EPTbut not for long ! he;...
shall be painted red by the blood
and the nerds he slays on his way
to CODE A GLORY!!!!
there can be only uno !
Why Fin looks like one of the best in sc2 already - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
but not for long ! he;... shall be painted red by the blood and the nerds he slays on his way to CODE A GLORY!!!! there can be only uno ! | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:23 Scribble wrote: You did a terrible job of addressing his point by overlooking the fact that it was an example. He's essentially saying that the limitation caused by the difficult macro effected multitasking; as in the hallmark of a top BW player was the ability to macro flawlessly and be in X places at once with his multitasking. He then posits that since macro is easier in SC2, the hallmark of a good player will be that he'll have to be doing twice as much multitasking (and that easier macro will allow him to do so). In that regard, I agree with him. This has been a long held belief of mine that 1) If you have perfect AI controlled machines controlling the action, then yes, the skill ceiling of BW is higher. 2) With human players, the skill ceiling of either game is out of reach and thus neither game is 'harder,' within the realms of what a human can attain. In other words, no person can ever be good enough at SC2 or BW to demonstrate that one is clearly harder. BW just happens to have over a decade of a headstart in development. 3) With the easier macro in SC2, more of a players mechanical ability will simply be diverted other areas. Think of it like this, if the idea of 'skill' or mechanics were to be illustrated as 50% emphasis on micro/50% emphasis on macro (a gross oversimplification) in BW, then SC2 may develop into more of a 65/35 split. The two games would be/will be equally taxing in two different proportions. Sure, that might be true if certain other factors were true. However most micro in SC2 is pretty easy/and or capped at a specific point (atleast compared to BW/WC3, etc micro). There are a few exceptions (blink micro, marine splitting), but even those have a realistic cap that will only ever be broken by machines. So if BW micro is harder, how does that point work out then? No matter how much time you devote to something, you will not be able to break it's cap, unless you are doing multiple things at once. (splitting two groups of marines in two places, etc) So that leaves multi-tasking as the only area. But even that has specific limitations. A player might be able to do 6 things at once as opposed to 4 things in BW, but if those 4 things he's doing in BW are a lot more complicated and show more talent than the 6 things, then what is the point? I suppose there might be some people who would prefer watching the 6 things, but I know I wouldn't. Anyways that's why I really want to see Blizzard add more micro mechanics to SC2, because that, imo is where it is lacking most. Macro can be determined easier by players having to micro/macro at the same time. | ||
|
inamorato
United States263 Posts
On December 07 2011 08:22 mothergoose729 wrote: Good points, all valid criticisms. My attempt with this thread was to high light specifics of his play that were really good. I stand by my statement before that the micro he displayed in those games was the best micro I have seen in any other sc2 games. Its great that a lot of people don't agree with me though. There is certainly a lot of good micro to compare that too. What I wanted to point out the most, and what I think a lot of people picked up on, is that he played starcraft differently in those games then most players, and it looked really promising. I would like to see him play like that in code S and I believe that style could take him far. It is certainly not a forgone conclusion he will win a GSL. I will be more shocked if he wins the next season then if he does poorly. I am hopeful he does well and expect to see lots more of him in the future. You and I as well as the rest of the community could go back and forth as to who has the best micro in Starcraft 2, but it would be frivolous. The great thing about opening a thread is everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as well as everyone being able to hold an opinion of indifference or opposite polarity. What I would like to point out that quite possibly convinces people of great control is the amount of units on the field, which can be deceiving. ForGG's micro while superb, isn't what sets him apart from the rest of the pack. It is his ability to micro at a significantly high level while multitasking. Macro, crisis management, rerally, rebind, and all while simultaneously controlling his units. Where as some players miss their Barracks ques and rely completely on micro their economy goes through the ceiling because they put all their bags in one basket. What impresses me the most isn't ForGGs alleged top tier anything. It is his well roundness, and versatility to be in control of ridiculous amount of actions, almost simultaneously. Even minute actions. Rebinding hot keys mid battle while grinding out units through every barracks while containing DT drops. As far as him playing Star2 differently in conjunction to other players, I see small idiosyncrasies that set him apart. He is one guy who commits fully to what he is doing and so far I've yet to see him second guess himself which is a great characteristic to have. His game sense in my opinion is what sets him apart. When he threw down an extra 4 rax on belshir vs Sage in game 2 on only 2 bases after being harassed at both his front door and his mineral line. He had minerals piling up from defending, while mule dropping so he spent it immediately on another 4 barracks which gave him such a ridiculous amount of units in a short period of time with the ability to reinforce. Game 1 against July where he opened with 3 reapers into banshee was a very different an innovative build because it forced July to make a decision. A decision that in 99 cases out of 100 after stepping in dog shit on his way to the office to make this decision, he couldn't come out on top. The reapers did a significant amount of damage and Julys decision was roach which is just what one would ask for going cloak banshee. All in all I respect your opinion and I understand the excitement that runs through your veins and raises the hair on your whole body after witnessing a great Brood War player without any respect in Star 2 come in and do well. The bracket is only going to get harder so I won't put all my eggs in his basket, but I've been a fan for years so I will definitely be rooting for him. Would love to see him and Boxer go at it seeing as they both advanced. | ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
| ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:25 Rikke wrote: Doesn't matter what he did 5years ago in a different game lolz! If he wins the next 2 GSLs we can talk again  this thread is directed to a starcraft fan like you! even if he gets to RO4/RO2 twice in the next two gom tournaments, it is worth talking about him. but this is also where being a fan of a sport comes from, u wanna hate? get ready to appreciate : ) | ||
|
Kashll
United States1117 Posts
| ||
|
Talin
Montenegro10532 Posts
On December 07 2011 08:54 Rebs wrote: GUYS REMEMBER when DRG showed up to team league and crushed everyone to pieces? And then he did it again ? Same old story. ForGG looks crazy good no doubt, but 3 Code A games while a huge achievement is nothing to go by. You know who else did it ? Parting and Brown also beat top players some of whom are better (at the moment) than July or a Polt. You could talk about the "manner" in which they did it and how dominating ForGG was (he was it was embarrasing for his opponents) but the jury's still out sorry. I don't understand the comparison you're making, are you implying that DRG isn't a top level player? As a matter of fact, it turns out that everyone who predicted DRG will be a monster not only during the team leagues, but even before that, based on his stream alone - was actually right. Just like everyone who predicted Bomber and MMA will be top players based on the play they showed very early in their career was right. Hell, people didn't even want to see or believe that MVP was a top player until he actually won GSL for the first time, even though it was freaking obvious to everyone who watched him play in his first season. Every single game is relevant, especially televized games. If you don't want to watch the games and the manner in which someone plays doesn't matter to you, then why are you participating in a discussion about someone's skill level in the first place? | ||
|
inamorato
United States263 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:25 Rikke wrote: Doesn't matter what he did 5years ago in a different game lolz! If he wins the next 2 GSLs we can talk again Why do your posts in a thought provoking thread contain 0 content? Here's an idea. When you have any empirical data or any information of the games you can talk again. Until then you could just type post's like these in a notepad document save it, and reformat your computer just so that we're sure it doesn't find its way into a thread containing years prior until this very moment of passion. | ||
|
Corrosive
Canada3741 Posts
On December 07 2011 08:54 superstartran wrote: Nada is a part time player in SC2 and for the longest time was regularly placing in the top 16 or better at almost every tournament. LOL. PoltPrime is a GSL winner, and still regularly does well in most tournaments he plays in. JulyZerg is a multiple GSL finalist. Sage is the most underachieved and yet still is touted as one of the most talented Protoss prospects coming out of Korea. Yeah.... mid tier pros. That would stomp the living shit out of 95% of the foreign pros. yeah polt and july really stomped the shit out of foreign pros at mlg <_< | ||
|
TheBanana
Norway2183 Posts
Granted I haven't watched more than g2 vs Polt, but I didn't see anything we haven't seen a million times before in that game. What was special was that I was getting annoyed at the casters hype, that doesn't bother me usually, but it seemed like we were watching different games. I also remember Fin flying up to 800 minerals while microing a single reaper, I remember that because whenever someone is being complemented on their control early in the game I glaze over to the bank. If he looked like a God in the other games, go ahead hype him up. If it was anything like g2 vs Polt, then simmer down guys. | ||
|
RJGooner
United States2076 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:23 Scribble wrote: You did a terrible job of addressing his point by overlooking the fact that it was an example. He's essentially saying that the limitation caused by the difficult macro effected multitasking; as in the hallmark of a top BW player was the ability to macro flawlessly and be in X places at once with his multitasking. He then posits that since macro is easier in SC2, the hallmark of a good player will be that he'll have to be doing twice as much multitasking (and that easier macro will allow him to do so). In that regard, I agree with him. This has been a long held belief of mine that 1) If you have perfect AI controlled machines controlling the action, then yes, the skill ceiling of BW is higher. 2) With human players, the skill ceiling of either game is out of reach and thus neither game is 'harder,' within the realms of what a human can attain. In other words, no person can ever be good enough at SC2 or BW to demonstrate that one is clearly harder. BW just happens to have over a decade of a headstart in development. 3) With the easier macro in SC2, more of a players mechanical ability will simply be diverted to other areas. Think of it like this. If the idea of 'skill' or mechanics were to be illustrated as 50% emphasis on micro / 50% emphasis on macro (a gross oversimplification) in BW, then SC2 may develop into more of a 65/35 split. The two games would be/will be equally taxing in two different proportions. The premise of this point sounds correct but what you just said illustrates why the Broodwar Pros WILL dominate when/if they switch. JD, Bisu, Flash, Stork and even the top-tier but not necessarily S-Class pros (Firebathero, Hydra, Effort, Sea etc.) all have the skill to not only be fantastic mechanically (which was harder in Broodwar) but also have absolutely insane multi-task. If multi-task is actually easier in SC2 because the mechanics are easier, wouldn't this just magnify their multi-tasking ability rather than make things more equal? The games are not equal. I'm sorry but they're not, and I'm a huge fan of SC2 myself. The new features that have been put in to SC2 make it this way. Micro in Broodwar was much harder than SC2, as was macro. I guess we'll never have a true answer until the top pros do switch. How ForGG performs will be a good barometer I feel. | ||
|
milesfacade
United Kingdom799 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:23 Scribble wrote: You did a terrible job of addressing his point by overlooking the fact that it was an example. He's essentially saying that the limitation caused by the difficult macro effected multitasking; as in the hallmark of a top BW player was the ability to macro flawlessly and be in X places at once with his multitasking. He then posits that since macro is easier in SC2, the hallmark of a good player will be that he'll have to be doing twice as much multitasking (and that easier macro will allow him to do so). In that regard, I agree with him. This has been a long held belief of mine that 1) If you have perfect AI controlled machines controlling the action, then yes, the skill ceiling of BW is higher. 2) With human players, the skill ceiling of either game is out of reach and thus neither game is 'harder,' within the realms of what a human can attain. In other words, no person can ever be good enough at SC2 or BW to demonstrate that one is clearly harder. BW just happens to have over a decade of a headstart in development. 3) With the easier macro in SC2, more of a players mechanical ability will simply be diverted to other areas. Think of it like this. If the idea of 'skill' or mechanics were to be illustrated as 50% emphasis on micro / 50% emphasis on macro (a gross oversimplification) in BW, then SC2 may develop into more of a 65/35 split. The two games would be/will be equally taxing in two different proportions. This is a great post and articulates my thoughts on the issue of skill ceiling perfectly. | ||
|
mlspmatt
Canada404 Posts
On December 07 2011 05:10 superstartran wrote: He just annihilated one of the most talented Protoss prospects, a GSL Super Tournament winner, and a two time finalist and former BW Champion. If you don't describe that as magical, please, do tell me what it is. He beat Sage who has done very little, Polt who is quickly trending downward, and July who as Artosis has said has not been playing well. Lets not exaggerate his accomplishments. His play has been stellar and he looks great, but magical? Come on. People throw superlatives too freely. If he moves to code "S", beats MVP, Nestea, and jakji, wins GSL - then it's magical. Making it to code 'S' isn't magical. Magical is Kurt Gibson's game winning walk off home run, or Boise State beating Oklahoma in a bowl game, Joe Namath walking off in victory after Superbowl 3. That's magical, not making it to code 'S'. | ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:42 inamorato wrote: Why do your posts in a thought provoking thread contain 0 content? Here's an idea. When you have any empirical data or any information of the games you can talk again. Until then you could just type post's like these in a notepad document save it, and reformat your computer just so that we're sure it doesn't find its way into a thread containing years prior until this very moment of passion. oh, shit, just have to say ._. served... rofl it has been much more rewarding for me to do simple acts of multitasking in sc2 as opposed to BW.. rewarding as in, satisfying in terms of results. there have been a couple people who have said that it is a game of inches--- a game within a game, but honestly to me, it is like a game of millimeters at most. how many games were you allowed BIO in a T v P (BW) as opposed to how many of those games you've seen the terran sit with his fast expansion on low barracks count while he builds enough to feel comfortable moving out? you're allowed to do so many things you didn't think were possible. you would find that out by trying things out at the highest level you could possibly go at, but luckily we also have others (sc2 pros) to do that for us : ) | ||
|
DarkGo
29 Posts
| ||
|
GARO
United States2255 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:44 Corrosive wrote: yeah polt and july really stomped the shit out of foreign pros at mlg <_< Yeah bro, I'm sure July losing to Moon and HongUn in the championship brackets at Columbus and Anaheim respectively qualify as foreign pros beating him. | ||
|
BabyGiraldo
United States135 Posts
| ||
|
ibreakurface
United States664 Posts
| ||
|
TheBanana
Norway2183 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:46 mlspmatt wrote: He beat Sage who has done very little, Polt who is quickly trending downward, and July who as Artosis has said has not been playing well. Lets not exaggerate his accomplishments. His play has been stellar and he looks great, but magical? Come on. People throw superlatives too freely. If he moves to code "S", beats MVP, Nestea, and jakji, wins GSL - then it's magical. Making it to code 'S' isn't magical. Magical is Kurt Gibson's game winning walk off home run, or Boise State beating Oklahoma in a bowl game, Joe Namath walking off in victory after Superbowl 3. That's magical, not making it to code 'S'. To put it in perspective, at Orlando Hongun "annihilated one of the most talented Protoss prospects, a GSL Open finalist and a two time finalist and former BW Champion. " I don't think I've ever heard anyone refer to Hongun as magical. | ||
|
nanaoei
3358 Posts
On December 07 2011 09:54 DarkGo wrote: wow you people still dont get it? he's not as good as you think, his style is perfect aggressive. we have NOT seen his macro yet, and i bet his is awful, you think in next season people wont figure him out?? please.. just like TASTOSIS SAID: macro players are the best players, not agressive gimicky players, bye. he is better than how i thought he was, or would be by this point, and he is as good as many people think he is. i don't think his style though, is as simple as you describe, even though i'm not exactly a fan of this player yet. if tastosis told you that a mule is never worth sacrificing, you would take it to your grave then? bye ~ ~;; have fun having your opinion as it is. | ||
| ||
