|
On October 28 2011 23:19 Grumbels wrote:
4. I used 'abusive' in quotes. You might think 4gate was abusive, but both Huk and Naniwa weren't really abusive players. Just because they liked to one-base using good micro? By the way, I think Huk has always been a macro player.
Huk wasn't "always" a macro player. In the early days of SC2, just like everyone else who played, he relied heavily on one and two base timings to take on players who were equally skilled or better than he was.
It's part of the natural progression of the meta-game. You start with early (usually 1-base) timing attacks until everyone learns to defend them (PvX 4-gate, 3rax, 6pool, 5 roach rush, 2 port bancheese, DT opening, etc.), or you learn that an attack is OP and needs to be nerfed (5 rax reaper, and PvP 4-gate).
As early timings are learned or balanced, the game naturally begins to enter into proper mid-game form where many 2 and 3 base timing attacks are abused until they're also figured out and defended (6-gate, Roach/Ling all-in vs 3gate expand, I'm not sure of a Terran equivalent, but you get the idea).
Finally, games start to enter the mid-late, and late game phases, where true skill and decision making starts to shine, and the players that relied on early timings and "gimmicks" fade away, while the skilled players continue to persevere and succeed.
It's just random chance that some of those players were called out early (Silver, for instance) while others were called out incorrectly (Nestea, Huk, for example).
|
One-base play isn't necessarily abusive, you seem to take that as an assumption. Huk has never been afraid to base his strategy on out-expanding. You also can have skill in a game solely about one-basing, maybe that's not true in Starcraft 2, but during beta we didn't really know what kind of game this was. Warcraft 3 was about one-basing and low-ish mechanics, but that was a skillful game.
|
I was watching some old school beta vods by husky and HD and I was like "WTF happened to CauthonLuck and MadFrog??
Checked their liquipedia page and it said they retired :-/
|
On October 28 2011 20:45 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 20:38 Hider wrote:On October 28 2011 20:29 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:
It's amusing how many of you think zerg was sooo UP back in 2010. Spare me the bullshit, after the reaper nerf, only thing that affected zerg was a bunker rush witch could be easily blocked by having a freaking drone at the bottom of the ramp. Besides that, muta/ling/baneling was as strong back then as it is now, only difference are the infestor plays you see today, witch were used back then also, to a lesser extent( ling infestor). Given that the maps played and no infestor buff (meaning you didn't actually need ghosts to counter hive tech) terran was a better race back then. However playing terran in macro game was just more difficult, and requires more practice. Controlling muta/bling just comes more natural than controlling tank marines. Terrans have slowly learned how to play macro games and hence slowly gotton nerfed in each patch. What has gotten nerfed that has affected zerg? Marines haven't, tanks haven't( I'm talking post beta here). Hive tech besides Infestors killing everything in a few fungals like now ,was the same.
Before the Infestor buff patch (1.3) and since beta you had...
* Reaper Nerfs (all of them)
* Zealot build time increase (33->38 on gateway)
* Siege mode damage decrease (50 -> 35 + 15 armored)
* Zerg building hp increase
* Corruptor energy removal
* Medivac speed/acceleration reduction
* Barracks requiring Supply depot
* Void Ray damage nerf at stage 2
* SCV repairing threat increase (makes lings better vs units being repaired like Thors)
* Nerf to ramp blocking
* BC ground damage nerf (sure they weren't seeing a ton of use, but it was starting to gain notice that even a single BC could decimate zerg ground).
* Dramatic map pool buffs (No Steppes, no close positions, no ramp blocking)
|
My point isn't that 1-base play is abusive.
I was only pointing out that the natural progression of the game follows that early timings are heavily relied upon until they are figured out. And Huk's play in the early days of SC2 was no different, when he was matched with an opponent of equal or greater talent.
|
On October 28 2011 23:49 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 20:45 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:On October 28 2011 20:38 Hider wrote:On October 28 2011 20:29 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:
It's amusing how many of you think zerg was sooo UP back in 2010. Spare me the bullshit, after the reaper nerf, only thing that affected zerg was a bunker rush witch could be easily blocked by having a freaking drone at the bottom of the ramp. Besides that, muta/ling/baneling was as strong back then as it is now, only difference are the infestor plays you see today, witch were used back then also, to a lesser extent( ling infestor). Given that the maps played and no infestor buff (meaning you didn't actually need ghosts to counter hive tech) terran was a better race back then. However playing terran in macro game was just more difficult, and requires more practice. Controlling muta/bling just comes more natural than controlling tank marines. Terrans have slowly learned how to play macro games and hence slowly gotton nerfed in each patch. What has gotten nerfed that has affected zerg? Marines haven't, tanks haven't( I'm talking post beta here). Hive tech besides Infestors killing everything in a few fungals like now ,was the same. Before the Infestor buff patch (1.3) and since beta you had... * Reaper Nerfs (all of them) * Zealot build time increase (33->38 on gateway) * Siege mode damage decrease (50 -> 35 + 15 armored) * Zerg building hp increase * Corruptor energy removal * Medivac speed/acceleration reduction * Barracks requiring Supply depot * Void Ray damage nerf at stage 2 * SCV repairing threat increase (makes lings better vs units being repaired like Thors) * Nerf to ramp blocking
*Stim timing increased
*Warp Gate tech timing increased
|
On October 28 2011 12:39 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 12:28 Buffy wrote:
After looking at those games again silver vs idra. Still thinks he was overrated :D Abusing the cliff on Lost tempel, and close pos metalopolis 1 base mech allin. If thats some kind of overwhelming skill, heck. I dont know what skill is anymore. I bet you think still is macroing your opponent to death. Actually, its winning games, in whatever way. Who wouldn't abuse the cliff on lost temple and close positions on metalopolis? The point of SC2 is to win, and if doing those strats give him the best win percentage, you can't blame Silver. Idra just likes to blame his defeats on opponents being "abusive".
Your point that "winning" translates to skill is generally correct. However, if your winnings largely rely upon gimmicky strategies such as cheese, 1 base all-ins, and exploiting abusive map features (walling ramps, Thor @ old lost temple cliff), you are not as consistent or truly skilled. The macro player indeed wins, and at a more consistent rate than the gimmicky player. Even if the gimmicky player is winning more than the macro player in the short term, the macro player's skills are forever while the cheesy player's skills vanish with map fixes or unit/race alterations. Changing fundamental aspects about units, maps, and races does not affect a macro player's skill, while it greatly affects a gimmicky player's arsenal.
|
On October 28 2011 23:54 Nemireck wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 23:49 Logo wrote:On October 28 2011 20:45 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:On October 28 2011 20:38 Hider wrote:On October 28 2011 20:29 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:
It's amusing how many of you think zerg was sooo UP back in 2010. Spare me the bullshit, after the reaper nerf, only thing that affected zerg was a bunker rush witch could be easily blocked by having a freaking drone at the bottom of the ramp. Besides that, muta/ling/baneling was as strong back then as it is now, only difference are the infestor plays you see today, witch were used back then also, to a lesser extent( ling infestor). Given that the maps played and no infestor buff (meaning you didn't actually need ghosts to counter hive tech) terran was a better race back then. However playing terran in macro game was just more difficult, and requires more practice. Controlling muta/bling just comes more natural than controlling tank marines. Terrans have slowly learned how to play macro games and hence slowly gotton nerfed in each patch. What has gotten nerfed that has affected zerg? Marines haven't, tanks haven't( I'm talking post beta here). Hive tech besides Infestors killing everything in a few fungals like now ,was the same. Before the Infestor buff patch (1.3) and since beta you had... * Reaper Nerfs (all of them) * Zealot build time increase (33->38 on gateway) * Siege mode damage decrease (50 -> 35 + 15 armored) * Zerg building hp increase * Corruptor energy removal * Medivac speed/acceleration reduction * Barracks requiring Supply depot * Void Ray damage nerf at stage 2 * SCV repairing threat increase (makes lings better vs units being repaired like Thors) * Nerf to ramp blocking *Stim timing increased *Warp Gate tech timing increased
Stim was 1.3 (same patch as Infestor buff) and Warp gate was 1.3.3.
Both important changes, but happened during/after the Infestor buff.
|
Forget MaDFroG. Now I played WC3 for about 6 years followed the scene maybe even harder than I follow SC2 now. MaDFroG was sick however there's a few other players I wonder about more than him.
What about Mother Fucking SHOWTIME MOTHER FUCKING WERRA.
ShowTime.WeRRa
This guy IIRC was the 'it' guy just slightly before Grubby/Moon. He was so nasty. Definitely the best in the world for a small period of time. Guy even came to East and fucked up Azeroth on a few smurfs. He had the most EPIC post on the blizzard forums that went something like this:
Title: 'Power Blue'
Message: 'Now 6-1 = rank 1 ladder? I will give try but not good'
/thread.
---
Deadman? aka apm70 I believe. Russian player I believe.
I also wonder about TiLLeRMaN and how good he would be at SC2. The guy was so knowledgeable about WC3 IT WAS DISGUSTING.
please please please does anyone on here remember 'the-inclan.com' iN.TiLLeRMaN. That site was literally teamliquid.net for the first year of WC3 ROC.
Such good times. SC series might produce better RT's than WC however there's just stuff in WC community that don't touch SC and I can't explain it.
|
On October 28 2011 23:57 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 23:54 Nemireck wrote:On October 28 2011 23:49 Logo wrote:On October 28 2011 20:45 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:On October 28 2011 20:38 Hider wrote:On October 28 2011 20:29 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:
It's amusing how many of you think zerg was sooo UP back in 2010. Spare me the bullshit, after the reaper nerf, only thing that affected zerg was a bunker rush witch could be easily blocked by having a freaking drone at the bottom of the ramp. Besides that, muta/ling/baneling was as strong back then as it is now, only difference are the infestor plays you see today, witch were used back then also, to a lesser extent( ling infestor). Given that the maps played and no infestor buff (meaning you didn't actually need ghosts to counter hive tech) terran was a better race back then. However playing terran in macro game was just more difficult, and requires more practice. Controlling muta/bling just comes more natural than controlling tank marines. Terrans have slowly learned how to play macro games and hence slowly gotton nerfed in each patch. What has gotten nerfed that has affected zerg? Marines haven't, tanks haven't( I'm talking post beta here). Hive tech besides Infestors killing everything in a few fungals like now ,was the same. Before the Infestor buff patch (1.3) and since beta you had... * Reaper Nerfs (all of them) * Zealot build time increase (33->38 on gateway) * Siege mode damage decrease (50 -> 35 + 15 armored) * Zerg building hp increase * Corruptor energy removal * Medivac speed/acceleration reduction * Barracks requiring Supply depot * Void Ray damage nerf at stage 2 * SCV repairing threat increase (makes lings better vs units being repaired like Thors) * Nerf to ramp blocking *Stim timing increased *Warp Gate tech timing increased Stim was 1.3 (same patch as Infestor buff) and Warp gate was 1.3.3. Both important changes, but happened during/after the Infestor buff.
Fair enough, in which case with those restrictions, I would at least include the Stim timing as it coincided with the Infester buff, and was still a post-beta nerf to Terran that affected zerg.
|
On October 28 2011 23:58 Nizzy wrote:
Forget MaDFroG. Now I played WC3 for about 6 years followed the scene maybe even harder than I follow SC2 now. MaDFroG was sick however there's a few other players I wonder about more than him.
What about Mother Fucking SHOWTIME MOTHER FUCKING WERRA.
ShowTime.WeRRa
This guy IIRC was the 'it' guy just slightly before Grubby/Moon. He was so nasty. Definitely the best in the world for a small period of time. Guy even came to East and fucked up Azeroth on a few smurfs. He had the most EPIC post on the blizzard forums that went something like this:
Title: 'Power Blue'
Message: 'Now 6-1 = rank 1 ladder? I will give try but not good'
/thread.
---
Deadman? aka apm70 I believe. Russian player I believe.
I also wonder about TiLLeRMaN and how good he would be at SC2. The guy was so knowledgeable about WC3 IT WAS DISGUSTING.
please please please does anyone on here remember 'the-inclan.com' iN.TiLLeRMaN. That site was literally teamliquid.net for the first year of WC3 ROC.
Such good times. SC series might produce better RT's than WC however there's just stuff in WC community that don't touch SC and I can't explain it.
I remember all of them  I do not know what happend too Showtime :<, Tillerman went over to play poker if i recall correct.. and apm70 "kicked" to much "face" ^_^
|
On October 28 2011 23:58 Nizzy wrote:
I also wonder about TiLLeRMaN and how good he would be at SC2. The guy was so knowledgeable about WC3 IT WAS DISGUSTING.
please please please does anyone on here remember 'the-inclan.com' iN.TiLLeRMaN. That site was literally teamliquid.net for the first year of WC3 ROC.
Additionally, TiLLeRMaN was insanely hilarious. Love his IMBIHLINCED.
|
On October 29 2011 00:05 Nivoh wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 23:58 Nizzy wrote:
I also wonder about TiLLeRMaN and how good he would be at SC2. The guy was so knowledgeable about WC3 IT WAS DISGUSTING.
please please please does anyone on here remember 'the-inclan.com' iN.TiLLeRMaN. That site was literally teamliquid.net for the first year of WC3 ROC. Additionally, TiLLeRMaN was insanely hilarious. Love his IMBIHLINCED.
but all his points were amazing. The guy literally could have been David Kim for WC3 if they gave him the job. He broke down everything minute by minute in a game of all races.
Best quote ever:
'What can you dew when the Human army, is better than your army?'
Anyone that's heard it, knows what I mean. And yes I knew he went to Poker. Dude's been very successful.
|
On October 28 2011 23:50 Nemireck wrote:
My point isn't that 1-base play is abusive.
I was only pointing out that the natural progression of the game follows that early timings are heavily relied upon until they are figured out. And Huk's play in the early days of SC2 was no different, when he was matched with an opponent of equal or greater talent.
No, you don't know that. It might be the most obvious thing in the world to parrot the notion that timings will be figured out and the game will evolve to become more macro based, but first of all, timings being figured out does not mean that the game will become more macro based. Maybe it just means that you can't expand. PvP didn't become more macro based until Blizzard patched the game after all. This is not a 'natural progression of the game', this is forced on the game by Blizzard. It was never certain it would happen - even if it was likely enough.
Second, I wasn't saying that Silver was some kind of genius, but that he still is somewhat of a unique player that had a different way of thinking. The Artosis position of: "macro = skill" was very deeply ingrained in a lot of pro players, so they were all really just trying to improve their general gameplay. It takes a different kind of player to really approach the game as if it were purely about strategy and timing attacks.
|
far to many corrections to be made in this thread
huk in korea/madfrog in sc2/madfrogs war3 legacy/jinro being a top 3 bw foreigner
just to name a few -_-
|
On October 29 2011 00:11 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 23:50 Nemireck wrote:
My point isn't that 1-base play is abusive.
I was only pointing out that the natural progression of the game follows that early timings are heavily relied upon until they are figured out. And Huk's play in the early days of SC2 was no different, when he was matched with an opponent of equal or greater talent. No, you don't know that. It might be the most obvious thing in the world to parrot the notion that timings will be figured out and the game will evolve to become more macro based, but first of all, timings being figured out does not mean that the game will become more macro based. Maybe it just means that you can't expand. PvP didn't become more macro based until Blizzard patched the game after all. This is not a 'natural progression of the game', this is forced on the game by Blizzard. It was never certain it would happen - even if it was likely enough. Second, I wasn't saying that Silver was some kind of genius, but that he still is somewhat of a unique player that had a different way of thinking. The Artosis position of: "macro = skill" was very deeply ingrained in a lot of pro players, so they were all really just trying to improve their general gameplay. It takes a different kind of player to really approach the game as if it were purely about strategy and timing attacks.
Your point about PvP was covered in my original post where I clearly pointed out that some builds were patched by Blizzard to fix them, rather than figured out.
You're arguing for the sake of arguing.
|
On October 28 2011 08:36 ClutchSC wrote:
Silver just wasn't good enough to sustain a pro-gaming career.
Nah, he was very talented, but decided to quit.
|
On October 29 2011 00:12 Nemireck wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2011 00:11 Grumbels wrote:On October 28 2011 23:50 Nemireck wrote:
My point isn't that 1-base play is abusive.
I was only pointing out that the natural progression of the game follows that early timings are heavily relied upon until they are figured out. And Huk's play in the early days of SC2 was no different, when he was matched with an opponent of equal or greater talent. No, you don't know that. It might be the most obvious thing in the world to parrot the notion that timings will be figured out and the game will evolve to become more macro based, but first of all, timings being figured out does not mean that the game will become more macro based. Maybe it just means that you can't expand. PvP didn't become more macro based until Blizzard patched the game after all. This is not a 'natural progression of the game', this is forced on the game by Blizzard. It was never certain it would happen - even if it was likely enough. Second, I wasn't saying that Silver was some kind of genius, but that he still is somewhat of a unique player that had a different way of thinking. The Artosis position of: "macro = skill" was very deeply ingrained in a lot of pro players, so they were all really just trying to improve their general gameplay. It takes a different kind of player to really approach the game as if it were purely about strategy and timing attacks. Your point about PvP was covered in my original post where I clearly pointed out that some builds were patched by Blizzard to fix them, rather than figured out. You're arguing for the sake of arguing.
Arguing on a discussion forum, omg. That wasn't my point at all, I meant that you couldn't have been sure that the game would end up macro based. We can't even know for sure if Blizzard would have been competent enough to really design the game so it would end up that way. It took them long enough for PvP too. And also that Silver was one of the few people to embrace the non-macro way of playing competitively, not just using your argument that games 'gravitate' to longer macro games.
|
|
|
On October 28 2011 23:19 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2011 20:32 Hider wrote:On October 28 2011 17:53 Grumbels wrote:
Cauthonluck (Cluck!) had results well into release and was still one of the better terran players back then. His style was slightly gimmicky, but almost everyone's was back then. The reason he quit the game was because he was offered a job opportunity, not because he was a scrub who abused terran only. Yeah, he was famous for his 11rax/11fac/11starport banshee all-in against Idra and beating him 4-0 (1?) in the King of the Beta Hill(?) series, but he had legitimate results.
Silver was quite a revolutionary player I think. In a time where everyone was still apprehensive, waiting to see how the SC2 metagame would work out, players like Idra were just working on raising their overall gameplay, he realized that he could have success right then and there because he had a good talent for discovering timings. It's actually not trivial to see if the game would end up being about macro and mechanics, similar to Brood War. Artosis always said that and he turned out to be right, but I think it could have been different and for a portion of time it really was different. Silver was one of the few good players to really run with that idea, just coming up with 'abusive' builds.
This also takes talent, a lot of the people good in beta didn't have the highest of APM, but they had RTS experience and were very clever. Nowadays, like Silver, they've faded, but in a way it was a more interesting time than it is now.
Also, MadFrog was terrible. I don't know if he just didn't practice enough, but he could never play well enough to beat anyone who played straight up. A player like him wouldn't win anything now. What abusive build did Silver come up with? Tanks on high grounds? 1 base thor push? He played kidna like every other terran back then. And obv. terran had it easy back then, and Idra was without a doubt a better mechanical player than him. But of course the reason he stopped playing wasn't because he was extremely bad and only could win with gimmicks. Players like Naniwa and HUk and lots of other terran players were abusive back then, and slowly improved and played a stronger and stronger macro style. And sc2 definitely was supposed to be a macro game. If sc2 still was played as it was back in beta/early release it would never had the succes it had now, as everybody would have gotton tired of the allins. So thinkin Silver was extremely intelligent or thinking he was an extremely bad player is not true. He was just a pretty decent terran player who played like most other terran players, and happened to beat idra. Why are you so hostile and why do you put so many words in my mouth? 1. Silver came up with some tricky all-in builds. 2. SC2 might have been supposed to be a macro game, but it need not have ended up that way. 3. I didn't say he was extremely intelligent, just that his approach was focused on mindgames and strategy in a way that was innovative and the right way to play at that specific point in the game's development. Nowadays it's terrible, of course. 4. I used 'abusive' in quotes. You might think 4gate was abusive, but both Huk and Naniwa weren't really abusive players. Just because they liked to one-base using good micro? By the way, I think Huk has always been a macro player.
1) Ehh. Throught you realized i wanted you to be specific (and tank on high ground + 1 base mech doesn't count as he did not invent them).
2) Well not in the short term. But long term it would and should be. SO if you only do gimmicks/cheese/all ins your not improving long term.
3) Yeh be specific again.
4) Ok.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
