|
On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:31 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:24 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:19 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:17 karpo wrote:
Kinda fun to see that you can guess the content of the post by just looking at the race portrait. Reading the last few pages really shows how invested people are in "their" race and how they just can't look at anything objectively.
It's like the average far left vs far right debate where no one will ever budge in their beliefs. I don't know, but I'm basically saying at every occasion that I think that Zerg is too strong against Terran right now. I just don't think it is as simply as "Unit X is too strong" - because TvZ good screwed by Zergs getting the availability to get too much eco too fast. Also I don't think you can nerf Zerg units straight up, without compensating for ZvP, as this matchup seems to be very balanced. On July 29 2012 06:18 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
It's certainly coinflippy. How do you think Protoss and Terran players get wins? By using gimmicks and lading Vortexes. "Everytime a zerg player plays well he wins." That's not a coinflip. That's straight up belief in imbalance. I didn't say both players were coinflipping. When I say "PvZ" I usually am referring to the Protoss perspective. If I want to talk about the Zerg side of things I'll say ZvP. So that I get that right, I'm gonna write down how I read what you said: in PvZ, Protoss coinflips but Zerg in ZvP does not participate in the coinflip. Sounds weird to me. Kind of like you wanted to tell me, that Zerg always does the same, Protoss always does something different, and out of no particular reason sometimes it works for Protoss and sometimes it doesn't. Weird... Out of no particular reason? No no, you see, Protoss is gambling on whether Zerg is going to scout/react properly/split their Broods etc. etc. So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)? Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss. And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased  I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well.
You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you?
|
On July 29 2012 06:56 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 06:54 karpo wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:31 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:24 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:19 Big J wrote:
[quote]
I don't know, but I'm basically saying at every occasion that I think that Zerg is too strong against Terran right now. I just don't think it is as simply as "Unit X is too strong" - because TvZ good screwed by Zergs getting the availability to get too much eco too fast.
Also I don't think you can nerf Zerg units straight up, without compensating for ZvP, as this matchup seems to be very balanced.
[quote]
"Everytime a zerg player plays well he wins." That's not a coinflip. That's straight up belief in imbalance. I didn't say both players were coinflipping. When I say "PvZ" I usually am referring to the Protoss perspective. If I want to talk about the Zerg side of things I'll say ZvP. So that I get that right, I'm gonna write down how I read what you said: in PvZ, Protoss coinflips but Zerg in ZvP does not participate in the coinflip. Sounds weird to me. Kind of like you wanted to tell me, that Zerg always does the same, Protoss always does something different, and out of no particular reason sometimes it works for Protoss and sometimes it doesn't. Weird... Out of no particular reason? No no, you see, Protoss is gambling on whether Zerg is going to scout/react properly/split their Broods etc. etc. So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)? Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss. And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. Didn't Stephano lose to Mana, Sase, and two times vs Oz recently? Hyperbole, it's fantastic! How does that contradict what I said? Mana and Sase both all-inned him, and Stephano reacted extremely atypically and got crushed. Oz prepared builds to mindgame Stephano, and they worked, on top of the fact that it was universally agreed that Stephano wasn't playing well.
So the times Stephano lost it was due to other circumstances but when he wins it's just that he's zerg and overpowered, amirite?
This is the problem about balance whining. Nothing will ever be accepted as proof of anything because it's either "wasn't playing well at the time", "did this or that wrong", mindgames, all ins, coinflips, bad opponent, or BO loss.
|
On July 29 2012 06:52 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:31 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:24 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:19 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:17 karpo wrote:
Kinda fun to see that you can guess the content of the post by just looking at the race portrait. Reading the last few pages really shows how invested people are in "their" race and how they just can't look at anything objectively.
It's like the average far left vs far right debate where no one will ever budge in their beliefs. I don't know, but I'm basically saying at every occasion that I think that Zerg is too strong against Terran right now. I just don't think it is as simply as "Unit X is too strong" - because TvZ good screwed by Zergs getting the availability to get too much eco too fast. Also I don't think you can nerf Zerg units straight up, without compensating for ZvP, as this matchup seems to be very balanced. On July 29 2012 06:18 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:13 Big J wrote:[quote] I would love to hear that as well, considering comments like this one: [quote] Seems like you don't think PvZ is coinflippy it all, but you just wanted to bash around randomly, because you don't like me  It's certainly coinflippy. How do you think Protoss and Terran players get wins? By using gimmicks and lading Vortexes. "Everytime a zerg player plays well he wins." That's not a coinflip. That's straight up belief in imbalance. I didn't say both players were coinflipping. When I say "PvZ" I usually am referring to the Protoss perspective. If I want to talk about the Zerg side of things I'll say ZvP. So that I get that right, I'm gonna write down how I read what you said: in PvZ, Protoss coinflips but Zerg in ZvP does not participate in the coinflip. Sounds weird to me. Kind of like you wanted to tell me, that Zerg always does the same, Protoss always does something different, and out of no particular reason sometimes it works for Protoss and sometimes it doesn't. Weird... Out of no particular reason? No no, you see, Protoss is gambling on whether Zerg is going to scout/react properly/split their Broods etc. etc. So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)? Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss. And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased Yes, you are biased. You're clearly implying a double standard that expects the game to be balanced around both optimal non-zerg play, and non-optimal zerg play.
No, because I'm not even going to start talking about "optimal play". Starcraft cannot be played "optimally". You cannot scout everything, know evertyhing, micro everything perfectly or just perform anything optimally at all.
The only benchmarks we have are things like winrates, and wether at a certain level Protoss players are consistently able to beat Zerg players of their level and vis-versa. And all of that is true:
The winrates are quite balanced
The best Zerg players win and lose to the best Protoss players
Protoss and Zergs are represented quite equally at all levels and seem to be able to win at those levels quite evenly against each other
So the benchmarks tell us that the best ways to play zerg and the best ways to play Protoss in ZvP/PvZ are quite even.
|
On July 29 2012 07:01 karpo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 06:56 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:54 karpo wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:31 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:24 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
I didn't say both players were coinflipping. When I say "PvZ" I usually am referring to the Protoss perspective. If I want to talk about the Zerg side of things I'll say ZvP. So that I get that right, I'm gonna write down how I read what you said: in PvZ, Protoss coinflips but Zerg in ZvP does not participate in the coinflip. Sounds weird to me. Kind of like you wanted to tell me, that Zerg always does the same, Protoss always does something different, and out of no particular reason sometimes it works for Protoss and sometimes it doesn't. Weird... Out of no particular reason? No no, you see, Protoss is gambling on whether Zerg is going to scout/react properly/split their Broods etc. etc. So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)? Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss. And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. Didn't Stephano lose to Mana, Sase, and two times vs Oz recently? Hyperbole, it's fantastic! How does that contradict what I said? Mana and Sase both all-inned him, and Stephano reacted extremely atypically and got crushed. Oz prepared builds to mindgame Stephano, and they worked, on top of the fact that it was universally agreed that Stephano wasn't playing well. So the times Stephano lost it was due to other circumstances but when he wins it's just that he's zerg and overpowered, amirite? This is the problem about balance whining. Nothing will ever be accepted as proof of anything because it's either "wasn't playing well at the time", "did this or that wrong", mindgames, all ins, coinflips, bad opponent, or BO loss.
Go watch MLG Summer and tell me Stephano played the same caliber of ZvP he did at NASL.
|
On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:31 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:24 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:19 Big J wrote:
[quote]
I don't know, but I'm basically saying at every occasion that I think that Zerg is too strong against Terran right now. I just don't think it is as simply as "Unit X is too strong" - because TvZ good screwed by Zergs getting the availability to get too much eco too fast.
Also I don't think you can nerf Zerg units straight up, without compensating for ZvP, as this matchup seems to be very balanced.
[quote]
"Everytime a zerg player plays well he wins." That's not a coinflip. That's straight up belief in imbalance. I didn't say both players were coinflipping. When I say "PvZ" I usually am referring to the Protoss perspective. If I want to talk about the Zerg side of things I'll say ZvP. So that I get that right, I'm gonna write down how I read what you said: in PvZ, Protoss coinflips but Zerg in ZvP does not participate in the coinflip. Sounds weird to me. Kind of like you wanted to tell me, that Zerg always does the same, Protoss always does something different, and out of no particular reason sometimes it works for Protoss and sometimes it doesn't. Weird... Out of no particular reason? No no, you see, Protoss is gambling on whether Zerg is going to scout/react properly/split their Broods etc. etc. So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)? Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss. And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you?
Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that.
|
On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:31 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:24 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
I didn't say both players were coinflipping. When I say "PvZ" I usually am referring to the Protoss perspective. If I want to talk about the Zerg side of things I'll say ZvP. So that I get that right, I'm gonna write down how I read what you said: in PvZ, Protoss coinflips but Zerg in ZvP does not participate in the coinflip. Sounds weird to me. Kind of like you wanted to tell me, that Zerg always does the same, Protoss always does something different, and out of no particular reason sometimes it works for Protoss and sometimes it doesn't. Weird... Out of no particular reason? No no, you see, Protoss is gambling on whether Zerg is going to scout/react properly/split their Broods etc. etc. So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)? Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss. And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that.
No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it.
|
On July 29 2012 07:15 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:31 Big J wrote:
[quote]
So that I get that right, I'm gonna write down how I read what you said:
in PvZ, Protoss coinflips but Zerg in ZvP does not participate in the coinflip.
Sounds weird to me. Kind of like you wanted to tell me, that Zerg always does the same, Protoss always does something different, and out of no particular reason sometimes it works for Protoss and sometimes it doesn't. Weird... Out of no particular reason? No no, you see, Protoss is gambling on whether Zerg is going to scout/react properly/split their Broods etc. etc. So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)? Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss. And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that. No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it.
So the key to beat Stephano is to simply build a third, because his standard build cannot scout it? Is that what you are saying? That does not sound like a coinflip either.
(even if I think that even half of the Code S Protoss players would have been in danger to die/fall behind against that ling aggression, because they would not have had those perfect forcefields and might have at least lost something in the process of defending)
|
On July 29 2012 07:25 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 07:15 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
Out of no particular reason? No no, you see, Protoss is gambling on whether Zerg is going to scout/react properly/split their Broods etc. etc. So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)? Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss. And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that. No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it. So the key to beat Stephano is to simply build a third, because his standard build cannot scout it? Is that what you are saying? That does not sound like a coinflip either. (even if I think that even half of the Code S Protoss players would have been in danger to die/fall behind against that ling aggression, because they would not have had those perfect forcefields and might have at least lost something in the process of defending)
Oz's build fails against fast ling speed, which Stephano never gets. So it is indeed a good strategic choice. But it's not solid in the sense that it it hard countered by a decently popular Zerg opening.
|
On July 29 2012 07:30 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 07:25 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:15 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:
[quote]
So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)?
Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss.
And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that. No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it. So the key to beat Stephano is to simply build a third, because his standard build cannot scout it? Is that what you are saying? That does not sound like a coinflip either. (even if I think that even half of the Code S Protoss players would have been in danger to die/fall behind against that ling aggression, because they would not have had those perfect forcefields and might have at least lost something in the process of defending) Oz's build fails against fast ling speed, which Stephano never gets. So it is indeed a good strategic choice. But it's not solid in the sense that it it hard countered by a decently popular Zerg opening.
So it comes down to scouting and builds and reactions to the other ones builds. All of this while the winrates are quite even and Protoss and Zergs are able to beat each other at all levels very consistently.
Or do I miss something?
|
On July 29 2012 07:25 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 07:15 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:33 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
Out of no particular reason? No no, you see, Protoss is gambling on whether Zerg is going to scout/react properly/split their Broods etc. etc. So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)? Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss. And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that. No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it. So the key to beat Stephano is to simply build a third, because his standard build cannot scout it? Is that what you are saying? That does not sound like a coinflip either. (even if I think that even half of the Code S Protoss players would have been in danger to die/fall behind against that ling aggression, because they would not have had those perfect forcefields and might have at least lost something in the process of defending)
It's not that his standard build cannot scout it. It's that he shows in previous games that he doesn't scout until a certain point. Nothing about that is fixed into his build (moving an Overlord doesn't affect his build in the slightest).
Can you be any more disingenuous?
|
On July 29 2012 07:46 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 07:25 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:15 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:37 Big J wrote:
[quote]
So do you think Zerg can do that(1), or Zerg can't(2)? Or does it come down to how the skill relation between the players is(3)?
Because in scenario (1) it is a coinflip for Protoss and the game is imbalanced towards Zerg, in scenario (2) it is a coinflip for Zerg to even go for that strategy as Protoss can "just shut it down" and the game is imbalanced towards Protoss.
And in scenario (3) it is not a coinflip, but a clash of skill, like it should be. It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that. No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it. So the key to beat Stephano is to simply build a third, because his standard build cannot scout it? Is that what you are saying? That does not sound like a coinflip either. (even if I think that even half of the Code S Protoss players would have been in danger to die/fall behind against that ling aggression, because they would not have had those perfect forcefields and might have at least lost something in the process of defending) It's not that his standard build cannot scout it. It's that he shows in previous games that he doesn't scout until a certain point. Nothing about that is fixed into his build (moving an Overlord doesn't affect his build in the slightest). Can you be any more disingenuous?
Of course it affects his build a ton. Controlling certain points of the map, having vision etc is crucial for builds.
It's what all the TvZ mess is about. The hellion build is still the same, but it doesn't accomplish the same anymore, because it cannot be in the same places anymore.
If Stephano does not put his overlords the way he does, lots of things can go differently. He misses gas timings and gas being mined if he doesn't put them around those, he misses probes moving around if he doesn't have the OLs at the OL spots on Daybreak but instead at the third, he does not have the potential to move in if something looks fishy etc.
Similarily for zerglings. Even more, it doesn't matter at all if you have 4 or 8 zerglings to spot early on. Protoss can clean those up at the third spot. Unless you seriously commit to a superearly contain, you cannot secure territory around Protoss bases, so you cannot be sure with the Stephano build.
|
On July 29 2012 07:52 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 07:46 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:25 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:15 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that. No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it. So the key to beat Stephano is to simply build a third, because his standard build cannot scout it? Is that what you are saying? That does not sound like a coinflip either. (even if I think that even half of the Code S Protoss players would have been in danger to die/fall behind against that ling aggression, because they would not have had those perfect forcefields and might have at least lost something in the process of defending) It's not that his standard build cannot scout it. It's that he shows in previous games that he doesn't scout until a certain point. Nothing about that is fixed into his build (moving an Overlord doesn't affect his build in the slightest). Can you be any more disingenuous? Of course it affects his build a ton. Controlling certain points of the map, having vision etc is crucial for builds. It's what all the TvZ mess is about. The hellion build is still the same, but it doesn't accomplish the same anymore, because it cannot be in the same places anymore. If Stephano does not put his overlords the way he does, lots of things can go differently. He misses gas timings and gas being mined if he doesn't put them around those, he misses probes moving around if he doesn't have the OLs at the OL spots on Daybreak but instead at the third, he does not have the potential to move in if something looks fishy etc. Similarily for zerglings. Even more, it doesn't matter at all if you have 4 or 8 zerglings to spot early on. Protoss can clean those up at the third spot. Unless you seriously commit to a superearly contain, you cannot secure territory around Protoss bases, so you cannot be sure with the Stephano build.
.......................................
The Overlord was already in position. He just didn't move it toward the third. It literally didn't move until he decided to scout the third.
|
On July 29 2012 07:56 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 07:52 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:46 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:25 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:15 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:[quote] OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that. No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it. So the key to beat Stephano is to simply build a third, because his standard build cannot scout it? Is that what you are saying? That does not sound like a coinflip either. (even if I think that even half of the Code S Protoss players would have been in danger to die/fall behind against that ling aggression, because they would not have had those perfect forcefields and might have at least lost something in the process of defending) It's not that his standard build cannot scout it. It's that he shows in previous games that he doesn't scout until a certain point. Nothing about that is fixed into his build (moving an Overlord doesn't affect his build in the slightest). Can you be any more disingenuous? Of course it affects his build a ton. Controlling certain points of the map, having vision etc is crucial for builds. It's what all the TvZ mess is about. The hellion build is still the same, but it doesn't accomplish the same anymore, because it cannot be in the same places anymore. If Stephano does not put his overlords the way he does, lots of things can go differently. He misses gas timings and gas being mined if he doesn't put them around those, he misses probes moving around if he doesn't have the OLs at the OL spots on Daybreak but instead at the third, he does not have the potential to move in if something looks fishy etc. Similarily for zerglings. Even more, it doesn't matter at all if you have 4 or 8 zerglings to spot early on. Protoss can clean those up at the third spot. Unless you seriously commit to a superearly contain, you cannot secure territory around Protoss bases, so you cannot be sure with the Stephano build. ....................................... The Overlord was already in position. He just didn't move it toward the third. It literally didn't move until he decided to scout the third.
Because it was in the spot where it is supposed to be?!?! Do you always move obs? No, because there are positions that you want/need to watch over all the time.
|
On July 29 2012 07:37 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 07:30 Toadvine wrote:On July 29 2012 07:25 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:15 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:43 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:39 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
It's (1). Of course Zerg can react properly. Stephano does it 9/10 games. OK, thanks, so Zerg players are simply too bad in your opinion. That's all I wanted to know. And you call me biased I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that. No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it. So the key to beat Stephano is to simply build a third, because his standard build cannot scout it? Is that what you are saying? That does not sound like a coinflip either. (even if I think that even half of the Code S Protoss players would have been in danger to die/fall behind against that ling aggression, because they would not have had those perfect forcefields and might have at least lost something in the process of defending) Oz's build fails against fast ling speed, which Stephano never gets. So it is indeed a good strategic choice. But it's not solid in the sense that it it hard countered by a decently popular Zerg opening. So it comes down to scouting and builds and reactions to the other ones builds. All of this while the winrates are quite even and Protoss and Zergs are able to beat each other at all levels very consistently. Or do I miss something?
It's not a reaction to anything in-game, he did it blindly because Stephano always plays the same. There is no way for Protoss to scout stuff like that and be able to react effectively at the same time. You can refer to my post on the previous page for some specifics. I'm not actually complaining about imbalance, mind you. Just saying, when you see a Protoss do a bad build and fail, it's often because that bad build hardcounters something that's very good against normal builds. Since Protoss can't scout in the early game, you can only do stuff blindly, and sometimes you will lose.
|
On July 29 2012 08:00 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 07:56 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:52 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:46 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:25 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:15 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:47 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
I think many professional Zerg players have incredibly poor scouting, reactions, and unit control. Whether or not that makes them "bad" is up to you. But it's a fact that Stephano doesn't lose ZvPs unless he gets mindgamed or unless he makes a massive blunder. How you rationalize that, I don't know. How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly. That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that). Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss. a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can. similarily for worse Protoss. And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that. No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it. So the key to beat Stephano is to simply build a third, because his standard build cannot scout it? Is that what you are saying? That does not sound like a coinflip either. (even if I think that even half of the Code S Protoss players would have been in danger to die/fall behind against that ling aggression, because they would not have had those perfect forcefields and might have at least lost something in the process of defending) It's not that his standard build cannot scout it. It's that he shows in previous games that he doesn't scout until a certain point. Nothing about that is fixed into his build (moving an Overlord doesn't affect his build in the slightest). Can you be any more disingenuous? Of course it affects his build a ton. Controlling certain points of the map, having vision etc is crucial for builds. It's what all the TvZ mess is about. The hellion build is still the same, but it doesn't accomplish the same anymore, because it cannot be in the same places anymore. If Stephano does not put his overlords the way he does, lots of things can go differently. He misses gas timings and gas being mined if he doesn't put them around those, he misses probes moving around if he doesn't have the OLs at the OL spots on Daybreak but instead at the third, he does not have the potential to move in if something looks fishy etc. Similarily for zerglings. Even more, it doesn't matter at all if you have 4 or 8 zerglings to spot early on. Protoss can clean those up at the third spot. Unless you seriously commit to a superearly contain, you cannot secure territory around Protoss bases, so you cannot be sure with the Stephano build. ....................................... The Overlord was already in position. He just didn't move it toward the third. It literally didn't move until he decided to scout the third. Because it was in the spot where it is supposed to be?!?! Do you always move obs? No, because there are positions that you want/need to watch over all the time.
It was in the fucking airspace. It didn't "need" to be there.
|
On July 29 2012 08:16 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 08:00 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:56 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:52 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:46 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:25 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 07:15 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 07:11 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 06:58 Shiori wrote:On July 29 2012 06:57 Big J wrote:
[quote]
How do I rationalize that? That the standard skill is that people don't have the skill to get what is going on exactly.
That only the very best of the best like Stephano or (probably even better) DRG really can know what is going on. That only those really get what the Protoss is up to and only their superior skill makes them that strong. And because of that, they can only be beaten by using equally strong skill, like doing unorthodox things (Oz, Naniwa) or just being better than the standard Protoss player (like MC or Oz who hold attacks with less units than other Protoss would need, due to faster and more precise FFs and stuff like that).
Basically: a good Zerg can only be beaten by a good Protoss.
a worse Zerg, will die easier, have less units for an aggressive timing and not be able to abuse Protoss mistakes (like missed FFs) the way DRG or Stephano can.
similarily for worse Protoss.
And yes, if you think they have poor scouting, reactions and unit control, than that does imply that they are bad players. That's what bad means. If you think that a Zerg has bad unit control because they are not as good as DRG, then I have to tell you that a Protoss that is not as good with forcefields as Oz is and can't take a third of 5units on Daybreak is bad as well. You think that Oz can take a third with 5 units on Daybreak because of his unit control? Lol, you really don't understand this game even a little bit, do you? Yes. If you don't have his FFs and army movement, you are going to die to Stephanos "standard" 20lings "that deny every Protoss third". Plain as that. No. Oz did that because he knows Stephano doesn't scout the third base until around the 7-8 minute mark, by which point enough Cannons are up that it doesn't matter. No amount of unit control is going to let you hold a 5 minute third base against a competent Zerg player who scouts it. So the key to beat Stephano is to simply build a third, because his standard build cannot scout it? Is that what you are saying? That does not sound like a coinflip either. (even if I think that even half of the Code S Protoss players would have been in danger to die/fall behind against that ling aggression, because they would not have had those perfect forcefields and might have at least lost something in the process of defending) It's not that his standard build cannot scout it. It's that he shows in previous games that he doesn't scout until a certain point. Nothing about that is fixed into his build (moving an Overlord doesn't affect his build in the slightest). Can you be any more disingenuous? Of course it affects his build a ton. Controlling certain points of the map, having vision etc is crucial for builds. It's what all the TvZ mess is about. The hellion build is still the same, but it doesn't accomplish the same anymore, because it cannot be in the same places anymore. If Stephano does not put his overlords the way he does, lots of things can go differently. He misses gas timings and gas being mined if he doesn't put them around those, he misses probes moving around if he doesn't have the OLs at the OL spots on Daybreak but instead at the third, he does not have the potential to move in if something looks fishy etc. Similarily for zerglings. Even more, it doesn't matter at all if you have 4 or 8 zerglings to spot early on. Protoss can clean those up at the third spot. Unless you seriously commit to a superearly contain, you cannot secure territory around Protoss bases, so you cannot be sure with the Stephano build. ....................................... The Overlord was already in position. He just didn't move it toward the third. It literally didn't move until he decided to scout the third. Because it was in the spot where it is supposed to be?!?! Do you always move obs? No, because there are positions that you want/need to watch over all the time. It was in the fucking airspace. It didn't "need" to be there.
+ Show Spoiler +
Situation when the Nexus gets thrown down. Standard OL positioning, Stalker clearing the third before the Nexus gets put down. If the OL is there, Oz could still deny the scouting of the third or alternatively he could either go for a tech build with 1-2 extra gases or a mass gateway build without gases. Having the OL over at the gases and nowhere else at this point is crucial to stand a chance against a possible 2base allin.
+ Show Spoiler +
Situation 1min and 12sec later, Stephano gets speed asap of the standard 3base double gas timing and produces as many lings as possible, even though he hasn't seen the third (but might suspect it, due to the late gas timings at the natural that are indicating no very fast tech build and also no mass gateway build).
+ Show Spoiler +
Stephano has been producing nonstop lings up to 44 and is attacking the moment speed is finishing. Oz holds with 2stalkers, a zealot, 2sentries a canon and a void ray. There was no way, that stephano could have attacked earlier with the build he was in and the way Oz was moving his units aggressivly towards Stephano while building the Nexus.
Additional note, Stephano most probably knew what was going on and was not surprised at all by the third. He saw the gas timings (which would be weird for a tech build and useless for a mass gateway build) and produced way more zerglings and an earlier ling speed (he goes lair quite often before speed) than he usually would do at that time (he would build some roaches and more drones instead, if he played his standard style, but as he wanted to attack the 3rd, he built speedlings instead).
I stand corrected. From rewatching the game, I'm completly sure that Stephano knew what was going on (after all, Artosis did also predict that build just from the same clues that Stephano had), but there was no way to deal damage against the very well thought out build and exectution of Oz, from what build Stephano was playing. (though I'm sure he would have killed many lesser toplevel Protosses with that attack)
It's a simply matter of: Oz build was better than stephanos. His reaction to attack it was wrong, due to the fact that Oz build was innovated to hold exactly something like that. Oz played better and won, but not due to some coinflip.
|
Yep, this confirms it. Even in the face of unflinching evidence that you supplied you're incapable of acknowledging when something is a metagame. We're done here. Don't bother debating with me until you have the ability to actually think outside of the box.
Taking a 5 minute third is not safe. Period. And yes, I read your entire post and all of its pictures. Either you do not understand how PvZ works, or you're being wilfully ignorant, because nothing you showed supports your argument in the slightest.
|
On July 29 2012 08:30 Shiori wrote:
Yep, this confirms it. Even in the face of unflinching evidence that you supplied you're incapable of acknowledging when something is a metagame. We're done here. Don't bother debating with me until you have the ability to actually think outside of the box.
Taking a 5 minute third is not safe. Period. And yes, I read your entire post and all of its pictures. Either you do not understand how PvZ works, or you're being wilfully ignorant, because nothing you showed supports your argument in the slightest.
Oh really. Stephano plays the most standard PvZ style. Something that you have whined about a thousand times ("Stephano always plays the same style and is capable of beating everyone without switching it up"). Then Oz plays a build that counters that style. Suddenly I'm the "one with problems acknowleding that this is a metagame".
Of course it is a metagame. Fast speed has been very useless for zergs, because Protoss figured how to deal with it, so Zergs figuered new builds without fast speed, now Protoss figure builds that are good against nonspeed builds.
|
On July 29 2012 08:40 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 08:30 Shiori wrote:
Yep, this confirms it. Even in the face of unflinching evidence that you supplied you're incapable of acknowledging when something is a metagame. We're done here. Don't bother debating with me until you have the ability to actually think outside of the box.
Taking a 5 minute third is not safe. Period. And yes, I read your entire post and all of its pictures. Either you do not understand how PvZ works, or you're being wilfully ignorant, because nothing you showed supports your argument in the slightest. Oh really. Stephano plays the most standard PvZ style. Something that you have whined about a thousand times ("Stephano always plays the same style and is capable of beating everyone without switching it up"). Then Oz plays a build that counters that style. Suddenly I'm the "one with problems acknowleding that this is a metagame". Of course it is a metagame. Fast speed has been very useless for zergs, because Protoss figured how to deal with it, so Zergs figuered new builds without fast speed, now Protoss figure builds that are good against nonspeed builds.
Jesus Christ. Oz's build was a reaction to Stephano's personal quirks, not the build itself.
|
On July 29 2012 08:44 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 08:40 Big J wrote:On July 29 2012 08:30 Shiori wrote:
Yep, this confirms it. Even in the face of unflinching evidence that you supplied you're incapable of acknowledging when something is a metagame. We're done here. Don't bother debating with me until you have the ability to actually think outside of the box.
Taking a 5 minute third is not safe. Period. And yes, I read your entire post and all of its pictures. Either you do not understand how PvZ works, or you're being wilfully ignorant, because nothing you showed supports your argument in the slightest. Oh really. Stephano plays the most standard PvZ style. Something that you have whined about a thousand times ("Stephano always plays the same style and is capable of beating everyone without switching it up"). Then Oz plays a build that counters that style. Suddenly I'm the "one with problems acknowleding that this is a metagame". Of course it is a metagame. Fast speed has been very useless for zergs, because Protoss figured how to deal with it, so Zergs figuered new builds without fast speed, now Protoss figure builds that are good against nonspeed builds. Jesus Christ. Oz's build was a reaction to Stephano's personal quirks, not the build itself.
no it's not: "Will he do the fast third build" (Artosis), before Oz puts down the Nexus.
This build seems to be around anyways, because of the metagame and you can hold such a fast third base, unless the zerg goes for a very fast speed (not part of the metagame, because you fall behind against other builds) or blindly builds mass units (bad decision against everything else).
This is not Stephano specifc. It was a nonpreparational tournament.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/37z7g.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/6RJQZ.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/c5lDV.png)
