. On January 10 2011 12:02 RHMVNovus wrote:
No, it doesn't mean you're playing the game wrong at all.
It does mean, however, that less skilled players are reaching high levels, making the ladder system not particularly indicative of skill. This is the whole point. And it's true. If you think it's wrong, then you are just not a good enough player to understand it. Nope you are wrong. I watch pros streams all the time. And they rush and early game cheese/all-in almost more than they do macro games. if you can't 4 gate or defend a 4 gate then you aren't good. It's the most basic protoss build known to man. If it beats you time and time again...don't whine about noobs that can't macro.
It's a strategy orders of magnitude more difficult to defend perfectly than it is to execute perfectly. 'Noobs' with reference to those that can't hold off a practiced 4gate is a term that seems to be attempting to build up your own worth as a player. It's significantly harder to react to a build and hold a practiced aggressive build than it is to pull off said build successfully.
On January 11 2011 03:14 iamke55 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 03:05 stormtemplar wrote:
Guys, cool the hell down. This is the stupidest argument I've ever heard. The pro-macro people are right in that macro is the best way to get to the VERY top, however, all in play is something that all good players should know well, so as to defend it and to have some variety. As this guy is not trying to be at the tip top, but just trying to have fun, than four-gate is fine. I personally get immense satisfaction from warping in 12 units off 3 bases and rolling my opponent with masses of 3/3/3 protoss units. Others don't. Fine. Don't care.
One last note. 4 gate is not really all-in in PvP as pretty much everybody either 4 gates or 3 gate robo's The "pro-macro" people are not right at all. Believe it or not, it's much easier to win against someone who only knows how to macro than someone who is good with a variety of builds. The latter puts much more pressure on his opponents to scout well and practice against everything. In the end, a tournament level Protoss player should excel at all aspects of the game, and someone's choice to learn the early game before learning the late game does not make him any worse of a player.
That's the working definition of a multidimensional macro player: being comfortable with a number of builds and being able to react to an opponent's build according to what he scouts. That is the complete antithesis of what this thread embodies, however. This thread encourages dogmatic adherence to a build order. This is not inherently bad, of course, and is a really useful way to introduce one to how to play SCII. But 4gating 100 times in a row, though it leads to successful results, does not lead to mastery of numerous builds, and thus does not lead to adaptable macro success, that which you are placing on a pedestal, even if you're trying to separate the two.
Macro isn't just getting bases and keeping minerals low. It's knowing when to expand, how to respond to various builds, and when to attack vs. when to stay back, and critically, knowing when to cut on economy in response to aggression to survive.
Generally, I, a lowly Silver Zerg, would be willing to offer a challenge to those who got where they are solely by 4-gating, with my opponent playing Zerg, myself playing Protoss, each of us given 24 hours to learn the other race's strategy. I don't actually have enough time for that in the next 24 hours, so I can't offer that challenge, but if someone else who is in agreement with me would take up the mantle, it could be useful. Probably would help settle the argument, assuming it's not HuK vs. Bronzie.
|
On January 11 2011 03:28 Sm3agol wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 02:59 Chise wrote:On January 11 2011 02:55 iamke55 wrote:On January 11 2011 00:58 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 11 2011 00:16 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 23:41 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 10 2011 23:25 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 13:26 alphafuzard wrote:On January 10 2011 13:18 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 11:16 FrayzZeUsher wrote:
excuse me... but why would your promote such a strat.
One basing is the WRONG way to play the game, remember that. Really? How is that the wrong way to play the game. I don't see any, "no 1 base all-ins" in Blizzard's ToS. Does it win games? Yes. Then it is a right way to play the game. Me speaking personally, I hate big macro games. i feel like it reduces games to pure unit composition and macro, instead of fun micro, and amazing tactical play. I enjoy a crisp 4 gate win where I FF 4 of his zealots into a corner and waste them with stalker/sentry, and that great play winning the game for me. Macroing inot a giant Toss death ball, and A-moving over a my enemies army, losing most of it but doing damage, re-macroing up, and slowly pushing him into oblivion? Not so fun. 30 minute game, and half of it is just managing your economy. imo the most beautiful tactics are in the late game the ball of death players are usually much easier to beat than players with a competent and confident late game also it shows off the real skill of the players in many more aspects than 8 minutes build order wins ANNNNNNDD we're done here. I prefer short micro based games. You prefer long macro based games. We couldn't both be right could we? Amazingly enough, we are both right. And so we do the things in the game we play for FUN, in a way that is FUN for us. Radical concept, I know, but as far as I know, one base micro gamers win just as many games as multiple base macro gamers. And if 1 basing is "nerfed" then going 4 gate all-in will be a lot less fun due to losing, and hence, I'll stop doing it, because it won't be as fun any more. Until then, if you see my name come up while laddering, scout your base for proxy warpgates at all times, and prepare for 4-gate/3 gate robo/ DTs etc, because they are coming. In other words you aren't really that good at the game. besides, if you think doing a 4gate or auto winning with DTs against people that are working hard to get better is fun or exciting. I sincerely wish you check your mental state. ROFL? YOU need your mental state checked. I'm having fun. You are working hard and practicing a video game that in all likelihood will never return you a profit. And if I'm bad at the game, then I wouldn't be beating other people's 4 gates or other "micro" based openings. My small group micro and tactical play is pretty solid, and getting better. Your macro and general micro is probably better than mine. So what? I am still winning. If you can't hold off a 4-gate, then get better. SC2 is obviously not a pure macro based game. So why is that the "correct" way to play? The correct way to play is the way that wins and is fun for you. You like macro. I like micro and hate "macro". So if you play me, by god, you're going to have to micro better than me to get to the macro portion of the game, where you will start having fun, and will beat me. If not, I'll have loads of fun baiting your units down your ramp, FF them away from it, and then running up with my units up and raping your base. You'll rage and quit and harass me in chat telling me I suck, and I'll just keep playing the way I like, and keep beating you because I obviously don't know how to play the game. I wouldnt say so, im 16 and improving steadily through constant practice. oh nvm ur an fps player - id expect your standards of 'excitement' to be low enough to enjoy 4gating. Why are you even on this site? This is a forum for Starcraft 2 players, not fastest map nr20 players. If someone can win in 10 minutes when you don't know how to end the game in under 30 minutes, you are hardly in a position to claim the other guy is less skilled. 4 gating is an important skill for high level play, and if you can't do it then you're not good at Protoss. You're wrong. On January 10 2011 12:02 RHMVNovus wrote:
No, it doesn't mean you're playing the game wrong at all.
It does mean, however, that less skilled players are reaching high levels, making the ladder system not particularly indicative of skill. This is the whole point. And it's true. If you think it's wrong, then you are just not a good enough player to understand it. Nope you are wrong. I watch pros streams all the time. And they rush and early game cheese/all-in almost more than they do macro games. if you can't 4 gate or defend a 4 gate then you aren't good. It's the most basic protoss build known to man. If it beats you time and time again...don't whine about noobs that can't macro.
Yeah, guess why more and more people start losing interest in SC2? Because shit is viable, even on pro level. Just watch BitByBit.Prime play. He has no skill what so ever and still he could make it to Code A.
4 Gate isn't overpowered, it's pretty easy to hold once you know the timing. But there's a difference in being the person who 4gates and being the person who defends.
The person who attacks needs no skill at all to do the 4 Gate - All you need to know is: I'm gonna Build my 4 Gates, get my Warpin Tech and then I'm going to attack. Obviously micro helps to make 4 Gate more effective, but that's it. On the other side, the person who defends needs to know a 4gate is coming, else they might lose. So, basically, if 4gate wins, it's not because the person who pulled it off was good, but because his opponent was bad. Hence: Winning with a 4gate doesn't make you a good player. At all.
On January 11 2011 03:59 Drunken.Jedi wrote:
This makes no sense whatsoever. Why would people getting high ratings from 4 gating invalidate the ladder system?
Is 4 gating somehow cheating? No, clearly not since there is no rule inside or outsider the game against it.
Is 4 gate overpowered? Well, if you think it is, protosses should be 4 gating even more so that Blizzard gets aware of the issue and can do something to fix it.
If you don't think 4 gate is cheating or overpowered, then why are you complaining?
Wouldn't it invalidate the rating system even more if players refused to do a strong strategy out of some misplaced sense of honour?
As I stated above, 4 gate isn't overpowered. Also, 4 gate isn't cheating. 4 gate is simply a result of the current game design, which is pretty poor if you consider SC2 an esport.
The problem with 4gate (and many other allin/cheese plays) is that they don't require skill to pull off, BUT it requires skill do defend such allin/cheese play, because you have to know they are coming and get the right unit mix to defend them. This means that people with lesser skill (4gaters) win against people with higher skill more often than they should, considering that the better out of 2 players should generally win more games.
That's the reason I'm complaining. I think SC2 is supposed to be a competitive game where the better player wins, but the current state of the game doesn't make this happen.
|
On January 11 2011 05:24 Chise wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 03:28 Sm3agol wrote:On January 11 2011 02:59 Chise wrote:On January 11 2011 02:55 iamke55 wrote:On January 11 2011 00:58 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 11 2011 00:16 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 23:41 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 10 2011 23:25 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 13:26 alphafuzard wrote:On January 10 2011 13:18 Sm3agol wrote:
[quote]
Really? How is that the wrong way to play the game. I don't see any, "no 1 base all-ins" in Blizzard's ToS.
Does it win games? Yes.
Then it is a right way to play the game.
Me speaking personally, I hate big macro games. i feel like it reduces games to pure unit composition and macro, instead of fun micro, and amazing tactical play. I enjoy a crisp 4 gate win where I FF 4 of his zealots into a corner and waste them with stalker/sentry, and that great play winning the game for me. Macroing inot a giant Toss death ball, and A-moving over a my enemies army, losing most of it but doing damage, re-macroing up, and slowly pushing him into oblivion? Not so fun. 30 minute game, and half of it is just managing your economy. imo the most beautiful tactics are in the late game the ball of death players are usually much easier to beat than players with a competent and confident late game also it shows off the real skill of the players in many more aspects than 8 minutes build order wins ANNNNNNDD we're done here. I prefer short micro based games. You prefer long macro based games. We couldn't both be right could we? Amazingly enough, we are both right. And so we do the things in the game we play for FUN, in a way that is FUN for us. Radical concept, I know, but as far as I know, one base micro gamers win just as many games as multiple base macro gamers. And if 1 basing is "nerfed" then going 4 gate all-in will be a lot less fun due to losing, and hence, I'll stop doing it, because it won't be as fun any more. Until then, if you see my name come up while laddering, scout your base for proxy warpgates at all times, and prepare for 4-gate/3 gate robo/ DTs etc, because they are coming. In other words you aren't really that good at the game. besides, if you think doing a 4gate or auto winning with DTs against people that are working hard to get better is fun or exciting. I sincerely wish you check your mental state. ROFL? YOU need your mental state checked. I'm having fun. You are working hard and practicing a video game that in all likelihood will never return you a profit. And if I'm bad at the game, then I wouldn't be beating other people's 4 gates or other "micro" based openings. My small group micro and tactical play is pretty solid, and getting better. Your macro and general micro is probably better than mine. So what? I am still winning. If you can't hold off a 4-gate, then get better. SC2 is obviously not a pure macro based game. So why is that the "correct" way to play? The correct way to play is the way that wins and is fun for you. You like macro. I like micro and hate "macro". So if you play me, by god, you're going to have to micro better than me to get to the macro portion of the game, where you will start having fun, and will beat me. If not, I'll have loads of fun baiting your units down your ramp, FF them away from it, and then running up with my units up and raping your base. You'll rage and quit and harass me in chat telling me I suck, and I'll just keep playing the way I like, and keep beating you because I obviously don't know how to play the game. I wouldnt say so, im 16 and improving steadily through constant practice. oh nvm ur an fps player - id expect your standards of 'excitement' to be low enough to enjoy 4gating. Why are you even on this site? This is a forum for Starcraft 2 players, not fastest map nr20 players. If someone can win in 10 minutes when you don't know how to end the game in under 30 minutes, you are hardly in a position to claim the other guy is less skilled. 4 gating is an important skill for high level play, and if you can't do it then you're not good at Protoss. You're wrong. On January 10 2011 12:02 RHMVNovus wrote:
No, it doesn't mean you're playing the game wrong at all.
It does mean, however, that less skilled players are reaching high levels, making the ladder system not particularly indicative of skill. This is the whole point. And it's true. If you think it's wrong, then you are just not a good enough player to understand it. Nope you are wrong. I watch pros streams all the time. And they rush and early game cheese/all-in almost more than they do macro games. if you can't 4 gate or defend a 4 gate then you aren't good. It's the most basic protoss build known to man. If it beats you time and time again...don't whine about noobs that can't macro. Yeah, guess why more and more people start losing interest in SC2? Because shit is viable, even on pro level. Just watch BitByBit.Prime play. He has no skill what so ever and still he could make it to Code A. 4 Gate isn't overpowered, it's pretty easy to hold once you know the timing. But there's a difference in being the person who 4gates and being the person who defends. The person who attacks needs no skill at all to do the 4 Gate - All you need to know is: I'm gonna Build my 4 Gates, get my Warpin Tech and then I'm going to attack. Obviously micro helps to make 4 Gate more effective, but that's it. On the other side, the person who defends needs to know a 4gate is coming, else they might lose. So, basically, if 4gate wins, it's not because the person who pulled it off was good, but because his opponent was bad. Hence: Winning with a 4gate doesn't make you a good player. At all. Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 03:59 Drunken.Jedi wrote:
This makes no sense whatsoever. Why would people getting high ratings from 4 gating invalidate the ladder system?
Is 4 gating somehow cheating? No, clearly not since there is no rule inside or outsider the game against it.
Is 4 gate overpowered? Well, if you think it is, protosses should be 4 gating even more so that Blizzard gets aware of the issue and can do something to fix it.
If you don't think 4 gate is cheating or overpowered, then why are you complaining?
Wouldn't it invalidate the rating system even more if players refused to do a strong strategy out of some misplaced sense of honour? As I stated above, 4 gate isn't overpowered. Also, 4 gate isn't cheating. 4 gate is simply a result of the current game design, which is pretty poor if you consider SC2 an esport. The problem with 4gate (and many other allin/cheese plays) is that they don't require skill to pull off, BUT it requires skill do defend such allin/cheese play, because you have to know they are coming and get the right unit mix to defend them. This means that people with lesser skill (4gaters) win against people with higher skill more often than they should, considering that the better out of 2 players should generally win more games. That's the reason I'm complaining. I think SC2 is supposed to be a competitive game where the better player wins, but the current state of the game doesn't make this happen.
There seems to be two lines of thought relating to how 4 gating is "bad". And yet you manage to contradict one or the other at all times.
One is that its not a true representation of skill level since the attacker can beat the defender more often than their skill level would normally allow. But this argument only holds water if you take ladder to actually mean something, as if it were a tournament of sorts. And yet it is not. It means nothing, it's a number. If we were competing for money, then yes, your argument would be correct. Someone that refuses to learn more than one-base all-ins would be looked down on, because while he would upset some legitimately good players, he would have no chance of proceeding far because there is guaranteed to be someone in the tournament that is at least his equal at one-basing, while also possessing a far superior macro game. This was very evident in the latest Korean matches with 2 rax all-in builds.
But why would this bother you in ladder? If 4-gating you puts me on equal terms with you because in all other respects you are far better, then I need to play you when I 4 gate. I will increase my skill with my 4-gate until I begin to hit the wall of players that are at least my equal at 4-gating. And there I will stop. At that point, my 4 gate "skill" puts me at the same level as everyone else around me. It doesn't lower your rating to beat me, in respect to rating, 4 gate puts me on even footing with you, and hence....we should be matched up in ladder.
But the other line of thought is that i learn nothing. And again, why should this concern you? YOU will be just getting more practice against the most common Protoss build on planet earth, while I will be doing what I consider to be fun. Win-win situation. Somehow that makes you angry.
|
On January 11 2011 05:24 Chise wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 03:28 Sm3agol wrote:On January 11 2011 02:59 Chise wrote:On January 11 2011 02:55 iamke55 wrote:On January 11 2011 00:58 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 11 2011 00:16 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 23:41 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 10 2011 23:25 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 13:26 alphafuzard wrote:On January 10 2011 13:18 Sm3agol wrote:
[quote]
Really? How is that the wrong way to play the game. I don't see any, "no 1 base all-ins" in Blizzard's ToS.
Does it win games? Yes.
Then it is a right way to play the game.
Me speaking personally, I hate big macro games. i feel like it reduces games to pure unit composition and macro, instead of fun micro, and amazing tactical play. I enjoy a crisp 4 gate win where I FF 4 of his zealots into a corner and waste them with stalker/sentry, and that great play winning the game for me. Macroing inot a giant Toss death ball, and A-moving over a my enemies army, losing most of it but doing damage, re-macroing up, and slowly pushing him into oblivion? Not so fun. 30 minute game, and half of it is just managing your economy. imo the most beautiful tactics are in the late game the ball of death players are usually much easier to beat than players with a competent and confident late game also it shows off the real skill of the players in many more aspects than 8 minutes build order wins ANNNNNNDD we're done here. I prefer short micro based games. You prefer long macro based games. We couldn't both be right could we? Amazingly enough, we are both right. And so we do the things in the game we play for FUN, in a way that is FUN for us. Radical concept, I know, but as far as I know, one base micro gamers win just as many games as multiple base macro gamers. And if 1 basing is "nerfed" then going 4 gate all-in will be a lot less fun due to losing, and hence, I'll stop doing it, because it won't be as fun any more. Until then, if you see my name come up while laddering, scout your base for proxy warpgates at all times, and prepare for 4-gate/3 gate robo/ DTs etc, because they are coming. In other words you aren't really that good at the game. besides, if you think doing a 4gate or auto winning with DTs against people that are working hard to get better is fun or exciting. I sincerely wish you check your mental state. ROFL? YOU need your mental state checked. I'm having fun. You are working hard and practicing a video game that in all likelihood will never return you a profit. And if I'm bad at the game, then I wouldn't be beating other people's 4 gates or other "micro" based openings. My small group micro and tactical play is pretty solid, and getting better. Your macro and general micro is probably better than mine. So what? I am still winning. If you can't hold off a 4-gate, then get better. SC2 is obviously not a pure macro based game. So why is that the "correct" way to play? The correct way to play is the way that wins and is fun for you. You like macro. I like micro and hate "macro". So if you play me, by god, you're going to have to micro better than me to get to the macro portion of the game, where you will start having fun, and will beat me. If not, I'll have loads of fun baiting your units down your ramp, FF them away from it, and then running up with my units up and raping your base. You'll rage and quit and harass me in chat telling me I suck, and I'll just keep playing the way I like, and keep beating you because I obviously don't know how to play the game. I wouldnt say so, im 16 and improving steadily through constant practice. oh nvm ur an fps player - id expect your standards of 'excitement' to be low enough to enjoy 4gating. Why are you even on this site? This is a forum for Starcraft 2 players, not fastest map nr20 players. If someone can win in 10 minutes when you don't know how to end the game in under 30 minutes, you are hardly in a position to claim the other guy is less skilled. 4 gating is an important skill for high level play, and if you can't do it then you're not good at Protoss. You're wrong. On January 10 2011 12:02 RHMVNovus wrote:
No, it doesn't mean you're playing the game wrong at all.
It does mean, however, that less skilled players are reaching high levels, making the ladder system not particularly indicative of skill. This is the whole point. And it's true. If you think it's wrong, then you are just not a good enough player to understand it. Nope you are wrong. I watch pros streams all the time. And they rush and early game cheese/all-in almost more than they do macro games. if you can't 4 gate or defend a 4 gate then you aren't good. It's the most basic protoss build known to man. If it beats you time and time again...don't whine about noobs that can't macro. Yeah, guess why more and more people start losing interest in SC2? Because shit is viable, even on pro level. Just watch BitByBit.Prime play. He has no skill what so ever and still he could make it to Code A. 4 Gate isn't overpowered, it's pretty easy to hold once you know the timing. But there's a difference in being the person who 4gates and being the person who defends. The person who attacks needs no skill at all to do the 4 Gate - All you need to know is: I'm gonna Build my 4 Gates, get my Warpin Tech and then I'm going to attack. Obviously micro helps to make 4 Gate more effective, but that's it. On the other side, the person who defends needs to know a 4gate is coming, else they might lose. So, basically, if 4gate wins, it's not because the person who pulled it off was good, but because his opponent was bad. Hence: Winning with a 4gate doesn't make you a good player. At all. Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 03:59 Drunken.Jedi wrote:
This makes no sense whatsoever. Why would people getting high ratings from 4 gating invalidate the ladder system?
Is 4 gating somehow cheating? No, clearly not since there is no rule inside or outsider the game against it.
Is 4 gate overpowered? Well, if you think it is, protosses should be 4 gating even more so that Blizzard gets aware of the issue and can do something to fix it.
If you don't think 4 gate is cheating or overpowered, then why are you complaining?
Wouldn't it invalidate the rating system even more if players refused to do a strong strategy out of some misplaced sense of honour? As I stated above, 4 gate isn't overpowered. Also, 4 gate isn't cheating. 4 gate is simply a result of the current game design, which is pretty poor if you consider SC2 an esport. The problem with 4gate (and many other allin/cheese plays) is that they don't require skill to pull off, BUT it requires skill do defend such allin/cheese play, because you have to know they are coming and get the right unit mix to defend them. This means that people with lesser skill (4gaters) win against people with higher skill more often than they should, considering that the better out of 2 players should generally win more games. That's the reason I'm complaining. I think SC2 is supposed to be a competitive game where the better player wins, but the current state of the game doesn't make this happen.
A strategy that does not take skill to execute, but takes a lot skill to defend should be considered overpowered.
It doesn't change the fact that playing 4gate to win is a valid strategy. It doesn't make you a bad player at all. If you think you maximize your chances of winning by doing a 4gate, then you should play a 4gate.
People that are complaining about the persons being lame and skillless are probably not understanding what it means to play to win.
If you want to complain, you should complain about the imbalance of skill that is needed for this strategy by the attacking and defending player, not about your opponent doing what maximizes his chances of winning the game.
|
4 gate should be nerf (not really)
Me myself player terran, so I giggle every time toss go 4 gate. However I felt 4 gate is unfair to zerg.
|
Name/ID: CDCramer.492/NA
Division: Gold
Points before 100 4Gate Challenge: 2397 (lol why am i still in gold)
Bonus Pool : 0
Final score: not yet
Replay pack: coming soon
Im hoping that if I 4 gate 100 times, it will help me defend it when someone else does it, beecause i know the timing when the push comes and stuff like that. (i play zerg)
|
Can we please get some mods in here to stop all this discussion of how the game should be played, and possibly have those posts removed too? I can't seem to find any relevant posts since the last 2 pages.
Also, (on topic) concerning the replay packs, do we have to make one? Because I don't save all of my replays and I doubt anybody would want to watch 100 of my games 
|
Main goal of Starcraft is to win the match. I will use whatever is given to me in the game to get to that end point, be it: worker rush, proxy gates, 4gate or macro game. Now piss off.
NOBODY on this forum is remotely in the position to absolutely judge a game for everyone.
Thanks.
|
What you guys are trying to tell me is not neccessary wrong. It is ok to use everything you can use to achieve your goal, which is to win.
BUT, if a game has tactics that don't require skill to execute but still win a lot, the game can't be considered beging part of esports.
|
On January 11 2011 06:48 Sm3agol wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2011 05:24 Chise wrote:On January 11 2011 03:28 Sm3agol wrote:On January 11 2011 02:59 Chise wrote:On January 11 2011 02:55 iamke55 wrote:On January 11 2011 00:58 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 11 2011 00:16 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 23:41 FrayzZeUsher wrote:On January 10 2011 23:25 Sm3agol wrote:On January 10 2011 13:26 alphafuzard wrote:
[quote]
imo the most beautiful tactics are in the late game
the ball of death players are usually much easier to beat than players with a competent and confident late game
also it shows off the real skill of the players in many more aspects than 8 minutes build order wins ANNNNNNDD we're done here. I prefer short micro based games. You prefer long macro based games. We couldn't both be right could we? Amazingly enough, we are both right. And so we do the things in the game we play for FUN, in a way that is FUN for us. Radical concept, I know, but as far as I know, one base micro gamers win just as many games as multiple base macro gamers. And if 1 basing is "nerfed" then going 4 gate all-in will be a lot less fun due to losing, and hence, I'll stop doing it, because it won't be as fun any more. Until then, if you see my name come up while laddering, scout your base for proxy warpgates at all times, and prepare for 4-gate/3 gate robo/ DTs etc, because they are coming. In other words you aren't really that good at the game. besides, if you think doing a 4gate or auto winning with DTs against people that are working hard to get better is fun or exciting. I sincerely wish you check your mental state. ROFL? YOU need your mental state checked. I'm having fun. You are working hard and practicing a video game that in all likelihood will never return you a profit. And if I'm bad at the game, then I wouldn't be beating other people's 4 gates or other "micro" based openings. My small group micro and tactical play is pretty solid, and getting better. Your macro and general micro is probably better than mine. So what? I am still winning. If you can't hold off a 4-gate, then get better. SC2 is obviously not a pure macro based game. So why is that the "correct" way to play? The correct way to play is the way that wins and is fun for you. You like macro. I like micro and hate "macro". So if you play me, by god, you're going to have to micro better than me to get to the macro portion of the game, where you will start having fun, and will beat me. If not, I'll have loads of fun baiting your units down your ramp, FF them away from it, and then running up with my units up and raping your base. You'll rage and quit and harass me in chat telling me I suck, and I'll just keep playing the way I like, and keep beating you because I obviously don't know how to play the game. I wouldnt say so, im 16 and improving steadily through constant practice. oh nvm ur an fps player - id expect your standards of 'excitement' to be low enough to enjoy 4gating. Why are you even on this site? This is a forum for Starcraft 2 players, not fastest map nr20 players. If someone can win in 10 minutes when you don't know how to end the game in under 30 minutes, you are hardly in a position to claim the other guy is less skilled. 4 gating is an important skill for high level play, and if you can't do it then you're not good at Protoss. You're wrong. On January 10 2011 12:02 RHMVNovus wrote:
No, it doesn't mean you're playing the game wrong at all.
It does mean, however, that less skilled players are reaching high levels, making the ladder system not particularly indicative of skill. This is the whole point. And it's true. If you think it's wrong, then you are just not a good enough player to understand it. Nope you are wrong. I watch pros streams all the time. And they rush and early game cheese/all-in almost more than they do macro games. if you can't 4 gate or defend a 4 gate then you aren't good. It's the most basic protoss build known to man. If it beats you time and time again...don't whine about noobs that can't macro. Yeah, guess why more and more people start losing interest in SC2? Because shit is viable, even on pro level. Just watch BitByBit.Prime play. He has no skill what so ever and still he could make it to Code A. 4 Gate isn't overpowered, it's pretty easy to hold once you know the timing. But there's a difference in being the person who 4gates and being the person who defends. The person who attacks needs no skill at all to do the 4 Gate - All you need to know is: I'm gonna Build my 4 Gates, get my Warpin Tech and then I'm going to attack. Obviously micro helps to make 4 Gate more effective, but that's it. On the other side, the person who defends needs to know a 4gate is coming, else they might lose. So, basically, if 4gate wins, it's not because the person who pulled it off was good, but because his opponent was bad. Hence: Winning with a 4gate doesn't make you a good player. At all. On January 11 2011 03:59 Drunken.Jedi wrote:
This makes no sense whatsoever. Why would people getting high ratings from 4 gating invalidate the ladder system?
Is 4 gating somehow cheating? No, clearly not since there is no rule inside or outsider the game against it.
Is 4 gate overpowered? Well, if you think it is, protosses should be 4 gating even more so that Blizzard gets aware of the issue and can do something to fix it.
If you don't think 4 gate is cheating or overpowered, then why are you complaining?
Wouldn't it invalidate the rating system even more if players refused to do a strong strategy out of some misplaced sense of honour? As I stated above, 4 gate isn't overpowered. Also, 4 gate isn't cheating. 4 gate is simply a result of the current game design, which is pretty poor if you consider SC2 an esport. The problem with 4gate (and many other allin/cheese plays) is that they don't require skill to pull off, BUT it requires skill do defend such allin/cheese play, because you have to know they are coming and get the right unit mix to defend them. This means that people with lesser skill (4gaters) win against people with higher skill more often than they should, considering that the better out of 2 players should generally win more games. That's the reason I'm complaining. I think SC2 is supposed to be a competitive game where the better player wins, but the current state of the game doesn't make this happen. There seems to be two lines of thought relating to how 4 gating is "bad". And yet you manage to contradict one or the other at all times. One is that its not a true representation of skill level since the attacker can beat the defender more often than their skill level would normally allow. But this argument only holds water if you take ladder to actually mean something, as if it were a tournament of sorts. And yet it is not. It means nothing, it's a number. If we were competing for money, then yes, your argument would be correct. Someone that refuses to learn more than one-base all-ins would be looked down on, because while he would upset some legitimately good players, he would have no chance of proceeding far because there is guaranteed to be someone in the tournament that is at least his equal at one-basing, while also possessing a far superior macro game. This was very evident in the latest Korean matches with 2 rax all-in builds.
Sorry, but your argument is absolute bullshit.
Nothing in this world has intrinsic value, it's all about perceived value and if you play this game competitively (which for me means you wanna be good & get better, quite simply) then ladder means A LOT to you, since it is the only way to get consistent practice and compete with others.
You can't say ladder has no value when people get invited to Blizzcon based off ladder performance.
But why would this bother you in ladder? If 4-gating you puts me on equal terms with you because in all other respects you are far better, then I need to play you when I 4 gate. I will increase my skill with my 4-gate until I begin to hit the wall of players that are at least my equal at 4-gating. And there I will stop. At that point, my 4 gate "skill" puts me at the same level as everyone else around me. It doesn't lower your rating to beat me, in respect to rating, 4 gate puts me on even footing with you, and hence....we should be matched up in ladder.
If all you do is 4gate and nothing else you WILL get to a very high rating and on your way there you will maintain a positive winratio and decrease the rating (and MMR) of people that do other strategies.
But the other line of thought is that i learn nothing. And again, why should this concern you? YOU will be just getting more practice against the most common Protoss build on planet earth, while I will be doing what I consider to be fun. Win-win situation. Somehow that makes you angry.
This should concern anyone who is interested in seeing this game evolve past 1-base-allins, who actually wants to see good players play good games. Playing against 4-gate is no fun.
People that 4gate because they don't know anything else slow down the evolution of this game, they're doing the community a disservice by deteriorating the rating of players better than them and staying bad players themselves.
If you're an asshole that only cares about winning, even at the expense of others, then go ahead pick Protoss and do your 4gate day in and day out.
If you are someone who wants to help himself and others understand the game, get better at macroing and don't really care about losing as long as you improve, well, then I guess you're not 4gating on ladder anyway and you can be proud of yourself.
On January 11 2011 11:21 Lorken wrote:
Can we please get some mods in here to stop all this discussion of how the game should be played,
I agree, this thread isn't for discussing 4gates but merely the 'challenge' of doing it 100 times in a row, people should discuss this elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
