|
On July 13 2011 14:08 aimless wrote:
Intrigue argued that poor quality of players was responsible for the revolving door that is GSL Champion. But I think the reason GSL champs keep rotating (and why players go from the top of Code S on out to Code B and back up again) is the lower skill ceiling. It turns the outcomes into more a dice roll. The units are more efficient at killing each other and more spells/abilities can be automated. A good player, caught out of position at one unlucky moment, can lost his entire army in 10 seconds. Poof. The poor unit AI in Brood War meant just getting into position was a APM spamming struggle. So bad BW players have a harder time just wandering up and killing good players' armies. In SC2, there aren't as many ways a good player can be head and shoulders above your opponent. Sure, better players have an small edge, but in Brood War, that edge was a cliff and the great ones could drop opponent after opponent off it.
No way man! EMP is completely about how you use your units!
+ Show Spoiler +
On July 13 2011 14:45 Primadog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2011 14:39 Indrium wrote:On July 13 2011 14:36 Primadog wrote:On July 13 2011 14:33 aimless wrote:On July 13 2011 14:25 Primadog wrote:
This article is terrible.
It is terrible because it consists entirely of conjectures and false analogies with no evidence or data to back it up. The central premise: that the skill ceiling is low, completely counters all existing tournament results everywhere.
Elephant was bad, but this was infinitely worse. There are plenty of resources available if you know or bother to look to which to back your assertions, but no effort were made. Shame on you. Thanks for the opinion. 1. Explain an example of a false analogy. 2. This article was theoretical in nature; it was never intended to have data (which seems impossible to obtain for this somewhat subjective concept anyway). 3. Counters tournament results? I just offer an opinion why MKP goes from GSL champ to out of Code S. Or why Fruitdealer has never been heard from again. The results are erratic, whether I try to explain them or not. 4. The Elephant article was not bad, you just had a knee-jerk reaction to it. 5. Again, resources aren't necessary to suggest a subjective argument. You give me a couple statistics I could use to "prove" the relative skill ceilings of BW and SC2 and I will go do that. It seems like an untenable criticism of the article. I will need to do research on the TLPD Elos to confidently say how terribly off it is. If you're willing to wait, I can have something out in about ten days. The most glaring is the the "macro button" stupidity. By that way of thinking, I can say that BW can be EVEN BETTER if players are required to tap-dance while playing. This is not kneejerk, I studies data extensively because I intend to bring sports statistics into starcraft, so my head hurts when people just take one tournament result and make sweeping claims. Oh ya, MKP never worn a GSL. What kind of data are you using here? I study sc2 tournaments' data extensively because I intend bring to sports statistics into starcraftSorry, linking to them took longer than I expected.
A small typo ^
Do you study statistics Prima?
|
Oh look, another BW-fan desperately trying to tell us that BW is not a totally irrelevant game these days... I can taste the bitterness of your tears all the way over here.
User was banned for this post.
|
On July 14 2011 06:43 naitS wrote:
Oh look, another BW-fan desperately trying to tell us that BW is not a totally irrelevant game these days... I can taste the bitterness of your tears all the way over here.
Lol this dude made his account for this one incendiary post. Unfortunately, its not even a good one...
|
On July 14 2011 06:47 QTIP. wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2011 06:43 naitS wrote:
Oh look, another BW-fan desperately trying to tell us that BW is not a totally irrelevant game these days... I can taste the bitterness of your tears all the way over here. Lol this dude made his account for this one incendiary post. Unfortunately, its not even a good one...
well, the OP did post on multiple accounts to agree with himself
|
If SC2 is so easy, why do the top players make so many mistakes and unrefined stuff?
All this talk about low skill ceiling is nonsense. For instance, sure you can rally workers to mine automatically, but to obtain optimal mining you need to babysit every worker and analize which patch it is best to go to. Now, I would love to see someone doing this while defending a couple of drops, repositioning their siege tank line and figure out what they are gonna do in the game strategically.
Just because you dont have to fight your interfase as much in SCII, doesnt mean the skill ceiling isnt unlimited for humans.
Edit: Another great example is marine splitting. I'm sure you've all seen marines being split by computers. It's quite beautiful to behold and practically impossible to do for humans. So much for low skill ceiling.
These examples are of course extremes, but even basic stuff like queuing a bunch of SCVs (Puma queuing 5 against MC on Crevasse springs to mind) when it makes sense to spend the money elsewhere.
|
Agreed. My mate is a high masters zerg with no mechanics at all, uses one hotkey(his hatches), doesn't even hotkey his units and somehow he's a masters level player? da fuck. It sucks tbh.
|
Compare Starcraft 2 to Broodwar in 1999 and try to see how it was back then... Until a certain degree of knowledge has been established strategies will matter more. First players to perfect macro play were iloveoov and from then on... When the strategies are more well known mechanics will come more into play. The freed up APM should allow players to harrass more places at once and increasingly decentralize the battles.
|
On July 14 2011 06:29 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2011 14:39 yosisoy wrote:
Why do people consider it good that in BW you had to struggle to do mundane tasks and complain that in SC2 you have MBS and auto-mine? It's a STRATEGY game, not a clicking competition. It's like complaining that we as humans have auto-breathe and coordination implemented - plain silly.
As much as I admire good mechanics and people's abilities to be able to control multiple bases, structures and attack fronts, I personally don't consider that aspect as what I want to be the main criteria that wins games. BW is often compared to chess, yet the game of kings has NOTHING to do with "mechanics". Someone without hands could play chess perfectly well.
Final point: BroodWar's design had major flaws that we've gotten used to and now some of us actually except new games to have the same flaws, and focus on the technical sound of the game instead of the strategy/tactics. This, so much this. Why do people think it even matters that some of these mundane tasks are automated, it gives so much more room for fantastic creative strategic play and better micro.
Except you can't really micro in SC2 past early mid game, and strategies always have weaknesses/strengths meaning most games would be coin flips.
|
On July 14 2011 07:25 ak1knight wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2011 06:29 Thorakh wrote:On July 13 2011 14:39 yosisoy wrote:
Why do people consider it good that in BW you had to struggle to do mundane tasks and complain that in SC2 you have MBS and auto-mine? It's a STRATEGY game, not a clicking competition. It's like complaining that we as humans have auto-breathe and coordination implemented - plain silly.
As much as I admire good mechanics and people's abilities to be able to control multiple bases, structures and attack fronts, I personally don't consider that aspect as what I want to be the main criteria that wins games. BW is often compared to chess, yet the game of kings has NOTHING to do with "mechanics". Someone without hands could play chess perfectly well.
Final point: BroodWar's design had major flaws that we've gotten used to and now some of us actually except new games to have the same flaws, and focus on the technical sound of the game instead of the strategy/tactics. This, so much this. Why do people think it even matters that some of these mundane tasks are automated, it gives so much more room for fantastic creative strategic play and better micro. Except you can't really micro in SC2 past early mid game, and strategies always have weaknesses/strengths meaning most games would be coin flips.
This is nonsense.
|
On July 14 2011 07:20 aFF.TEEN wrote:
All this talk about low skill ceiling is nonsense. For instance, sure you can rally workers to mine automatically, but to obtain optimal mining you need to babysit every worker and analize which patch it is best to go to. Now, I would love to see someone doing this while defending a couple of drops, repositioning their siege tank line and figure out what they are gonna do in the game strategically.
Obviously there's a difference, not getting a few extra tenths of a mineral per minute is not comparable to having a few workers sitting in your base doing nothing.
From a competitive standpoint the addition of things such as automine and MBS closed the skill gap and made SC2 much more luck/build based at the highest level.
|
On July 14 2011 07:29 aFF.TEEN wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2011 07:25 ak1knight wrote:On July 14 2011 06:29 Thorakh wrote:On July 13 2011 14:39 yosisoy wrote:
Why do people consider it good that in BW you had to struggle to do mundane tasks and complain that in SC2 you have MBS and auto-mine? It's a STRATEGY game, not a clicking competition. It's like complaining that we as humans have auto-breathe and coordination implemented - plain silly.
As much as I admire good mechanics and people's abilities to be able to control multiple bases, structures and attack fronts, I personally don't consider that aspect as what I want to be the main criteria that wins games. BW is often compared to chess, yet the game of kings has NOTHING to do with "mechanics". Someone without hands could play chess perfectly well.
Final point: BroodWar's design had major flaws that we've gotten used to and now some of us actually except new games to have the same flaws, and focus on the technical sound of the game instead of the strategy/tactics. This, so much this. Why do people think it even matters that some of these mundane tasks are automated, it gives so much more room for fantastic creative strategic play and better micro. Except you can't really micro in SC2 past early mid game, and strategies always have weaknesses/strengths meaning most games would be coin flips. This is nonsense.
Then it should be easy to give a counterpoint, instead of just saying it's "nonsense"
|
On July 14 2011 07:31 ak1knight wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2011 07:20 aFF.TEEN wrote:
All this talk about low skill ceiling is nonsense. For instance, sure you can rally workers to mine automatically, but to obtain optimal mining you need to babysit every worker and analize which patch it is best to go to. Now, I would love to see someone doing this while defending a couple of drops, repositioning their siege tank line and figure out what they are gonna do in the game strategically.
Obviously there's a difference, not getting a few extra tenths of a mineral per minute is not comparable to having a few workers sitting in your base doing nothing. From a competitive standpoint the addition of things such as automine and MBS closed the skill gap and made SC2 much more luck/build based at the highest level.
Wait ... a strategy game which is about strategy? Blasphemy!
I have a good idea to ensure the *better* players will be more likely to win: make it so that each time a worker returns to the commend center, Nexus or hatch, it will stop and you must tell it to go back to mining!
|
Two short counter arguments:
1. Koreans are dominating foreign tournaments in SC2.
2. Savior wasn't known for having the best mechanics in his prime. He was a relatively low apm player.
|
On July 14 2011 07:32 ak1knight wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2011 07:29 aFF.TEEN wrote:On July 14 2011 07:25 ak1knight wrote:On July 14 2011 06:29 Thorakh wrote:On July 13 2011 14:39 yosisoy wrote:
Why do people consider it good that in BW you had to struggle to do mundane tasks and complain that in SC2 you have MBS and auto-mine? It's a STRATEGY game, not a clicking competition. It's like complaining that we as humans have auto-breathe and coordination implemented - plain silly.
As much as I admire good mechanics and people's abilities to be able to control multiple bases, structures and attack fronts, I personally don't consider that aspect as what I want to be the main criteria that wins games. BW is often compared to chess, yet the game of kings has NOTHING to do with "mechanics". Someone without hands could play chess perfectly well.
Final point: BroodWar's design had major flaws that we've gotten used to and now some of us actually except new games to have the same flaws, and focus on the technical sound of the game instead of the strategy/tactics. This, so much this. Why do people think it even matters that some of these mundane tasks are automated, it gives so much more room for fantastic creative strategic play and better micro. Except you can't really micro in SC2 past early mid game, and strategies always have weaknesses/strengths meaning most games would be coin flips. This is nonsense. Then it should be easy to give a counterpoint, instead of just saying it's "nonsense"
Go a-move with your marine-marauder medivac ghost viking against a P who microes and positions himself well. Be sure to let me know how it went.
|
I don't think SC2 will be anything like BW, where the "bonjwas" of the game took turns controlling the scene before passing the torch to the next juggernaut.
Can somebody point me to the page where people discuss the fact that there have been 3 repeat champions of the GSL? That MC, NesTea, and MVP have each won 2 championships apiece, while MKP has been second place numerous times? That there is a lot of consistency in, at the very least, the GSL championships?
|
On July 14 2011 07:34 aFF.TEEN wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2011 07:31 ak1knight wrote:On July 14 2011 07:20 aFF.TEEN wrote:
All this talk about low skill ceiling is nonsense. For instance, sure you can rally workers to mine automatically, but to obtain optimal mining you need to babysit every worker and analize which patch it is best to go to. Now, I would love to see someone doing this while defending a couple of drops, repositioning their siege tank line and figure out what they are gonna do in the game strategically.
Obviously there's a difference, not getting a few extra tenths of a mineral per minute is not comparable to having a few workers sitting in your base doing nothing. From a competitive standpoint the addition of things such as automine and MBS closed the skill gap and made SC2 much more luck/build based at the highest level. Wait ... a strategy game which is about strategy? Blasphemy! I have a good idea to ensure the *better* players will be more likely to win: make it so that each time a worker returns to the commend center, Nexus or hatch, it will stop and you must tell it to go back to mining!
Like I said, making the game too much about strategy makes it much more luck based. If my strategy is a 4 gate, I better hope my opponent didn't get a fast immortal or I lose no matter how good my execution is.
|
On July 14 2011 07:36 suejak wrote:Show nested quote +I don't think SC2 will be anything like BW, where the "bonjwas" of the game took turns controlling the scene before passing the torch to the next juggernaut. Can somebody point me to the page where people discuss the fact that there have been 3 repeat champions of the GSL? That MC, NesTea, and MVP have each won 2 championships apiece, while MKP has been second place numerous times? That there is a lot of consistency in, at the very least, the GSL championships?
And I think the pro-BW argument would be that all 3 of those players were BW players on top teams who brought mechanics over, proving that strategy only takes you so far and that the games aren't so far apart in the idea that mechanics can overcome bad strat and make good strats unbeatable.
|
On July 14 2011 07:35 aFF.TEEN wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2011 07:32 ak1knight wrote:On July 14 2011 07:29 aFF.TEEN wrote:On July 14 2011 07:25 ak1knight wrote:On July 14 2011 06:29 Thorakh wrote:On July 13 2011 14:39 yosisoy wrote:
Why do people consider it good that in BW you had to struggle to do mundane tasks and complain that in SC2 you have MBS and auto-mine? It's a STRATEGY game, not a clicking competition. It's like complaining that we as humans have auto-breathe and coordination implemented - plain silly.
As much as I admire good mechanics and people's abilities to be able to control multiple bases, structures and attack fronts, I personally don't consider that aspect as what I want to be the main criteria that wins games. BW is often compared to chess, yet the game of kings has NOTHING to do with "mechanics". Someone without hands could play chess perfectly well.
Final point: BroodWar's design had major flaws that we've gotten used to and now some of us actually except new games to have the same flaws, and focus on the technical sound of the game instead of the strategy/tactics. This, so much this. Why do people think it even matters that some of these mundane tasks are automated, it gives so much more room for fantastic creative strategic play and better micro. Except you can't really micro in SC2 past early mid game, and strategies always have weaknesses/strengths meaning most games would be coin flips. This is nonsense. Then it should be easy to give a counterpoint, instead of just saying it's "nonsense" Go a-move with your marine-marauder medivac ghost viking against a P who microes and positions himself well. Be sure to let me know how it went.
What does the P have? As long as you use EMP (something gold leaguers can do) then the question is much more about unit comp really.
|
On July 14 2011 07:38 ak1knight wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2011 07:34 aFF.TEEN wrote:On July 14 2011 07:31 ak1knight wrote:On July 14 2011 07:20 aFF.TEEN wrote:
All this talk about low skill ceiling is nonsense. For instance, sure you can rally workers to mine automatically, but to obtain optimal mining you need to babysit every worker and analize which patch it is best to go to. Now, I would love to see someone doing this while defending a couple of drops, repositioning their siege tank line and figure out what they are gonna do in the game strategically.
Obviously there's a difference, not getting a few extra tenths of a mineral per minute is not comparable to having a few workers sitting in your base doing nothing. From a competitive standpoint the addition of things such as automine and MBS closed the skill gap and made SC2 much more luck/build based at the highest level. Wait ... a strategy game which is about strategy? Blasphemy! I have a good idea to ensure the *better* players will be more likely to win: make it so that each time a worker returns to the commend center, Nexus or hatch, it will stop and you must tell it to go back to mining! Like I said, making the game too much about strategy makes it much more luck based. If my strategy is a 4 gate, I better hope my opponent didn't get a fast immortal or I lose no matter how good my execution is.
How is determining what build you're gonna do based on your scouting information (however limited) not strategy? To me strategy is all about knowing the limits within the game and calculating risks, but feel free to bring forth your own definition of strategy.
|
On July 14 2011 07:41 ak1knight wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2011 07:35 aFF.TEEN wrote:On July 14 2011 07:32 ak1knight wrote:On July 14 2011 07:29 aFF.TEEN wrote:On July 14 2011 07:25 ak1knight wrote:On July 14 2011 06:29 Thorakh wrote:On July 13 2011 14:39 yosisoy wrote:
Why do people consider it good that in BW you had to struggle to do mundane tasks and complain that in SC2 you have MBS and auto-mine? It's a STRATEGY game, not a clicking competition. It's like complaining that we as humans have auto-breathe and coordination implemented - plain silly.
As much as I admire good mechanics and people's abilities to be able to control multiple bases, structures and attack fronts, I personally don't consider that aspect as what I want to be the main criteria that wins games. BW is often compared to chess, yet the game of kings has NOTHING to do with "mechanics". Someone without hands could play chess perfectly well.
Final point: BroodWar's design had major flaws that we've gotten used to and now some of us actually except new games to have the same flaws, and focus on the technical sound of the game instead of the strategy/tactics. This, so much this. Why do people think it even matters that some of these mundane tasks are automated, it gives so much more room for fantastic creative strategic play and better micro. Except you can't really micro in SC2 past early mid game, and strategies always have weaknesses/strengths meaning most games would be coin flips. This is nonsense. Then it should be easy to give a counterpoint, instead of just saying it's "nonsense" Go a-move with your marine-marauder medivac ghost viking against a P who microes and positions himself well. Be sure to let me know how it went. What does the P have? As long as you use EMP (something gold leaguers can do) then the question is much more about unit comp really.
Your ignorace is amazing, no offense. I am speechless. I dont know how to reply to this in a serious way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
