|
On November 26 2019 02:55 tigon_ridge wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2019 02:43 UnLarva wrote:On November 26 2019 02:24 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 26 2019 01:52 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 26 2019 01:36 UnLarva wrote:I have no particular complains about Bo5 / Bo5+Bo3 system when using double elimination. It's much better than just +1 map for a Winner brackets winner in the finals. After all a loser finalist was already 'eliminated' once when he drops to the losers bracket. Elimimated player really need/should/must reset the score before he can reach to the final, deciding games. No problems what ever with that, but for ensuring that really best players in the tournament will reach to Ro4, there should be more internal 'control' in how many ways that can happen, IMO. Is there any realistic (by time constraints set by the reality itself and players, audiences, and tournament organisers' well-being) ways to make it so that there would be a chance for a loser bracket player to rise to the winner bracket by their game performances during a tournament? Already eliminated player could for example rise back to upper bracket if winning 2 or 3 consecutive matches, but having to match against the dropping player (at that latest moment someone drops) in Bo1 or Bo3? That would mean also something in the lower bracket then if once eliminated dropping player happens to lose to that uprising consecutive loser bracket winner. Maybe something like direct swap with the worst loser bracket player measured by map score in their entirety that far in that tournament. Loser would just drop out of contention (even if being a winner of his/hers last match) in that case. The point of these thoughts is to seek a format that maximize the likelihood for best players being in last matches of the tournament, allowing more chances for tactical throws short term to get as far as possible, but also making it possible to recover from a one bad match or sub-par group performance that put a player to lower bracket, before the finals. Current system is fine overall, but it potentially makes a player who loses his/hers first playoffs match look much more accomplished if he/she manage to make it to the finals, than player who made an uninterrupted, but considerably shorter upper bracket winning streak into the finals. That's how I see Serral's meta endgame now. It was not that bad decision to throw a series against Inno if that can help to avoid meeting Reynor too soon, lol. For Note, that was same meta strategy Maru has used in the past in his apparent fear of Serral, tho failing in it this far.  Elimination brackets are never going to be 100% "fair". If you want the "right" order for every single player, you need a giant round robin group, probably with each player facing each other multiple times. Like in German soccer there is an league (=giant round robin group) and a cup (=single elimination bracket) wich are two completly different formats. A giant round robin group would just not work that well as a SC2 tournament. Blizz tried that with WCS Winter this year and the comunity over all wasn t that happy. I still remember, that Reynor got straight in the final by finishing 1st in the round robin and everyone was complaining, that there were no built up for that. I really liked that format, though. Oh, well... People prefer drama and excitement over substance, unfortunately. I really really like that format too, and I loath artificial drama (not counting moments of pathological drunkenness). For me it all is pretty much about the defense of that substance, and the integrity of the talent against bullshitters and cying-for-vainers. Structures, habits, customs, and conventions can be easily chanced to UN-support those ill-spirited phenoms and perpetual whiners, but this require that people clearly recognize where and whom are carrying that substance, and what are general out-of-game frameworks that can even theoretically happen. In-game. HSC XXI should go random. Sorry, I got completely lost after your first sentence...
Lol. Only in 6-cans-upmood.
Risking now against potential spamming, and not going to repeat what I think about 'Randomness' of future SC2.
In all scenarios where you have 3 options to play with, you will fare well against specialists of only 1 option. Damn, you need do only above average with all 3 options to be statistically better than any of 1-option specialist. If you can handle with one option at top level, and you're very good with two other options as well, your chances against average agents of mediocrity are very good. If you must choose one option in a circumstances where all options are intimately interrelated, its impossible to reach the peak level performances in any of those 3 options without knowing also 2 others.
The Case of a SC2 player's trilemma. Currently. Why not set it as default?
Those are best players of SC2 that can handle with that trilemma best, knowing all out-of-preferred-race strats, paradigms, meta, history, legends, tricks, wibes and jives...
Its huge mental leap, like armstrongs on moons, but its also most obvious leap to be taken in this era of twilight of Blizzard back up'd game of SC2.
Go random now, thank yourself later you did it then.
|
On November 26 2019 03:11 UnLarva wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2019 02:55 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 26 2019 02:43 UnLarva wrote:On November 26 2019 02:24 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 26 2019 01:52 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 26 2019 01:36 UnLarva wrote:I have no particular complains about Bo5 / Bo5+Bo3 system when using double elimination. It's much better than just +1 map for a Winner brackets winner in the finals. After all a loser finalist was already 'eliminated' once when he drops to the losers bracket. Elimimated player really need/should/must reset the score before he can reach to the final, deciding games. No problems what ever with that, but for ensuring that really best players in the tournament will reach to Ro4, there should be more internal 'control' in how many ways that can happen, IMO. Is there any realistic (by time constraints set by the reality itself and players, audiences, and tournament organisers' well-being) ways to make it so that there would be a chance for a loser bracket player to rise to the winner bracket by their game performances during a tournament? Already eliminated player could for example rise back to upper bracket if winning 2 or 3 consecutive matches, but having to match against the dropping player (at that latest moment someone drops) in Bo1 or Bo3? That would mean also something in the lower bracket then if once eliminated dropping player happens to lose to that uprising consecutive loser bracket winner. Maybe something like direct swap with the worst loser bracket player measured by map score in their entirety that far in that tournament. Loser would just drop out of contention (even if being a winner of his/hers last match) in that case. The point of these thoughts is to seek a format that maximize the likelihood for best players being in last matches of the tournament, allowing more chances for tactical throws short term to get as far as possible, but also making it possible to recover from a one bad match or sub-par group performance that put a player to lower bracket, before the finals. Current system is fine overall, but it potentially makes a player who loses his/hers first playoffs match look much more accomplished if he/she manage to make it to the finals, than player who made an uninterrupted, but considerably shorter upper bracket winning streak into the finals. That's how I see Serral's meta endgame now. It was not that bad decision to throw a series against Inno if that can help to avoid meeting Reynor too soon, lol. For Note, that was same meta strategy Maru has used in the past in his apparent fear of Serral, tho failing in it this far. Elimination brackets are never going to be 100% "fair". If you want the "right" order for every single player, you need a giant round robin group, probably with each player facing each other multiple times. Like in German soccer there is an league (=giant round robin group) and a cup (=single elimination bracket) wich are two completly different formats. A giant round robin group would just not work that well as a SC2 tournament. Blizz tried that with WCS Winter this year and the comunity over all wasn t that happy. I still remember, that Reynor got straight in the final by finishing 1st in the round robin and everyone was complaining, that there were no built up for that. I really liked that format, though. Oh, well... People prefer drama and excitement over substance, unfortunately. I really really like that format too, and I loath artificial drama (not counting moments of pathological drunkenness). For me it all is pretty much about the defense of that substance, and the integrity of the talent against bullshitters and cying-for-vainers. Structures, habits, customs, and conventions can be easily chanced to UN-support those ill-spirited phenoms and perpetual whiners, but this require that people clearly recognize where and whom are carrying that substance, and what are general out-of-game frameworks that can even theoretically happen. In-game. HSC XXI should go random. Sorry, I got completely lost after your first sentence... Lol. Only in 6-cans-upmood. Risking now against potential spamming, and not going to repeat what I think about 'Randomness' of future SC2. In all scenarios where you have 3 options to play with, you will fare well against specialists of only 1 option. Damn, you need do only above average with all 3 options to be statistically better than any of 1-option specialist. If you can handle with one option at top level, and you're very good with two other options as well, your chances against average agents of mediocrity are very good. If you must choose one option in a circumstances where all options are intimately interrelated, its impossible to reach the peak level performances in any of those 3 options without knowing also 2 others. The Case of a SC2 player's trilemma. Currently. Why not set it as default? Those are best players of SC2 that can handle with that trilemma best, knowing all out-of-preferred-race strats, paradigms, meta, history, legends, tricks, wibes and jives... Its huge mental leap, like armstrongs on moons, but its also most obvious leap to be taken in this era of twilight of Blizzard back up'd game of SC2. Go random now, thank yourself later you did it then.
I'd would like to see Scarlett i this format.
Best moment of SC2 for me was she off racing and beating DRG as a Toss.
|
Northern Ireland23675 Posts
On November 26 2019 03:11 UnLarva wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2019 02:55 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 26 2019 02:43 UnLarva wrote:On November 26 2019 02:24 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 26 2019 01:52 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 26 2019 01:36 UnLarva wrote:I have no particular complains about Bo5 / Bo5+Bo3 system when using double elimination. It's much better than just +1 map for a Winner brackets winner in the finals. After all a loser finalist was already 'eliminated' once when he drops to the losers bracket. Elimimated player really need/should/must reset the score before he can reach to the final, deciding games. No problems what ever with that, but for ensuring that really best players in the tournament will reach to Ro4, there should be more internal 'control' in how many ways that can happen, IMO. Is there any realistic (by time constraints set by the reality itself and players, audiences, and tournament organisers' well-being) ways to make it so that there would be a chance for a loser bracket player to rise to the winner bracket by their game performances during a tournament? Already eliminated player could for example rise back to upper bracket if winning 2 or 3 consecutive matches, but having to match against the dropping player (at that latest moment someone drops) in Bo1 or Bo3? That would mean also something in the lower bracket then if once eliminated dropping player happens to lose to that uprising consecutive loser bracket winner. Maybe something like direct swap with the worst loser bracket player measured by map score in their entirety that far in that tournament. Loser would just drop out of contention (even if being a winner of his/hers last match) in that case. The point of these thoughts is to seek a format that maximize the likelihood for best players being in last matches of the tournament, allowing more chances for tactical throws short term to get as far as possible, but also making it possible to recover from a one bad match or sub-par group performance that put a player to lower bracket, before the finals. Current system is fine overall, but it potentially makes a player who loses his/hers first playoffs match look much more accomplished if he/she manage to make it to the finals, than player who made an uninterrupted, but considerably shorter upper bracket winning streak into the finals. That's how I see Serral's meta endgame now. It was not that bad decision to throw a series against Inno if that can help to avoid meeting Reynor too soon, lol. For Note, that was same meta strategy Maru has used in the past in his apparent fear of Serral, tho failing in it this far. Elimination brackets are never going to be 100% "fair". If you want the "right" order for every single player, you need a giant round robin group, probably with each player facing each other multiple times. Like in German soccer there is an league (=giant round robin group) and a cup (=single elimination bracket) wich are two completly different formats. A giant round robin group would just not work that well as a SC2 tournament. Blizz tried that with WCS Winter this year and the comunity over all wasn t that happy. I still remember, that Reynor got straight in the final by finishing 1st in the round robin and everyone was complaining, that there were no built up for that. I really liked that format, though. Oh, well... People prefer drama and excitement over substance, unfortunately. I really really like that format too, and I loath artificial drama (not counting moments of pathological drunkenness). For me it all is pretty much about the defense of that substance, and the integrity of the talent against bullshitters and cying-for-vainers. Structures, habits, customs, and conventions can be easily chanced to UN-support those ill-spirited phenoms and perpetual whiners, but this require that people clearly recognize where and whom are carrying that substance, and what are general out-of-game frameworks that can even theoretically happen. In-game. HSC XXI should go random. Sorry, I got completely lost after your first sentence... Lol. Only in 6-cans-upmood. Risking now against potential spamming, and not going to repeat what I think about 'Randomness' of future SC2. In all scenarios where you have 3 options to play with, you will fare well against specialists of only 1 option. Damn, you need do only above average with all 3 options to be statistically better than any of 1-option specialist. If you can handle with one option at top level, and you're very good with two other options as well, your chances against average agents of mediocrity are very good. If you must choose one option in a circumstances where all options are intimately interrelated, its impossible to reach the peak level performances in any of those 3 options without knowing also 2 others. The Case of a SC2 player's trilemma. Currently. Why not set it as default? Those are best players of SC2 that can handle with that trilemma best, knowing all out-of-preferred-race strats, paradigms, meta, history, legends, tricks, wibes and jives... Its huge mental leap, like armstrongs on moons, but its also most obvious leap to be taken in this era of twilight of Blizzard back up'd game of SC2. Go random now, thank yourself later you did it then.
Random is trash, I would love the option to ‘roll a random race’ when laddering but really hate actual random gameplay. I hate facing random, I also hate facing others as random.
There’s no amount of strategic improvisation that can overcome the really, really early decisions you have to make and it makes everything horrendously wonky.
|
On November 26 2019 03:36 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2019 03:11 UnLarva wrote:On November 26 2019 02:55 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 26 2019 02:43 UnLarva wrote:On November 26 2019 02:24 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 26 2019 01:52 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 26 2019 01:36 UnLarva wrote:I have no particular complains about Bo5 / Bo5+Bo3 system when using double elimination. It's much better than just +1 map for a Winner brackets winner in the finals. After all a loser finalist was already 'eliminated' once when he drops to the losers bracket. Elimimated player really need/should/must reset the score before he can reach to the final, deciding games. No problems what ever with that, but for ensuring that really best players in the tournament will reach to Ro4, there should be more internal 'control' in how many ways that can happen, IMO. Is there any realistic (by time constraints set by the reality itself and players, audiences, and tournament organisers' well-being) ways to make it so that there would be a chance for a loser bracket player to rise to the winner bracket by their game performances during a tournament? Already eliminated player could for example rise back to upper bracket if winning 2 or 3 consecutive matches, but having to match against the dropping player (at that latest moment someone drops) in Bo1 or Bo3? That would mean also something in the lower bracket then if once eliminated dropping player happens to lose to that uprising consecutive loser bracket winner. Maybe something like direct swap with the worst loser bracket player measured by map score in their entirety that far in that tournament. Loser would just drop out of contention (even if being a winner of his/hers last match) in that case. The point of these thoughts is to seek a format that maximize the likelihood for best players being in last matches of the tournament, allowing more chances for tactical throws short term to get as far as possible, but also making it possible to recover from a one bad match or sub-par group performance that put a player to lower bracket, before the finals. Current system is fine overall, but it potentially makes a player who loses his/hers first playoffs match look much more accomplished if he/she manage to make it to the finals, than player who made an uninterrupted, but considerably shorter upper bracket winning streak into the finals. That's how I see Serral's meta endgame now. It was not that bad decision to throw a series against Inno if that can help to avoid meeting Reynor too soon, lol. For Note, that was same meta strategy Maru has used in the past in his apparent fear of Serral, tho failing in it this far. Elimination brackets are never going to be 100% "fair". If you want the "right" order for every single player, you need a giant round robin group, probably with each player facing each other multiple times. Like in German soccer there is an league (=giant round robin group) and a cup (=single elimination bracket) wich are two completly different formats. A giant round robin group would just not work that well as a SC2 tournament. Blizz tried that with WCS Winter this year and the comunity over all wasn t that happy. I still remember, that Reynor got straight in the final by finishing 1st in the round robin and everyone was complaining, that there were no built up for that. I really liked that format, though. Oh, well... People prefer drama and excitement over substance, unfortunately. I really really like that format too, and I loath artificial drama (not counting moments of pathological drunkenness). For me it all is pretty much about the defense of that substance, and the integrity of the talent against bullshitters and cying-for-vainers. Structures, habits, customs, and conventions can be easily chanced to UN-support those ill-spirited phenoms and perpetual whiners, but this require that people clearly recognize where and whom are carrying that substance, and what are general out-of-game frameworks that can even theoretically happen. In-game. HSC XXI should go random. Sorry, I got completely lost after your first sentence... Lol. Only in 6-cans-upmood. Risking now against potential spamming, and not going to repeat what I think about 'Randomness' of future SC2. In all scenarios where you have 3 options to play with, you will fare well against specialists of only 1 option. Damn, you need do only above average with all 3 options to be statistically better than any of 1-option specialist. If you can handle with one option at top level, and you're very good with two other options as well, your chances against average agents of mediocrity are very good. If you must choose one option in a circumstances where all options are intimately interrelated, its impossible to reach the peak level performances in any of those 3 options without knowing also 2 others. The Case of a SC2 player's trilemma. Currently. Why not set it as default? Those are best players of SC2 that can handle with that trilemma best, knowing all out-of-preferred-race strats, paradigms, meta, history, legends, tricks, wibes and jives... Its huge mental leap, like armstrongs on moons, but its also most obvious leap to be taken in this era of twilight of Blizzard back up'd game of SC2. Go random now, thank yourself later you did it then. Random is trash, I would love the option to ‘roll a random race’ when laddering but really hate actual random gameplay. I hate facing random, I also hate facing others as random. There’s no amount of strategic improvisation that can overcome the really, really early decisions you have to make and it makes everything horrendously wonky.
I respect your opinion.
But, in circumstances where every player would be on equal standings race-wise, meta would develop much faster likely being also much more complex. Strats would be discussed much more in-depth because all serious players would get motivational boost to play and test good strats and all variations of them. "Anarchists" could prevail in that kind of meta. Material for new innovations would pile up faster. Whiners could look at a mirror (concrete one, at a wall) then and see only their whining faces staring at them, something that would drastically decrease an amount of stupid spam in all relevant threads and debates. Being bad is not bad thing, you can improve. But you cannot ever improve in anything if you can easily transfer your own fault to elsewhere. In 'All-Random' SC2 future you cannot do that as known imbalances would be known by everyone, and skills and theory needed to adapt to those imbalances would be under discussions, and important part of SC2 meta itself.
Decisions you would make then during early game would still measure something about you as a player of race T, P, or Z. But you couldn't ever just transfer your bad game play decisions to imaginary 'upper level' as they would be faults in the game. Meta itself would accept that there are some faults in the game.
Best understanding of meta across all races would become a deciding factor at the top level SC2 among overall skills of play.
+ Whole competitive scene would be much more cool! Dennis! Make it happen!
|
Northern Ireland23675 Posts
On November 26 2019 03:58 UnLarva wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2019 03:36 Wombat_NI wrote:On November 26 2019 03:11 UnLarva wrote:On November 26 2019 02:55 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 26 2019 02:43 UnLarva wrote:On November 26 2019 02:24 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 26 2019 01:52 dbRic1203 wrote:On November 26 2019 01:36 UnLarva wrote:I have no particular complains about Bo5 / Bo5+Bo3 system when using double elimination. It's much better than just +1 map for a Winner brackets winner in the finals. After all a loser finalist was already 'eliminated' once when he drops to the losers bracket. Elimimated player really need/should/must reset the score before he can reach to the final, deciding games. No problems what ever with that, but for ensuring that really best players in the tournament will reach to Ro4, there should be more internal 'control' in how many ways that can happen, IMO. Is there any realistic (by time constraints set by the reality itself and players, audiences, and tournament organisers' well-being) ways to make it so that there would be a chance for a loser bracket player to rise to the winner bracket by their game performances during a tournament? Already eliminated player could for example rise back to upper bracket if winning 2 or 3 consecutive matches, but having to match against the dropping player (at that latest moment someone drops) in Bo1 or Bo3? That would mean also something in the lower bracket then if once eliminated dropping player happens to lose to that uprising consecutive loser bracket winner. Maybe something like direct swap with the worst loser bracket player measured by map score in their entirety that far in that tournament. Loser would just drop out of contention (even if being a winner of his/hers last match) in that case. The point of these thoughts is to seek a format that maximize the likelihood for best players being in last matches of the tournament, allowing more chances for tactical throws short term to get as far as possible, but also making it possible to recover from a one bad match or sub-par group performance that put a player to lower bracket, before the finals. Current system is fine overall, but it potentially makes a player who loses his/hers first playoffs match look much more accomplished if he/she manage to make it to the finals, than player who made an uninterrupted, but considerably shorter upper bracket winning streak into the finals. That's how I see Serral's meta endgame now. It was not that bad decision to throw a series against Inno if that can help to avoid meeting Reynor too soon, lol. For Note, that was same meta strategy Maru has used in the past in his apparent fear of Serral, tho failing in it this far. Elimination brackets are never going to be 100% "fair". If you want the "right" order for every single player, you need a giant round robin group, probably with each player facing each other multiple times. Like in German soccer there is an league (=giant round robin group) and a cup (=single elimination bracket) wich are two completly different formats. A giant round robin group would just not work that well as a SC2 tournament. Blizz tried that with WCS Winter this year and the comunity over all wasn t that happy. I still remember, that Reynor got straight in the final by finishing 1st in the round robin and everyone was complaining, that there were no built up for that. I really liked that format, though. Oh, well... People prefer drama and excitement over substance, unfortunately. I really really like that format too, and I loath artificial drama (not counting moments of pathological drunkenness). For me it all is pretty much about the defense of that substance, and the integrity of the talent against bullshitters and cying-for-vainers. Structures, habits, customs, and conventions can be easily chanced to UN-support those ill-spirited phenoms and perpetual whiners, but this require that people clearly recognize where and whom are carrying that substance, and what are general out-of-game frameworks that can even theoretically happen. In-game. HSC XXI should go random. Sorry, I got completely lost after your first sentence... Lol. Only in 6-cans-upmood. Risking now against potential spamming, and not going to repeat what I think about 'Randomness' of future SC2. In all scenarios where you have 3 options to play with, you will fare well against specialists of only 1 option. Damn, you need do only above average with all 3 options to be statistically better than any of 1-option specialist. If you can handle with one option at top level, and you're very good with two other options as well, your chances against average agents of mediocrity are very good. If you must choose one option in a circumstances where all options are intimately interrelated, its impossible to reach the peak level performances in any of those 3 options without knowing also 2 others. The Case of a SC2 player's trilemma. Currently. Why not set it as default? Those are best players of SC2 that can handle with that trilemma best, knowing all out-of-preferred-race strats, paradigms, meta, history, legends, tricks, wibes and jives... Its huge mental leap, like armstrongs on moons, but its also most obvious leap to be taken in this era of twilight of Blizzard back up'd game of SC2. Go random now, thank yourself later you did it then. Random is trash, I would love the option to ‘roll a random race’ when laddering but really hate actual random gameplay. I hate facing random, I also hate facing others as random. There’s no amount of strategic improvisation that can overcome the really, really early decisions you have to make and it makes everything horrendously wonky. I respect your opinion. But, in circumstances where every player would be on equal standings race-wise, meta would develop much faster likely being also much more complex. Strats would be discussed much more in-depth because all serious players would get motivational boost to play and test good strats and all variations of them. "Anarchists" could prevail in that kind of meta. Material for new innovations would pile up faster. Whiners could look at a mirror (concrete on, at a wall) then and see only their whining faces staring at them, something that would drastically decrease an amount of stupid spam in all relevant threads and debates. Being bad is not bad thing, you can improve. But you cannot ever improve in anything if you can easily transfer your own fault to elsewhere. In 'All-Random' SC2 future you cannot do that as known imbalances would be known by everyone, and skills and theory needed to adapt to those imbalances would be under discussions, and important part of SC2 meta itself. Decisions you would make then during early game would still measure something about you as a player of race T, P, or Z. But you couldn't ever just transfer your bad game play decisions to imaginary 'upper level' as they would be faults in the game. Meta itself would accept that there some faults in the game. Best understanding of meta across all races would become a deciding factor at the top level SC2 among overall skills of play.
You can absolutely do that, my desire is for the option to roll random but your opponent to know what race you’re playing, then you can really test yourself across all three races.
I don’t think random where the random is unknown advances anything really.
Regardless of how creative you are, you need to wall against Zerg and you need that pylon down really early to do so. Before you scout, unless you do such an early scout that it’s not really optimal as a vZ build.
You do not want to wall in such a fashion against Protoss, where you want the wall above your ramp, and you don’t want to initially wall vT at your natural (but such a wall can be good vs Hellions)
Really dislike these kind of dynamics and they make for stupid games. Most random players on ladder just do stupid builds based on that lack of information, and on the flip side people who want to play random to try and play all 9 matchups ‘legit’ don’t really get the opportunity because opponents do outright bad catch-all builds when it’s vs random, even if you tell them your race (which I do) sometimes they don’t believe you.
If not the only way to play random, an option to play ‘revealed random’ should 100% exist as an option for these reasons.
As an aside I’d love more options in terms of matchmaking and I don’t get why they’re not there.
There should be a ‘3 shoot’ option where you pick 3 matchups and ladder, which would be cool, or variants thereof. Anyone maining a race only had 3 matchups to worry about so picking 3 matchups wouldn’t be too unfair or anything, or unrepresentative.
Basically since forever I’ve been good at PvT and TvP and enjoyed TvZ a ton. I’ve been a passable PvP player and always, always a terrible PvZ player (my vT and vZ have consistently been 70 and 30 across expansions and patches). I’ve had a long gap out playing and am not sure if I want to return as Protoss or Terran yet, and I’d like to try both. Alas I don’t have the time to get competent at 6 matchups right now in my life, whereas this form of race-picking I’d totally dig.
Maybe not have it factor into your actual ladder ranking but feed into your MMR in certain matchups etc, that way people couldn’t just pick their top 3 matchups and abuse it to get inflated ratings.
|
'Revealed Random' is my default in above comments. Sorry.
|
On November 25 2019 18:37 UnLarva wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2019 18:04 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 25 2019 17:46 UnLarva wrote:
Weird feeling. Never seen generally more calm, happy aftermath reactions of a tournament in the internet. Level of balance whining is down despite Zergs once again stole the show. Serral fans are seemingly collectively feeling little bit shamed for Serral's win because Reynor was so incredibly great and would've very well deserved to win the tournament too by his performances. Terrans and Protosses, and generally all who hate mirror matchups, but particularly ZvZ seems behaving and commenting in way that they all are arrived to the consensus opinion: "ZvZ is soooooooooo ZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZzzzzzz-zzz....., but Serral vs Reynor... that is totally something else". Things probably will change back to "normal" soon enough, but I've never witnessed more serene, friendly, and pleased SC2 community as a whole online before.
That level Great the HSC XX was. We want more, we want more, we want more.... :D I did see a bit of whining on the part of some koreaboos and general balance whiners, but yeah all in all the results were pretty non-controversial. I'm also still a bit disappointed by the lack of respect and recognition Reynor deserves. Well, no wonder there's a lack of fresh blood; here's a guy not even old enough to vote, and he's wreaking havoc upon some of the best—and hardly anyone acknowledges him as top 10 in the world. Maybe the community doesn't deserve to see new SC2 talents. Indeed. Reynor doesn't get enough love he deserves. Someone, somewhere in the reddit commented that there haven't ever been more accomplished 17 years old player in SC-scene. At least now its pretty clear that if there was long period of time when Serral was considered as "Bottle neck" and "Ultimate test" for all players trying to win a top tournament, now there are two bottle necks and tests one must pass to get to the goal. Together as training partners and friends they form so tight bottle neck that saying like "Going full foreigner" get new meaning these days. You really have to go 'full foreigner' to get past that test in the future, Top Koreans included. Together they can bring the game, ZvZ especially, to the new, unprecedented, stratospheric layers of existence. They are each others best patch to get adapted. As Serral fan, I honestly think that Reynor's potential top ceiling is at higher level than Serral's, and saying that with rather high feelings of confidence too. Reynor deserves all the love and hype he can get. The Real SC2 prodigy he is.
In StarCraft 2. In Brood War, Flash had won 3 StarLeague titles by the time he was 17, if I'm not mistaken.
But Reynor does seem quite mature for his age. He definitely has great potential. As one of the commentators noted, Reynor's ego does not seem to get in the way of his development. Whenever someone points out a mistake in his play, he swiftly corrects it.
|
Beside the insanely great story line with Mana being a surprise once again, with having Serral brought down to the lower bracket only to face Reynor in the grand finals, and going through the maximum number of game possible, having Mike fucking Morhaime showing up, having Take almost crying when he started things off with remembering Incontrol, this tournament had something which many other lack:
Heart.
Bly, TLO, Showtime. That alone sounds great. But Artosis was there, too. Rotterdam finally shirtless.
Yes there were great games. Above all, the atmosphere was fantastic, even for guys like me not being there in person and just watching the stream. It all came together.
I watched the original Homestory Cup and HSC2 in full, when it happened, on stream. With HSC3 it became much bigger and I only watched parts from then on. Now this HSC20 was something which echoes trough esport history. Done by fans for fans.
I want to hug everyone involved. Thank you.
|
Northern Ireland23675 Posts
On November 26 2019 04:30 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2019 18:37 UnLarva wrote:On November 25 2019 18:04 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 25 2019 17:46 UnLarva wrote:
Weird feeling. Never seen generally more calm, happy aftermath reactions of a tournament in the internet. Level of balance whining is down despite Zergs once again stole the show. Serral fans are seemingly collectively feeling little bit shamed for Serral's win because Reynor was so incredibly great and would've very well deserved to win the tournament too by his performances. Terrans and Protosses, and generally all who hate mirror matchups, but particularly ZvZ seems behaving and commenting in way that they all are arrived to the consensus opinion: "ZvZ is soooooooooo ZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZzzzzzz-zzz....., but Serral vs Reynor... that is totally something else". Things probably will change back to "normal" soon enough, but I've never witnessed more serene, friendly, and pleased SC2 community as a whole online before.
That level Great the HSC XX was. We want more, we want more, we want more.... :D I did see a bit of whining on the part of some koreaboos and general balance whiners, but yeah all in all the results were pretty non-controversial. I'm also still a bit disappointed by the lack of respect and recognition Reynor deserves. Well, no wonder there's a lack of fresh blood; here's a guy not even old enough to vote, and he's wreaking havoc upon some of the best—and hardly anyone acknowledges him as top 10 in the world. Maybe the community doesn't deserve to see new SC2 talents. Indeed. Reynor doesn't get enough love he deserves. Someone, somewhere in the reddit commented that there haven't ever been more accomplished 17 years old player in SC-scene. At least now its pretty clear that if there was long period of time when Serral was considered as "Bottle neck" and "Ultimate test" for all players trying to win a top tournament, now there are two bottle necks and tests one must pass to get to the goal. Together as training partners and friends they form so tight bottle neck that saying like "Going full foreigner" get new meaning these days. You really have to go 'full foreigner' to get past that test in the future, Top Koreans included. Together they can bring the game, ZvZ especially, to the new, unprecedented, stratospheric layers of existence. They are each others best patch to get adapted. As Serral fan, I honestly think that Reynor's potential top ceiling is at higher level than Serral's, and saying that with rather high feelings of confidence too. Reynor deserves all the love and hype he can get. The Real SC2 prodigy he is. In StarCraft 2. In Brood War, Flash had won 3 StarLeague titles by the time he was 17, if I'm not mistaken. But Reynor does seem quite mature for his age. He definitely has great potential. As one of the commentators noted, Reynor's ego does not seem to get in the way of his development. Whenever someone points out a mistake in his play, he swiftly corrects it.
His ceiling may be higher, I’m skeptical. I can see Reynor hitting the odd crazy peak, I’m not sure he’ll ever be as relentlessly consistently performing like Serral does though, but then again I don’t think anyone really has in SC2 thus far quite like Serral.
Serral reminds me of Flash in that his motivation levels in climbing the mountain and being at the top of the mountain remain seemingly the same. There are far more players who go through peaks and troughs, or fall off entirely once they conquer their white whale than players who seemingly are always hunting theirs, which I think is what sets a Serral or a Flash apart.
Before people freak out, no Serral isn’t as dominant as Flash, but I think their mentalities are pretty similarly atypical.
|
Northern Ireland23675 Posts
On November 26 2019 04:27 UnLarva wrote:
'Revealed Random' is my default in above comments. Sorry.
Ah no apology necessary my man! Quite happy I got to use the phrase ‘revealed random’ which I feel flows off the tongue quite nicely.
|
On November 26 2019 04:42 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2019 04:30 maybenexttime wrote:On November 25 2019 18:37 UnLarva wrote:On November 25 2019 18:04 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 25 2019 17:46 UnLarva wrote:
Weird feeling. Never seen generally more calm, happy aftermath reactions of a tournament in the internet. Level of balance whining is down despite Zergs once again stole the show. Serral fans are seemingly collectively feeling little bit shamed for Serral's win because Reynor was so incredibly great and would've very well deserved to win the tournament too by his performances. Terrans and Protosses, and generally all who hate mirror matchups, but particularly ZvZ seems behaving and commenting in way that they all are arrived to the consensus opinion: "ZvZ is soooooooooo ZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZzzzzzz-zzz....., but Serral vs Reynor... that is totally something else". Things probably will change back to "normal" soon enough, but I've never witnessed more serene, friendly, and pleased SC2 community as a whole online before.
That level Great the HSC XX was. We want more, we want more, we want more.... :D I did see a bit of whining on the part of some koreaboos and general balance whiners, but yeah all in all the results were pretty non-controversial. I'm also still a bit disappointed by the lack of respect and recognition Reynor deserves. Well, no wonder there's a lack of fresh blood; here's a guy not even old enough to vote, and he's wreaking havoc upon some of the best—and hardly anyone acknowledges him as top 10 in the world. Maybe the community doesn't deserve to see new SC2 talents. Indeed. Reynor doesn't get enough love he deserves. Someone, somewhere in the reddit commented that there haven't ever been more accomplished 17 years old player in SC-scene. At least now its pretty clear that if there was long period of time when Serral was considered as "Bottle neck" and "Ultimate test" for all players trying to win a top tournament, now there are two bottle necks and tests one must pass to get to the goal. Together as training partners and friends they form so tight bottle neck that saying like "Going full foreigner" get new meaning these days. You really have to go 'full foreigner' to get past that test in the future, Top Koreans included. Together they can bring the game, ZvZ especially, to the new, unprecedented, stratospheric layers of existence. They are each others best patch to get adapted. As Serral fan, I honestly think that Reynor's potential top ceiling is at higher level than Serral's, and saying that with rather high feelings of confidence too. Reynor deserves all the love and hype he can get. The Real SC2 prodigy he is. In StarCraft 2. In Brood War, Flash had won 3 StarLeague titles by the time he was 17, if I'm not mistaken. But Reynor does seem quite mature for his age. He definitely has great potential. As one of the commentators noted, Reynor's ego does not seem to get in the way of his development. Whenever someone points out a mistake in his play, he swiftly corrects it. His ceiling may be higher, I’m skeptical. I can see Reynor hitting the odd crazy peak, I’m not sure he’ll ever be as relentlessly consistently performing like Serral does though, but then again I don’t think anyone really has in SC2 thus far quite like Serral. Serral reminds me of Flash in that his motivation levels in climbing the mountain and being at the top of the mountain remain seemingly the same. There are far more players who go through peaks and troughs, or fall off entirely once they conquer their white whale than players who seemingly are always hunting theirs, which I think is what sets a Serral or a Flash apart. Before people freak out, no Serral isn’t as dominant as Flash, but I think their mentalities are pretty similarly atypical.
Serral is the best "weekend" player ever, no debate, period. His ability to keep his comprehension is totally another level than any other one's. Reynor is lucky, Serral will ultimately teach to him also that part of the art, for the love of the game, not for his own benefits. Reynor is already the biggest psychological menace of Serral's tournament success, and that says a lot about the player of his age.
You're right. Serral is as consistent as SC2 can be, but that doesn't mean Reynor cannot become consistent too. The best start by consistency and result to the SC2 top level competition in the history of the game is rather promising start.
And for him, nobody can accuse that his level of competition isn't enough high for further developments in consistency, and skill.
|
Northern Ireland23675 Posts
On November 26 2019 04:59 UnLarva wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2019 04:42 Wombat_NI wrote:On November 26 2019 04:30 maybenexttime wrote:On November 25 2019 18:37 UnLarva wrote:On November 25 2019 18:04 tigon_ridge wrote:On November 25 2019 17:46 UnLarva wrote:
Weird feeling. Never seen generally more calm, happy aftermath reactions of a tournament in the internet. Level of balance whining is down despite Zergs once again stole the show. Serral fans are seemingly collectively feeling little bit shamed for Serral's win because Reynor was so incredibly great and would've very well deserved to win the tournament too by his performances. Terrans and Protosses, and generally all who hate mirror matchups, but particularly ZvZ seems behaving and commenting in way that they all are arrived to the consensus opinion: "ZvZ is soooooooooo ZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZzzzzzz-zzz....., but Serral vs Reynor... that is totally something else". Things probably will change back to "normal" soon enough, but I've never witnessed more serene, friendly, and pleased SC2 community as a whole online before.
That level Great the HSC XX was. We want more, we want more, we want more.... :D I did see a bit of whining on the part of some koreaboos and general balance whiners, but yeah all in all the results were pretty non-controversial. I'm also still a bit disappointed by the lack of respect and recognition Reynor deserves. Well, no wonder there's a lack of fresh blood; here's a guy not even old enough to vote, and he's wreaking havoc upon some of the best—and hardly anyone acknowledges him as top 10 in the world. Maybe the community doesn't deserve to see new SC2 talents. Indeed. Reynor doesn't get enough love he deserves. Someone, somewhere in the reddit commented that there haven't ever been more accomplished 17 years old player in SC-scene. At least now its pretty clear that if there was long period of time when Serral was considered as "Bottle neck" and "Ultimate test" for all players trying to win a top tournament, now there are two bottle necks and tests one must pass to get to the goal. Together as training partners and friends they form so tight bottle neck that saying like "Going full foreigner" get new meaning these days. You really have to go 'full foreigner' to get past that test in the future, Top Koreans included. Together they can bring the game, ZvZ especially, to the new, unprecedented, stratospheric layers of existence. They are each others best patch to get adapted. As Serral fan, I honestly think that Reynor's potential top ceiling is at higher level than Serral's, and saying that with rather high feelings of confidence too. Reynor deserves all the love and hype he can get. The Real SC2 prodigy he is. In StarCraft 2. In Brood War, Flash had won 3 StarLeague titles by the time he was 17, if I'm not mistaken. But Reynor does seem quite mature for his age. He definitely has great potential. As one of the commentators noted, Reynor's ego does not seem to get in the way of his development. Whenever someone points out a mistake in his play, he swiftly corrects it. His ceiling may be higher, I’m skeptical. I can see Reynor hitting the odd crazy peak, I’m not sure he’ll ever be as relentlessly consistently performing like Serral does though, but then again I don’t think anyone really has in SC2 thus far quite like Serral. Serral reminds me of Flash in that his motivation levels in climbing the mountain and being at the top of the mountain remain seemingly the same. There are far more players who go through peaks and troughs, or fall off entirely once they conquer their white whale than players who seemingly are always hunting theirs, which I think is what sets a Serral or a Flash apart. Before people freak out, no Serral isn’t as dominant as Flash, but I think their mentalities are pretty similarly atypical. Serral is the best "weekend" player ever, no debate, period. His ability to keep his comprehension is totally another level than any other one's. Reynor is lucky, Serral will ultimately teach to him also that part of the art, for the love of the game, not for his own benefits. Reynor is already the biggest psychological menace of Serral's tournament success, and that says a lot about the player of his age. You're right. Serral is as consistent as SC2 can be, but that doesn't mean Reynor cannot become consistent too. The best start by consistency and result to the SC2 top level competition in the history of the game is rather promising start. And for him, nobody can accuse that his level of competition isn't enough high for further developments in consistency, and skill.
Even when Jinro was making a Ro4 in GSL, or Stephano was doing his thing they weren’t nearly as dominant over the foreign scene than Serral was, who was also doing the same vs good Koreans.
I feel Serral’s sheer consistency even if it’s ‘only’ at the WCS level is a bit underrated because no ‘best foreigner’ has been close to as dominant or consistent vs other foreigners.
|
I'm on the reynor hype train. It think his problem is mental and he is slowly getting better at that, as he matures. Don't be surprised when he gets to plough through the scene like Serral or even better. Even more excitingly, he can enter GSL .. unlike Serral who very likely won't.
|
Great event with great moments as always, HSC keeps being the pinnacle of the SC2 Community.
|
I like to imagine there was someone at the Tropical Islands, an outsider to StarCraft but perhaps not to gaming, just looking on in utter confusion. An esports tournament held in a German water park in the middle of November (with an awful lot of Korean being spoken for some reason), with the co-founders of Twitch and Blizzard randomly in attendance, with a live rap performance of an internet meme song, with the head organizer breaking down in tears at least twice before it was all over—Wait, what?
And, said outsider would have wondered aloud "Man, I have no idea what's going, but these guys sure know how to have a helluva good time. I wonder how all this started?" At which point, Take, who happened to be walking by, draped an arm over his shoulder and started to say "Well, it's a long story..."
FacebookI like to imagine there was someone at the Tropical Islands, an outsider to StarCraft but perhaps not to gaming, just looking on in utter confusion. An esports tournament held in a German water park in the middle of November (with an awful lot of Korean being spoken for some reason), with the co-founders of Twitch and Blizzard randomly in attendance, with a live rap performance of an internet meme song, with the head organizer breaking down in tears at least twice before it was all over—Wait, what?
And, said outsider would have wondered aloud "Man, I have no idea what's going, but these guys sure know how to have a helluva good time. I wonder how all this started?" At which point, Take, who happened to be walking by, draped an arm over his shoulder and started to say "Well, it's a long story..."
Facebook
i love this, had to think of Takes stream back in the days,very well written...
|
Congratulations to Serral.
As an old fan of INnoVation, I was actually very happy to see him beat Serral 3-1 in the victors group. It was a pity to lose the next match against Reynor and Serral by a big score. Although his age is very old for a player who has experienced KeSpa, I as a Terran would like to see him achieve more.
|
Congratulations to the shield of consistency Serral on yet another tournament victory.
This man is just unassailably good. What he has accomplished in the last 24 months is simply staggering.
|
Great write up and great tournament. Thanks to everyone involved!!!
|
I would be remiss if I did not add to the general consensus: this tournament really was beyond incredible. Everything was simply perfection, from the players, the caster, the crowd, the special guests, the actual games, and of course last but not least, the production.
I personally had tapered my expectations for production to not be on the level of TaKe's studio, yet I was blown away by how smooth everything was, whether it be the games, the interviews, the consistently fun and entertaining (and sometimes emotional) side content, or the general event and how it unfolded.
This very well go down the history books as SC2's greatest tournament- thank you to ALL who have no doubt worked months upon months to pull it off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
