|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On September 30 2011 22:45 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +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. 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. 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.
Not sure if you are actually just dense or you refuse to analyze the situation on a non idra biased perspective... I actually state numerous times that I feel any "well zerg just goes 50 roaches after maxing on drones and has a +70 pop on P then walk over wins" or "protoss turtles 3 base and goes collo and can't die" is a BAD way to argue. You want me to engage in the hypothetical army composition debate just to show my (lol) above diamond game reflection capabilities ?? ?? Pull your head out of IdrA's ass please. If you and IdrA think statistics, results and numbers are bad ways to evaluate something FINE but it isn't like your word is law and the only way to look at a situation. I for one won't take IdrA's creativity to the bank on a balance discussion and if you had above a bronze metagame evaluation on sc2 ability (lol look I can use arbitrary standards for concepts as well) you would have seen that too!
|
On September 30 2011 22:45 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +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. 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. 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.
That kind of discussion is almost never useful (especially with Idra who exaggerates everything) and TL is full of balance threads where people who have limited knowledge of the races point out counters.
Let's say we are talking about PvT.
I say Ghosts and EMP are too strong, you'd just say use Feedback.
How useful is that?
|
There's a reason anecdotal evidence is considered the highest form of proof in scientific inquiry, iNcontrol. It's just ridiculous that you would try to bring generalisable figures and statistics into a debate when these clearly neglect the key variable of how Idra's gut feels about the issue. God, don't you know anything?
|
On October 01 2011 01:19 Dzerzhinsky wrote:
There's a reason anecdotal evidence is considered the highest form of proof in scientific inquiry, iNcontrol. It's just ridiculous that you would try to bring generalisable figures and statistics into a debate when these clearly neglect the key variable of how Idra's gut feels about the issue. God, don't you know anything?
the problem is the stats he's been referencing are worthless, look back in the thread, I've already posted the numbers.
also kinda funny he was mentioning protoss results in GSTL, team leauges etc., and then tails and creator came to life. Talk about some ehan timing.
|
On October 01 2011 01:52 crms wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 01:19 Dzerzhinsky wrote:
There's a reason anecdotal evidence is considered the highest form of proof in scientific inquiry, iNcontrol. It's just ridiculous that you would try to bring generalisable figures and statistics into a debate when these clearly neglect the key variable of how Idra's gut feels about the issue. God, don't you know anything? the problem is the stats he's been referencing are worthless, look back in the thread, I've already posted the numbers. also kinda funny he was mentioning protoss results in GSTL, team leauges etc., and then tails and creator came to life. Talk about some ehan timing.
Actually I don't really care about who is right or wrong (I don't watch many PvZs). Idra saying that use of statistics showed that someone didn't know how to debate just made me die a little inside.
|
|
|
On October 01 2011 03:12 QTIP. wrote:
Did it occur to any of you that you are watching a free show for which Progamers take time out of their day to answer your questions and offer high-level analysis for discussion topics that they might not give a shit about? Or the fact that sometimes JP needs to get some fucking rest and it's not his fault that he couldn't upload the VOD for your viewing pleasure?
All these
"OMG WHERES THE VODS IM GONNA DIE"
"OMG INCONTROL IS SO ANNOYING DIAMOND LEVEL ANALYSIS"
"OMG WTF NO GUESTS WTF"
comments are fucking ridiculous.
What the fuck is wrong with you people. Try to be grateful for a change.
Wrong thread  . Pretty sure you are looking for state of the game!
|
On October 01 2011 02:27 Dzerzhinsky wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 01:52 crms wrote:On October 01 2011 01:19 Dzerzhinsky wrote:
There's a reason anecdotal evidence is considered the highest form of proof in scientific inquiry, iNcontrol. It's just ridiculous that you would try to bring generalisable figures and statistics into a debate when these clearly neglect the key variable of how Idra's gut feels about the issue. God, don't you know anything? the problem is the stats he's been referencing are worthless, look back in the thread, I've already posted the numbers. also kinda funny he was mentioning protoss results in GSTL, team leauges etc., and then tails and creator came to life. Talk about some ehan timing. Actually I don't really care about who is right or wrong (I don't watch many PvZs). Idra saying that use of statistics showed that someone didn't know how to debate just made me die a little inside.
I can agree with that. IdrA definitely went over board. Stats are tremendously helpful but always need to be looked at very closely. 
|
On October 01 2011 03:14 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 03:12 QTIP. wrote:
Did it occur to any of you that you are watching a free show for which Progamers take time out of their day to answer your questions and offer high-level analysis for discussion topics that they might not give a shit about? Or the fact that sometimes JP needs to get some fucking rest and it's not his fault that he couldn't upload the VOD for your viewing pleasure?
All these
"OMG WHERES THE VODS IM GONNA DIE"
"OMG INCONTROL IS SO ANNOYING DIAMOND LEVEL ANALYSIS"
"OMG WTF NO GUESTS WTF"
comments are fucking ridiculous.
What the fuck is wrong with you people. Try to be grateful for a change. Wrong thread . Pretty sure you are looking for state of the game!
This is true. T_T. Moving it... (lol)
|
Is it so wrong to politely ask for the .mp3 of the show? There are many that are using the SC2 podcast to brighten up their work day. So why not give them the file they want and that is usually supplied for each episode anyhow?
|
On October 01 2011 01:02 iNcontroL wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2011 22:45 Hider wrote: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. 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. 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. Not sure if you are actually just dense or you refuse to analyze the situation on a non idra biased perspective... I actually state numerous times that I feel any "well zerg just goes 50 roaches after maxing on drones and has a +70 pop on P then walk over wins" or "protoss turtles 3 base and goes collo and can't die" is a BAD way to argue. You want me to engage in the hypothetical army composition debate just to show my (lol) above diamond game reflection capabilities ?? ?? Pull your head out of IdrA's ass please. If you and IdrA think statistics, results and numbers are bad ways to evaluate something FINE but it isn't like your word is law and the only way to look at a situation. I for one won't take IdrA's creativity to the bank on a balance discussion and if you had above a bronze metagame evaluation on sc2 ability (lol look I can use arbitrary standards for concepts as well) you would have seen that too!
1) I think any statistictian (or how its spelled) will dismiss your way of using statistic. To use statistics you need A) a high enough sample size (a few GSL seasons proves nothing), and B) To take account for external factors which could influence your hypothesis (e.g. protoss players in GSL possible being of worse skill than the zerg/terran players).
Since you dont really watch a lot of GSL your not really able to discuss whether protoss players might be worse/of equal skill than the players of the other races, and given the small sample size, your use of statistics is close to useless.
2) As I remember Idras reasoning for zerg winning in midgame is A) Toss generally do gimmicky openings and then come behind if the zerg plays well, and B) Toss players are bad at control/army positioning/timings/scoutings. Is Idra correct? Honestly I dont know, and he is defintely biased, but you aren't really doing a very good job of proving him wrong.
3) Hyphothetical discussions are actually a very efficient method of debating, as it allow you to control for external factors, and make assumptions. Of course you have to make hyp. situations that are relevant to high level pvz games. This means that you have to use logic to reach "the truth". You can try and prove me wrong now, but I would like from you an analysis of why protoss turtling doesn't work vs zerg. It would be a good idea to make a scenario analysis where you analyze different situations given that you play the turtle style and the zerg can react in different ways.
4) If you think I am praising Idra, I must not have made myself clear/you must have misunderstood me.
|
On October 01 2011 01:13 Condor Hero wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2011 22:45 Hider wrote: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. 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. 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. That kind of discussion is almost never useful (especially with Idra who exaggerates everything) and TL is full of balance threads where people who have limited knowledge of the races point out counters. Let's say we are talking about PvT. I say Ghosts and EMP are too strong, you'd just say use Feedback. How useful is that?
This actually isn't how Idra debates. Idra always relates to game situations, e.g (he might not always directly state it though).: Terran has a mech/ghost army and it kills everything the zerg has, and hence it is op.
If I was Incontrol I would use arguments like "Typical Idra,", Zerg still beats terran,", "DRG just won against a few terrans, "korean terrans dont use ghost/mech".
But if I was to discuss his statement I would use try to argue why it isn't op through game hyphothetical situations, and make realistic assumptions on how the terran opened/zerg opened, the economic situation of the players, the unit counts, how the battle would likely take place, zergs reactions possiblites, terrrans possible conterreactions, etc.
Obv. it is kind of complicated, but balance discussions are complicated. Only players who have a superficial understanding of the game should use "pure low sample statistics".
|
Enjoyed the show. It's in my opinion so much more interesting then SotG because it's, ironically enough, more about the state of the game and the discussions feels so much more "real" with lively argumentations and such (Lo3 is a couple of notches above on that one tho').
Special thanks to Goatlust for his question that led to tears of laughter.
|
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
their "valuable time" is better spent bitching on forums about people who take the time to provide entertainment to them
everybody feels so entitled to everything nowadays...
|
On September 30 2011 17:29 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 11:30 BLCabeldank wrote:On September 29 2011 08:55 Hider wrote:On September 29 2011 07:47 BLCabeldank wrote:On September 29 2011 06:14 Hider wrote:On September 29 2011 05:27 Longshank wrote:On September 29 2011 04:53 Jinsho wrote:
IdrA said it himself : he can't handle turtle play from Terran or Protoss. That is his own weakness, which also concides with Zerg's weakness as a race : Zerg is weak against turtle style in the late game. I am not sure if there is any Sc2 player in the world who would dispute that, right?
The question is though, shouldn't he see to what other the zergs who don't consistently lose to these players are doing right rather than throw up his hands and call imbalance? A racial weakness doesn't mean it's imbalanced, there are racial strenghts aswell. Idra IMO players wrong vs turtle play (at least from what ive seen vs his terran). Nydus worms are heavily underused late game against terran players that play passive and have an immobile army. 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. And if get the nydus up there, and attack his production facilities it can do a lot of dmg. Idras play seems to be: "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. THis is actually not a bad game design or imbalanced in anyway. Idra imo just doesn't play very well. Have you ever watched a game above Silver? Turns out that terrans, especially Koreans, know how to position buildings to see their own entire base, and also if a terran sees that you're trying to nydus "his main again again" it's not difficult to set up one seige tank and also nydus worms cost money and also cannot be canceled. If the terran has any form of a brain the nydus should never go up, and even if it does, the "straight line stream" of units that come out are so shaky where they MIGHT do a little bit of damage but the chance that they will is quite low. BL/infestor is the only cost efficient army zergs have late game so honestly before you start trying to talk, learn the game. And if a terran ever makes ghosts they should very easily win. Thorzain's introduction to turtle mech mass ghost is ridiculously good and should never lose. Ever. You dont really understand what i wrote. Reread and think about what I say again. Posotionering of buildings are completely irrelevant. If you still dont understand what i am reading, perhaps you lack an understanding of how nydus should be used. 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.
you implied midgame, and a turtle terran/toss, how fucking stupid do you have to be to not realize that a turtling terran implies mid-late game and not early game... jesus christ you're an idiot that can't argue for shit
|
On September 30 2011 19:14 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2011 17:44 Longshank wrote: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. 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).
maybe he didn't rebuddle because maybe he thought it was the right thing to do? how to hell do you know what anybody thinks at a high level when your though process is at a silver level?
|
On October 01 2011 07:29 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 01:13 Condor Hero wrote:On September 30 2011 22:45 Hider wrote: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. 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. 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. That kind of discussion is almost never useful (especially with Idra who exaggerates everything) and TL is full of balance threads where people who have limited knowledge of the races point out counters. Let's say we are talking about PvT. I say Ghosts and EMP are too strong, you'd just say use Feedback. How useful is that? This actually isn't how Idra debates. Idra always relates to game situations, e.g (he might not always directly state it though).: Terran has a mech/ghost army and it kills everything the zerg has, and hence it is op. If I was Incontrol I would use arguments like "Typical Idra,", Zerg still beats terran,", "DRG just won against a few terrans, "korean terrans dont use ghost/mech". But if I was to discuss his statement I would use try to argue why it isn't op through game hyphothetical situations, and make realistic assumptions on how the terran opened/zerg opened, the economic situation of the players, the unit counts, how the battle would likely take place, zergs reactions possiblites, terrrans possible conterreactions, etc. Obv. it is kind of complicated, but balance discussions are complicated. Only players who have a superficial understanding of the game should use "pure low sample statistics".
You, sir, should be sterilized before you engage in coitus at the age of 53.
Honestly, think about it, do the world a giant favor.
You could do that, or go into politics since you seem to be a STRONG debater with the ability to problem solve at a very intellectually high level...
You cannot honestly say that somebody has the inability to think on a (grandmaster level) then say that you're counter argument to anything "IdrA" says would be a specific hypothetical situation, and I don't even want to imagine what your "realistic assumptions" would be. Something maybe that goes like "well he made a lotta zerglings, i think he shoulda made banelings cause the terran make many mariners and go kill him" idk maybe something in the area... or was that theorycrafting to high level for your feeble silver mind??
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On October 01 2011 07:20 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 01:02 iNcontroL wrote:On September 30 2011 22:45 Hider wrote: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. 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. 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. Not sure if you are actually just dense or you refuse to analyze the situation on a non idra biased perspective... I actually state numerous times that I feel any "well zerg just goes 50 roaches after maxing on drones and has a +70 pop on P then walk over wins" or "protoss turtles 3 base and goes collo and can't die" is a BAD way to argue. You want me to engage in the hypothetical army composition debate just to show my (lol) above diamond game reflection capabilities ?? ?? Pull your head out of IdrA's ass please. If you and IdrA think statistics, results and numbers are bad ways to evaluate something FINE but it isn't like your word is law and the only way to look at a situation. I for one won't take IdrA's creativity to the bank on a balance discussion and if you had above a bronze metagame evaluation on sc2 ability (lol look I can use arbitrary standards for concepts as well) you would have seen that too! 1) I think any statistictian (or how its spelled) will dismiss your way of using statistic. To use statistics you need A) a high enough sample size (a few GSL seasons proves nothing), and B) To take account for external factors which could influence your hypothesis (e.g. protoss players in GSL possible being of worse skill than the zerg/terran players). Since you dont really watch a lot of GSL your not really able to discuss whether protoss players might be worse/of equal skill than the players of the other races, and given the small sample size, your use of statistics is close to useless. 2) As I remember Idras reasoning for zerg winning in midgame is A) Toss generally do gimmicky openings and then come behind if the zerg plays well, and B) Toss players are bad at control/army positioning/timings/scoutings. Is Idra correct? Honestly I dont know, and he is defintely biased, but you aren't really doing a very good job of proving him wrong. 3) Hyphothetical discussions are actually a very efficient method of debating, as it allow you to control for external factors, and make assumptions. Of course you have to make hyp. situations that are relevant to high level pvz games. This means that you have to use logic to reach "the truth". You can try and prove me wrong now, but I would like from you an analysis of why protoss turtling doesn't work vs zerg. It would be a good idea to make a scenario analysis where you analyze different situations given that you play the turtle style and the zerg can react in different ways. 4) If you think I am praising Idra, I must not have made myself clear/you must have misunderstood me.
You say large amount of sample sizes necessary, yet in the next post you say to make hypothetical assumptions. So i can assume that a terran makes 4 BFH, kills all the drones, then makes a 200/200 marine tank army and go kills the zerg while the terran is on 6 bases, then validly make an assumption of that? Maybe using your silver mind level thought process, I would say that "the zerg should've made more zerglings, cause he made mariners real good" how in the hell is that a valid argument in any sense?
The obvious response to that is that that example was a very far fetched example, but what makes it less valid then a terran 11/11 2 raxing a zerg? All possible, feasible.
After almost every post you say that "I must not have made myself clear/you must have misunderstood me" Maybe it's because you sound, as inControl so lovingly put it, as though you have your head up IdrA's ass... you literally sound like a cocksucking fanboy that uses absolutely NO arguments themselves, but just merely restates what their "idol" said because they "herp derp smart" and you also sound very foreign (no hate on foreigners) and just like you were raised by the pig in your master bedroom.
I love all SC2 players, not one that i don't hate, but to literally latch yourself on to one's ballsack and ONLY repeat what that player said is very depressing.
And your other points are points that a 6th grader who learned the Scientific Method could have come up with...
|
BlCabeldank: I am not really gonna reply to your post, because honestly there are just to much nonsense in it (like when you dont understand the difference between stupid hyphothetical assumptions and realistic assumption, or when you referering to me as a silver league player, even though your plat, and I am obv. not) . You have 1 point though I would like to adress:
"maybe he didn't rebuddle because maybe he thought it was the right thing to do?"
Well they are tryin to debate if the game is balanced/imbalanced or not. I kinda stated how I felt they should have discussed. Relying on low sample size statistics and comments like "Idra being Idra" really doesn't add anything to the discussions. And honestly Incontrol probably knows this, but he (prob.) just feels like he cant comepete with Idra in a game theoretic discussion.
|
On October 01 2011 05:28 Thrombozyt wrote:
Is it so wrong to politely ask for the .mp3 of the show? There are many that are using the SC2 podcast to brighten up their work day. So why not give them the file they want and that is usually supplied for each episode anyhow?
Yes, I only listen to these in audio format, where is it? The show was on tuesday :S
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
