EPT[Show] Inside The Game - Official Thread - Page 140
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
lim1017
Canada1278 Posts
| ||
|
Funkydonky
950 Posts
On September 29 2011 23:59 moxley wrote: Why does it take so long for Inside The Game podcasts to be posted? JP gets SOTG podcasts up within hours (sometimes) of the show airing. I like to listen to ITG, Live on 3 and SOTG together, but Live on 3 and ITG are always (at least) a week behind SOTG.. Wat? all onemoregame shows are on their twitch.tv page after they aired. | ||
|
BLCabeldank
United States99 Posts
| ||
|
Bleak
Turkey3059 Posts
| ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
Like, Idra apparently watched Sage vs Lucky on Terminus, but then cited it as a JYP game during the podcast. He says JYP and Sage have a stable and consistent midgame, but like half of JYP's PvZ wins are 2 base all-ins. He calls HongUn a talentless idiot for going double Stargate, when JYP won his Ro32 game with the same build. It seems like he watched like 1 series of Sage, and somehow extrapolated that onto all the "up and coming" Protosses. Incontrol didn't even know what games he was trying to talk about. Wasn't he in some sort of debate club in college? You'd think he'd have all his facts and sources prepared to back up any statement he makes, but nope. | ||
|
DoubleReed
United States4130 Posts
On September 30 2011 04:09 Toadvine wrote: I tuned it to see if anything of worth was said during the "balance discussion. Turned it off when Incontrol thought Code A Ro32 was still going on. What a painful waste of time. Honestly, reading the stupid designated balance thread on TL is more interesting and to the point than that. Both Idra and Incontrol barely had any idea about anything specific. Like, Idra apparently watched Sage vs Lucky on Terminus, but then cited it as a JYP game during the podcast. He says JYP and Sage have a stable and consistent midgame, but like half of JYP's PvZ wins are 2 base all-ins. He calls HongUn a talentless idiot for going double Stargate, when JYP won his Ro32 game with the same build. It seems like he watched like 1 series of Sage, and somehow extrapolated that onto all the "up and coming" Protosses. Incontrol didn't even know what games he was trying to talk about. Wasn't he in some sort of debate club in college? You'd think he'd have all his facts and sources prepared to back up any statement he makes, but nope. It's not like they had notes and stuff with them. It's a live show, and you really can't expect them to be that accurate off the top of their heads. And I think Idra said like double stargate into robo or something more specific than just double stargate. Was it really the same build or was it different? And Idra has always said HongUn is a talentless idiot. | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On September 30 2011 12:31 DoubleReed wrote: It's not like they had notes and stuff with them. It's a live show, and you really can't expect them to be that accurate off the top of their heads. And I think Idra said like double stargate into robo or something more specific than just double stargate. Was it really the same build or was it different? And Idra has always said HongUn is a talentless idiot. I am assuming they knew they would be doing this. So yes, I do expect at least a bit of preparation. At the very least, it makes them waste less valuable air time on pointless meandering, like Incontrol wondering what Zergs Hero lost to in recent memory, or what stage Code A is at. And my point about idra is that he watched like one series by Sage and made huge assumptions based on that. All the new Protoss hopes do a lot of 2 basing in PvZ, which Idra clearly thinks is retarded. But he wouldn't know that without watching the games. | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Sorry we got numbers wrong and wasted "valuable time" thinking of matches to back our claims. Hopefully you can take the show a lot less serious and calm down | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9448 Posts
When he talks about a specific game situation he talks like this: "PLayer a Walks in with 50 roaches and kills the toss." A player at a higher level of thinking would be thinking about: "What strategies were used by the players? Was it gimmicky/solid" "How was the execution by the players?". "Is there any solid counters"? "Had maps any influence on the outcome?". I would probably think that 9/10 grandmaster toss players who plays a lot and watches a lot of GSL would think reflect upon the above factors, and would be able to go into an argument against Idra based on these factors. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9448 Posts
On September 29 2011 11:30 BLCabeldank wrote: LOL okay buddy Its almost impossilbe for a terran to not make the nydus worm "go up" at one of his expansion (as there always is a place where he do not have vision), and as a zerg you can consistently try to nydus his main again again. Well that right there MIGHT be true if the terran is on about 5 bases and doesn't have a planetary at one of his more exposed bases. And as Zerg... you can't "consistently" try to throw up a nydus unless you're maxed and just sitting there stockpiling money, which as a zerg 200/200 usually never happens unless multiple more bases are being established. And then he let the terran player get a good eco, take his 4th, 5th and 6th for free basically, and the terran will then be able to outproduce the zerg with ghosts and vikings. And if get the nydus up there, and attack his production facilities it can do a lot of dmg. Unless the terran has ANY response at all because as you've stated, he is turtling which means he has cover of his entire base and can respond to anything quite easily... 1-2 tanks easily shuts down the ENTIRE base from nydus' going up. "Ok i have an advantage, let me make broodlords.... He is still not attacking, let me make more broodlord/infestor... And then he let the terran player get a good eco, take his 4th, 5th and 6th for free basically, and the terran will then be able to outproduce the zerg with ghosts and vikings Have you ever tried to break a turtle terran? Obviously the way zerg wants to trade armies is slightly less favorable then ideal, but when you throw 200/200 muta/ling/bling or 200/200 infestor/BL or any 200/200 army into a turtle terran, more then often you come out extremely bad, due to the tank spread and thors+ghosts Also i don't know why a terran wants to outproduce a zerg with ghosts AND vikings, since ghosts by themselves shut down the entire infestor/BL army, and if the control is good enough, can shut down muta/ling/bling. I don't really understand how you think that with vikings a nydus would ever actually go up, because as you mindlessly said terran would want vikings against BL/ infestor cause obviously fungal isn't good anymore, the terran response to seeing the nydus is re-position small amount of units due to the straight line the units come out in. Once the terran has killed the nydus and doesn't take any damage cause he's not in bronze, then he can easily bring whatever vikings he has, even thors if vikings are out, and push the overlord away and just leave the thor or 1 viking in the spot and patrol. I don't know if you understand the mechanic that vision is necessary for nydus'. Thanks to overlords, zergs can get vision. If a terran takes his vikings and clears the area around his base of overlords, no vision. The fact that you said the terran would even WANT to mass produce vikings AND ghosts leads me to believe you think you understand the meta-game, and you also think you can speak English because the " Posotionering" of your thoughts just aren't quite there. The way you think nydus' should be used is extremely late game when zerg and a CRAZY surplus of money and in the gold league, when people don't have their entire base scouted. perhaps you lack an understanding of how nydus should be used. i think you really don't understand basic terran, or basic zerg, due to the fact that you really think Nydus' can be spammed endlessly (can't due to money, and the fact that you can only build one at a time with one canal) and that they will EVENTUALLY get up (which they shouldn't do to building spread and range 13 seige mode). I honestly feel like you really have attempted nydus' in gold and it works against baddies, or that you've seen IdrA do it against toss in the MID GAME, where he is also putting pressure on the front... Now go relate what you said and what I said to actual gamesituations. You will (hopefully) realize that a lot of your conclusions are based on your analyses are wrong. They might be correct in 1 situation, but there are a lot of different situations and possibilities for the zerg that make the strategy you advise for the terran not efficient. | ||
|
Longshank
1648 Posts
On September 30 2011 17:25 Hider wrote: Regarding PvZ debate, I kinda agree with the consensus in here that Idra argued better. Not nessacrily because he is correct, but it seems like he watches GSL much more than Incontrol, and simply reflects more upon the games. This is why he is really good to have at a talkshow, and IMO it is kinda dissapointing that Incontrol tries to go into an argument only watching a few GSL matches/season. When he talks about a specific game situation he talks like this: "PLayer a Walks in with 50 roaches and kills the toss." A player at a higher level of thinking would be thinking about: "What strategies were used by the players? Was it gimmicky/solid" "How was the execution by the players?". "Is there any solid counters"? "Had maps any influence on the outcome?". I would probably think that 9/10 grandmaster toss players who plays a lot and watches a lot of GSL would think reflect upon the above factors, and would be able to go into an argument against Idra based on these factors. The 50 roaches thing was a sarcastic reply to illustrate how silly Idra's way of thinking and way of approaching the discussion was, iirc. He made a good point. | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
| ||
|
Hider
Denmark9448 Posts
On September 30 2011 17:44 Longshank wrote: The 50 roaches thing was a sarcastic reply to illustrate how silly Idra's way of thinking and way of approaching the discussion was, iirc. He made a good point. Guess i did not make my self that clear. What I meant to say is that Incontrol dont look at the depths of the actual game. He rather use analyses games in a superficial way. Like: "infestoras are really good, zergs just have much more stuff and then they willl go and kill the protoss". Idra discusses in another way. He analyses the outcome of the game based on the strategies of the players and tries to reason out how player x should have won the game. Idra is of course kinda biased and make pretty big generalisations, but his throught proces seems to be at a higher level than Incontrol. 1 example of this is when Incontrol felt that you could need beat zerg because infestors are good, and refered to the destiny - huk series. Idra tried to argue how the toss should beat it( going ht and turtle I think was his response). Incontrol then simply was not able to argue why that should not work (given he disagreed with idra). If hís game understanding was better, he should have argued something like this: "When toss plays passive, zerg can do an x and x to counter that unit composition of the toss". Idra would probably reponse that the zerg cant do that because of y and y, and then Incontrol could try to argue that the zerg actually can do that, if he uses some kind of tactic, etc. So i am not saying that Incontrol or Idra is correct/incorrect, I am simply trying to argue that it seems that Incontrol lacks the higher level of game understanding (which I think Idra kinda said as well in this ITG). | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9448 Posts
On September 30 2011 17:49 iNcontroL wrote: yes I very clearly made that point to illustrate how bad "hypothetical situations" argumentation is. The only sure way to gain knowledge is through the use of logic. Misuing statistics doesn't prove anything. Idra tries to argue through logic. If you feel his logic is wrong, its your job to argue why its wrong. You arent doing that. | ||
|
MilesTeg
France1271 Posts
On September 30 2011 19:14 Hider wrote: Guess i did not make my self that clear. What I meant to say is that Incontrol dont look at the depths of the actual game. He rather use analyses games in a superficial way. Like: "infestoras are really good, zergs just have much more stuff and then they willl go and kill the protoss". Idra discusses in another way. He analyses the outcome of the game based on the strategies of the players and tries to reason out how player x should have won the game. Idra is of course kinda biased and make pretty big generalisations, but his throught proces seems to be at a higher level than Incontrol. 1 example of this is when Incontrol felt that you could need beat zerg because infestors are good, and refered to the destiny - huk series. Idra tried to argue how the toss should beat it( going ht and turtle I think was his response). Incontrol then simply was not able to argue why that should not work (given he disagreed with idra). If hís game understanding was better, he should have argued something like this: "When toss plays passive, zerg can do an x and x to counter that unit composition of the toss". Idra would probably reponse that the zerg cant do that because of y and y, and then Incontrol could try to argue that the zerg actually can do that, if he uses some kind of tactic, etc. So i am not saying that Incontrol or Idra is correct/incorrect, I am simply trying to argue that it seems that Incontrol lacks the higher level of game understanding (which I think Idra kinda said as well in this ITG). Hm... I don't know how to say that... but... you are actually talking to Incontrol... :p But anyway even though I dislike idra I'm more enclined to agree with him on this one. It's one thing to look at the stats (and I think even statistically Protoss isn't struggling anywhere else than Korea), but if you look at the games it's hard to say there's imbalance favouring Zerg in PvZ. And honestly it's true that the code S Protoss seem weak, I much prefer the code A guys. I mean, when you look at HongUn with his awesome strategy of "lowering all the zerg units and buildings' health by half without finishing them off", I find it hard to feel bad for him when he loses to someone who's actually really good at this game. | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On September 30 2011 17:03 iNcontroL wrote: nope we didn't know we'd debate pvz and specific matchups. It's a live show between progamers who are involved in the game and the community discussing stuff. Sorry we got numbers wrong and wasted "valuable time" thinking of matches to back our claims. Hopefully you can take the show a lot less serious and calm down Allright then, I guess my expectations were off. If the show is just supposed to be about you guys talking about SC2 and having fun, then that's fine too. Although it did seem like you and Idra were pretty serious about that balance discussion. It's certainly being commented upon seriously in this thread for instance. But whatever, I'll know better in the future. Best of luck to you and ItG. Hope you can give them Korean Terrans a run for their money at Orlando. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9448 Posts
On September 30 2011 17:44 Longshank wrote: The 50 roaches thing was a sarcastic reply to illustrate how silly Idra's way of thinking and way of approaching the discussion was, iirc. He made a good point. Well Idra kinda makes huge generalisations when discussing balance. But its still a logical proces, like when he says: "Toss should take bases slowly and max out, and then they will beat any zerg". Everytime Idra made such a statement Incontrol (and other sotg members) would just laugh, and say typical Idra whatever, and say stuff like "zerg needs to reinvent how they play". They did not come up with actual practical solutions, most likely because they did not really understand the game. Now when Incontrol says stuff like Infestors are very strong, Idra comes up with possible solutions. Incontrol will then respond with stuff like "typical idra,", "toss does bad statiscally". Its imo pretty clear that there is a huge difference in the way they are arguing. Again... I am not saying that IDra is correct/incorrect, I am only tring to disvalidate Incontrols argumentations. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9448 Posts
On September 30 2011 19:52 Toadvine wrote: The one thing that bothers me about Idra's theoretical arguments, is that they always go only one way. It's always "P/T can do X and Y, and it's really hard to deal with", never about what Zerg can do in any given situation. It's like he talks about how good Warp Prism play will be once Protosses figure out how to execute it correctly, but never considers that Zergs will also learn how to deal with it better. It's very easy to see Zerg players mishandling the Warp Prism harass in games where it happens. Allright then, I guess my expectations were off. If the show is just supposed to be about you guys talking about SC2 and having fun, then that's fine too. Although it did seem like you and Idra were pretty serious about that balance discussion. It's certainly being commented upon seriously in this thread for instance. But whatever, I'll know better in the future. Best of luck to you and ItG. Hope you can give them Korean Terrans a run for their money at Orlando. I dont really disagree with you here. But if Idra says unit xx is OP, and zerg cant do shit about it, then its the other guys repsonsibilty to say, that zerg should do that and that. But every time there is a game theoretical situation it seems like Incontrol just dont know what to say, even though I dont think Idras arguments shows any incredicbly high level of reflection (more of a standard GM level of reflection). Incontrol on the other hand I feel like shows the average game understanding om diamond- mid master league player. | ||
|
ElPeque.fogata
Uruguay462 Posts
the obvious ones are blocked where i'm at :| | ||
|
ElPeque.fogata
Uruguay462 Posts
On September 30 2011 22:54 ElPeque.fogata wrote: are there any mirrors for the mp3? the obvious ones are blocked where i'm at :| maybe some charitable entity could reupload it somewhere so i can kill by absolute boredom? :D | ||
| ||
