Why Fin looks like one of the best in sc2 already - Page 23

On December 08 2011 19:22 shucklesors wrote:
Glad to see fOrGG doing so well after moving to SC2, loved that guy just because he was ever from OZ.
Funny to see you praising his multitasking and ability to 'keep his resources below 400'..
You see in BW, that doesn't ever come up as a topic of discussion, like you would never hear a progamer say to another progamer, screw that, practice partners saying to each other "Hey you need to macro/multitask better at the late gaem etc.", it's way too basic a requirement to mention. They talk about very very MINUTE details and subtle micro that decided the game's outcome, the timings that were late and so on so forth.
So for a BW A-teamer at time of transferring, you shouldn't expect less. Hope to see him a GSL champion soon.

On December 09 2011 12:54 MasonosaM wrote:
oh god he totally destroyed hwansin game 2 with some crazy 111 play

On December 09 2011 12:54 MasonosaM wrote:
oh god he totally destroyed hwansin game 2 with some crazy 111 play

On December 09 2011 12:35 HardMacro wrote:
Ok seriously what the fuck. Does this guy ever lose? He curbs stomps even in TvT; gets hard countered opening banshees where his opponent opened with a viking, only to push into the other terran's natural 3 minutes later with marine/tank and sealing the game right there... two games in a row. He just has more shit than his opponent despite his sub-optimal openings.

Not a single zerg survives his hellions, let alone the banshee follow-up. It's the small shit he does like baiting the queen towards the bunker, then pulling marines out as the bunker died and micro'ing the shit out of them, getting additional drone kills and damaging a queen to within 1-2 hits, while also during these ~15 seconds macro'ed perfectly, that gains him both a small unit and economic advantage every time.

I think these tiny advantages compounds into a much bigger advantage, especially in the early game, which would explain why his opponents look like amateurs playing him - his timings hit a few seconds earlier and a bit harder, eventually compounding into half a minute earlier and 2x harder.

Which makes me realize an important point regarding the "mechanical" requirement of playing SC2. Sure, to play relatively well, SC2 is easier mechanically as my ~250/150 (sc2gears) APM/EAPM and C+ BW multitasking is more or less enough to have 90+ % perfect macro in the early/mid game. But having 400/250 APM/EAPM is going to turn that percentage into 95+ %, and it's clear from these games that the 5% matters a LOT - it's the difference between rolling over and dying and defending JUST in time. So there isn't even a soft skill-ceiling cap, not even in the early-mid game, because it's just not possible to play 100% perfectly and purely by being 2% faster (effectively faster, not limited to APM) you're going to stomp a lot of faces.

Which in turns makes me remember what idra predicted, can someone quote what he said originally? The gist being:

SC is a game of limited information, which is fine in BW because the skill ceiling is so much higher, so the luck factor is relatively small compared to sc2 and the better player could almost always come back despite being countered, and there are very few hard counters to anything, so situations where player A automatically loses if he made X units instead of Y are rare. However, this is a serious problem in sc2 because blizzard is trying to make the game into chess, which would be fine if the players had perfect information, but they don't. Therefore, in the near future when the average mechanics of players improve to a point where even code B players could flawlessly execute all kinds of all-ins, the scene would be more or less fucked by volatility.

On December 09 2011 13:05 Loki57 wrote:
The thing I notice most about this guy is that no matter what form or level of aggression he's putting on he's ALWAYS doing it in multiple places. The multitask is pretty insane