|
On August 25 2012 07:35 jinorazi wrote:
optimal build do not win you games or should it be the #1 focus of your attention.
and if you really want to practice match ups, ladder isn't the place. and i totally understand in practice environments, random is not good but ladder isn't that.
But optimal builds aren't irrelevant. That's why there are long threads debating whether 9 overlord or extractor trick 11 overlord is optimal.
I would agree that having practice partners is more optimal (although a combination might be even better), but saying ladder is not a practice environment doesn't make sense. The ladder is the practice environment for a huge portion of sc2 players.
|
On August 25 2012 07:38 Lorch wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 07:30 Silentenigma wrote:On August 25 2012 06:58 Lorch wrote:
1. Tell your opponnent your race
2. Don't get one of these guys who think you are mind gaming them.
3. Play pro random This doesnt work.Most people lie.Even sometimes they dont lie how can I believe his honesty.It is ladder everyone wants points-.- Well see the thing is I'm on the other side of the fence were I'm like "I just wanna improve in all these matchups and this guy doesn't believe me so the game is fucked and I get bad practice". But yeah assholes on ladder lying about it really fucks up your life playing random.
Then you are one of those players that SHOULD select his race before clicking "Find Match" Roll a die or something. There are others who play Random as an actual race and want to play RvT RvZ and RvP matchups, which completely differ from the standard matchups.
|
On August 25 2012 07:40 Catatafish wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 07:35 jinorazi wrote:
optimal build do not win you games or should it be the #1 focus of your attention.
and if you really want to practice match ups, ladder isn't the place. and i totally understand in practice environments, random is not good but ladder isn't that. But optimal builds aren't irrelevant. That's why there are long threads debating whether 9 overlord or extractor trick 11 overlord is optimal. I would agree that having practice partners is more optimal (although a combination might be even better), but saying ladder is not a practice environment doesn't make sense. The ladder is the practice environment for a huge portion of sc2 players.
yes to get better, not to practice your optimal build order for certain match up....because that does not work vs random and you dont get the MU u want. and random is on ladder.
having a optimal build, studying it to be most optimal is one thing, blaming random for deterring you from using that optimal favorite build is another. that is a cry, a complaint, not a valid one at that. and not having a optimal build will not be the reason for losing the game nor having the optimal build be the reason for winning the game. thats just a personal perfection one wants to have in their build, it should not be taken in as "a way to win".
|
On August 25 2012 07:43 jinorazi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 07:40 Catatafish wrote:On August 25 2012 07:35 jinorazi wrote:
optimal build do not win you games or should it be the #1 focus of your attention.
and if you really want to practice match ups, ladder isn't the place. and i totally understand in practice environments, random is not good but ladder isn't that. But optimal builds aren't irrelevant. That's why there are long threads debating whether 9 overlord or extractor trick 11 overlord is optimal. I would agree that having practice partners is more optimal (although a combination might be even better), but saying ladder is not a practice environment doesn't make sense. The ladder is the practice environment for a huge portion of sc2 players. yes to get better, not to practice your optimal build order for certain match up....because that does not work vs random and you dont get the MU u want. and random is on ladder. having a optimal build, studying it to be most optimal is one thing, blaming random for deterring you from using that optimal favorite build is another. that is a cry, a complaint, not a valid one at that.
While we're at it, we should ban all cheesers. These ass holes deter everyone from using their optimal builds that they want to practice and are ruining the game!
Gaulzi, you're first buddy.
|
No they don't. Cheesers help coming up with the optimal builds, as they try to find holes and exploit them.
On August 25 2012 07:43 jinorazi wrote:
yes to get better, not to practice your optimal build order for certain match up....because that does not work vs random and you dont get the MU u want. and random is on ladder.
having a optimal build, studying it to be most optimal is one thing, blaming random for deterring you from using that optimal favorite build is another. that is a cry, a complaint, not a valid one at that. and not having a optimal build will not be the reason for losing the game nor having the optimal build be the reason for winning the game. thats just a personal perfection one wants to have in their build, it should not be taken in as "a way to win".
You can absolutely lose a game from having a shitty overlord placement for instance. That has happened to me countless of times. You lose by getting a disadvantage and then having that disadvantage increase until you are out of the game. A sub-optimal build is a disadvantage. It impacts the result of the game. It doesn't determine it absolutely. All the little things combined usually do.
|
If cheese was finding holes, then they would change. Pretty sure a 6pool, 9pool, 2rax, 2gate proxy, bunker rush, cannon rush, and 4gate have all remained the same for the past 2 years...
|
But your build has to be 6-pool proof to not be a gamble. If there wasn't any kind of cheese then people would just play greedier and greedier. When the metagame evolves towards greedy enough play, cheeses start to get more commonly used again. So 6pool has actually been used a few times, for instance, against terran because terrans felt they could go 14cc every time versus zerg.
|
On August 25 2012 07:50 Catatafish wrote:No they don't. Cheesers help coming up with the optimal builds, as they try to find holes and exploit them. Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 07:43 jinorazi wrote:
yes to get better, not to practice your optimal build order for certain match up....because that does not work vs random and you dont get the MU u want. and random is on ladder.
having a optimal build, studying it to be most optimal is one thing, blaming random for deterring you from using that optimal favorite build is another. that is a cry, a complaint, not a valid one at that. and not having a optimal build will not be the reason for losing the game nor having the optimal build be the reason for winning the game. thats just a personal perfection one wants to have in their build, it should not be taken in as "a way to win". You can absolutely lose a game from having a shitty overlord placement for instance. That has happened to me countless of times. You lose by getting a disadvantage and then having that disadvantage increase until you are out of the game. A sub-optimal build is a disadvantage. It impacts the result of the game. It doesn't determine it absolutely. All the little things combined usually do.
do people leave the game losing their first overlord to misplacement or getting it sniped by marine? maybe some people but most people dont. as the game goes on, previous disadvantages become smaller. player's skill comes into play on minimizing that damage through proper reactions like buying time, doing damage, all-in, harass, w/e. player's skill and decision making throughout the game will, or should determine the winner of the game, not when you chronoboost or when you place a gateway, when to make first overlord, 9 scout or 14 scout etc. (as long as they're within proper times)
what i'm saying is player's skill plays bigger role in winning or losing the game instead of how you manage the first 3 minutes. the talk of random advantage is soooooo over-exaggerated and talking as if 9scout is suicide is horrendously idiotic. as long as you're not making 5 evo chambers or 5 hatcheries or something of that stupidity or blindly doing a certain build like ffe or 6pool, you should be able to adapt easily after scouting.
|
I'm not necessarily talking about losing an overlord to a marine, but rather not having an overlord in place to scout for a certain timing, which then ends up killing me.
I don't really understand your second point. I agree that the player's skill and decision making should determine the winner, which is why I am arguing against an artificial buff. What I don't know, is what 'skill and decision-making' is, if it is not the sum of all the little individual actions that you don't seem to think are important.
Edit cause you edited: How can you say that I am exaggerating the 'random advantage' when I have only said that it exists? I'm not saying it is huge or insurmountable. I'm saying it's there. And that the game would be better if it weren't.
And I'm not saying a 9 scout is suicide, I'm saying that having to do it is a disadvantage. Stop with the reductio ad absurdum please.
|
On August 25 2012 08:10 Catatafish wrote:
I'm not necessarily talking about losing an overlord to a marine, but rather not having an overlord in place to scout for a certain timing, which then ends up killing me.
I don't really understand your second point. I agree that the player's skill and decision making should determine the winner, which is why I am arguing against an artificial buff. What I don't know, is what 'skill and decision-making' is, if it is not the sum of all the little individual actions that you don't seem to think are important.
and how do players make those small individual actions? proper decision making and skill is what determines those actions, no? wont it be the player's fault for reacting badly to a randomer? why commit to something so fast when all you have to do is open safe and scout, then react to that? mistakes happen and sometimes games can end with one mistake, not sure how that is related to random.
i'm saying you say it is disadvantageous to 9scout, yes, sure, compared to 14 scout, i agree. BUT not enough to complain about, not enough to say random has THAT much advantage, it is minuscule, it has literally nothing to partake in "small things that add up". its becoming mule vs scan argument. it doesnt matter, one is not better than the other, do what you need, use what you need.. if you're scared of random, scout early and know for sure, isn't that worth the disadvantage you get? scared that zerg will 6pool? scout early. my point is randomer's advantage and opponent's disadvantage is minuscule, not enough to complain about in terms of how much of upper hand they get. only thing i can agree on is practice environment.
|
Commit to what, placing your overlords? As you will see from Belial's pretty awesome guide to overlord placement, there is a specific one for each match up. One of the things this does is protect you against certain cheeses. The overlord placement that will help you scout for 2port banshee will not be the same that will help you scout zerglings running across the map. That's not about committing, it's about making a noneducated guess, something the game should have as least of as possible.The point is that you have less to react to when you are playing against a random until you scout him. You don't think that matters, I think it decreases the level of play for everyone.
I think that the principle of giving them any kind of advantage, however miniscule (I don't however think the difference between 9 drone scout and 14 drone scout is that insignificant) is basically flawed
|
On August 25 2012 08:16 Catatafish wrote:
Commit to what, placing your overlords? As you will see from Belial's pretty awesome guide to overlord placement, there is a specific one for each match up. One of the things this does is protect you against certain cheeses. The overlord placement that will help you scout for 2port banshee will not be the same that will help you scout zerglings running across the map. That's not about committing, it's about making a noneducated guess, something the game should have as least of as possible.The point is that you have less to react to when you are playing against a random until you scout him. You don't think that matters, I think it decreases the level of play for everyone.
I think that the principle of giving them any kind of advantage, however miniscule (I don't however think the difference between 9 drone scout and 14 drone scout is that insignificant) is basically flawed
what i'm saying is being scared of 6pool or proxy two rax, 2gate, bunker rush, scv/marine all in and whatever you might think of random is the same. you react by scouting, how is that any different. you open different in tvp as you would in tvz or tvt, how is TvR any different? (or other races, zvz, zvt, zvp, etc. etc.) you open safe and move on after scouting. that is my point, there is 0 disadvantage to anyone. the disadvantage comes from what you say you have to do different from random and non random, and i'm saying that is no different than comparing one match up to another.
|
Surely the supposed disadvantage to playing as random is eliminated by using an external source of randomness, i.e. instead of selecting 'random', roll a dice or use a random number generator to determine the race you'll play for each game. That way, your opponent will know your race.
Or, just be nice and tell them what race you got.
|
On August 25 2012 08:13 jinorazi wrote:It has literally nothing to partake in "small things that add up".
That is flat out wrong. Exchange 'literally' for 'almost' and it would be debatable instead.
On August 25 2012 08:26 jinorazi wrote:
what i'm saying is being scared of 6pool or proxy two rax, 2gate, bunker rush, scv/marine all in and whatever you might think of random is the same. you react by scouting, how is that any different. you open different in tvp as you would in tvz or tvt, how is TvR any different? (or other races, zvz, zvt, zvp, etc. etc.) you open safe and move on after scouting. that is my point, there is 0 disadvantage to anyone. the disadvantage comes from what you say you have to do different from random and non random, and i'm saying that is no different than comparing one match up to another.
TvR is different because there is no race called 'random', there are three races and picking random, you can limit the amount of things you have to account for, while your opponent can't. This argument is getting very pointless. I'll just reiterate my point that I don't see why random should be given an artificial advantage.
|
On August 25 2012 07:17 Catatafish wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 07:04 SupLilSon wrote:
Because you are assuming Random players play to that advantage. There are many Random players that simply play standard. People like you assume every Random is cheesing, so in the event they do cheese you should be the one with the BO advantage. Anyone relying heavily on such a miniscule advantage won't be anywhere near a high level player, making it hilarious that so many people here claim it ruins their practice. If you think it grants a significant advantage, then having to master many more races and matchups surely incurrs an equal if not greater disadvantage (you can't just ignore it because Random players have a choice). The problem is that the hidden random does not allow the opposing player to play standard. A zerg player playing against a random rolling terran, for instance, has to go pool first instead of the standard hatch first, while the terran gets to do a more optimal build. Again, I'm not saying it's a huge advantage, but it does limit my options and force me down a non-optimal build that I don't want to be pracitising, and it decreases the level of diversity of play.
Your second point that the advantage given (which you now, sort of, seem to recognize, even though you found it borderline retarded before) by random is outweighed by the disadvantage of learning 9 match-ups is self-evidently true, otherwise the pro scene would be dominated by randoms and it would be a really huge issue (which I never argued, it was. I was just trying to give a well-argued reason for why I don't like it, in response to your provocative earlier post). But it is also irrelevant, which goes back to my earlier point about the analagous unit health buff. You could remove the hidden random and instead give all random players a +5% (the exact number is not important to the argument) hit point handicap, and still probably argue that playing random was not overpowered because the advantaged is outweighed by the difficulty of learning three times as many match ups. I would still argue, however, that you should, insofar as it is possible, win a game solely based on the strength of the match up you are playing, and not due to a buff that is a kind of pat on the back for you because you are so awesome you can play 9 matchups. If I get beaten by a random player, and a lucky early game situation for him had any major part to play in it, I find it really infuriating. (This is not as inconcievable as you make it sound. Less economy, sub-optimal overlord locations, etc. can all have major impacts on the game. Starcraft is in the details, which is why it's awesome.)
I think the point that random is a fourth race has gone miles over your head. You aren't opening pool first against a Terran. You're opening pool first against a random. It's a different race, different match-up. You're playing standard ZvR, not ZvT. This is the advantage of playing random. Consequently, it's the only advantage overwhelmed by it's glaringly large downsides -- that regardless of whose opening build is more optimal, you still have a big advantage after the first three minutes.
TvR is different because there is no race called 'random', there are three races and picking random, you can limit the amount of things you have to account for, while your opponent can't. This argument is getting very pointless. I'll just reiterate my point that I don't see why random should be given an artificial advantage.
Are you kidding me? In the same breath you declare that random is not a race yet you ask why it has an advantage. Because it's it's own goddamn race. Jesus. This argument cannot proceed until you realize this.
|
No, I get it. I just firmly disagree with it. That's why people talk about there being 3 races and 9 match ups, and how good each player's match up is. I haven't heard anyone talk about how awesome Taeja's TvR is. Although it probably would be.
|
And now I'm arguing against the points that random is an entirely different race and that playing against someone who is random doesn't really make a big difference at the same time...
|
On August 25 2012 08:40 Catatafish wrote:
No, I get it. I just firmly disagree with it. That's why people talk about there being 3 races and 9 match ups, and how good each player's match up is. I haven't heard anyone talk about how awesome Taeja's TvR is. Although it probably would be.
There are 9 match-ups but you're opening vs random. And I'm pretty sure Taeja's TvR is among the best in the world. Doubt any real random player would get remotely close to his MMR, let alone qualify for a GSL.
|
1100 point random master here. You are dumb.
|
the unknown factor can easily be neglected. its no different than in zvt and wonder "terran might double proxy rax me, i better scout early" or being scared of 6pool or other econ builds and playing vs random. scout and that advantage is gone, completely. that unknown factor applies to non random too since you dont know what they will do, i'm saying this "unknown" is no different from random or non random, i think its safe to say random has no effect on terran.
why dont you complain about terran that how they can block ramp and do whatever the hell they want safely meanwhile zerg needs to worry about so many things? isn't that unfair advantage to one race? in that sense, random is a 4th race for the first 3 minutse and my point was that the first 3 minutes of unknown factor does not determine the winner of the game.
so to complain about random is unneeded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
