EPTHeart Of The Swarm: The Pro's Opinions - Page 11
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Shagg
Finland825 Posts
| ||
|
-MoOsE-
United States236 Posts
On December 03 2011 22:41 thezanursic wrote: I think the majority of people agree that the game is pretty balanced at the moment, but that doesn't change the fact that PvP is a coin flip... PvP is not a coin flip. I go phoenix every game and have about a 90 % winrate. It is all scouting and responding correctly. Every opening is good none get advantages over the other, other than an unscouted fast expo. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On December 04 2011 01:41 7mk wrote: "afaik" .. thats the problematic part reavers were powerful but its super hard to handle them, they are slow as fuck and therefore useless for attacking unless coupled with a shuttle, so it takes a lot of micro to do damage with them while making sure they wont get sniped. Colossus on the other hand: easy 1 a auto damage. EMP wasnt anywhere near as strong as in sc2, it was mainly used for its Mana-draining against arbiters (protoss flying caster) rather than its damage output (since in bw there werent 100 units in one small spot), and obviously science vessels werent as massable as ghosts. Plague is very powerful but you can only get it very late in the game (esp. compared to stuff like sc2 EMP and fungal), and there was no smart casting and defilers die very fast to irradiate. Storm is also very powerful in BW but you have to protect your HTs like theyre your babies or else you die.. and again, no smartcasting. Just as an explanation, I dont really agree with clouds pessimistic view of the game. happy birthday ^^ People should be able to discuss this without the bashing and behaving like dicks though, its not too hard. Thumbs up. I just hope Blizzard finds a good way to deal with blanket spells. EMP's radius already got boned and I'm sure we'll see more of the same once the first expansion gets released. I would honestly like to see some sort of penalty for selecting more than one unit with an ability, so players cannot arbitrarily spam one key. De-select/select clone. It's been brought up many times before. Maybe add a very short CD to all the units that were selected at the same time or have them all cast it on the same spot. A few more keystrokes wouldn't hurt. | ||
|
SeaSwift
Scotland4486 Posts
On December 04 2011 01:54 -MoOsE- wrote: PvP is not a coin flip. I go phoenix every game and have about a 90 % winrate. It is all scouting and responding correctly. Every opening is good none get advantages over the other, other than an unscouted fast expo. Even pros still complain a lot about the coinflippiness of PvP (Hasu in his interview for NASL 2). Going Phoenix is good until someone does a hardcore 4gate, or get faster Phoenix by playing greedy, or goes blind Blink Stalkers. Plenty of builds in PvP get advantages over other builds. | ||
|
413X
Sweden203 Posts
| ||
|
Gentso
United States2218 Posts
| ||
|
Sandermatt
Switzerland1365 Posts
On December 04 2011 01:56 StarStruck wrote: Thumbs up. I just hope Blizzard finds a good way to deal with blanket spells. EMP's radius already got boned and I'm sure we'll see more of the same once the first expansion gets released. I would honestly like to see some sort of penalty for selecting more than one unit with an ability, so players cannot arbitrarily spam one key. De-select/select clone. It's been brought up many times before. Maybe add a very short CD to all the units that were selected at the same time or have them all cast it on the same spot. A few more keystrokes wouldn't hurt. I haven't seen blizzard trying to weaken an ability by makeing the interface worse and I am happy about that. The selection of a unit should not impact the unit. | ||
|
Elefanto
Switzerland3584 Posts
On December 04 2011 02:02 Gentso wrote: It's funny how 'pros' are still using that excuse for losing. The best players consistently do well, it's just about getting to that level. This game was so build and that 'one deciding battle' focused for so long people (pros. mainly foreigners) don't play it well enough. SC2 has evolved beyond coin flip, it's 100% whoever plays better wins. First TT1's thread and now this statement.. I find it kind of sad. I believe they think they're better than they actually are. So, you think your insight gives you better judgment over the intricacies at the top level than people who invested over a year worth of dedicated practice into the game? I don't think you should speak so condescending to these people. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
If you ask any pro who plays protoss they will tell how volatile the PvP match-up is (in BW, you'd hear similar arguments for ZvZ). With that said, you lose sight of a guy's army for one second and you could be dead in SC2. That's just how it is. Scouting has never been more important. | ||
|
sleepingdog
Austria6145 Posts
On December 04 2011 01:54 -MoOsE- wrote: PvP is not a coin flip. I go phoenix every game and have about a 90 % winrate. It is all scouting and responding correctly. Every opening is good none get advantages over the other, other than an unscouted fast expo. every PvP build that's not safe against 4 gate > every PvP build that's safe against 4 gate > 4 gate > every PvP build that's not safe against 4 gate give me a call once you've solved that funny how pessimistic Cloud has become...though I have to say, compared to BW it really does seem like HotS still won't bring enough stuff into the game with a high skill cap for great players to really differentiate themselves from the merely "good" ones | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
On December 04 2011 02:02 Gentso wrote: It's funny how 'pros' are still using that excuse for losing. The best players consistently do well, it's just about getting to that level. This game was so build and that 'one deciding battle' focused for so long people (pros. mainly foreigners) don't play it well enough. SC2 has evolved beyond coin flip, it's 100% whoever plays better wins. First TT1's thread and now this statement.. I find it kind of sad. I believe they think they're better than they actually are. You're acting like Cloud and TT1 are the only pros dissapointed with the game. Plenty of pros have expressed their complaints and dissapointments. A lot of them have said they prefer BW, but because all of the money is in SC2 they have no choice but to play it. Oh, and I would still give veteran players like Cloud's voice a lot more weight than yours. | ||
|
TheDougler
Canada8302 Posts
LOOOOVE what they're doing for zerg tho | ||
|
Gentso
United States2218 Posts
On December 04 2011 02:10 Elefanto wrote: So, you think your insight gives you better judgment over the intricacies at the top level than people who invested over a year worth of dedicated practice into the game? I don't think you should speak so condescending to these people. Haha, SIGH! Ok, first off I didn't say anything about my understanding of 'the intricacies'. That's irrelevant, I'm just pointing out the fact that the top players do well consistently (MLGs are proof of this). I don't think I'm being condescending, either. I just don't appreciate when people reach for excuses that aren't necessarily fact. Regardless what of they say, statistics will prove otherwise. SC2 has come quite a long way. Blizzard said it themselves, they wouldn't change Wings of Liberty at all. I don't see "so many bad players getting decent results". Wins these days are earned or lost fairly, at least according to results. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6190 Posts
On December 04 2011 02:13 StarStruck wrote: Excuse for losing? I beg your pardon? If you ask any pro who plays protoss they will tell how volatile the PvP match-up is (in BW, you'd hear similar arguments for ZvZ). With that said, you lose sight of a guy's army for one second and you could be dead in SC2. That's just how it is. Scouting has never been more important. The real good one will always get a good winrate though, MC had a sick win rate in PvP when he was beasting it up, Jaedong was a beast in ZvZ etc. the best will almost always win regardless of match up. | ||
|
Gentso
United States2218 Posts
On December 04 2011 02:16 1Eris1 wrote: You're acting like Cloud and TT1 are the only pros dissapointed with the game. Plenty of pros have expressed their complaints and dissapointments. A lot of them have said they prefer BW, but because all of the money is in SC2 they have no choice but to play it. They're losing and reaching for excuses, that's really all there is to it. What about prior to SC2, where was the money there? I see all these previous foreigner BW pros complaining about how they should be doing better than everyone else but I feel it's just a wake up call. As far as I can tell, there were only a handful of foreigners that were decent on the global level. What does that say about their skill in general? SC2 exploded and for a while it was a volatile game because people were figuring it out. Well, the top players seem to have figured it out and calling the game a coin flip now is purely just an excuse. Oh, and I would still give veteran players like Cloud's voice a lot more weight than yours. So? Just look at tournament results then, it contradicts the excuses these pros are throwing out really badly. I would really like for someone to show me who and where these bad players are who are getting decent results! | ||
|
merz
Sweden2760 Posts
On December 04 2011 02:10 Elefanto wrote: So, you think your insight gives you better judgment over the intricacies at the top level than people who invested over a year worth of dedicated practice into the game? I don't think you should speak so condescending to these people. Point is Gentso, even the best players (HuK for example) still lacks consistency. No one can deny their skill, and how good they are at this game, yet they go from winning huge events to failing in Group stages day 1 vs complete "no names". Things like these tells me a thing or two about how volatile the game still is. I'm certain ClouD for example, isn't complaining about this due to his own losses. Whenever I go to events and I see a favorite losing to a complete unknown (which pretty much happends every event now) it just saddens me. Upsets are upsets for a reason, they are called upsets because they rarely happen and no one expected that guy to win. But at this time, they are not even upsets, when a really good player loses to someone unknown we're hardly even surprised anymore, because that's just how this game is at the moment, and it sucks. | ||
|
teamsolid
Canada3668 Posts
On December 03 2011 16:19 Eluadyl wrote: I woulda thought no one could argue with cloud on his concerns, which are shared by far more people than this thread makes it look like. In video games as a general rule, if something is more powerful, it's harder to pull off than less powerful ones. You can find a infinite amount of examples to this. However this is not the case in SC2. Everything has almost the same difficulty of execution. This means if you have something in your arsenal, you can mostly use it. When this something happens to counter what your opponent has to offer, you simply win. TL,DR: If things were harder to execute, this would give the opponent room for reaction, which would leave more space for skill which makes Cloud right. Yea this is so true... everything that was very strong in BW... defiler, HTs, reavers, mutas, were incredibly hard to use properly. On the other hand, in SC2 we have very powerful units like banelings (just rolls into enemy), colossus (a-move) that barely take any more skill to use than any other units. Also, spellcasting across the board is of course is easier. | ||
|
Roxy
Canada753 Posts
On December 04 2011 02:31 dignitas.merz wrote: Point is Gentso, even the best players (HuK for example) still lacks consistency. No one can deny their skill, and how good they are at this game, yet they go from winning huge events to failing in Group stages day 1 vs complete "no names". Things like these tells me a thing or two about how volatile the game still is. I'm certain ClouD for example, isn't complaining about this due to his own losses. Whenever I go to events and I see a favorite losing to a complete unknown (which pretty much happends every event now) it just saddens me. Upsets are upsets for a reason, they are called upsets because they rarely happen and no one expected that guy to win. But at this time, they are not even upsets, when a really good player loses to someone unknown we're hardly even surprised anymore, because that's just how this game is at the moment, and it sucks. In response to your comment about upsets Jjakji deserved his wins I think a lot of upsets happen because of the metagames at higher levels verses those of the mid-higher levels something that works at mid-high will not work at high level because of that, a pro player may discount certain strategies and underprepare for them because of this, if someone executes one of those strategies perfectly, they can beat the better player it is just a case of getting too greedy | ||
|
merz
Sweden2760 Posts
On December 04 2011 02:36 Roxy wrote: In response to your comment about upsets http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfOTG0b40i4 Jjakji deserved his wins I'm not sure what point you are trying to make? | ||
|
Gentso
United States2218 Posts
On December 04 2011 02:31 dignitas.merz wrote: Point is Gentso, even the best players (HuK for example) still lacks consistency. No one can deny their skill, and how good they are at this game, yet they go from winning huge events to failing in Group stages day 1 vs complete "no names". Things like these tells me a thing or two about how volatile the game still is. I'm certain ClouD for example, isn't complaining about this due to his own losses. Whenever I go to events and I see a favorite losing to a complete unknown (which pretty much happends every event now) it just saddens me. Upsets are upsets for a reason, they are called upsets because they rarely happen and no one expected that guy to win. But at this time, they are not even upsets, when a really good player loses to someone unknown we're hardly even surprised anymore, because that's just how this game is at the moment, and it sucks. Huk is just one player, though. Upsets happen, and 99% of the time you can point out why the favorite lost. I'll admit, I haven't been following Huk too closely. Who has he lost to that is a no name? On the larger scale, I still don't see it happening. Overall you'll see the players you expect to advance advancing to the later stages of tournaments. If the game were as volatile as you'd suggest, then Koreans wouldn't be so consistent in foreign tournaments. | ||
| ||
