|
On February 20 2012 04:05 Squeegy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2012 21:29 Dingodile wrote:On February 19 2012 10:46 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 10:17 Falconblade wrote:On February 19 2012 09:49 canikizu wrote:On February 19 2012 04:50 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 04:34 Falconblade wrote:On February 19 2012 04:19 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 03:54 ohampatu wrote:On February 19 2012 03:43 Forikorder wrote:[quote] well i was never into WC3 at all  Oh its all good. I was never a big sc1 fan myself. We just all have to realize that SC2 pros come from alot of backgrounds, and while some of them may not have been a bonjwa or won a golden mouse in SC1, they may have equally been famous in other regards. If my memory serves very few people have won as much money as Grubby has, or has had as much success internationally (this includes all sc1 bonjwas, they were isolated, while Grubby was 'worldwide'). With that said, this can only help Feast understand the finer workings of being a progamer, and being affiliated with Grubby itself will just boost your own popularity. Helps 'get his feet wet' so to speak Winning Special Olympics is not as prestigious as winning Olympics. Winning many titles out of many is not more prestigious than winning few titles out of few. Nor is winning internationally more prestigious if the level of competition isn't high. And because BW was so wondrous and obviously > WC3 it relegates WC3 to Special Olympics? That's utter bullcrap. I played BW a bit as a kid, and WC3 a grand total of once. Either way, they're different games and doesn't make WC3 easier. Being an average player in BW doesn't mean you'd make a good WC3 player. Imagine Idra or Ret in WC3 with their macro heavy style and far less micro and how they'd do in WC3? Stephano was mediocre in WC3 and one of the better SC2 foreigners. Skill in one does not equate to skill in the other. Aptitude perhaps, but not actual skill. That's downright disrespectful, to compare something to the Special Olympics. And some of those people are damn amazing, and deserve a bit of respect. Prestige or not, it takes skill to be at the top of a game. Dominating the scene, despite having more games, means more than middling it in a different scene. I love Demu, Ret and Grubby all, but that logic is downright vile. My example of special olympics is only to show that winning X does not equal to winning Y. Middling it in professional football is better than winning it in mobile phone tossing. People seem to have this erroneous idea that all scenes are equal and it is simply not true. My opinion of Idra and Ret in WC3 is that they would have done really well. As has been seen in SC2, the micro of WC3 players has not been better than BW players. In fact, I would go as far as to say the best microers in SC2 seem to have come from BW. When it comes to people like Stephano, they seem to be peaking now instead of then. Although I do agree that sometimes the skills dont translate that well. And why do you think that because they win Special Olympics, they are not as good as the person who win normal Olympics? Don't you think that if they had the same condition and stuff like normal people, they were gonna be great too? Or the person who win normal Olympic, if they had handicaps, would they still be great? The point is, human always reach their best with the tools that they have available. Just because you're good at sword, that doesn't mean you can win against other best spear fighters, or bow fighters once you switch. Just because no one can beat you in barehand combat, doesn't mean no one can beat you in a sword match, cane match,.v.v.v. Switching from BW to SC2 is like switching from medieval to katana, most of the transition is pretty easy, although there're bumps here and there. But switching from BW to WC3 and vice versa, is like switching from using sword and spear/bow, they are just so different in a lot of way, more than just micro and macro. Sometimes the only thing matters is their own discipline. - Build orders and timing attacks are not relevant in WC3 (some of the popular timing attacks you can usually see are 2nd hero getting level 3, or scroll of healing timing attack, but it also depends greatly how you got harassed and how you are positioned, there's no stim timing attack, no weapon +1 attack (kind of)) - You get punished for having good economy (no upkeep, low upkeep, high upkeep), you have to choose to get bigger army or better economy, since your money is not only being invested in army, but in hero items too. - You don't scout to read build order and tech tree, you scout to read troop movement, hero level and items. You can always tp back when your base is being attacked, but if you get ambushed or creepjacked while your heroes are on low health without town portal scroll, you're pretty much screwed. - Sure, you can see no difference in micro between WC3 and BW players, some BW players even have better micro. Hell, even in WC3, you can't really see the difference in micro between some of top players. But the difference between WC3 micro and SC micro is, SC micro happens in a flash while WC3 micro is all about consistency. An engagement in WC3 may last for 3,4 minutes, and the longer it gets the more exhausted it is to micro. That is why players like Moon is praised to have such good micro because even if he has a bad engagement, after 5 minutes he suddenly wins the battle. The micro is more in depth too. They have to literally turn off autocasting spell to maximize the potential. You don't need your sorceress to autocast slow spell to priests because well, they will spend all the time in battle to heal stuff anyway, they're not gonna run anywhere, or your talon to autocast -5armor spells on units that you don't focus fire. Because the battle lasts very long, it's all about how you conserve your units' mana to do stuffs. The point is, arguing about SC and WC3 is silly, why don't we just enjoy the games as a whole? I used to play and follow WC3 and I enjoyed it, now I'm enjoying SC2, that's all that matters. Again about Grubby and Feast, Grubby clearly doesn't mean he's gonna coach Feast. How do you say this, Grubby is not trying to teach Feast how to get stronger, but to show Feast the way of life, like how to deal with everything, teams, sponsors, organization, travels, the mentality. Calling it mentoring is kind of weird, I guess it's like Grubby will act like a big brother to give advice and everything to Feast. I thumbs up this post many times over. Calling out BW vs. WC3 and how things are comparable is asinine. Hell, even calling BW better than WC3 is bullshit. These are games people, and if people think one is harder than the other, they're sorely underestimating the complexity of the other. And to put it frankly, Grubby dominated. And dominated, and then dominated some more in his field of gaming. He wasn't dethroned by some upstart BW pro. Squeegy suggests some sort of intellectual snobbery by the BW pros thinking, "Hey, WC3 is easy, but BW is the true test of skill, so lets not do the prudent thing and switch making tons of money". Bullshit. BW and WC3 are vastly different, and even if BW pros had switched, there is no guarantee they would have done well. Just because someone is a brilliant Neurosurgeon, it doesn't mean that he'd make a good internal medicine doctor. Neurosurgery is one of the most difficult, but if he were to "downgrade" as you lot derisively imply in regards to WC3, he might be terrible with diagnosis. Grubby took on the strongest competition, and stayed at the top for a long career, and deserves recognition for that. Hell, even SC2 is considered easier than BW. I see that oGsFin and golden mouse winner July, etc., are doing well in it. No? It's actually a B-teamer in BW in MMA dominating? And Drg? And the rest? I'm more just incensed about the special olympics comparison. I don't see Phelps beating that armless swimmer from China or wherever in the Olympics should Phelps lose the use of his arms. Vastly different, and honestly, ludicrous and vile argument. And I'd like to reiterate to DeMu and Grubby should they read this, you're both my two favorite players so I am not against any of you, just really annoyed with this WC3 slamming (despite me having only ever played it once as opposed to BW) Games tend to be only as hard as the competition allows. And that is of course the point I have to repeat to people like you over and over again. Special Olympics are not comparable to Olympics because the competition isn't as fierce. Getting to study Law at Harvard is harder than getting to study a vocation in a random vocational school because the competition is more fierce. Succeeding in BW is harder than succeeding in WC3 because the competition is more fierce. When it comes to the question which game is harder to be good at, I will vote BW anyday over WC3. But I don't really care to argue about that. He took on the strongest competition in WC3 and was very succesful. I recognise that and think what he did was of course great. But it's just not that impressive to me when I know the scene wasn't on par with BW. The fact that people seem to make it as big a thing as, say, July's Golden Mouse seems disrespectful to July. To further illustrate my point, yet again via exaggeration (which I repeat is intentional), consider Federer and Grubby. Let us assume for the sake of the argument that they both were the best in their games. I think I am right in saying that most people would find it absurd if you talked of them as equals. Both were the best in their own scenes but as the scenes are not equal, neither are their achievements. That is not to say that Grubby was not great and that his achievements are not worthy of praise. The part about ForGG and July compared to MMA and DRG, well, you can go to the Elephant thread if you wish to discuss that. That point has been explained numerous times already. I'll explain again. It is the competition in Olympic swimming that is more fierce than competition in Special Olympic swimming. I guarantee you Phelps, given that he had no arms, would do better in Special Olympics than the armless swimmer, given that he had arms, would do in Olympics. Perhaps instead of thinking whether an argument is vile or not you should think about their validity. @squeegy, i understand you very good, but this isnt good. Nadal and Federer are one of the kings of tennis, Phelps is one of the king of swimmer, klitschko is one of the king of box, karabatic is one of the king of handball (player), Bolt in 100m run, the one is the best in y, the in other in x, ...etc. If you say, football is more difficult than handball or tennis or basketball. Than by your logic, Messi deserve more recognition than Dwane Wade or LeBron James?! This should be not fair/correct! Even in other way. The same amount is the right way. Compare with 2 very different sports IS always bad like wc3 und sc1. wc3 is a micro-centered, sc1 a macro-centered game. It gets rather tricky when we get to sports that are global and highly popular. But to an extent, yes, the point stands. I am the greatest player of Squeegy (it's a sport I just made up). I have played it with my friends and always won. I deserve the same amount of respect as Messi. Does that sound right? Comparisions can be made even when the games are very different. It just gets harder the larger the scenes are. That is why it is probably impossible to say anything about Messi in comparison to LeBron James. Luckily for us WC3 and BW are rather similar, so the comparison isn't that hard to make. The differences between the games are probably something like between amateur and professional boxing. Or perhaps boxing and kickboxing.
I don't think Messi deserve more respect that anybody else in general. He deserve more respect with regards to his discipline (soccer), but not with regard to something else. Like if he would come and talk to me about physics, I wouldn't have any respect for him.
So yeah, Grubby has some things to say when talking about WC3, Messi about soccer and you about Squeegy. Unfortunately, nobody is playing Squeegy so your skills won't be very useful.
I don't really know how you set up the scale for comparing one sport to another. Is it based on number of players, money, prize pool, number of professional, total time played, something else ?
I don't really think it makes much sense to compare two sport in term of one being more difficult than the other. Not all things need to be ordered as A < B.
|
|
|
On February 22 2012 08:14 bouhko wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 04:05 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 21:29 Dingodile wrote:On February 19 2012 10:46 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 10:17 Falconblade wrote:On February 19 2012 09:49 canikizu wrote:On February 19 2012 04:50 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 04:34 Falconblade wrote:On February 19 2012 04:19 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 03:54 ohampatu wrote:
[quote]
Oh its all good. I was never a big sc1 fan myself. We just all have to realize that SC2 pros come from alot of backgrounds, and while some of them may not have been a bonjwa or won a golden mouse in SC1, they may have equally been famous in other regards. If my memory serves very few people have won as much money as Grubby has, or has had as much success internationally (this includes all sc1 bonjwas, they were isolated, while Grubby was 'worldwide'). With that said, this can only help Feast understand the finer workings of being a progamer, and being affiliated with Grubby itself will just boost your own popularity. Helps 'get his feet wet' so to speak Winning Special Olympics is not as prestigious as winning Olympics. Winning many titles out of many is not more prestigious than winning few titles out of few. Nor is winning internationally more prestigious if the level of competition isn't high. And because BW was so wondrous and obviously > WC3 it relegates WC3 to Special Olympics? That's utter bullcrap. I played BW a bit as a kid, and WC3 a grand total of once. Either way, they're different games and doesn't make WC3 easier. Being an average player in BW doesn't mean you'd make a good WC3 player. Imagine Idra or Ret in WC3 with their macro heavy style and far less micro and how they'd do in WC3? Stephano was mediocre in WC3 and one of the better SC2 foreigners. Skill in one does not equate to skill in the other. Aptitude perhaps, but not actual skill. That's downright disrespectful, to compare something to the Special Olympics. And some of those people are damn amazing, and deserve a bit of respect. Prestige or not, it takes skill to be at the top of a game. Dominating the scene, despite having more games, means more than middling it in a different scene. I love Demu, Ret and Grubby all, but that logic is downright vile. My example of special olympics is only to show that winning X does not equal to winning Y. Middling it in professional football is better than winning it in mobile phone tossing. People seem to have this erroneous idea that all scenes are equal and it is simply not true. My opinion of Idra and Ret in WC3 is that they would have done really well. As has been seen in SC2, the micro of WC3 players has not been better than BW players. In fact, I would go as far as to say the best microers in SC2 seem to have come from BW. When it comes to people like Stephano, they seem to be peaking now instead of then. Although I do agree that sometimes the skills dont translate that well. And why do you think that because they win Special Olympics, they are not as good as the person who win normal Olympics? Don't you think that if they had the same condition and stuff like normal people, they were gonna be great too? Or the person who win normal Olympic, if they had handicaps, would they still be great? The point is, human always reach their best with the tools that they have available. Just because you're good at sword, that doesn't mean you can win against other best spear fighters, or bow fighters once you switch. Just because no one can beat you in barehand combat, doesn't mean no one can beat you in a sword match, cane match,.v.v.v. Switching from BW to SC2 is like switching from medieval to katana, most of the transition is pretty easy, although there're bumps here and there. But switching from BW to WC3 and vice versa, is like switching from using sword and spear/bow, they are just so different in a lot of way, more than just micro and macro. Sometimes the only thing matters is their own discipline. - Build orders and timing attacks are not relevant in WC3 (some of the popular timing attacks you can usually see are 2nd hero getting level 3, or scroll of healing timing attack, but it also depends greatly how you got harassed and how you are positioned, there's no stim timing attack, no weapon +1 attack (kind of)) - You get punished for having good economy (no upkeep, low upkeep, high upkeep), you have to choose to get bigger army or better economy, since your money is not only being invested in army, but in hero items too. - You don't scout to read build order and tech tree, you scout to read troop movement, hero level and items. You can always tp back when your base is being attacked, but if you get ambushed or creepjacked while your heroes are on low health without town portal scroll, you're pretty much screwed. - Sure, you can see no difference in micro between WC3 and BW players, some BW players even have better micro. Hell, even in WC3, you can't really see the difference in micro between some of top players. But the difference between WC3 micro and SC micro is, SC micro happens in a flash while WC3 micro is all about consistency. An engagement in WC3 may last for 3,4 minutes, and the longer it gets the more exhausted it is to micro. That is why players like Moon is praised to have such good micro because even if he has a bad engagement, after 5 minutes he suddenly wins the battle. The micro is more in depth too. They have to literally turn off autocasting spell to maximize the potential. You don't need your sorceress to autocast slow spell to priests because well, they will spend all the time in battle to heal stuff anyway, they're not gonna run anywhere, or your talon to autocast -5armor spells on units that you don't focus fire. Because the battle lasts very long, it's all about how you conserve your units' mana to do stuffs. The point is, arguing about SC and WC3 is silly, why don't we just enjoy the games as a whole? I used to play and follow WC3 and I enjoyed it, now I'm enjoying SC2, that's all that matters. Again about Grubby and Feast, Grubby clearly doesn't mean he's gonna coach Feast. How do you say this, Grubby is not trying to teach Feast how to get stronger, but to show Feast the way of life, like how to deal with everything, teams, sponsors, organization, travels, the mentality. Calling it mentoring is kind of weird, I guess it's like Grubby will act like a big brother to give advice and everything to Feast. I thumbs up this post many times over. Calling out BW vs. WC3 and how things are comparable is asinine. Hell, even calling BW better than WC3 is bullshit. These are games people, and if people think one is harder than the other, they're sorely underestimating the complexity of the other. And to put it frankly, Grubby dominated. And dominated, and then dominated some more in his field of gaming. He wasn't dethroned by some upstart BW pro. Squeegy suggests some sort of intellectual snobbery by the BW pros thinking, "Hey, WC3 is easy, but BW is the true test of skill, so lets not do the prudent thing and switch making tons of money". Bullshit. BW and WC3 are vastly different, and even if BW pros had switched, there is no guarantee they would have done well. Just because someone is a brilliant Neurosurgeon, it doesn't mean that he'd make a good internal medicine doctor. Neurosurgery is one of the most difficult, but if he were to "downgrade" as you lot derisively imply in regards to WC3, he might be terrible with diagnosis. Grubby took on the strongest competition, and stayed at the top for a long career, and deserves recognition for that. Hell, even SC2 is considered easier than BW. I see that oGsFin and golden mouse winner July, etc., are doing well in it. No? It's actually a B-teamer in BW in MMA dominating? And Drg? And the rest? I'm more just incensed about the special olympics comparison. I don't see Phelps beating that armless swimmer from China or wherever in the Olympics should Phelps lose the use of his arms. Vastly different, and honestly, ludicrous and vile argument. And I'd like to reiterate to DeMu and Grubby should they read this, you're both my two favorite players so I am not against any of you, just really annoyed with this WC3 slamming (despite me having only ever played it once as opposed to BW) Games tend to be only as hard as the competition allows. And that is of course the point I have to repeat to people like you over and over again. Special Olympics are not comparable to Olympics because the competition isn't as fierce. Getting to study Law at Harvard is harder than getting to study a vocation in a random vocational school because the competition is more fierce. Succeeding in BW is harder than succeeding in WC3 because the competition is more fierce. When it comes to the question which game is harder to be good at, I will vote BW anyday over WC3. But I don't really care to argue about that. He took on the strongest competition in WC3 and was very succesful. I recognise that and think what he did was of course great. But it's just not that impressive to me when I know the scene wasn't on par with BW. The fact that people seem to make it as big a thing as, say, July's Golden Mouse seems disrespectful to July. To further illustrate my point, yet again via exaggeration (which I repeat is intentional), consider Federer and Grubby. Let us assume for the sake of the argument that they both were the best in their games. I think I am right in saying that most people would find it absurd if you talked of them as equals. Both were the best in their own scenes but as the scenes are not equal, neither are their achievements. That is not to say that Grubby was not great and that his achievements are not worthy of praise. The part about ForGG and July compared to MMA and DRG, well, you can go to the Elephant thread if you wish to discuss that. That point has been explained numerous times already. I'll explain again. It is the competition in Olympic swimming that is more fierce than competition in Special Olympic swimming. I guarantee you Phelps, given that he had no arms, would do better in Special Olympics than the armless swimmer, given that he had arms, would do in Olympics. Perhaps instead of thinking whether an argument is vile or not you should think about their validity. @squeegy, i understand you very good, but this isnt good. Nadal and Federer are one of the kings of tennis, Phelps is one of the king of swimmer, klitschko is one of the king of box, karabatic is one of the king of handball (player), Bolt in 100m run, the one is the best in y, the in other in x, ...etc. If you say, football is more difficult than handball or tennis or basketball. Than by your logic, Messi deserve more recognition than Dwane Wade or LeBron James?! This should be not fair/correct! Even in other way. The same amount is the right way. Compare with 2 very different sports IS always bad like wc3 und sc1. wc3 is a micro-centered, sc1 a macro-centered game. It gets rather tricky when we get to sports that are global and highly popular. But to an extent, yes, the point stands. I am the greatest player of Squeegy (it's a sport I just made up). I have played it with my friends and always won. I deserve the same amount of respect as Messi. Does that sound right? Comparisions can be made even when the games are very different. It just gets harder the larger the scenes are. That is why it is probably impossible to say anything about Messi in comparison to LeBron James. Luckily for us WC3 and BW are rather similar, so the comparison isn't that hard to make. The differences between the games are probably something like between amateur and professional boxing. Or perhaps boxing and kickboxing. I don't think Messi deserve more respect that anybody else in general. He deserve more respect with regards to his discipline (soccer), but not with regard to something else. Like if he would come and talk to me about physics, I wouldn't have any respect for him. So yeah, Grubby has some things to say when talking about WC3, Messi about soccer and you about Squeegy. Unfortunately, nobody is playing Squeegy so your skills won't be very useful. I don't really know how you set up the scale for comparing one sport to another. Is it based on number of players, money, prize pool, number of professional, total time played, something else ? I don't really think it makes much sense to compare two sport in term of one being more difficult than the other. Not all things need to be ordered as A < B.
Do you think I was talking about physics or baking here? What about sports in general? We can even narrow it down more. But Imagine this: someone hosts a sport ceremony where all the greatest sports people are invited to but only I and Messi arrive. So the hosts decide to focus all their attention to us, including splitting the million dollar prize. Do you think, I, as the representative of Squeegy deserve it as much as Messi, as the representative of football? How do you think the majority would react? I dare say they would not agree with the decision.
|
On February 22 2012 08:24 Squeegy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 08:14 bouhko wrote:On February 20 2012 04:05 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 21:29 Dingodile wrote:On February 19 2012 10:46 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 10:17 Falconblade wrote:On February 19 2012 09:49 canikizu wrote:On February 19 2012 04:50 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 04:34 Falconblade wrote:On February 19 2012 04:19 Squeegy wrote:
[quote]
Winning Special Olympics is not as prestigious as winning Olympics. Winning many titles out of many is not more prestigious than winning few titles out of few. Nor is winning internationally more prestigious if the level of competition isn't high. And because BW was so wondrous and obviously > WC3 it relegates WC3 to Special Olympics? That's utter bullcrap. I played BW a bit as a kid, and WC3 a grand total of once. Either way, they're different games and doesn't make WC3 easier. Being an average player in BW doesn't mean you'd make a good WC3 player. Imagine Idra or Ret in WC3 with their macro heavy style and far less micro and how they'd do in WC3? Stephano was mediocre in WC3 and one of the better SC2 foreigners. Skill in one does not equate to skill in the other. Aptitude perhaps, but not actual skill. That's downright disrespectful, to compare something to the Special Olympics. And some of those people are damn amazing, and deserve a bit of respect. Prestige or not, it takes skill to be at the top of a game. Dominating the scene, despite having more games, means more than middling it in a different scene. I love Demu, Ret and Grubby all, but that logic is downright vile. My example of special olympics is only to show that winning X does not equal to winning Y. Middling it in professional football is better than winning it in mobile phone tossing. People seem to have this erroneous idea that all scenes are equal and it is simply not true. My opinion of Idra and Ret in WC3 is that they would have done really well. As has been seen in SC2, the micro of WC3 players has not been better than BW players. In fact, I would go as far as to say the best microers in SC2 seem to have come from BW. When it comes to people like Stephano, they seem to be peaking now instead of then. Although I do agree that sometimes the skills dont translate that well. And why do you think that because they win Special Olympics, they are not as good as the person who win normal Olympics? Don't you think that if they had the same condition and stuff like normal people, they were gonna be great too? Or the person who win normal Olympic, if they had handicaps, would they still be great? The point is, human always reach their best with the tools that they have available. Just because you're good at sword, that doesn't mean you can win against other best spear fighters, or bow fighters once you switch. Just because no one can beat you in barehand combat, doesn't mean no one can beat you in a sword match, cane match,.v.v.v. Switching from BW to SC2 is like switching from medieval to katana, most of the transition is pretty easy, although there're bumps here and there. But switching from BW to WC3 and vice versa, is like switching from using sword and spear/bow, they are just so different in a lot of way, more than just micro and macro. Sometimes the only thing matters is their own discipline. - Build orders and timing attacks are not relevant in WC3 (some of the popular timing attacks you can usually see are 2nd hero getting level 3, or scroll of healing timing attack, but it also depends greatly how you got harassed and how you are positioned, there's no stim timing attack, no weapon +1 attack (kind of)) - You get punished for having good economy (no upkeep, low upkeep, high upkeep), you have to choose to get bigger army or better economy, since your money is not only being invested in army, but in hero items too. - You don't scout to read build order and tech tree, you scout to read troop movement, hero level and items. You can always tp back when your base is being attacked, but if you get ambushed or creepjacked while your heroes are on low health without town portal scroll, you're pretty much screwed. - Sure, you can see no difference in micro between WC3 and BW players, some BW players even have better micro. Hell, even in WC3, you can't really see the difference in micro between some of top players. But the difference between WC3 micro and SC micro is, SC micro happens in a flash while WC3 micro is all about consistency. An engagement in WC3 may last for 3,4 minutes, and the longer it gets the more exhausted it is to micro. That is why players like Moon is praised to have such good micro because even if he has a bad engagement, after 5 minutes he suddenly wins the battle. The micro is more in depth too. They have to literally turn off autocasting spell to maximize the potential. You don't need your sorceress to autocast slow spell to priests because well, they will spend all the time in battle to heal stuff anyway, they're not gonna run anywhere, or your talon to autocast -5armor spells on units that you don't focus fire. Because the battle lasts very long, it's all about how you conserve your units' mana to do stuffs. The point is, arguing about SC and WC3 is silly, why don't we just enjoy the games as a whole? I used to play and follow WC3 and I enjoyed it, now I'm enjoying SC2, that's all that matters. Again about Grubby and Feast, Grubby clearly doesn't mean he's gonna coach Feast. How do you say this, Grubby is not trying to teach Feast how to get stronger, but to show Feast the way of life, like how to deal with everything, teams, sponsors, organization, travels, the mentality. Calling it mentoring is kind of weird, I guess it's like Grubby will act like a big brother to give advice and everything to Feast. I thumbs up this post many times over. Calling out BW vs. WC3 and how things are comparable is asinine. Hell, even calling BW better than WC3 is bullshit. These are games people, and if people think one is harder than the other, they're sorely underestimating the complexity of the other. And to put it frankly, Grubby dominated. And dominated, and then dominated some more in his field of gaming. He wasn't dethroned by some upstart BW pro. Squeegy suggests some sort of intellectual snobbery by the BW pros thinking, "Hey, WC3 is easy, but BW is the true test of skill, so lets not do the prudent thing and switch making tons of money". Bullshit. BW and WC3 are vastly different, and even if BW pros had switched, there is no guarantee they would have done well. Just because someone is a brilliant Neurosurgeon, it doesn't mean that he'd make a good internal medicine doctor. Neurosurgery is one of the most difficult, but if he were to "downgrade" as you lot derisively imply in regards to WC3, he might be terrible with diagnosis. Grubby took on the strongest competition, and stayed at the top for a long career, and deserves recognition for that. Hell, even SC2 is considered easier than BW. I see that oGsFin and golden mouse winner July, etc., are doing well in it. No? It's actually a B-teamer in BW in MMA dominating? And Drg? And the rest? I'm more just incensed about the special olympics comparison. I don't see Phelps beating that armless swimmer from China or wherever in the Olympics should Phelps lose the use of his arms. Vastly different, and honestly, ludicrous and vile argument. And I'd like to reiterate to DeMu and Grubby should they read this, you're both my two favorite players so I am not against any of you, just really annoyed with this WC3 slamming (despite me having only ever played it once as opposed to BW) Games tend to be only as hard as the competition allows. And that is of course the point I have to repeat to people like you over and over again. Special Olympics are not comparable to Olympics because the competition isn't as fierce. Getting to study Law at Harvard is harder than getting to study a vocation in a random vocational school because the competition is more fierce. Succeeding in BW is harder than succeeding in WC3 because the competition is more fierce. When it comes to the question which game is harder to be good at, I will vote BW anyday over WC3. But I don't really care to argue about that. He took on the strongest competition in WC3 and was very succesful. I recognise that and think what he did was of course great. But it's just not that impressive to me when I know the scene wasn't on par with BW. The fact that people seem to make it as big a thing as, say, July's Golden Mouse seems disrespectful to July. To further illustrate my point, yet again via exaggeration (which I repeat is intentional), consider Federer and Grubby. Let us assume for the sake of the argument that they both were the best in their games. I think I am right in saying that most people would find it absurd if you talked of them as equals. Both were the best in their own scenes but as the scenes are not equal, neither are their achievements. That is not to say that Grubby was not great and that his achievements are not worthy of praise. The part about ForGG and July compared to MMA and DRG, well, you can go to the Elephant thread if you wish to discuss that. That point has been explained numerous times already. I'll explain again. It is the competition in Olympic swimming that is more fierce than competition in Special Olympic swimming. I guarantee you Phelps, given that he had no arms, would do better in Special Olympics than the armless swimmer, given that he had arms, would do in Olympics. Perhaps instead of thinking whether an argument is vile or not you should think about their validity. @squeegy, i understand you very good, but this isnt good. Nadal and Federer are one of the kings of tennis, Phelps is one of the king of swimmer, klitschko is one of the king of box, karabatic is one of the king of handball (player), Bolt in 100m run, the one is the best in y, the in other in x, ...etc. If you say, football is more difficult than handball or tennis or basketball. Than by your logic, Messi deserve more recognition than Dwane Wade or LeBron James?! This should be not fair/correct! Even in other way. The same amount is the right way. Compare with 2 very different sports IS always bad like wc3 und sc1. wc3 is a micro-centered, sc1 a macro-centered game. It gets rather tricky when we get to sports that are global and highly popular. But to an extent, yes, the point stands. I am the greatest player of Squeegy (it's a sport I just made up). I have played it with my friends and always won. I deserve the same amount of respect as Messi. Does that sound right? Comparisions can be made even when the games are very different. It just gets harder the larger the scenes are. That is why it is probably impossible to say anything about Messi in comparison to LeBron James. Luckily for us WC3 and BW are rather similar, so the comparison isn't that hard to make. The differences between the games are probably something like between amateur and professional boxing. Or perhaps boxing and kickboxing. I don't think Messi deserve more respect that anybody else in general. He deserve more respect with regards to his discipline (soccer), but not with regard to something else. Like if he would come and talk to me about physics, I wouldn't have any respect for him. So yeah, Grubby has some things to say when talking about WC3, Messi about soccer and you about Squeegy. Unfortunately, nobody is playing Squeegy so your skills won't be very useful. I don't really know how you set up the scale for comparing one sport to another. Is it based on number of players, money, prize pool, number of professional, total time played, something else ? I don't really think it makes much sense to compare two sport in term of one being more difficult than the other. Not all things need to be ordered as A < B. Do you think I was talking about physics or baking here? What about sports in general? We can even narrow it down more. But Imagine this: someone hosts a sport ceremony where all the greatest sports people are invited to but only I and Messi arrive. So the hosts decide to focus all their attention to us, including splitting the million dollar prize. Do you think, I, as the representative of Squeegy deserve it as much as Messi, as the representative of football? How do you think the majority would react? I dare say they would not agree with the decision.
You can't really determine which sport/game is more competitive by the amount of people watching or playing. Especially since the amount of people playing and watching the two games was probably pretty similar. And if that were the case then LoL would be more competitive than both games and I wouldn't dare make that statement on these forums.
|
On February 22 2012 09:33 drgoats wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 08:24 Squeegy wrote:On February 22 2012 08:14 bouhko wrote:On February 20 2012 04:05 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 21:29 Dingodile wrote:On February 19 2012 10:46 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 10:17 Falconblade wrote:On February 19 2012 09:49 canikizu wrote:On February 19 2012 04:50 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 04:34 Falconblade wrote:
[quote]
And because BW was so wondrous and obviously > WC3 it relegates WC3 to Special Olympics?
That's utter bullcrap. I played BW a bit as a kid, and WC3 a grand total of once. Either way, they're different games and doesn't make WC3 easier. Being an average player in BW doesn't mean you'd make a good WC3 player. Imagine Idra or Ret in WC3 with their macro heavy style and far less micro and how they'd do in WC3? Stephano was mediocre in WC3 and one of the better SC2 foreigners. Skill in one does not equate to skill in the other. Aptitude perhaps, but not actual skill.
That's downright disrespectful, to compare something to the Special Olympics. And some of those people are damn amazing, and deserve a bit of respect. Prestige or not, it takes skill to be at the top of a game. Dominating the scene, despite having more games, means more than middling it in a different scene.
I love Demu, Ret and Grubby all, but that logic is downright vile. My example of special olympics is only to show that winning X does not equal to winning Y. Middling it in professional football is better than winning it in mobile phone tossing. People seem to have this erroneous idea that all scenes are equal and it is simply not true. My opinion of Idra and Ret in WC3 is that they would have done really well. As has been seen in SC2, the micro of WC3 players has not been better than BW players. In fact, I would go as far as to say the best microers in SC2 seem to have come from BW. When it comes to people like Stephano, they seem to be peaking now instead of then. Although I do agree that sometimes the skills dont translate that well. And why do you think that because they win Special Olympics, they are not as good as the person who win normal Olympics? Don't you think that if they had the same condition and stuff like normal people, they were gonna be great too? Or the person who win normal Olympic, if they had handicaps, would they still be great? The point is, human always reach their best with the tools that they have available. Just because you're good at sword, that doesn't mean you can win against other best spear fighters, or bow fighters once you switch. Just because no one can beat you in barehand combat, doesn't mean no one can beat you in a sword match, cane match,.v.v.v. Switching from BW to SC2 is like switching from medieval to katana, most of the transition is pretty easy, although there're bumps here and there. But switching from BW to WC3 and vice versa, is like switching from using sword and spear/bow, they are just so different in a lot of way, more than just micro and macro. Sometimes the only thing matters is their own discipline. - Build orders and timing attacks are not relevant in WC3 (some of the popular timing attacks you can usually see are 2nd hero getting level 3, or scroll of healing timing attack, but it also depends greatly how you got harassed and how you are positioned, there's no stim timing attack, no weapon +1 attack (kind of)) - You get punished for having good economy (no upkeep, low upkeep, high upkeep), you have to choose to get bigger army or better economy, since your money is not only being invested in army, but in hero items too. - You don't scout to read build order and tech tree, you scout to read troop movement, hero level and items. You can always tp back when your base is being attacked, but if you get ambushed or creepjacked while your heroes are on low health without town portal scroll, you're pretty much screwed. - Sure, you can see no difference in micro between WC3 and BW players, some BW players even have better micro. Hell, even in WC3, you can't really see the difference in micro between some of top players. But the difference between WC3 micro and SC micro is, SC micro happens in a flash while WC3 micro is all about consistency. An engagement in WC3 may last for 3,4 minutes, and the longer it gets the more exhausted it is to micro. That is why players like Moon is praised to have such good micro because even if he has a bad engagement, after 5 minutes he suddenly wins the battle. The micro is more in depth too. They have to literally turn off autocasting spell to maximize the potential. You don't need your sorceress to autocast slow spell to priests because well, they will spend all the time in battle to heal stuff anyway, they're not gonna run anywhere, or your talon to autocast -5armor spells on units that you don't focus fire. Because the battle lasts very long, it's all about how you conserve your units' mana to do stuffs. The point is, arguing about SC and WC3 is silly, why don't we just enjoy the games as a whole? I used to play and follow WC3 and I enjoyed it, now I'm enjoying SC2, that's all that matters. Again about Grubby and Feast, Grubby clearly doesn't mean he's gonna coach Feast. How do you say this, Grubby is not trying to teach Feast how to get stronger, but to show Feast the way of life, like how to deal with everything, teams, sponsors, organization, travels, the mentality. Calling it mentoring is kind of weird, I guess it's like Grubby will act like a big brother to give advice and everything to Feast. I thumbs up this post many times over. Calling out BW vs. WC3 and how things are comparable is asinine. Hell, even calling BW better than WC3 is bullshit. These are games people, and if people think one is harder than the other, they're sorely underestimating the complexity of the other. And to put it frankly, Grubby dominated. And dominated, and then dominated some more in his field of gaming. He wasn't dethroned by some upstart BW pro. Squeegy suggests some sort of intellectual snobbery by the BW pros thinking, "Hey, WC3 is easy, but BW is the true test of skill, so lets not do the prudent thing and switch making tons of money". Bullshit. BW and WC3 are vastly different, and even if BW pros had switched, there is no guarantee they would have done well. Just because someone is a brilliant Neurosurgeon, it doesn't mean that he'd make a good internal medicine doctor. Neurosurgery is one of the most difficult, but if he were to "downgrade" as you lot derisively imply in regards to WC3, he might be terrible with diagnosis. Grubby took on the strongest competition, and stayed at the top for a long career, and deserves recognition for that. Hell, even SC2 is considered easier than BW. I see that oGsFin and golden mouse winner July, etc., are doing well in it. No? It's actually a B-teamer in BW in MMA dominating? And Drg? And the rest? I'm more just incensed about the special olympics comparison. I don't see Phelps beating that armless swimmer from China or wherever in the Olympics should Phelps lose the use of his arms. Vastly different, and honestly, ludicrous and vile argument. And I'd like to reiterate to DeMu and Grubby should they read this, you're both my two favorite players so I am not against any of you, just really annoyed with this WC3 slamming (despite me having only ever played it once as opposed to BW) Games tend to be only as hard as the competition allows. And that is of course the point I have to repeat to people like you over and over again. Special Olympics are not comparable to Olympics because the competition isn't as fierce. Getting to study Law at Harvard is harder than getting to study a vocation in a random vocational school because the competition is more fierce. Succeeding in BW is harder than succeeding in WC3 because the competition is more fierce. When it comes to the question which game is harder to be good at, I will vote BW anyday over WC3. But I don't really care to argue about that. He took on the strongest competition in WC3 and was very succesful. I recognise that and think what he did was of course great. But it's just not that impressive to me when I know the scene wasn't on par with BW. The fact that people seem to make it as big a thing as, say, July's Golden Mouse seems disrespectful to July. To further illustrate my point, yet again via exaggeration (which I repeat is intentional), consider Federer and Grubby. Let us assume for the sake of the argument that they both were the best in their games. I think I am right in saying that most people would find it absurd if you talked of them as equals. Both were the best in their own scenes but as the scenes are not equal, neither are their achievements. That is not to say that Grubby was not great and that his achievements are not worthy of praise. The part about ForGG and July compared to MMA and DRG, well, you can go to the Elephant thread if you wish to discuss that. That point has been explained numerous times already. I'll explain again. It is the competition in Olympic swimming that is more fierce than competition in Special Olympic swimming. I guarantee you Phelps, given that he had no arms, would do better in Special Olympics than the armless swimmer, given that he had arms, would do in Olympics. Perhaps instead of thinking whether an argument is vile or not you should think about their validity. @squeegy, i understand you very good, but this isnt good. Nadal and Federer are one of the kings of tennis, Phelps is one of the king of swimmer, klitschko is one of the king of box, karabatic is one of the king of handball (player), Bolt in 100m run, the one is the best in y, the in other in x, ...etc. If you say, football is more difficult than handball or tennis or basketball. Than by your logic, Messi deserve more recognition than Dwane Wade or LeBron James?! This should be not fair/correct! Even in other way. The same amount is the right way. Compare with 2 very different sports IS always bad like wc3 und sc1. wc3 is a micro-centered, sc1 a macro-centered game. It gets rather tricky when we get to sports that are global and highly popular. But to an extent, yes, the point stands. I am the greatest player of Squeegy (it's a sport I just made up). I have played it with my friends and always won. I deserve the same amount of respect as Messi. Does that sound right? Comparisions can be made even when the games are very different. It just gets harder the larger the scenes are. That is why it is probably impossible to say anything about Messi in comparison to LeBron James. Luckily for us WC3 and BW are rather similar, so the comparison isn't that hard to make. The differences between the games are probably something like between amateur and professional boxing. Or perhaps boxing and kickboxing. I don't think Messi deserve more respect that anybody else in general. He deserve more respect with regards to his discipline (soccer), but not with regard to something else. Like if he would come and talk to me about physics, I wouldn't have any respect for him. So yeah, Grubby has some things to say when talking about WC3, Messi about soccer and you about Squeegy. Unfortunately, nobody is playing Squeegy so your skills won't be very useful. I don't really know how you set up the scale for comparing one sport to another. Is it based on number of players, money, prize pool, number of professional, total time played, something else ? I don't really think it makes much sense to compare two sport in term of one being more difficult than the other. Not all things need to be ordered as A < B. Do you think I was talking about physics or baking here? What about sports in general? We can even narrow it down more. But Imagine this: someone hosts a sport ceremony where all the greatest sports people are invited to but only I and Messi arrive. So the hosts decide to focus all their attention to us, including splitting the million dollar prize. Do you think, I, as the representative of Squeegy deserve it as much as Messi, as the representative of football? How do you think the majority would react? I dare say they would not agree with the decision. You can't really determine which sport/game is more competitive by the amount of people watching or playing. Especially since the amount of people playing and watching the two games was probably pretty similar. And if that were the case then LoL would be more competitive than both games and I wouldn't dare make that statement on these forums.
That is a nice assertion. But what about the questions I asked. Do you have an answer to them?
|
Can I get mentored as well?
|
I demand to see his first lightsaber.
|
That's the spirit! Attitude like that will move the sport forward.
|
Things like this are why i love Grubby. He's such a great spokesperson for eSports and he could write a how-to on how to conduct yourself in a professional manner. Keep up the good work, I'll be rooting for you!
|
On February 22 2012 08:24 Squeegy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 08:14 bouhko wrote:On February 20 2012 04:05 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 21:29 Dingodile wrote:On February 19 2012 10:46 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 10:17 Falconblade wrote:On February 19 2012 09:49 canikizu wrote:On February 19 2012 04:50 Squeegy wrote:On February 19 2012 04:34 Falconblade wrote:On February 19 2012 04:19 Squeegy wrote:
[quote]
Winning Special Olympics is not as prestigious as winning Olympics. Winning many titles out of many is not more prestigious than winning few titles out of few. Nor is winning internationally more prestigious if the level of competition isn't high. And because BW was so wondrous and obviously > WC3 it relegates WC3 to Special Olympics? That's utter bullcrap. I played BW a bit as a kid, and WC3 a grand total of once. Either way, they're different games and doesn't make WC3 easier. Being an average player in BW doesn't mean you'd make a good WC3 player. Imagine Idra or Ret in WC3 with their macro heavy style and far less micro and how they'd do in WC3? Stephano was mediocre in WC3 and one of the better SC2 foreigners. Skill in one does not equate to skill in the other. Aptitude perhaps, but not actual skill. That's downright disrespectful, to compare something to the Special Olympics. And some of those people are damn amazing, and deserve a bit of respect. Prestige or not, it takes skill to be at the top of a game. Dominating the scene, despite having more games, means more than middling it in a different scene. I love Demu, Ret and Grubby all, but that logic is downright vile. My example of special olympics is only to show that winning X does not equal to winning Y. Middling it in professional football is better than winning it in mobile phone tossing. People seem to have this erroneous idea that all scenes are equal and it is simply not true. My opinion of Idra and Ret in WC3 is that they would have done really well. As has been seen in SC2, the micro of WC3 players has not been better than BW players. In fact, I would go as far as to say the best microers in SC2 seem to have come from BW. When it comes to people like Stephano, they seem to be peaking now instead of then. Although I do agree that sometimes the skills dont translate that well. And why do you think that because they win Special Olympics, they are not as good as the person who win normal Olympics? Don't you think that if they had the same condition and stuff like normal people, they were gonna be great too? Or the person who win normal Olympic, if they had handicaps, would they still be great? The point is, human always reach their best with the tools that they have available. Just because you're good at sword, that doesn't mean you can win against other best spear fighters, or bow fighters once you switch. Just because no one can beat you in barehand combat, doesn't mean no one can beat you in a sword match, cane match,.v.v.v. Switching from BW to SC2 is like switching from medieval to katana, most of the transition is pretty easy, although there're bumps here and there. But switching from BW to WC3 and vice versa, is like switching from using sword and spear/bow, they are just so different in a lot of way, more than just micro and macro. Sometimes the only thing matters is their own discipline. - Build orders and timing attacks are not relevant in WC3 (some of the popular timing attacks you can usually see are 2nd hero getting level 3, or scroll of healing timing attack, but it also depends greatly how you got harassed and how you are positioned, there's no stim timing attack, no weapon +1 attack (kind of)) - You get punished for having good economy (no upkeep, low upkeep, high upkeep), you have to choose to get bigger army or better economy, since your money is not only being invested in army, but in hero items too. - You don't scout to read build order and tech tree, you scout to read troop movement, hero level and items. You can always tp back when your base is being attacked, but if you get ambushed or creepjacked while your heroes are on low health without town portal scroll, you're pretty much screwed. - Sure, you can see no difference in micro between WC3 and BW players, some BW players even have better micro. Hell, even in WC3, you can't really see the difference in micro between some of top players. But the difference between WC3 micro and SC micro is, SC micro happens in a flash while WC3 micro is all about consistency. An engagement in WC3 may last for 3,4 minutes, and the longer it gets the more exhausted it is to micro. That is why players like Moon is praised to have such good micro because even if he has a bad engagement, after 5 minutes he suddenly wins the battle. The micro is more in depth too. They have to literally turn off autocasting spell to maximize the potential. You don't need your sorceress to autocast slow spell to priests because well, they will spend all the time in battle to heal stuff anyway, they're not gonna run anywhere, or your talon to autocast -5armor spells on units that you don't focus fire. Because the battle lasts very long, it's all about how you conserve your units' mana to do stuffs. The point is, arguing about SC and WC3 is silly, why don't we just enjoy the games as a whole? I used to play and follow WC3 and I enjoyed it, now I'm enjoying SC2, that's all that matters. Again about Grubby and Feast, Grubby clearly doesn't mean he's gonna coach Feast. How do you say this, Grubby is not trying to teach Feast how to get stronger, but to show Feast the way of life, like how to deal with everything, teams, sponsors, organization, travels, the mentality. Calling it mentoring is kind of weird, I guess it's like Grubby will act like a big brother to give advice and everything to Feast. I thumbs up this post many times over. Calling out BW vs. WC3 and how things are comparable is asinine. Hell, even calling BW better than WC3 is bullshit. These are games people, and if people think one is harder than the other, they're sorely underestimating the complexity of the other. And to put it frankly, Grubby dominated. And dominated, and then dominated some more in his field of gaming. He wasn't dethroned by some upstart BW pro. Squeegy suggests some sort of intellectual snobbery by the BW pros thinking, "Hey, WC3 is easy, but BW is the true test of skill, so lets not do the prudent thing and switch making tons of money". Bullshit. BW and WC3 are vastly different, and even if BW pros had switched, there is no guarantee they would have done well. Just because someone is a brilliant Neurosurgeon, it doesn't mean that he'd make a good internal medicine doctor. Neurosurgery is one of the most difficult, but if he were to "downgrade" as you lot derisively imply in regards to WC3, he might be terrible with diagnosis. Grubby took on the strongest competition, and stayed at the top for a long career, and deserves recognition for that. Hell, even SC2 is considered easier than BW. I see that oGsFin and golden mouse winner July, etc., are doing well in it. No? It's actually a B-teamer in BW in MMA dominating? And Drg? And the rest? I'm more just incensed about the special olympics comparison. I don't see Phelps beating that armless swimmer from China or wherever in the Olympics should Phelps lose the use of his arms. Vastly different, and honestly, ludicrous and vile argument. And I'd like to reiterate to DeMu and Grubby should they read this, you're both my two favorite players so I am not against any of you, just really annoyed with this WC3 slamming (despite me having only ever played it once as opposed to BW) Games tend to be only as hard as the competition allows. And that is of course the point I have to repeat to people like you over and over again. Special Olympics are not comparable to Olympics because the competition isn't as fierce. Getting to study Law at Harvard is harder than getting to study a vocation in a random vocational school because the competition is more fierce. Succeeding in BW is harder than succeeding in WC3 because the competition is more fierce. When it comes to the question which game is harder to be good at, I will vote BW anyday over WC3. But I don't really care to argue about that. He took on the strongest competition in WC3 and was very succesful. I recognise that and think what he did was of course great. But it's just not that impressive to me when I know the scene wasn't on par with BW. The fact that people seem to make it as big a thing as, say, July's Golden Mouse seems disrespectful to July. To further illustrate my point, yet again via exaggeration (which I repeat is intentional), consider Federer and Grubby. Let us assume for the sake of the argument that they both were the best in their games. I think I am right in saying that most people would find it absurd if you talked of them as equals. Both were the best in their own scenes but as the scenes are not equal, neither are their achievements. That is not to say that Grubby was not great and that his achievements are not worthy of praise. The part about ForGG and July compared to MMA and DRG, well, you can go to the Elephant thread if you wish to discuss that. That point has been explained numerous times already. I'll explain again. It is the competition in Olympic swimming that is more fierce than competition in Special Olympic swimming. I guarantee you Phelps, given that he had no arms, would do better in Special Olympics than the armless swimmer, given that he had arms, would do in Olympics. Perhaps instead of thinking whether an argument is vile or not you should think about their validity. @squeegy, i understand you very good, but this isnt good. Nadal and Federer are one of the kings of tennis, Phelps is one of the king of swimmer, klitschko is one of the king of box, karabatic is one of the king of handball (player), Bolt in 100m run, the one is the best in y, the in other in x, ...etc. If you say, football is more difficult than handball or tennis or basketball. Than by your logic, Messi deserve more recognition than Dwane Wade or LeBron James?! This should be not fair/correct! Even in other way. The same amount is the right way. Compare with 2 very different sports IS always bad like wc3 und sc1. wc3 is a micro-centered, sc1 a macro-centered game. It gets rather tricky when we get to sports that are global and highly popular. But to an extent, yes, the point stands. I am the greatest player of Squeegy (it's a sport I just made up). I have played it with my friends and always won. I deserve the same amount of respect as Messi. Does that sound right? Comparisions can be made even when the games are very different. It just gets harder the larger the scenes are. That is why it is probably impossible to say anything about Messi in comparison to LeBron James. Luckily for us WC3 and BW are rather similar, so the comparison isn't that hard to make. The differences between the games are probably something like between amateur and professional boxing. Or perhaps boxing and kickboxing. I don't think Messi deserve more respect that anybody else in general. He deserve more respect with regards to his discipline (soccer), but not with regard to something else. Like if he would come and talk to me about physics, I wouldn't have any respect for him. So yeah, Grubby has some things to say when talking about WC3, Messi about soccer and you about Squeegy. Unfortunately, nobody is playing Squeegy so your skills won't be very useful. I don't really know how you set up the scale for comparing one sport to another. Is it based on number of players, money, prize pool, number of professional, total time played, something else ? I don't really think it makes much sense to compare two sport in term of one being more difficult than the other. Not all things need to be ordered as A < B. Do you think I was talking about physics or baking here? What about sports in general? We can even narrow it down more. But Imagine this: someone hosts a sport ceremony where all the greatest sports people are invited to but only I and Messi arrive. So the hosts decide to focus all their attention to us, including splitting the million dollar prize. Do you think, I, as the representative of Squeegy deserve it as much as Messi, as the representative of football? How do you think the majority would react? I dare say they would not agree with the decision.
Well, it's up to the people who give you one million dollar to decide how they want to spend their money. Maybe they can decide to give more to Messi because he's more well-known, but being well-known doesn't mean his sport is better or more competitive than another one.
The thing is, you need to define how you compare two sports competitiveness. Again, is it the prize pool, the amount of viewers, the amount of players, the amount of training or something else ?
|
On February 22 2012 11:02 Klogbert wrote:
Things like this are why i love Grubby. He's such a great spokesperson for eSports and he could write a how-to on how to conduct yourself in a professional manner. Keep up the good work, I'll be rooting for you!
Minus his BM vs Demuslim in MLG Arena.. I expected better from him... Lighten up dude
|
On February 26 2012 10:53 3rdEYEsix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 11:02 Klogbert wrote:
Things like this are why i love Grubby. He's such a great spokesperson for eSports and he could write a how-to on how to conduct yourself in a professional manner. Keep up the good work, I'll be rooting for you! Minus his BM vs Demuslim in MLG Arena.. I expected better from him... Lighten up dude
What for a BM? If you're reffering to the last game on TDA: This was not BM but trying to keep the last 1% winpercentage. Otherwise: What did i miss? o0
|
On February 26 2012 11:03 o)_Saurus wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 10:53 3rdEYEsix wrote:On February 22 2012 11:02 Klogbert wrote:
Things like this are why i love Grubby. He's such a great spokesperson for eSports and he could write a how-to on how to conduct yourself in a professional manner. Keep up the good work, I'll be rooting for you! Minus his BM vs Demuslim in MLG Arena.. I expected better from him... Lighten up dude What for a BM? If you're reffering to the last game on TDA: This was not BM but trying to keep the last 1% winpercentage. Otherwise: What did i miss? o0
Could someone shed some light on this? What happened?
|
On February 27 2012 00:18 solidbebe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2012 11:03 o)_Saurus wrote:On February 26 2012 10:53 3rdEYEsix wrote:On February 22 2012 11:02 Klogbert wrote:
Things like this are why i love Grubby. He's such a great spokesperson for eSports and he could write a how-to on how to conduct yourself in a professional manner. Keep up the good work, I'll be rooting for you! Minus his BM vs Demuslim in MLG Arena.. I expected better from him... Lighten up dude What for a BM? If you're reffering to the last game on TDA: This was not BM but trying to keep the last 1% winpercentage. Otherwise: What did i miss? o0 Could someone shed some light on this? What happened?
last game grubby was pretty dead with no army and like 70 supply down and hid pylon and assimlators around when it was 3 stalkers and 3 zealots vs like 30 marines 3 tanks and 2 banshees
|
What Grubby did in that game was BM. In a base race it is one thing to hide assimilators and pylons if you have a standing army that has a chance to defeat his army/buildings (which is questionable given Demusilm was terran and floating). It is also fine if you have enough money to build production facilities or a nexus and you are trying to stay alive that way. However when you have less then 100 minerals, can only build assimilators, all of your structures are dead, and your supply is literally 7 vs 70 it is BM to then proceed to prolong the game for no other reason then your own pride. No one here can say he was playing to win at that point; when he could only build assimilators.
|
On February 27 2012 00:27 JBrown08 wrote:
What Grubby did in that game was BM. In a base race it is one thing to hide assimilators and pylons if you have a standing army that has a chance to defeat his army/buildings (which is questionable given Demusilm was terran and floating). It is also fine if you have enough money to build production facilities or a nexus and you are trying to stay alive that way. However when you have less then 100 minerals, can only build assimilators, all of your structures are dead, and your supply is literally 7 vs 70 it is BM to then proceed to prolong the game for no other reason then your own pride. No one here can say he was playing to win at that point; when he could only build assimilators.
Wow, just wow. Trying your hardest to win and not giving up when things look bad are what make amazing comebacks, and they are not in fact signs of BM.
|
Grubby <3!!! You're such boss for going jedi master on Feast.
Yeah, and also stop derailing the thread, kk thx bye.
|
On February 27 2012 00:39 Westy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2012 00:27 JBrown08 wrote:
What Grubby did in that game was BM. In a base race it is one thing to hide assimilators and pylons if you have a standing army that has a chance to defeat his army/buildings (which is questionable given Demusilm was terran and floating). It is also fine if you have enough money to build production facilities or a nexus and you are trying to stay alive that way. However when you have less then 100 minerals, can only build assimilators, all of your structures are dead, and your supply is literally 7 vs 70 it is BM to then proceed to prolong the game for no other reason then your own pride. No one here can say he was playing to win at that point; when he could only build assimilators. Wow, just wow. Trying your hardest to win and not giving up when things look bad are what make amazing comebacks, and they are not in fact signs of BM.
Things weren't looking bad, they were over. Would you feel the same if a Terran had lifted all of his buildings floated them to the corners of the map and waited for protoss to tech all the way back up to starport and did not leave until every last building was killed (with no standing army mind you)?
He had no money, his units couldn't win in a straight up fight, and everyone knew it was over. He was not fighting to the last moment, he was dead and prolonging a game in which he could not build a single thing other than an assimilator. Im sorry to tell you this, but when all you can build is an assimilator you have no chance.
It is only at that exact moment that it becomes BM, not before. Not while he was building useful units, not while he had a chance and not when he wasn't revealed. It was when he was revealed, built and assimilator, waited for it to be found, and built another one across map for no reason.
I feel like I am in the Monty Python sketch about the Parrot; Grubby was infact a dead Parrot and you aren't gonna sell me that he was just pining for the fields.
|
Wo Grubby you are so nice! Gogo! Help Feast to reach the top 
|
grubby and demuslim know each other for years, this is no big deal to them whatsoever, so why should it be to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
