|
On August 21 2012 13:07 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2012 13:03 Fyrewolf wrote:On August 21 2012 12:44 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 12:42 BearStorm wrote:On August 21 2012 12:16 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 12:04 Liquid`NonY wrote:On August 21 2012 08:30 Tao367 wrote:On August 21 2012 08:26 Liquid`NonY wrote:On August 21 2012 07:38 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 07:34 fire_brand wrote:
[quote]
Not at all. Nony gateway expands more often than not in his PvZs and yet he's GM. This completely throws a lot of the Toss QQ out the window. Adapt or die. No offense to Liquid`Nony or his opponents, but firstly they are not top tier, secondly his opponent tends to not abuse his opening (from what I've seen on his stream). the OP's opponents are better than mine? :o there is no way to abuse my opening. i have a safe, cover-all opening. trying to "abuse" it is a sure way to get a disadvantage. i've lost early game by getting outplayed. but there's never a zerg build that can automatically get an advantage against me when im playing my build just as well or better Respectfully, this makes no sense. Yes gateway openings are viable. Not disputing that. However, the random opponent (unless they're special) can make a reasonable assumption that you won't be ffe'ing. Then the opponent knows you're not going for that build, and can pretty much make a build to directly counter the gateway opening here. That's the issue me, and a lot of other people are having. The extreme majority of your opponents are not random, and are not likely to just simply assume you are going for a gateway opening. That's the issue here. I've played against people who know to expect gateway openings from me. In fact, they know to expect 2gate expand from me so they know I won't be aggressive while on one base and they know my production directly after expanding is limited. I still haven't seen a direct counter. No, I'm not playing against Stephano and shit, but neither are you. And you are worried that a random player who plays ZvP 1/9 of the time is going to come up with a direct counter. I've gone 3-0 against zergs on ladder doing identical builds up to 7:30 game time. I beat zergs that blindly do things that would be stupid as hell against any other protoss but neatly work against my exact build. If your opponents were somewhat decent (e.g. stephano) there is no way they would be able to lose if they abuse your opening in an intelligent way. I didn't know Stephano would be considered "somewhat decent". Makes me wonder who I can call "good". Also the thing about safe openings is that they are really hard to outright counter. You might be able to take risks and get ahead, but that's the nature of any opening. So how can you claim there is "no way they would be able to lose"? Why don't you explain how you would abuse the opening? That is unless you are claiming you don't know how to abuse it in an intelligent way. Do you even know the opening? You can call whoever you consider good good. I quoted the post where I explained an example of a way to abuse. As far as your stating that all openings can be abused, I agree, it's just that FFE has a better worst case scenario. No, that was not a good example of abuse. Hiding a base and crossing your fingers hoping it works out is not a good way to abuse any build; it's trying to exploit a solid build by doing something really exploitable. Taking a risk and being greedy like that can pay off, but if it's unwarranted then it just ends up being a bad play, even if it does last long enough to pay off. And FFE having a better worst case scenario than gateway expands is highly debateable. You dont seem to understand what abuse means. In my example, how could the risk not pay off?
By losing the hidden third because you have no units for one. Nony has spent quite a lot of time making his build quite solid. A troll who just joined tl today isn't going to convince anyone that it's not a viable build with poor theorycrafting like that.
|
On August 21 2012 13:16 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2012 13:07 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 13:03 Fyrewolf wrote:On August 21 2012 12:44 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 12:42 BearStorm wrote:On August 21 2012 12:16 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 12:04 Liquid`NonY wrote:On August 21 2012 08:30 Tao367 wrote:On August 21 2012 08:26 Liquid`NonY wrote:On August 21 2012 07:38 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:
[quote]
No offense to Liquid`Nony or his opponents, but firstly they are not top tier, secondly his opponent tends to not abuse his opening (from what I've seen on his stream). the OP's opponents are better than mine? :o there is no way to abuse my opening. i have a safe, cover-all opening. trying to "abuse" it is a sure way to get a disadvantage. i've lost early game by getting outplayed. but there's never a zerg build that can automatically get an advantage against me when im playing my build just as well or better Respectfully, this makes no sense. Yes gateway openings are viable. Not disputing that. However, the random opponent (unless they're special) can make a reasonable assumption that you won't be ffe'ing. Then the opponent knows you're not going for that build, and can pretty much make a build to directly counter the gateway opening here. That's the issue me, and a lot of other people are having. The extreme majority of your opponents are not random, and are not likely to just simply assume you are going for a gateway opening. That's the issue here. I've played against people who know to expect gateway openings from me. In fact, they know to expect 2gate expand from me so they know I won't be aggressive while on one base and they know my production directly after expanding is limited. I still haven't seen a direct counter. No, I'm not playing against Stephano and shit, but neither are you. And you are worried that a random player who plays ZvP 1/9 of the time is going to come up with a direct counter. I've gone 3-0 against zergs on ladder doing identical builds up to 7:30 game time. I beat zergs that blindly do things that would be stupid as hell against any other protoss but neatly work against my exact build. If your opponents were somewhat decent (e.g. stephano) there is no way they would be able to lose if they abuse your opening in an intelligent way. I didn't know Stephano would be considered "somewhat decent". Makes me wonder who I can call "good". Also the thing about safe openings is that they are really hard to outright counter. You might be able to take risks and get ahead, but that's the nature of any opening. So how can you claim there is "no way they would be able to lose"? Why don't you explain how you would abuse the opening? That is unless you are claiming you don't know how to abuse it in an intelligent way. Do you even know the opening? You can call whoever you consider good good. I quoted the post where I explained an example of a way to abuse. As far as your stating that all openings can be abused, I agree, it's just that FFE has a better worst case scenario. No, that was not a good example of abuse. Hiding a base and crossing your fingers hoping it works out is not a good way to abuse any build; it's trying to exploit a solid build by doing something really exploitable. Taking a risk and being greedy like that can pay off, but if it's unwarranted then it just ends up being a bad play, even if it does last long enough to pay off. And FFE having a better worst case scenario than gateway expands is highly debateable. You dont seem to understand what abuse means. In my example, how could the risk not pay off? By losing the hidden third because you have no units for one. Nony has spent quite a lot of time making his build quite solid. A troll who just joined tl today isn't going to convince anyone that it's not a viable build with poor theorycrafting like that.
Why am I even bothering posting at all. Too many brain-damaged noobs here. Consider this my resignation.
|
On August 21 2012 13:18 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2012 13:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On August 21 2012 13:07 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 13:03 Fyrewolf wrote:On August 21 2012 12:44 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 12:42 BearStorm wrote:On August 21 2012 12:16 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 12:04 Liquid`NonY wrote:On August 21 2012 08:30 Tao367 wrote:On August 21 2012 08:26 Liquid`NonY wrote:
[quote]
the OP's opponents are better than mine? :o
there is no way to abuse my opening. i have a safe, cover-all opening. trying to "abuse" it is a sure way to get a disadvantage. i've lost early game by getting outplayed. but there's never a zerg build that can automatically get an advantage against me when im playing my build just as well or better Respectfully, this makes no sense. Yes gateway openings are viable. Not disputing that. However, the random opponent (unless they're special) can make a reasonable assumption that you won't be ffe'ing. Then the opponent knows you're not going for that build, and can pretty much make a build to directly counter the gateway opening here. That's the issue me, and a lot of other people are having. The extreme majority of your opponents are not random, and are not likely to just simply assume you are going for a gateway opening. That's the issue here. I've played against people who know to expect gateway openings from me. In fact, they know to expect 2gate expand from me so they know I won't be aggressive while on one base and they know my production directly after expanding is limited. I still haven't seen a direct counter. No, I'm not playing against Stephano and shit, but neither are you. And you are worried that a random player who plays ZvP 1/9 of the time is going to come up with a direct counter. I've gone 3-0 against zergs on ladder doing identical builds up to 7:30 game time. I beat zergs that blindly do things that would be stupid as hell against any other protoss but neatly work against my exact build. If your opponents were somewhat decent (e.g. stephano) there is no way they would be able to lose if they abuse your opening in an intelligent way. I didn't know Stephano would be considered "somewhat decent". Makes me wonder who I can call "good". Also the thing about safe openings is that they are really hard to outright counter. You might be able to take risks and get ahead, but that's the nature of any opening. So how can you claim there is "no way they would be able to lose"? Why don't you explain how you would abuse the opening? That is unless you are claiming you don't know how to abuse it in an intelligent way. Do you even know the opening? You can call whoever you consider good good. I quoted the post where I explained an example of a way to abuse. As far as your stating that all openings can be abused, I agree, it's just that FFE has a better worst case scenario. No, that was not a good example of abuse. Hiding a base and crossing your fingers hoping it works out is not a good way to abuse any build; it's trying to exploit a solid build by doing something really exploitable. Taking a risk and being greedy like that can pay off, but if it's unwarranted then it just ends up being a bad play, even if it does last long enough to pay off. And FFE having a better worst case scenario than gateway expands is highly debateable. You dont seem to understand what abuse means. In my example, how could the risk not pay off? By losing the hidden third because you have no units for one. Nony has spent quite a lot of time making his build quite solid. A troll who just joined tl today isn't going to convince anyone that it's not a viable build with poor theorycrafting like that. Why am I even bothering posting at all. Too many brain-damaged noobs here. Consider this my resignation.
And TL became a slightly better place to be 
|
On August 21 2012 13:18 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2012 13:16 Fyrewolf wrote:On August 21 2012 13:07 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 13:03 Fyrewolf wrote:On August 21 2012 12:44 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 12:42 BearStorm wrote:On August 21 2012 12:16 BBQ`BBQKingPrime wrote:On August 21 2012 12:04 Liquid`NonY wrote:On August 21 2012 08:30 Tao367 wrote:On August 21 2012 08:26 Liquid`NonY wrote:
[quote]
the OP's opponents are better than mine? :o
there is no way to abuse my opening. i have a safe, cover-all opening. trying to "abuse" it is a sure way to get a disadvantage. i've lost early game by getting outplayed. but there's never a zerg build that can automatically get an advantage against me when im playing my build just as well or better Respectfully, this makes no sense. Yes gateway openings are viable. Not disputing that. However, the random opponent (unless they're special) can make a reasonable assumption that you won't be ffe'ing. Then the opponent knows you're not going for that build, and can pretty much make a build to directly counter the gateway opening here. That's the issue me, and a lot of other people are having. The extreme majority of your opponents are not random, and are not likely to just simply assume you are going for a gateway opening. That's the issue here. I've played against people who know to expect gateway openings from me. In fact, they know to expect 2gate expand from me so they know I won't be aggressive while on one base and they know my production directly after expanding is limited. I still haven't seen a direct counter. No, I'm not playing against Stephano and shit, but neither are you. And you are worried that a random player who plays ZvP 1/9 of the time is going to come up with a direct counter. I've gone 3-0 against zergs on ladder doing identical builds up to 7:30 game time. I beat zergs that blindly do things that would be stupid as hell against any other protoss but neatly work against my exact build. If your opponents were somewhat decent (e.g. stephano) there is no way they would be able to lose if they abuse your opening in an intelligent way. I didn't know Stephano would be considered "somewhat decent". Makes me wonder who I can call "good". Also the thing about safe openings is that they are really hard to outright counter. You might be able to take risks and get ahead, but that's the nature of any opening. So how can you claim there is "no way they would be able to lose"? Why don't you explain how you would abuse the opening? That is unless you are claiming you don't know how to abuse it in an intelligent way. Do you even know the opening? You can call whoever you consider good good. I quoted the post where I explained an example of a way to abuse. As far as your stating that all openings can be abused, I agree, it's just that FFE has a better worst case scenario. No, that was not a good example of abuse. Hiding a base and crossing your fingers hoping it works out is not a good way to abuse any build; it's trying to exploit a solid build by doing something really exploitable. Taking a risk and being greedy like that can pay off, but if it's unwarranted then it just ends up being a bad play, even if it does last long enough to pay off. And FFE having a better worst case scenario than gateway expands is highly debateable. You dont seem to understand what abuse means. In my example, how could the risk not pay off? By losing the hidden third because you have no units for one. Nony has spent quite a lot of time making his build quite solid. A troll who just joined tl today isn't going to convince anyone that it's not a viable build with poor theorycrafting like that. Why am I even bothering posting at all. Too many brain-damaged noobs here. Consider this my resignation.
shoo! troll. this is no place for you.
i dont think you're actually a troll but your last comment was appropriately ironic.
|
On August 21 2012 12:54 Grimmyman123 wrote:
When I see Random, I think Cheese, all in play, and no skill outside of those traits.
On a 4 player map, it is VERY hard to guess what race your opponent is, and prepare accordingly for the ensuing cheese, until you scout the race, and the cheese which is being prepared. On 2 player maps, the cheese is even more agressive - I sometimes will scout with my 7 probe to get the race proper, so I can take appropriate action immediately.
As such, I give Random players no ground or respect- I simply cannot be bothered to play against an opponent that cannot even decide what race he wants to be, and moreso they have no desire to learn the minute intricacies related to a specific race. I just leave the match, Random's are not worth my time whatsoever. They can have the points, it's their reward for being a waste of time.
Man you sound really ignorant.
So I guess Gumiho (only person to qualify for GSL as random) has no respect and can't play the game?
Only reason I play random is because of three reasons:
1) I don't play this game in hopes of being a professional.. so I just play casually.
2) I don't prefer a particular race, I like ALL of em.
3) I can appreciate watching all matchups during tournaments, because I've experienced them all.
_____
I played Terran only in Brood War, but I realized that I never watched ZvP or Z/P mirror matches in Proleague or OSL because if Terran wasn't on my screen I didn't see the point of watching Toss/Zerg. I missed out on a lot of quality games not involving Terran.
I always enjoy when people leave the game instantly because it just means instant MMR increase.
___________
*EDIT* Blizzard should just stop all the tears and butt hurt whiners, and make random show their race when the game starts, but still show the "dice" to let their opponent know that it's a random player. That way when they lose to random they have no excuse for when they get owned.
|
"Only reason I play random is because of three reasons:"
why? piss all the gamma police off that's why.
|
To be completely honest, I mainly play Random because I think I'm better than others.
The fact that people get angry solely because I'm Random just makes the feeling better.
So I continue playing Random, and continue owning nerds.
|
Have 0 problem as a Terran. Just 14 depot wall off and scout them. Normally wouldn't wall vs t, but has the extra advantage that they don't know if you took gas.
|
On August 21 2012 15:21 TRaFFiC wrote:
Have 0 problem as a Terran. Just 14 depot wall off and scout them. Normally wouldn't wall vs t, but has the extra advantage that they don't know if you took gas.
But that is as a terran. What do you think happens if you don't know your playing a PvP? PvP has been so far at least accepted as the most coinflip matchup, and not knowing it's a PvP from the start just makes it more of a coinflip. I actually think that it would be better if the dice showed so we all could see we were facing a random player, but showed the race since all the people here obviously play random just for the sake of playing all three races and as such, they wouldn't mind showing their own race in the beginning. It would save a lot of tears playing the ladder.
|
On August 21 2012 15:27 droken wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2012 15:21 TRaFFiC wrote:
Have 0 problem as a Terran. Just 14 depot wall off and scout them. Normally wouldn't wall vs t, but has the extra advantage that they don't know if you took gas. But that is as a terran. What do you think happens if you don't know your playing a PvP? PvP has been so far at least accepted as the most coinflip matchup, and not knowing it's a PvP from the start just makes it more of a coinflip. I actually think that it would be better if the dice showed so we all could see we were facing a random player, but showed the race since all the people here obviously play random just for the sake of playing all three races and as such, they wouldn't mind showing their own race in the beginning. It would save a lot of tears playing the ladder.
Scout at 9, always scout at 9 if you're paranoid.
I don't think random players have enough advantage to warrant a change. There was random in Sc1, and Wc3, I really don't see it as a big deal.
|
On August 21 2012 13:43 Silentness wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2012 12:54 Grimmyman123 wrote:
When I see Random, I think Cheese, all in play, and no skill outside of those traits.
On a 4 player map, it is VERY hard to guess what race your opponent is, and prepare accordingly for the ensuing cheese, until you scout the race, and the cheese which is being prepared. On 2 player maps, the cheese is even more agressive - I sometimes will scout with my 7 probe to get the race proper, so I can take appropriate action immediately.
As such, I give Random players no ground or respect- I simply cannot be bothered to play against an opponent that cannot even decide what race he wants to be, and moreso they have no desire to learn the minute intricacies related to a specific race. I just leave the match, Random's are not worth my time whatsoever. They can have the points, it's their reward for being a waste of time. Man you sound really ignorant. So I guess Gumiho (only person to qualify for GSL as random) has no respect and can't play the game? Only reason I play random is because of three reasons: 1) I don't play this game in hopes of being a professional.. so I just play casually. 2) I don't prefer a particular race, I like ALL of em. 3) I can appreciate watching all matchups during tournaments, because I've experienced them all. _____ I played Terran only in Brood War, but I realized that I never watched ZvP or Z/P mirror matches in Proleague or OSL because if Terran wasn't on my screen I didn't see the point of watching Toss/Zerg. I missed out on a lot of quality games not involving Terran. I always enjoy when people leave the game instantly because it just means instant MMR increase. ___________ *EDIT* Blizzard should just stop all the tears and butt hurt whiners, and make random show their race when the game starts, but still show the "dice" to let their opponent know that it's a random player. That way when they lose to random they have no excuse for when they get owned.
Sound? No, I am a bit ignorant. I'll admit that.
Re: Gumiho - could you imagine how good he'd if he picked one race and really hashed it out?
You have good reasons for your play. I'll hand that.
|
Where does this overarching stereotype of Random players as 2gate/2rax/6pool whores come from? I played all 3 races in BW and I wanted to learn all the new mechanics in SC2 so I started off as Random. I couldn't choose a favorite race so I continued to play Random. I rarely cheese when I play Random because people expect it of you, as evidenced by this thread. Everyone sends out a scout against random by 9, your only hope is 4 player maps. People relying on these cheeses coupled with the miniscule "advantage" of Random usually won't be able to progress too far on ladder... So if you're one of these people claiming that ladder is strictly for your practice, therefore you don't want to play vs Randoms, you most likely won't meet many Randoms, and they probably won't be a completely cheese oriented player.
MVP plays Random in KR GM and nobody seems to balk. Gumiho started off in Code A as a random player and Guineapig played Random in the GSL as well, no body there seems to mind, let alone cry about it. There was also a ST player who played Random in Code A I believe. None of them are still Random because it's actually much harder than playing a single race. There aren't even any pros outside of MorroW who race pick, because it's much harder.
TLDR, stop complaining about Random, it's not advantageous.
|
On August 21 2012 15:27 droken wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2012 15:21 TRaFFiC wrote:
Have 0 problem as a Terran. Just 14 depot wall off and scout them. Normally wouldn't wall vs t, but has the extra advantage that they don't know if you took gas. But that is as a terran. What do you think happens if you don't know your playing a PvP? PvP has been so far at least accepted as the most coinflip matchup, and not knowing it's a PvP from the start just makes it more of a coinflip. I actually think that it would be better if the dice showed so we all could see we were facing a random player, but showed the race since all the people here obviously play random just for the sake of playing all three races and as such, they wouldn't mind showing their own race in the beginning. It would save a lot of tears playing the ladder.
Definitely harder for protoss, but you can just pylon scout and adjust your build a bit. Vs zerg you can gateway expand into fast gateway pressure (Naniwa style). I agree it's annoying, but if you're willing to play random, it's an advantage you should have.
|
whats with this metagame bullshit people using for this debate. i played a zerg other day and i massed marine after 14cc. zerg's reply: wtf you dont open hellion? fucking noob. leaves game. W.T.F this guy actually pissed me off like no other bm ever because of his astounding arrogance and ignorance.
do what is fun, do whatever and make it work. improve your mechanics to make stuff work and not rely on build orders to win. this is how you improve, not perfecting a build. embrace cheese, learn to love crisis management, it makes you a better player.
and whats with people arguing over probe timing, chronoboost and other bs. when to send/make probes, 12, 13, or 14 gate, how many chronoboosts used aren't going to determine the outcome of the game. if you truly believe this you're full of yourself. this is only to optimize your play, not to win.
make gate opening viable against zerg instead of crying about it. its simple aint it?
note: gateway. you can do whatever afterwards, expand, stargate, 4gate, mothership, colossus, templar tech, warp prism harass, w/e. or take the chance and ffe anyways, who gives a damn.
|
I played protoss at high master level, but after having played them so much i felt that the game got a bit boring for me so i switched to random and got put in diamond. I love it. Now it is more exciting to press quickmatch, knowing that i can get my weakest matchups, or my strongest.
Also as one poster above said, i can enjoy watching all matchups in tournaments if i want to. Instead of just watching protoss games, like before my switch to random.
I think that everyone who isn´t playing the game to become a pro should try out random.
|
I know many people do not agree, but I almost view palying random as cheating, as it gives an unfair advantage.
Say two people are of exact equal skill in PvP. If its PvR and the random rolls P, they will win more than 50% even though they have equal skill. That does not seem fair. At all. Same goes for all the matches. Its just an unfair advantage.
It seems that its generally accepted that the race a random gets would be told to the opponent. (I think at least). This would have no downside for the people playing random purely for fun, and for the people playing Random because it gives an advantage, well imo your kinda cheating, so deal with it.
|
On August 20 2012 17:48 boxman22 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 17:40 Tobberoth wrote:
Your arguments are irrelevant. It doesn't matter IF you can play a certain way vs all races, the point is that you don't WANT to because it doesn't improve your game. There's is depth in SC2 in how you have different styles for all matchups, and that grows from the start of the game. You can scout on 9, sure, but there's no guarantee you'll scout your opponent fast enough to decide on opening build on some maps, so you'll have to scout even earlier, which messes up your economy.
Basically, your whole argument is something along the lines of "Random is a fourth race, you have to play differently vs randoms or you're doing it wrong", when my point is there's no fucking need, just have the race show up on the loading screen. There's no con to that, and massive benefit. Hell, the opponent shouldn't even have to know you're playing random, he's just having another normal game.
If the information advantage is so extremely minor, like you guys are saying, what's the argument for NOT removing it, when it makes the game more boring for your opponents? Ah finally the complaints. If you're below grandmaster, then you have more than enough things to work on that "wasting your time" beating a cheese with a highly defensive standard opener is going to help you. Scouting on 9 is not to decide your opener but to scout the cheese that most people seem to expect. And yes, random should be treated like a 4th race. The massive benefit is, in essence, a 4TH RACE without creating one. Just because you don't like to have to think doesn't mean that Blizz should get rid of a portion of the game. The information advantage is minor but it exists. It doesn't make the game more boring because, apparently, you have literally no clue how to deal with random. Learning how to deal with random should be a goal of yours and then all of a sudden, more fun! More strategies to have to think of. More openings to deal with. More new situations to be in. Random is great and should be left alone.
yes it makes the game more boring because im practicing at a suboptimal level when I play against randoms.
If you dont realise how much an opening does in terms of advantage/disadvantage, you have no reason whatsoever to post here...
|
On August 21 2012 19:56 NEEDZMOAR wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 17:48 boxman22 wrote:On August 20 2012 17:40 Tobberoth wrote:
Your arguments are irrelevant. It doesn't matter IF you can play a certain way vs all races, the point is that you don't WANT to because it doesn't improve your game. There's is depth in SC2 in how you have different styles for all matchups, and that grows from the start of the game. You can scout on 9, sure, but there's no guarantee you'll scout your opponent fast enough to decide on opening build on some maps, so you'll have to scout even earlier, which messes up your economy.
Basically, your whole argument is something along the lines of "Random is a fourth race, you have to play differently vs randoms or you're doing it wrong", when my point is there's no fucking need, just have the race show up on the loading screen. There's no con to that, and massive benefit. Hell, the opponent shouldn't even have to know you're playing random, he's just having another normal game.
If the information advantage is so extremely minor, like you guys are saying, what's the argument for NOT removing it, when it makes the game more boring for your opponents? Ah finally the complaints. If you're below grandmaster, then you have more than enough things to work on that "wasting your time" beating a cheese with a highly defensive standard opener is going to help you. Scouting on 9 is not to decide your opener but to scout the cheese that most people seem to expect. And yes, random should be treated like a 4th race. The massive benefit is, in essence, a 4TH RACE without creating one. Just because you don't like to have to think doesn't mean that Blizz should get rid of a portion of the game. The information advantage is minor but it exists. It doesn't make the game more boring because, apparently, you have literally no clue how to deal with random. Learning how to deal with random should be a goal of yours and then all of a sudden, more fun! More strategies to have to think of. More openings to deal with. More new situations to be in. Random is great and should be left alone. yes it makes the game more boring because im practicing at a suboptimal level when I play against randoms. If you dont realise how much an opening does in terms of advantage/disadvantage, you have no reason whatsoever to post here...
And if you don't realize how much more time it takes to practice 9 matchups instead of 3, then you have no reason whatsoever to post here...
|
On August 20 2012 17:59 boxman22 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 17:53 Tobberoth wrote:
Which is why a lot of players, including IIRC some pros, who simply leave games vs randoms because it's not part of their traning "learning" to play a matchup with a suboptimal opening. If you're a pro, then yes it makes perfect sense to leave vs randoms. There are no randoms good enough to be professional. The pros are playing for money and need to get better against only the races they play against. Are you anywhere near pro? I highly doubt it, therefore play against random, have some fun with it. If you crush random so hard, then why are you complaining so much? Take the free win whenever you play them (~8% globally) May I ask what league you're in?
again, some of us dont play for ladder points but to improve... the "free win" (which by the way is such a stupid expression since most of us dont pay for wins to begin with) doesnt mean shit to me.
|
On August 20 2012 17:59 31415926535 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 17:03 Tobberoth wrote:On August 20 2012 16:51 NicolBolas wrote:On August 20 2012 16:43 Tobberoth wrote:On August 20 2012 16:39 boxman22 wrote:On August 20 2012 16:38 Tobberoth wrote:
It could be fixed so easily by Blizzard making it so that the race is shown on the load screen. That way players can enjoy having a random race, while their opponents aren't punished for their choices. I hate PvT, therefore I am punished any time you play terran. I have read many people don't like playing against terrans. Therefore blizzard should ban terran so their opponents aren't punished for their choices. There's a big difference disliking a certain matchup, and disliking your opponent having an unfair advantage, forcing you to play badly. You might suck against a terran, but at least you can improve your build and learn from every match, but there's nothing to learn from a game vs a random who wins because you had to do a shitty opening. There is no evidence that the random only wins "because you had to do a shitty opening." If that were true, you'd see a lot more random pro players. Just because you always lose to randoms doesn't mean that randoms have an insurmountable advantage. No one has said that randoms have an insurmountable advantage, nor that every game you lose against a random depends on their advantage, so your whole post is 100% irrelevant. Point is, they get an advatange, which: A) They don't deserve. B) Which makes the game more boring for their opponent, because it messes up the balance of the early game. Everyone bringing up performance of random players on ladder or in tournaments is completely missing the point. The advantage randoms get isn't there to make them viable in tournaments or on high level, because they aren't. If you pick random, you do so because you want to play random, not because you expect to do awesome with it, so the advantage has no place there. As a random player, if you feel you need this advantage, you're doing it wrong. A) Some people might consider that by having to be proficient at 9 matchups, random players deserve the small information advantage they have at the beginning.
If you random, you wont face a "real" matchup but a suboptimal starting build that will transition into a twisted mid/late-game. so randoms do not have to be proficient at 9 matchups at all...
On August 20 2012 20:28 Avicularia wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2012 19:51 Lorch wrote:
Honestly I'd have 0 problem with random if the fucking game would just show the race during the loading screen instead of random.
Honestly I'd have 0 problem with terran if the fucking game would just show me what's behind his wall in main. Random race is part of this game and it's the hardest one. I really would love to see great random pro player in torunament doing well. That would give so much more adrenaline. About the ladder. Random is just another race so they have also about 50% winrate. That is, you have about 50% to win. How is this not balanced?
please tell me why random "is the hardest race"....
people keep talkign about random as a fourth race, but as far as I can tell, it's the same unitcompositions and mechanics as T/Z/P. And I have to counter them the same way I'd counter T/Z/P only there's a 67%chance that I'll have to do it in a sub-optimal way since I can no longer play the map or my matchup properly.
Now to all the players who are suggesting "just scout at 9" if you scout on 12 instead of 13 you lose about 180 minerals which fucks up queens/gas/hatch timings etc etc....
the best solution would be to tell your opponent (and yourself) at the loadingscreen which race u're going to be, just like a normal loading screen without even mentioning that one guy is a random player.
Hell if blizzard did that change, I'd def start playing random but as it is right now, I hate playing from unfair advantages/disadvantages since its not going to give me a good practice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
