| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Indrium
United States2236 Posts
On March 25 2011 04:00 BRaegO wrote: Artosis Day9 TLO (was really really good at IEM imho) Sheth Psy IdrA Is that in some kind of order? And top would definitely be Artosis, assuming you're not counting IdrA or TLO as commentators. | ||
|
Aberu
United States968 Posts
| ||
|
AnotherEon
United Kingdom250 Posts
On March 25 2011 03:43 OldBamboo wrote: Day is getting his M.S. in Math, right? That takes one heck of a self-disciplined mind. I think the question is: Does Day9 have the talent to use with his genius brain and become a dominant sc2 gamer. If he can't execute all of the brilliant ideas/strategies he comes up with, then he'll be limited in how far he can go. What... day9 competed at a high level for years and years in BW getting A+ on iccup, of course he has enough skill to become a great sc2 player if he fully commited to training (not going to happen due to other commitments eg day9 daily and casting) Good news is he will have a lot more time to train whenever he is done with his thesis so he will become even more knowledgable than he already is  | ||
|
chaokel
Australia535 Posts
On March 25 2011 01:23 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote: Exciting by saying that it's over? They're all the time 'Yeah, we could pretend that it's not over to make it more exciting, but he actually has 0% chance of coming back'. -> comes back. By claiming that something is 100% ensured it causes excitement when it doesn't happen. i.e if everybody said someone was 100% guarenteed to fail in a major tournament it sure as hell would be exciting to watch them climb their way to the top. When MC holds after such a comment the viewer is excited because what happened seems more miraculous that it actually was. On March 25 2011 01:23 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote: I expect him to not say 'There is 0% chance of him coming back, trust me guys, this game is over, some of you noobs might think at home 'But what if he ...', but no, it's actually over.' And then he comes back. He's a commentator his job is to exaggerate, obviously in almost any scenario there is not really an 0% chance of whatever it is to happen. He's just trying to create excitement by sensationalising. See my previous statement On March 25 2011 01:23 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote: It's not hard to get that right 99% of the time and he'smore like 95%. Recognising when a game is totally over is quite easy actually, people do it all the time on ladder, without third person view even, it's when they gg. Actually predicting builds due to the nature of the opponent / map / previous games is not as easy as you make it out to be, think about the GSTL where even more factors come into play, ie are they just throwing this guy out there to put the opponent on tilt for the next person, will it be some kind of funky timing push/greedy fast expands/standard macro/cheese for X reasons. If you think about the number of builds for each race + each different matchup / map etc there is a lot more to take into consideration than just oh its a PvZ i think we'll see 3gate expand. As for recognising when a game is over, we can read gg ourselves, having the casters repeat that serves no purpose i don't even get what you're getting at here. On March 25 2011 01:23 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote: Watch the teamleague, MC versus SlayersWhatshisname. He said 'there is 0% chance this nexus is going to live', MC ends up holding it off very easily and watching it I was like 'Nahh, that nexus is going to survive very easily.'. slayers mma i think it was When they actually engaged you might of been able to see the nexus was going to survive, however unless you made that call at the same time he did theres no use comparing. (and if you did how could you take into account mc's stalkers and how mma would react to the stalling) Artosis simply commentated on what he thought was going to happen at the current pace of the game. On March 25 2011 01:23 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote: No, vikings are decent on the ground because they do 12 dps on the ground (1 armour redux) and do 10 dps in the air versus unarmoured and 14 versus armoured, both getting double armour reduction. Vikings are for instance actually on equal footing with stalkers on the ground, which wins in equal numbers depends on target acquisition and concave. And yes, Vikings are more expensive, but they can fly away, stalkers can't. Vikings are by no means 'terrible' on the ground. Also, stalkers receive a penalty versus unarmoured units, vikings do not. 8 vikings beat 16 marines on the ground hands down, some green vikings left, only one dies in unit tester. However 8 stalkers versus 16 marines again depends on random target acquisition who comes out ahead. PsY knows this and pointed it out in a video. I once made a thread here about this situation, my hypothesis is that the viking attack animation looks weak, and therefore it gives people the subconscious idea that it is weak. (not to mention that few people actually land them). If you think that Vikings are terrible on the ground I have some doubts about your own understanding of the game and by extension ability to judge that of others, there is neither a statistical nor an empirical justification for this. They perform similarly to stalkers against armoured targets and a lot better against unarmoured targets on the ground, well worth the extra 25/25 price tag for their ability to lift off and fly away. Artosis however is very good in making it appear he knows a lot by just talking analytical all the time, quite often he's also wrong or is really prone to 'hipster reasoning' ("I love what he's doing, because it's never been done before!") Let's face it, the guy loves every protoss who doesn't go 2base colossus, not because it's not that good (he's desperately trying to find a justification why it's bad, kind of ironical since he called the unit imbalanced and overpowered), but simply because it's trite and everyone does it. Also, back at the beginning of GSL 5 he didn't even know why you would get armour against terran as protoss, he wasn't sure how to explain that San got armour first, surely this is the standard and people have figured this out months ago? I'm not even going to touch the viking debate cause tbh i have no idea how it all matches up. How does talking analytically mean he doesn't know a lot? (it doesn't necessarily mean he does, but it in no way means he doesn't either) the way i see it is hes breaking down the decision making and the play as its going on to get a better understanding which he shares with the viewers. This so called 'hipster reasoning' that you've dubbed is what starcraft 2 is all about, finding new ways to defeat your opponent. Of course Artosis loves this, who doesn't enjoy seeing something brand new? Its exciting to watch, you can only watch so many 4 gates before it gets stale. Not even sure where you got that hes 'desperately trying to find a justification' for why 2 base colosi is bad, sure he doesn't like it but i haven't seen him clutching at straws at any point trying to defend his dislike of two base colosi (i may of missed some of the GSL where he did this, feel free to direct me to it). In my eyes you seem to have an unreasonable expectation of the casters, they are there to make the game fun to watch for the masses not to act as robots simply spouting facts, which would be quite boring to watch for any length of time and isn't really feasible anyway. feel free to let me know if i totally got the wrong idea. Final note: cbf going through and replying to all your posts (or editing this one, so please don't nitpick my sentences grammatically) as i saw you had a ton other posts so i just picked the largest one to 'dissect' but feel free to reply to this and i'll write something back when i wake up tomorrow. | ||
|
BRaegO
United States243 Posts
On March 25 2011 04:08 HRSA wrote: Is that in some kind of order? And top would definitely be Artosis, assuming you're not counting IdrA or TLO as commentators. No particular order I guess, I enjoy them all. Artosis being #1 should be a given though imo. | ||
|
AJMcSpiffy
United States1154 Posts
| ||
|
Arisen
United States2382 Posts
Starcraft II: Artosis | ||
|
Indrium
United States2236 Posts
On March 25 2011 04:11 BRaegO wrote: No particular order I guess, I enjoy them all. Artosis being #1 should be a given though imo. Indeed. Just checking, wasn't sure. | ||
|
Stress
United States980 Posts
| ||
|
garlicface
Canada4196 Posts
On March 25 2011 03:13 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote: I want you to go and read my post again (or the rest of the thread) and realize how much you failed reading properly, then realize it doesn't matter and we all make mistakes and that there is no shame in admitting 'Oh, okay, I misread, sorry', and go on with your life. Would you do that for me? Well I did you the honour of reading your original post in its entirety again. It's just as absurd the second time around. | ||
|
bigbeau
368 Posts
| ||
|
Irave
United States9965 Posts
| ||
|
Roggay
Switzerland6320 Posts
As said, Artosis might be the best player out of the highly popular commentators. Incontrol, Sheth and Gretorp are better, but I don't know if you can classify them in the same category as Artosis, because they commentate a lot less and its not their main focus. | ||
|
oGm`REM
United States870 Posts
I would put Artosis first, Tasteless second, Day9 third.. everyone else inbetween with djWHEAT at the end. | ||
|
Zapdos_Smithh
Canada2620 Posts
Though Tasteless I heard is REALLY good, at least in brood war. Apparently he was like A/A- on iccup? Hard to believe based on his jokes but he definitely is really good. | ||
|
Mabius
Canada323 Posts
| ||
|
Poo
Canada536 Posts
| ||
|
Endymion
United States3701 Posts
| ||
|
bigbeau
368 Posts
| ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
No it isn't. | ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Invitational
Epic.LAN
IPSL
eOnzErG vs McRibbed
LancerX vs StRyKeR
AI Arena Tournament
OSC
Yamato Cup
IPSL
Artosis vs RiceHat
Kyrie vs Sony
Map Test Tournament
WardiTV Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
