On December 03 2011 00:12 deth2munkies wrote: It seems as if the prevailing opinion is beginning to agree with me that there is not much NASL is doing right. I quit watching halfway through the first season, and if the first season finals didn't make me care, this one's surely won't. The writeup was enjoyable though.
their argument for this huge long season was always that it would develop story lines. but since a player from pool 1 will be playing people from other groups and the open bracket, how can there be a story line between then?
"liquid'hero will be fighting off against his huge rival EGpuma today after they both made it to the finals by avoiding each other completely all season long, serious tension here today"
the story lines of last season were all completely from the finals. this will be no different. the main season has been a huge failure in every stated way.
On December 03 2011 01:17 Hrrrrm wrote: So many people want shit to be sugarcoated to "inflate" the hype and help ESPORTS. Nothing will hurt ESPORTS more than being dishonest about the reality of certain situations. Yes the timing is a little off, feels like Waxangel might've missed the deadline for this and should've been on the front page when the regular season ended or the playoffs. It's pointless to have something like this AFTER the Finals because barring any horrendous screw ups(Eagles), it'll be good-great and people would then claim the article is trying to put a wet blanket over a "successful finals event". Good article just late timing.
noones saying sugarcoat it but dont rip off the sugar thats already on it
theres plenty of amazing games, amazing players, and amazing casters and amazing shows (Live on three and the Day[9] daily) going on during the grand finals which is plenty to get me hyped and all the article does it talk about the regular season
no mention of the casters no mention of the games to be played no mention of the shows happening no information at all about whats actually going to be happening at the grand finals aside from a list of palyers
if i wanted to know who would be palying id check the site
or are u just butthurt that i eliminated a tl member? i guess thats where the bo3 reference came from right?
That measures how many unspent resources you have vs your actual income, being on three bases wont give you a higher score if you have a lot of unspent resources, so you could be on 1 base cheesing and still get a high score...
Does that make you have a decent macro? ROFL
In Fact if you are collecting an average of 850 resources and unspending 250 resources your SQ would be : 87.5. EDIT: Try it yourself
LOOOOLs. It does mean he has decent macro actually because it speaks volumes about his build orders and early game timings (not necessarily attack, but when to build something) which while a lot of people downplay these days, is really essential and fundamental. Notice there still is a difference in SQ between the various rankings.
But seriously though, the fact that TT1 has a reputation as a cheesy player would not suggest that he's a cheesy player, but rather most of the community is just flat-out wrong in their perception.
On December 03 2011 01:17 Hrrrrm wrote: So many people want shit to be sugarcoated to "inflate" the hype and help ESPORTS. Nothing will hurt ESPORTS more than being dishonest about the reality of certain situations. Yes the timing is a little off, feels like Waxangel might've missed the deadline for this and should've been on the front page when the regular season ended or the playoffs. It's pointless to have something like this AFTER the Finals because barring any horrendous screw ups(Eagles), it'll be good-great and people would then claim the article is trying to put a wet blanket over a "successful finals event". Good article just late timing.
noones saying sugarcoat it but dont rip off the sugar thats already on it
theres plenty of amazing games, amazing players, and amazing casters and amazing shows (Live on three and the Day[9] daily) going on during the grand finals which is plenty to get me hyped and all the article does it talk about the regular season
no mention of the casters no mention of the games to be played no mention of the shows happening no information at all about whats actually going to be happening at the grand finals aside from a list of palyers
if i wanted to know who would be palying id check the site
On December 03 2011 01:17 Hrrrrm wrote: So many people want shit to be sugarcoated to "inflate" the hype and help ESPORTS. Nothing will hurt ESPORTS more than being dishonest about the reality of certain situations. Yes the timing is a little off, feels like Waxangel might've missed the deadline for this and should've been on the front page when the regular season ended or the playoffs. It's pointless to have something like this AFTER the Finals because barring any horrendous screw ups(Eagles), it'll be good-great and people would then claim the article is trying to put a wet blanket over a "successful finals event". Good article just late timing.
noones saying sugarcoat it but dont rip off the sugar thats already on it
theres plenty of amazing games, amazing players, and amazing casters and amazing shows (Live on three and the Day[9] daily) going on during the grand finals which is plenty to get me hyped and all the article does it talk about the regular season
no mention of the casters no mention of the games to be played no mention of the shows happening no information at all about whats actually going to be happening at the grand finals aside from a list of palyers
if i wanted to know who would be palying id check the site
It's true about the casters, and it isn't anybody trying to put them down. NASL isn't super appealing because it's hard to sit through them. I think if NASL is going to have any chance they need to find a new pair to cast the games daily. It's a legitimate topic to discuss if we're talking about why the event is having problems. This organization is a grass roots one, but I think it's time for them to make a big boy business decision and replace them for season :.
Step 1: Get rid of Gretorp, he was the worst part of season 1 ...... and they kept him???? It is very hard to watch their stream with that guy casting he is just horrible.
or are u just butthurt that i eliminated a tl member? i guess thats where the bo3 reference came from right?
That measures how many unspent resources you have vs your actual income, being on three bases wont give you a higher score if you have a lot of unspent resources, so you could be on 1 base cheesing and still get a high score...
Does that make you have a decent macro? ROFL
In Fact if you are collecting an average of 850 resources and unspending 250 resources your SQ would be : 87.5. EDIT: Try it yourself
LOOOOLs. It does mean he has decent macro actually because it speaks volumes about his build orders and early game timings (not necessarily attack, but when to build something) which while a lot of people downplay these days, is really essential and fundamental. Notice there still is a difference in SQ between the various rankings.
But seriously though, the fact that TT1 has a reputation as a cheesy player would not suggest that he's a cheesy player, but rather most of the community is just flat-out wrong in their perception.
You say they're wrong without giving any real evidence or support you know.
We've already established that having a high SQ does not necessarily make you a macro player. Indeed I believe we established that having a high SQ is also very important to aggressive players. Think about it: if you have a lot of hanging resources early on in the game, do you really think your early aggression is going to work? Doesn't matter how early you start making units if your SQ sucks. SQ is important to both macro and aggressive players (high SQ tends to mean better player, TT1 happens to have high SQ).
First off, who is "they"? If you mean people who say TT1 is a bad macro player? I do agree that it does not necessarily make you a macro player (in the you try to go for macro-games sense), but it does not mean your macro is bad.
Secondly, my first statement of evidence was the difference in SQ between the rankings still existing even in the early game and despite low resource collection in the same post he sourced. And I want to point out that having a tight build order is macro and there actually is macro in the early game even if it is considered to be easier.
Reading over your post I think we have a fundamental disagreement with the term macro since I include early game macro and see it as extremely important whereas you generally see macro as a player that goes for "macro games" which while relates to the term macro isn't necessarily macro. I'll admit that I could be wrong, but based on the SQ's idea of macro, TT1 has good macro though he isn't necessarily a macro-oriented player that goes for macro games more often than not.
I don't really want to argue that much because I don't actually disagree with anything you say... Actually I have nothing to say against your statements if I define them by your terms, though I think you're defining my statements by your terms.
or are u just butthurt that i eliminated a tl member? i guess thats where the bo3 reference came from right?
That measures how many unspent resources you have vs your actual income, being on three bases wont give you a higher score if you have a lot of unspent resources, so you could be on 1 base cheesing and still get a high score...
Does that make you have a decent macro? ROFL
In Fact if you are collecting an average of 850 resources and unspending 250 resources your SQ would be : 87.5. EDIT: Try it yourself
LOOOOLs. It does mean he has decent macro actually because it speaks volumes about his build orders and early game timings (not necessarily attack, but when to build something) which while a lot of people downplay these days, is really essential and fundamental. Notice there still is a difference in SQ between the various rankings.
But seriously though, the fact that TT1 has a reputation as a cheesy player would not suggest that he's a cheesy player, but rather most of the community is just flat-out wrong in their perception.
You say they're wrong without giving any real evidence or support you know.
We've already established that having a high SQ does not necessarily make you a macro player. Indeed I believe we established that having a high SQ is also very important to aggressive players. Think about it: if you have a lot of hanging resources early on in the game, do you really think your early aggression is going to work? Doesn't matter how early you start making units if your SQ sucks. SQ is important to both macro and aggressive players (high SQ tends to mean better player, TT1 happens to have high SQ).
it doesnt really say that your an early game player either though :D. it says how good your macro is, but thats not the same as being a macro player. its true that if you float 1000 minerals at 4 mins then your timing attack is going to suck. but floating 1k at 4 mins but then playing a "macro game" would suck too. high sq =~good macro, it doesnt say anything about if you rush or sit back and defence it. obviously its gets harder to keep your sq high the longer your average game is but that added information is needed before making any judgement. this is part of what makes idra so impressive with macro. not only does he has the highest sq but his average game length is the highest.
All the TT1 drama in the first few pages is great, I'm doing a study about the label of cheesey being used as a form of social control atm, keep up the bitching please <3
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dGY3J.png)
