|
On August 29 2012 23:54 YMCApylons wrote:
Rain vs. MKP: MKP threw away a huge lead. MKP looked bad, but Rain made him look bad with his constant zealot harass. He didn't lose his advantage all at once, just watch the VODs. It took 3 engagements down the central axis for MKP to lose his supply lead. Each time he was killed by storms+collosi+chargelots, by units spread-out in a good concave across two screens. It wasn't a fluke bad engagement, it was multiple bad engagements. So either MKP choked multiple times, or Rain made him look that way.
IMO, MKP should have used his banshees (which already had cloak!) and done some drops, but perhaps he didn't feel comfortable, given how easily Rain deflected those earlier. But at a 90 to 160 food deficit, Rain certainly wouldn't have had the army to counter banshees at the 3rd, a drop in the main, and a push at the fourth.
Flying vs. MVP: I think MVP got screwed by a well-practiced map-specific build designed to punish the quick 3 CC MVP likes to do on Ohana. Flying executed flawlessly, then won the game. But I think the outcome might have been different in a Bo3 or Bo5.
MC vs. Best: PvP baby. MC 1-base blink stalker against an expanding protoss. Enough said.
Plus Best had his army in a terrible position, asking to be forcefielded on the ramp. And when he got forcefielded, he did not move his immortals so they could shoot up the plateau (they bugged at the FF). And when they finally made it up, sure they lived long due to Guardian Shield, but he still had chances if he would have microed his immortals at all.
So besides his ridiculously good Blink micro, MC had 3 times luck that Best screwed up
|
On August 29 2012 23:03 CoR wrote:watch today games + Show Spoiler +WTF MVP ? i knew flying is a fuckn badass strong player but if MVP loosing to a semigood kespa player world is over guys
have you not seen WCS korea? Its the protoss meta right now. Protoss fucking everywhere. The entire game might as well just be PvP.
Also people need to really put into perspectives on how good kespa players really are atm. 16 available spots to qualify in WCS Korea, and only 1 out of dozens of Kespa players actually qualified through the open bracket.
Of the 6 invited, only 3 made top 10.
Just fyi
|
On August 29 2012 23:51 Darkthorn wrote:Show nested quote +On August 29 2012 23:32 bo1b wrote:On August 29 2012 23:28 rysecake wrote:On August 29 2012 23:27 bo1b wrote:
As much a dick as this makes me sound, the thing I'm most looking forward to from the dramatically increased talent pool, is finally not seeing people like yugioh. That bland, overly "standard" style of play just has to go. lol i havent watched a game of his in a long time. explain! =) He's just a boring player to watch, and he doesn't have the macro of other players to make watching other people try to overcome him interesting. This pretty much leads him to beating people who shouldn't be in code a, and then losing in the up and down matches. So hes the gatekeeper =))
The Janitor.
|
Fantasy ran circles around Nestea, but Parting? I don't know how you can possibly say that successfully defending multiple front harassment is being "outclassed".
|
Bo1 format is just idiotic. Honestly when GSL is Bo3 from the start and every real tournament is as well it makes me view OSL as some joke online tournament or like the blizzard cup that was Bo1 round robin. I don't know why people think OSL is the best, Bo1 will never bring the best games and it will never ensure the players who deserve to advance do so.
|
On August 30 2012 02:02 hunts wrote:
Bo1 format is just idiotic. Honestly when GSL is Bo3 from the start and every real tournament is as well it makes me view OSL as some joke online tournament or like the blizzard cup that was Bo1 round robin. I don't know why people think OSL is the best, Bo1 will never bring the best games and it will never ensure the players who deserve to advance do so.
TV show vs online TV, the money & the fame come from big audience & OSL will raise the standard by a lot. Besides it's not one bo1 it's 3 bo1 & even with one win you often can play tiebreaker so it's not that random.
|
On August 30 2012 02:11 nojok wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 02:02 hunts wrote:
Bo1 format is just idiotic. Honestly when GSL is Bo3 from the start and every real tournament is as well it makes me view OSL as some joke online tournament or like the blizzard cup that was Bo1 round robin. I don't know why people think OSL is the best, Bo1 will never bring the best games and it will never ensure the players who deserve to advance do so. TV show vs online TV, the money & the fame come from big audience & OSL will raise the standard by a lot. Besides it's not one bo1 it's 3 bo1 & even with one win you often can play tiebreaker so it's not that random.
But it is random, it's infinitely easier to win a couple BO1s than to win a couple BO3's like GSL and every other real tournament requires. I'm sorry but after seeing the format I just can't take OSL seriously.
|
Flash is nothing special...
Are you high?
That kid held 2400+ Elo for a bazillion months in a row in a system where 2200 was considered elite and 2300 "god (s-class) tier". And against the toughest competition on the planet no less- pretty sure he is special. These puny few months of SC2 mean nothing as an indicator for his talents.
|
On August 30 2012 02:13 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 02:11 nojok wrote:On August 30 2012 02:02 hunts wrote:
Bo1 format is just idiotic. Honestly when GSL is Bo3 from the start and every real tournament is as well it makes me view OSL as some joke online tournament or like the blizzard cup that was Bo1 round robin. I don't know why people think OSL is the best, Bo1 will never bring the best games and it will never ensure the players who deserve to advance do so. TV show vs online TV, the money & the fame come from big audience & OSL will raise the standard by a lot. Besides it's not one bo1 it's 3 bo1 & even with one win you often can play tiebreaker so it's not that random. But it is random, it's infinitely easier to win a couple BO1s than to win a couple BO3's like GSL and every other real tournament requires. I'm sorry but after seeing the format I just can't take OSL seriously.
Build orders on specific maps matter more in a bo3. In a bo1 it's less mind games and more mechanical. In a bo3 you can fuck around with the opponents mind by cheesing first set, playing standard next, or cheesing again etc. bo1 is more random but what can you do? This has been tradition at osl for a decade. And it's not as simple as just changing the format. This is broadcasted on national tv in Korea, so tv scheduling comes into play
|
On August 30 2012 02:13 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 02:11 nojok wrote:On August 30 2012 02:02 hunts wrote:
Bo1 format is just idiotic. Honestly when GSL is Bo3 from the start and every real tournament is as well it makes me view OSL as some joke online tournament or like the blizzard cup that was Bo1 round robin. I don't know why people think OSL is the best, Bo1 will never bring the best games and it will never ensure the players who deserve to advance do so. TV show vs online TV, the money & the fame come from big audience & OSL will raise the standard by a lot. Besides it's not one bo1 it's 3 bo1 & even with one win you often can play tiebreaker so it's not that random. But it is random, it's infinitely easier to win a couple BO1s than to win a couple BO3's like GSL and every other real tournament requires. I'm sorry but after seeing the format I just can't take OSL seriously.
The Super Bowl is Bo1. March Madness is a series of Bo1s. You're not going to grow the audience if you require massive amounts of viewing time just to increase the chance of the better player advancing.
|
On August 30 2012 02:32 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 02:13 hunts wrote:On August 30 2012 02:11 nojok wrote:On August 30 2012 02:02 hunts wrote:
Bo1 format is just idiotic. Honestly when GSL is Bo3 from the start and every real tournament is as well it makes me view OSL as some joke online tournament or like the blizzard cup that was Bo1 round robin. I don't know why people think OSL is the best, Bo1 will never bring the best games and it will never ensure the players who deserve to advance do so. TV show vs online TV, the money & the fame come from big audience & OSL will raise the standard by a lot. Besides it's not one bo1 it's 3 bo1 & even with one win you often can play tiebreaker so it's not that random. But it is random, it's infinitely easier to win a couple BO1s than to win a couple BO3's like GSL and every other real tournament requires. I'm sorry but after seeing the format I just can't take OSL seriously. The Super Bowl is Bo1. March Madness is a series of Bo1s. You're not going to grow the audience if you require massive amounts of viewing time just to increase the chance of the better player advancing.
sports games take hours and hours, SC2 don't. You can easily fit 2-4 BOs in the ammount of time it takes for a football or basketball game to finish, probably can do 5+ BO3s in the time it takes a baseball game to finish. Also saying football is BO1 is stupid. If you want to compare it to SC2, it being BO1 would mean the game ends with the first touchdown.
|
On August 30 2012 02:32 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 02:13 hunts wrote:On August 30 2012 02:11 nojok wrote:On August 30 2012 02:02 hunts wrote:
Bo1 format is just idiotic. Honestly when GSL is Bo3 from the start and every real tournament is as well it makes me view OSL as some joke online tournament or like the blizzard cup that was Bo1 round robin. I don't know why people think OSL is the best, Bo1 will never bring the best games and it will never ensure the players who deserve to advance do so. TV show vs online TV, the money & the fame come from big audience & OSL will raise the standard by a lot. Besides it's not one bo1 it's 3 bo1 & even with one win you often can play tiebreaker so it's not that random. But it is random, it's infinitely easier to win a couple BO1s than to win a couple BO3's like GSL and every other real tournament requires. I'm sorry but after seeing the format I just can't take OSL seriously. The Super Bowl is Bo1. March Madness is a series of Bo1s. You're not going to grow the audience if you require massive amounts of viewing time just to increase the chance of the better player advancing.
comparing the super bowl to starcraft
nice comparison
|
See... Here's the deal:
KeSPA players have been playing for at most 4 months (give or take). ESF players have been playing for 2 years. KeSPA players are beating ESF players consistently already.
KeSPA players will only get better, we all know that. Looks like its time to say goodbye to ESF players and GSL.
|
On August 30 2012 02:41 Chronald wrote:
See... Here's the deal:
KeSPA players have been playing for at most 4 months (give or take). ESF players have been playing for 2 years. KeSPA players are beating ESF players consistently already.
KeSPA players will only get better, we all know that. Looks like its time to say goodbye to ESF players and GSL.
You also fail to realize that while ESF players had to figure out everything every build, timing, etc... on their own, all the kespa guys have to do is watch VODs or streams and get all that information right away. Bw didn't have this, SC2 does. That makes a huge difference in how long it takes to catch up.
|
On August 30 2012 02:39 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 02:32 andrewlt wrote:On August 30 2012 02:13 hunts wrote:On August 30 2012 02:11 nojok wrote:On August 30 2012 02:02 hunts wrote:
Bo1 format is just idiotic. Honestly when GSL is Bo3 from the start and every real tournament is as well it makes me view OSL as some joke online tournament or like the blizzard cup that was Bo1 round robin. I don't know why people think OSL is the best, Bo1 will never bring the best games and it will never ensure the players who deserve to advance do so. TV show vs online TV, the money & the fame come from big audience & OSL will raise the standard by a lot. Besides it's not one bo1 it's 3 bo1 & even with one win you often can play tiebreaker so it's not that random. But it is random, it's infinitely easier to win a couple BO1s than to win a couple BO3's like GSL and every other real tournament requires. I'm sorry but after seeing the format I just can't take OSL seriously. The Super Bowl is Bo1. March Madness is a series of Bo1s. You're not going to grow the audience if you require massive amounts of viewing time just to increase the chance of the better player advancing. sports games take hours and hours, SC2 don't. You can easily fit 2-4 BOs in the ammount of time it takes for a football or basketball game to finish, probably can do 5+ BO3s in the time it takes a baseball game to finish. Also saying football is BO1 is stupid. If you want to compare it to SC2, it being BO1 would mean the game ends with the first touchdown.
The main thing is that this goes on TV, not an online stream. They have to fit 4 matches in, each potentially 30-40 minutes, and no TV program is going to last longer than 2 hours, tops.
This is a good thing if it leads to more viewers. Right now instead of trying to please hardcore fans, SC2 needs to figure out a way to appeal to fans who don't play the game. Otherwise, eSports can't become an independent pillar of revenue...
|
Actually, if anything, BO1 is LESS random than BO3 if you think about it. Players are much more likely to do very one-dimensional (super greedy or super aggressive all-in/cheesy) builds in a multi-match series, whereas to cheese when playing a BO1 (be it aggressive or eco-cheese) requires massive balls and luck. Players are more likely to play conservative and safe, bringing out their most refined builds that they are most confident in. Also, with each player only having one match every few days during group stage means there is a ton of prep-time for each game, which always leads to better games.
Of course nerves play a bigger part in BO1, especially once you get to the games that decide whether you advance or get eliminated for sure - but that is also a very good thing; how many awful GSL finals have we watched just because one of the finalists ends up throwing the games completely due to nerves? If the players who can't handle pressure get filtered out in groups, all the better.
|
On August 30 2012 02:39 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 02:32 andrewlt wrote:On August 30 2012 02:13 hunts wrote:On August 30 2012 02:11 nojok wrote:On August 30 2012 02:02 hunts wrote:
Bo1 format is just idiotic. Honestly when GSL is Bo3 from the start and every real tournament is as well it makes me view OSL as some joke online tournament or like the blizzard cup that was Bo1 round robin. I don't know why people think OSL is the best, Bo1 will never bring the best games and it will never ensure the players who deserve to advance do so. TV show vs online TV, the money & the fame come from big audience & OSL will raise the standard by a lot. Besides it's not one bo1 it's 3 bo1 & even with one win you often can play tiebreaker so it's not that random. But it is random, it's infinitely easier to win a couple BO1s than to win a couple BO3's like GSL and every other real tournament requires. I'm sorry but after seeing the format I just can't take OSL seriously. The Super Bowl is Bo1. March Madness is a series of Bo1s. You're not going to grow the audience if you require massive amounts of viewing time just to increase the chance of the better player advancing. sports games take hours and hours, SC2 don't. You can easily fit 2-4 BOs in the ammount of time it takes for a football or basketball game to finish, probably can do 5+ BO3s in the time it takes a baseball game to finish. Also saying football is BO1 is stupid. If you want to compare it to SC2, it being BO1 would mean the game ends with the first touchdown.
And no, sports games don't take hours and hours. Most regular sports shows end in 2 hours or less. To expect viewers keep interest in 5 hours of games for several days/weeks in a row is, frankly, ridiculous. Does anyone even really watch all of GSL's group stages?
|
On August 30 2012 02:11 nojok wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 02:02 hunts wrote:
Bo1 format is just idiotic. Honestly when GSL is Bo3 from the start and every real tournament is as well it makes me view OSL as some joke online tournament or like the blizzard cup that was Bo1 round robin. I don't know why people think OSL is the best, Bo1 will never bring the best games and it will never ensure the players who deserve to advance do so. TV show vs online TV, the money & the fame come from big audience & OSL will raise the standard by a lot. Besides it's not one bo1 it's 3 bo1 & even with one win you often can play tiebreaker so it's not that random.
One problem with Bo1 is that you might have to play infinite rounds of tiebreakers before deciding a winner. If you use Bo3 you can have a tie-breaker process on how tie's should be decided.
Bo3 generate better matches as well as a chance for the players to improve themselves between the games, thinking of what could've been different.
And saying that sports uses Bo1 doesn't hold since in, for example ice hockey, you have three 20-minutes periods and if you fail horribly in the first one, you can still come back in the other two. In the last season of Elitserien (Sweden's highest hockey league), the team HV71 managed to turn a 2-7 disadvantage in the last period to 7-7 (in less the 5 minutes) and eventually winning in overtime.
|
On August 30 2012 02:43 Salazarz wrote:
Actually, if anything, BO1 is LESS random than BO3 if you think about it. Players are much more likely to do very one-dimensional (super greedy or super aggressive all-in/cheesy) builds in a multi-match series, whereas to cheese when playing a BO1 (be it aggressive or eco-cheese) requires massive balls and luck. Players are more likely to play conservative and safe, bringing out their most refined builds that they are most confident in. Also, with each player only having one match every few days during group stage means there is a ton of prep-time for each game, which always leads to better games.
Of course nerves play a bigger part in BO1, especially once you get to the games that decide whether you advance or get eliminated for sure - but that is also a very good thing; how many awful GSL finals have we watched just because one of the finalists ends up throwing the games completely due to nerves? If the players who can't handle pressure get filtered out in groups, all the better.
Sorry but no matter how you spin it BO1s are NOT good. This has been discussed to death, mainly during the GSL blizzard cup where everyone basically agreed that the games didn't mean anything because they were BO1. It's too easy for someone to get lucky and take a game off a better player, it's much less likely for them to take a BO3. Until OSL switches to a BO3 format I guess it will have to continue being just that: for the non hardcore fans who don't care about the best players winning.
|
What multi-tasking? NesTea is already the slowest player in GSL so you can't really take him as an example. PartinG was perfectly fine in his match. He played brilliantly and wasn't lacking in any multi-tasking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
