|
On May 08 2011 12:37 ffadicted wrote:
- Were all the builds you showed today made for Nada?
In the closed beta, when the zerg balance was completely broken, I called it “Inca rule” where I used all-ins every game. I remembered myself of past and prepared 4 all-ins for this best of 5 set match
siiiiiiiiiiigh, I just can't respect players like this. Obviously they want to win and it's not like they're cheating, but I just can't. Nestea 4 - 1 in yet another dissapointing GSL finals imo. Looks like sc vs. nestea will remain the "real" GSL May finals.
Why can't you respect them? Because they're doing what they must to win? This is a strategy game, not everyone has to follow the retarded "hour long macro game" rule. Those kinds of games are usually shit anyways.
|
On May 08 2011 12:44 rysecake wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2011 12:37 ffadicted wrote:
- Were all the builds you showed today made for Nada?
In the closed beta, when the zerg balance was completely broken, I called it “Inca rule” where I used all-ins every game. I remembered myself of past and prepared 4 all-ins for this best of 5 set match
siiiiiiiiiiigh, I just can't respect players like this. Obviously they want to win and it's not like they're cheating, but I just can't. Nestea 4 - 1 in yet another dissapointing GSL finals imo. Looks like sc vs. nestea will remain the "real" GSL May finals. Why can't you respect them? Because they're doing what they must to win? This is a strategy game, not everyone has to follow the retarded "hour long macro game" rule. Those kinds of games are usually shit anyways.
No they're not. All-in games are bad. You're saying that the first two games between inca and nada were better then sc-nestea games 3 and 5? Give me a break. And I have no respect because they're trying to win easy. Sure, they're "doing what they gotta do", but I think it's the thing that separates sc2 from real sports, it's too volatile and it's too easy to "play dirty" with all-ins and win. It hurts the game itself when stuff like this happens. You can't claim the soon-to-be one sided Nestea vs. Inca finals will be anywhere as good for the GSL and sc2 in general then a NaDa vs. Nestea finals.
And before you say "inca won game 3 macro", then yes, obviously. Nada made big mistakes in that game, and it's normal, everyone does once in a while. However, because of all-ins, he was in a situation where inca had a huge amount of room for mistakes and nada didn't, and one or two silly mistakes (not getting ghosts, over committing to the nexus) cost him the entire series, instead of just one game in a bo5 because of cheesy all-ins.
|
Inca is a complete and utter hack, I hope Nestea completely roflstomps him. He is barely above the level of bitbybitprime
|
|
|
On May 08 2011 12:53 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2011 12:44 rysecake wrote:On May 08 2011 12:37 ffadicted wrote:
- Were all the builds you showed today made for Nada?
In the closed beta, when the zerg balance was completely broken, I called it “Inca rule” where I used all-ins every game. I remembered myself of past and prepared 4 all-ins for this best of 5 set match
siiiiiiiiiiigh, I just can't respect players like this. Obviously they want to win and it's not like they're cheating, but I just can't. Nestea 4 - 1 in yet another dissapointing GSL finals imo. Looks like sc vs. nestea will remain the "real" GSL May finals. Why can't you respect them? Because they're doing what they must to win? This is a strategy game, not everyone has to follow the retarded "hour long macro game" rule. Those kinds of games are usually shit anyways. No they're not. All-in games are bad. You're saying that the first two games between inca and nada were better then sc-nestea games 3 and 5? Give me a break. And I have no respect because they're trying to win easy. Sure, they're "doing what they gotta do", but I think it's the thing that separates sc2 from real sports, it's too volatile and it's too easy to "play dirty" with all-ins and win. It hurts the game itself when stuff like this happens. You can't claim the soon-to-be one sided Nestea vs. Inca finals will be anywhere as good for the GSL and sc2 in general then a NaDa vs. Nestea finals. And before you say "inca won game 3 macro", then yes, obviously. Nada made big mistakes in that game, and it's normal, everyone does once in a while. However, because of all-ins, he was in a situation where inca had a huge amount of room for mistakes and nada didn't, and one or two silly mistakes (not getting ghosts, over committing to the nexus) cost him the entire series, instead of just one game in a bo5 because of cheesy all-ins.
Then what do you call MKP vs MC? Where MKP said he only prepared all-in builds because he said he wasn't confident in playing a macro game against MC? The only reason it didn't work out that way completely is because MC mixed a few all-ins and pressure builds that hit before MKP's did.
All-ins can provide entertaining games, as long as both players are sensible with their execution. There is no all-in right now in PvT that can't be stopped, inCa said he prepared those specifically because all he does is play macro games against nada.
|
It's really sad when the community needs to have a bitch-fit all the time about players who like to all-in in tournaments. Things would get really stale if all games were macro games.
Me personally, I find myself more entertained from people who develop/execute really well timed and planned out timing pushes and even more entertained by people who can hold them off rather then a game of both players dumping units back and forth.
To each their own I suppose. Props to Inca for being honest with himself.
|
Wow, Inca is being a boss with this interview. Of course they were all-ins, and they were the right decisions to make. He said that he only practiced macro against nada, so he all-ins, nada cuts corners, he wins. I can't believe all the hate that he is getting for playing to win the game. If I had a chance to get to the GSL finals and a cannon rush will get me there, I'm gonna do a damn cannon rush! Anyway, I'd bet a lot of the hate is coming from zerg players and nada fans, which while understandable that they are disappointed, does not warrant them calling him a "hack" or "dirty." Anyway, these people play to win the game, not to let your favorite player advance or for you to be entertained.
|
On May 08 2011 14:27 ampson wrote:
Wow, Inca is being a boss with this interview. Of course they were all-ins, and they were the right decisions to make. He said that he only practiced macro against nada, so he all-ins, nada cuts corners, he wins. I can't believe all the hate that he is getting for playing to win the game. If I had a chance to get to the GSL finals and a cannon rush will get me there, I'm gonna do a damn cannon rush! Anyway, I'd bet a lot of the hate is coming from zerg players and nada fans, which while understandable that they are disappointed, does not warrant them calling him a "hack" or "dirty." Anyway, these people play to win the game, not to let your favorite player advance or for you to be entertained.
I agree - players shouldn't be blamed for playing to win -, but as a fan, I'd rather see solid macro games than all-in cheeses. A Nada-Nestea final would have been funner to watch.
|
On May 08 2011 14:27 ampson wrote:
Wow, Inca is being a boss with this interview. Of course they were all-ins, and they were the right decisions to make. He said that he only practiced macro against nada, so he all-ins, nada cuts corners, he wins. I can't believe all the hate that he is getting for playing to win the game. If I had a chance to get to the GSL finals and a cannon rush will get me there, I'm gonna do a damn cannon rush! Anyway, I'd bet a lot of the hate is coming from zerg players and nada fans, which while understandable that they are disappointed, does not warrant them calling him a "hack" or "dirty." Anyway, these people play to win the game, not to let your favorite player advance or for you to be entertained.
He cheesed against Sangho and with his play against Rain, do you honestly think he deserves to be in the finals? It's similar to GSL3 where Rain was in the finals
|
I have nothing but respect for Inca, since I think the word "all-in" is blown out of proportion, but even then all someone needs to do is all-in once and they get slammed. SC had nothing but brilliant play leading up to the semis, and is now respected for it after a great series with Nestea, but before then he was getting slammed by the community for all-in'ing against fan-favourite Losira. But now that he's had a "difficult" and "close" series against a fan favourite where he lost, he's gained respect.
Calling it now:
If Inca beats Nestea, people will hate him.
If Nestea beats Inca in a close series, he might gain a little respect.
If Inca wipes the floor with Nestea, people will hate him.
Poor Inca, it's got to be hard being better than a fan favourite (in before someone tells me "the loser would have won if he hadn't have lost").
But now that I've said all that Inca stuff: glad Nestea gave SC the respect he's due. I don't care how you do it, but if you 3-0 Losira people should sit up and watch. I've been watching SC the entire series as my dark horse tip, and enjoyed, as Nestea noted, his mind-game play style.
|
I don't really understand why Inca has to feel ashamed for beating Nada tbh 
It is not like all-ins are impossible to stop and even then; In the end you play the game to win. Why play to lose? I am sure inca is better in macro-gaming than any of you so whatever 
Having that said; I hope nestea will win his 2nd title
|
I find that Inca's strategy to do all-ins is understandable. NaDa is his teammate so most probably he knows Inca's play style. It's not that all he can do are all-ins, it's just that he thinks that NaDa is too familiar with his standard macro game.
Still, because he eliminated NaDa, I want Nestea to crush Inca.
|
On May 08 2011 12:53 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2011 12:44 rysecake wrote:On May 08 2011 12:37 ffadicted wrote:
- Were all the builds you showed today made for Nada?
In the closed beta, when the zerg balance was completely broken, I called it “Inca rule” where I used all-ins every game. I remembered myself of past and prepared 4 all-ins for this best of 5 set match
siiiiiiiiiiigh, I just can't respect players like this. Obviously they want to win and it's not like they're cheating, but I just can't. Nestea 4 - 1 in yet another dissapointing GSL finals imo. Looks like sc vs. nestea will remain the "real" GSL May finals. Why can't you respect them? Because they're doing what they must to win? This is a strategy game, not everyone has to follow the retarded "hour long macro game" rule. Those kinds of games are usually shit anyways. No they're not. All-in games are bad. You're saying that the first two games between inca and nada were better then sc-nestea games 3 and 5? Give me a break. And I have no respect because they're trying to win easy. Sure, they're "doing what they gotta do", but I think it's the thing that separates sc2 from real sports, it's too volatile and it's too easy to "play dirty" with all-ins and win. It hurts the game itself when stuff like this happens. You can't claim the soon-to-be one sided Nestea vs. Inca finals will be anywhere as good for the GSL and sc2 in general then a NaDa vs. Nestea finals. And before you say "inca won game 3 macro", then yes, obviously. Nada made big mistakes in that game, and it's normal, everyone does once in a while. However, because of all-ins, he was in a situation where inca had a huge amount of room for mistakes and nada didn't, and one or two silly mistakes (not getting ghosts, over committing to the nexus) cost him the entire series, instead of just one game in a bo5 because of cheesy all-ins.
that's your opinion dude. the majority of players (less the steamy glasses TL elite) get excited over seeing nonstandard (cheese) play. why do you think BW got so popular? have you ever seen Boxer play? why do you think people get so excited about seeing gadget plays in the NFL?
this is a strategy game, not a sim-city game as idra might have you thinking.
sometimes strategy > skill in this game. get over it already.
even though i'd hardly classify myself as a casual player, even i can clearly see why most players would have a greater appreciation for seeing a clever build order or strategy than seeing how quickly a guy can build supply depots and barracks and command centers and spam aaaaa.
and fuck all the people comparing bitbybit to InCa. BitByBit scv marine rushed every game, which was a good strategy...... like the first time. After that it was predictable and showed how much of a dumbass he is. On the contrary, InCa's well crafted strategies (cheese if u wanna call it that) show how much thought he's put into the game.
and unlike TSL_Rain he actually deserves to be in the finals. he OUTPLAYED his opponents, while Rain got lucky that his opponents sandbagged. Re-watch the games, the stars aligned and most of his opponents sandbagged at the most crucial points.
|
On May 08 2011 12:53 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2011 12:44 rysecake wrote:On May 08 2011 12:37 ffadicted wrote:
- Were all the builds you showed today made for Nada?
In the closed beta, when the zerg balance was completely broken, I called it “Inca rule” where I used all-ins every game. I remembered myself of past and prepared 4 all-ins for this best of 5 set match
siiiiiiiiiiigh, I just can't respect players like this. Obviously they want to win and it's not like they're cheating, but I just can't. Nestea 4 - 1 in yet another dissapointing GSL finals imo. Looks like sc vs. nestea will remain the "real" GSL May finals. Why can't you respect them? Because they're doing what they must to win? This is a strategy game, not everyone has to follow the retarded "hour long macro game" rule. Those kinds of games are usually shit anyways. No they're not. All-in games are bad. You're saying that the first two games between inca and nada were better then sc-nestea games 3 and 5? Give me a break. And I have no respect because they're trying to win easy. Sure, they're "doing what they gotta do", but I think it's the thing that separates sc2 from real sports, it's too volatile and it's too easy to "play dirty" with all-ins and win. It hurts the game itself when stuff like this happens. You can't claim the soon-to-be one sided Nestea vs. Inca finals will be anywhere as good for the GSL and sc2 in general then a NaDa vs. Nestea finals. And before you say "inca won game 3 macro", then yes, obviously. Nada made big mistakes in that game, and it's normal, everyone does once in a while. However, because of all-ins, he was in a situation where inca had a huge amount of room for mistakes and nada didn't, and one or two silly mistakes (not getting ghosts, over committing to the nexus) cost him the entire series, instead of just one game in a bo5 because of cheesy all-ins.
They do everything to win in real sports too, Suarez defending the goal with his hand in WC 2010 anyone? The incredibly dirty finals between Spain and Netherlands? The Italian national team's entire playstyle?.
This is their living, they will do everything to win as long as they don't break the rules.
Even in BW you have boxer SCV rushing Yellow, and the recent 4pool vs proxy Rax between JvF in an OSL/MSL finals.
Either way, if you didn't manage to scout and defend the all-in then you're the one to blame.
On May 08 2011 17:12 Dakkas wrote:
He cheesed against Sangho and with his play against Rain, do you honestly think he deserves to be in the finals? It's similar to GSL3 where Rain was in the finals
There's no such thing as cheese in PvP , it was 1 out of 3 games anyway, Sangho got thoroughly trounced in the previous 2 games.
Yeah he did a 2base all-in against Rain, but Rain defended it and proceeded to win, then choked hard in the following game.
A thing to note is that Inca did different all-ins every game, as opposed to Rain who did just one type, the marine SCV all-in. This shows that Inca did a great deal of preparation, while Rain even said he "didn't have much time to practice so I all-in'd".
|
On May 08 2011 11:40 `Forte wrote:
People are confusing skill to mean "how often you win."
Starcraft II is a test to see if you can beat your opponent. To beat your opponent you have to use skill, but being overall more skilled doesn't equate to winning.
Going back to the tennis example: you can have great speed, agility, and stamina, have the most precise cross court shots, and have amazing approaches for volleys, but if you're awful at returning serves, you'll have a hard time winning games. It doesn't matter that you're overall much more skilled than your opponent--you can easily lose if that part of your gameplay isn't good.
Sure, having good late-game macro and multitasking skills is important, but they don't matter if your opponent decides to all-in and you have no clue how to react. That can just as well make you win or lose the game even though it requires a smaller skillset than winning/losing at the 30 minute mark.
Players like BitByBit or Rain who all-ined their way through GSL weren't necessarily more skilled simply because they won, and they weren't better players because they won. But they were the winners, and at the time, that's what matters. I think Inca deserves more credit though. He regularly played Nada in "macro" games and lost most of them, and he knew that all-inning would get him a better chance of success. When you're up against a player who's better than you with thousands of dollars on the line, you don't just hand up the prize and say, "You're more skilled than me so you should advance." You try to abuse everything you can to win.
What makes you say nada won most of them?
|
Cocoshoo rule, hehe.
A real jinxer that one.
|
It feels like Nada is in his BW niche where he isn't the best, but he manages to stay relevant forever.
I mean, NaDa hasn't been all that great since like 2007 in BW but he has the one of the best combinations of staying power and wins over time of all the great Progamers with the exception of maybe Boxer and Reach. He never really had a period where he completely crashed and burned except when he had his eye surgery and seemed really depressed.
|
I was really hoping Nada would make it to the finals I'm very disappointed by that he didn't. Now I just hope that Nestea can pull out the win amd doesn't lose by cheese.
|
On May 08 2011 17:12 Dakkas wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2011 14:27 ampson wrote:
Wow, Inca is being a boss with this interview. Of course they were all-ins, and they were the right decisions to make. He said that he only practiced macro against nada, so he all-ins, nada cuts corners, he wins. I can't believe all the hate that he is getting for playing to win the game. If I had a chance to get to the GSL finals and a cannon rush will get me there, I'm gonna do a damn cannon rush! Anyway, I'd bet a lot of the hate is coming from zerg players and nada fans, which while understandable that they are disappointed, does not warrant them calling him a "hack" or "dirty." Anyway, these people play to win the game, not to let your favorite player advance or for you to be entertained. He cheesed against Sangho and with his play against Rain, do you honestly think he deserves to be in the finals? It's similar to GSL3 where Rain was in the finals
Have you ever cannon rushed and won? It's hard kekekeke
|
On May 08 2011 17:12 Dakkas wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2011 14:27 ampson wrote:
Wow, Inca is being a boss with this interview. Of course they were all-ins, and they were the right decisions to make. He said that he only practiced macro against nada, so he all-ins, nada cuts corners, he wins. I can't believe all the hate that he is getting for playing to win the game. If I had a chance to get to the GSL finals and a cannon rush will get me there, I'm gonna do a damn cannon rush! Anyway, I'd bet a lot of the hate is coming from zerg players and nada fans, which while understandable that they are disappointed, does not warrant them calling him a "hack" or "dirty." Anyway, these people play to win the game, not to let your favorite player advance or for you to be entertained. He cheesed against Sangho and with his play against Rain, do you honestly think he deserves to be in the finals? It's similar to GSL3 where Rain was in the finals
There's no such thing as "deserving" to be in a place. In football (soccer) this happens all the time. One team attacks the whole game but can't find a breach in defense, fast forward to minute 90, defending team goes for a counter and scores. One commentator will go like "aww this is so bad, they didn't deserve to win" then the other one (correct one) goes "in football there's no such thing as deserving goals, there's only scored goals"
There's no such thing as "deserving to win", only a real win counts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
