EPTWhy are Starcraft 2 tournaments so unpredictable? - Page 9
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
HowardRoark
1146 Posts
| ||
|
windsupernova
Mexico5280 Posts
I don´t really think the game is that volatile. We have 3 players with a total of 8 titles out of 12 tournaments. About all this crapstorm. Its ok to not like the game, just move on and find another thing to do rather than reminding everybody of how much you hate it. | ||
|
boxman22
Canada430 Posts
| ||
|
zefreak
United States2731 Posts
On February 03 2012 14:58 Gravesong wrote: This is to people who share this opinion. I can understand being frustrated with the game and blaming its volatility on poor design, which may or may not be the case. I'm not actually arguing whether the game is balanced or a good test of "skill" in a player versus player environment. But I don't understand players who continue playing SC2 if they hold the opinion that the game is shit. I can understand pursuing a professional career if the pro believes that the game will become more stable as the knowledge of the game develops in time, and therefore spending time now will benefit long-term. I could also understand if the potential financial gain is enough that playing a "shit" game would be worth it. And the hidden expected value of playing SC2 professionally besides money (living in Korea, connecting with very smart people, traveling the world, the pride and knowledge that they're the best in their respective field, etc.) might make playing the game worth it for Idra or other pros in his situation, even if the game is shit, and I obv can't speak for them. But if the above isn't true, wouldn't it make more sense for these professionals to pursue a more balanced lifestyle instead of playing a game that is not only "shit" and frustrating to play but also probably -EV long-term in the sense of economic and emotional balance. They could use their intelligence (and I believe that the majority of these players are probably all highly intelligent people) to find careers that are much more financially lucrative. There are plenty of jobs with earning potential way way higher than SC2 can provide. Besides providing the previously stated hidden EV of playing SC2, isn't the actual value relatively low playing professionally? There are plenty of jobs that have much higher earning potential, and in fields that may be just as worthwhile from a value stance. So these intelligent pros could pursue high value careers, and then have time and the financial flexibility to pursue other things that make them happy. http://www.philgalfond.com/it-always-comes-back-to-balance-doesnt-it/ This isn't SC2, but I find it paralleling some of the issues that a lot of these pros face. It is written by Phil Galfond, a highly successful professional poker player, who has learned that for him to deal with the volatility and unpredictable nature of his game (which DEFINITELY has a ton more variance that SC2), he has had to find balance in his own lifestyle outside of poker. Of course there is a non-0 probability that his post is complete troll and I wrote a ton of shit for no reason, but I hope this might spark some discussion at least. TL;DR Find balance if you think that SC2 is not +Life EV. Agreed. As a poker player myself, the idea that pros play SC2 for the money alone seems ridiculous, considering the amount of time and effort that goes into playing at a competitive level. This discussion interests me because most people seem to act as if SC2 has no volatility at all when someone like MVP gets dropped to code A. People are quick to judge the level of a players skill based on a single bo3 or a single day of matches, or even a single tournament. SC2 isn't volatile to the extent that poker is but there definitely needs to be a large sample size of results before people can make justified generalizations about peoples relative skill level. Then in this thread we have everyone saying that SC2 is too volatile, that skill edges are so small etc. I bet the very same people go about making outrageous claims based on a single days results. | ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
1: THE BEST PLAYERS GET FIGURED OUT one factor of that is when you do really really well and go super far. the progamers analyse the shit out of your play and imitate it and quickly learn possible weaknesses in your builds or in your play. plus they learn you inside out so they have the "mindgames" advantage, the "underdog" will more likely know and sit more comfortably how the more accomplished player will play. knowing your opponents style and weaknesses is a very nice advantage to have around. i think thats 1 reason why were seeing upsets like this 2: UNDERDOGS ARE ACTUALLY NOT UNDERDOGS another thing, people need to realize how actually good everyone is in code S. their games are usually sick close is because the players are actually that close in terms of skill. the players that make it far or win tournaments these days tend to get hugely overrated compared to the ones who lost in around top8. the skill difference might be very small but everyone talks about how amazing the winner plays constantly so it amplifies even more "what a huge upset that was" 3: FORMAT the format gsl uses where they play pretty few games and give them alot of time to prepare for the maps and their opponent give a huge edge to the player that embraces map abuse, mindgames and blind counters etc. where as you have a huge bracket where you play all games in short time (like most foreigner lans) you rely on standard play and basic mechanics to take you through alot more because you dont have the time to practice specific maps vs specific players as much 4: MAPS this has been around for sc2 for ages by now. yes sc2 is pretty fragile, you practice your ass off for macro games and so on and on this 1 particilar map you and your practice teamates didnt find out about a bunker abuse spot in zvt so you just straight die to a 2rax bunker rush. you actually need to play all maps pretty damn much before these "map features" start to getting figured out and the abusing players get alot less straight wins from it. so with new maps in gsl, expect more upsets because its just like a patch that comes out, it needs to get figured out more 5: COINFLIPS, HIGH RISK HIGH REWARD this is a general concern i have about sc2. the matchups i play (zvp, zvt, tvz well thats 2 mathcups only out of 6) are the matchups i concider least luck based. i have the possibility as a "stronger player mentality" to scout pretty much everything in time and respond accordingly without falling too much behind. there are very small possibilities that i actually just straight out die because the matchup didnt let me play more safe. the rest of the 4 matchups feel more luck based to me, tvt les than pvp and zvz obviously, and tvp seems kind of luckbased too right now. in general there are so many strong timing attacks or ways to abuse your way to get ahead in economy that your opponent cant figure out in time so he has to guess. so with this being said the number 1 and 2 that i mentioned are even stronger than before, behind a huge underdog that nobody knows how he will play facing a player thats pretty figured out might actually get a big lead right here because of that. not only the fact that you might mathematically have higher chanses of falling behind, mentally it can be frustrating and hard for the "stronger player" to deal with this fact, which then can lead to paranoia or extreme risks where hes generally more predictable than the underdog would be. (hence thats why its also super impressive to see players like mvp actually mindfuck the crap out of anyone while still being the best) well these are not all reasons but its some of them anyway. dont just spew out that sc2 is imbalanced or a stupidly designed game because theres alot more to it why we have so unpredictable results | ||
|
NeMeSiS3
Canada2972 Posts
But anywho, to answer your question (TLDR) the game is much MUCH to new, and anyone who thinks differently... Well I'd like to hear the rebut because I have trouble seeing a counter argument to that. | ||
|
MCXD
Australia2738 Posts
That said, I don't really have much to add that hasn't already been said. Every competitive sport has a degree of randomness (in-game and out-of-game) and volatility. I could accept that SC2 has more than some others, or even the MOST of popular esports, but I don't really think it makes it any less entertaining. And it wouldn't have taken off as an esport in the first place if it wasn't consistantly competitive to some degree. Edit: Also Morrow's post above is spot on. Solid. | ||
|
Rabbet
Canada404 Posts
I have a hard time watching ZvZ right now as banelings bring so much of the coin flip scenario into the match up. It almost seems like a completely different game with the fragility of the units as compared to all other match ups. I know it is still mostly skill based but losing 8 units to one unit instantly seems too powerful and it takes away from the game. | ||
Fionn
United States23455 Posts
Fun fact: There have been 13 GSL finals, counting the Blizzzard Cup. Can you guess how many didn't involve one of The Big 4 of MVP, MMA, Nestea and MC? Only two and that was the first GSL between FruitDealer and Rainbow, and Jjakji playing Leenock in the last finals where MMA/MVP were in the semifinals and quarterfinals, both losing in five game series. | ||
|
Drake
Germany6146 Posts
On February 02 2012 23:51 OpTiKDream wrote: tbh sc2 has more of a "gamble/luck/volatile" aspect compared to sc1. It just wont be as consistent as sc1. Players will easily have their up and downs and player skill gap from one another isnt as vast as one would think. dont see it this way myself. when you see the players was strong in early sc1 days, and later, nearly no one expect nada stays top. foreigns who even won osl in the beginning had no chance anymore etc etc sc2 is STILL to young and to be compared with tennis, this guys play since they are 8 ? 10 ? and they play for more then half their lifes. when all sc2 players play 10+ years we will have more consitence but already some have 3 some 2 championchips is not THAT unpredictable | ||
|
AcrosstheSky
United States237 Posts
| ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
On February 02 2012 23:36 IdrA wrote: cuz its a shit game Lol. I think I like you again. | ||
|
illsick
United States1770 Posts
In other sports, it's way too hard to pick the outright best or winners too. Just like in other sports, you can pick teams or players that are doing well and are considered favorites but upsets do happen a lot. Green Bay packers (NFL) seem to be the best team this year (they won last year's Super Bowl) but they got eliminated. Or in NBA, Dallas Mavericks won the championship as an underdog. And what morrow said makes a lot of sense too. But I also want to add that this is a game with 3 races, some people have bad matchups or good ones and the winner might have a favorable tournament bracket that would fit their strengths. Also, the way the brackets are put together can be random and perhaps the two best player may not be in the finals but would meet before that; like mvp and nestea. Especially in tournaments that don't have lower brackets. But even so, I think there weren't that many surprises on who won. | ||
|
fezvez
France3021 Posts
| ||
|
Vaporak
70 Posts
On February 03 2012 15:51 Fionn wrote: It's not unpredictable. BW is the same as SC2 currently in predictably. Just replace Flash's name with MVP. Replace Jaedong's name with Nestea. Replace MC's name with Bisu. Replace MMA's name with Fantasy. Fun fact: There have been 13 GSL finals, counting the Blizzzard Cup. Can you guess how many didn't involve one of The Big 4 of MVP, MMA, Nestea and MC? Only two and that was the first GSL between FruitDealer and Rainbow, and Jjakji playing Leenock in the last finals where MMA/MVP were in the semifinals and quarterfinals, both losing in five game series. This is what always bugs me about these threads. TONS of people come in talking about how unpredictable/unstable SC2 is and I just don't see it. Almost every single finals involves one of the known top player and/or someone who is on a super hard upswing in their play. How much more predictable does it have to be to be a "good" or "stable" game? It seems like their already are a class of players that win a damn lot already with mostly straight up play. These aren't the days of bit by bit anymore guys. | ||
|
raga4ka
Bulgaria5679 Posts
On February 03 2012 15:51 Fionn wrote: It's not unpredictable. BW is the same as SC2 currently in predictably. Just replace Flash's name with MVP. Replace Jaedong's name with Nestea. Replace MC's name with Bisu. Replace MMA's name with Fantasy. Fun fact: There have been 13 GSL finals, counting the Blizzzard Cup. Can you guess how many didn't involve one of The Big 4 of MVP, MMA, Nestea and MC? Only two and that was the first GSL between FruitDealer and Rainbow, and Jjakji playing Leenock in the last finals where MMA/MVP were in the semifinals and quarterfinals, both losing in five game series. Yeah Fionn you yourself are really good at predicting who will win SC2 matches  .Baring everything else that has been said i think it's also important to point out that most of the teams don't have fixed practise shedules like in BW . I think only TSL and Slayers have , but i could be wrong . So when you see MVP play even thought he is probably the smartest player in SC2 and Nestea also , they will still lose to players who have practised more then them occasionally and that doesn't suprise me . Most players don't commit fully to SC2 or their practise regime isn't as refine as in the BW proscene . Unlike in BW , pros still want to have a life outside of starcraft like the article elephant in the room was trying to point out . BW isn't completely predictle either recent years it was a bunch of guys playing and in the end it's either Flash vs Jaedong or Flash vs someone else either way Flash still wins . There is the occasional upset ala JangBi , but after that it's back to normal . | ||
|
karpo
Sweden1998 Posts
On February 03 2012 16:27 Vaporak wrote: This is what always bugs me about these threads. TONS of people come in talking about how unpredictable/unstable SC2 is and I just don't see it. Almost every single finals involves one of the known top player and/or someone who is on a super hard upswing in their play. How much more predictable does it have to be to be a "good" or "stable" game? It seems like their already are a class of players that win a damn lot already with mostly straight up play. These aren't the days of bit by bit anymore guys. I'd like to add to that point. When players slump, like MC/Nestea/MVP they usually show worse play. It's not just that people figure them out or that they lose a coinflip, they probably just didn't practise enough or they had other issues (RL stuff, injuries etc). Many other athletes in real sports have this. Some soccer players are god tier then drop in skill for months due to a huge number of reasons. Some come back better than ever and some just fade away for top level play. | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
To me, the crucial difference is that we don't have proleague running in the background. With proleague, we saw good players before they did well in the starleagues, because teams gained confidence in them, sent them out to lose a few times, and gradually they matured, got more comfortable, and then they did well in individual stuff. It almost never was the other way around. In Sc2 in Korea, we don't have that kind of system. GOM treats team competition like another GSL, and while the teams take it seriously, it just doesn't happen often enough to give us a glimpse and regular skill check on a bunch of players. And because individual Sc2 games can be so stupid all the time, often you don't even feel as though you got a good read on a player, because the game consisted of some dumb immortal all-in, or a 1/1/1. In Europe however, the Sc2 scene is much more predictable, because most top pros still play weekly cups, and so we're constantly getting a reference of their skill level compared to that of other players. We can see up and coming players as they emerge, because they start beating better and better people every week. We can see who will never be any good because they just stay the same. We can see who is falling off. Weekly cups are basically the equivalent of proleague. It doesn't need to be a team competiton, just a regular way of assessing a player's skill. In Korea, with all these new tournaments coming out, we have a better sense of who is good in Korea than we did before. Players like TSL_Symbol, for example, have been able to prove they have redeeming qualities, despite being terrible in Code B. So while Sc2 is a pretty silly game in pretty much every respect compared to it's predecessor, and way less balanced and rewarding than tennis, the difficulty of predicting Korean sc2 is mostly because we just don't see these players very often. | ||
|
NightOfTheDead
Lithuania1711 Posts
On February 03 2012 08:48 teddyoojo wrote: there are quite a lot of pros that think sc2 is a terrible game. and it is. there are so many things wrong with the game as a whole. just shitload of design errors and the biggest one is protoss. people play it because of the competition and money (yes, the money). Thing is, there arent many games to pick from that would have such support, scene and fair share of balance. It's people's expectations and impatience what is wrong. You cant have perfectly balanced game in such short period of time, if at all. Even if some things get annoying, Blizz are trying, patching game. I think patching process should be slow, cause if we would get more patches, people would start bitching about testing phase being too short. People are never happy. | ||
|
Lord_J
Kenya1085 Posts
| ||
| ||
