|
On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years.
So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not.
The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots....
Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2.
|
On March 03 2020 00:51 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 00:22 a7xEnsiferum wrote:On March 02 2020 23:57 midhigh wrote:On March 02 2020 21:16 Charoisaur wrote:On March 02 2020 18:14 MarianoSC2 wrote:
Rogue now has to be included in a GOAT discussion right? Has to be in the top 10 / top 8 at this point. I don't think I'd place him above any of Maru, Inno, Life, soO, Stats, Zest, sOs, Dark, Mvp Maybe 10th tied with Classic. He has a few big wins but isn't consistent (not a lot of ro4 finishes compared to other players) and had success mostly in a weaker era Also I don't think you can place any of these players above Rogue without an argument. His peak was as high as the mentioned player, or even the highest ever below Serral's. I would take Rogues career any day of the week from your list, even he is not as talented as Maru or Dark. I don't want to get into balance discussion, so just based on the facts. Rogue has never lost a final, while winning 2 IEM Katowice, 1 WCS Global final and also a GSL. These are the most competitive tourneys. He performs when the stakes are the highest. That is also a very important quality/talent. So in my eyes, Dark, Stats, soO cannot be placed above Rogue just based on their performances when it matters the most. Zest and sOs are as inconsistent as Rogue, so they definitely cannot be higher, with similar results. Inno however has never won IEM Katowice or WCS Global Finals, but he can be comparable to Rogue in terms of achievements, but his peak was never that high as Maru's or Darks. We need to appreciate and enjoy his longevity, however this quality alone does not make him the GOAT. Mvp is in between Rogue and Inno in terms of achievements, peak and longevity, but most of his results came in a much different era. Maru is the most talented from the list i think, however he underperforms too many times to call him the GOAT. He is the Peyton Manning of the SC2, while Rogue is Tom Brady. Who must not be named career was too short to call him the GOAT. Sorry for my language but that comment is bullshit. First, all Serrals WCS are not worth much in terms of achievements. Id say winning 3 WCS is less impressive than winning 1 GSL. Second, one of the most, if not the most important aspect to dermine the GOAT is to analyze how they performed through different eras, patches and meta. In that category, Maru is the undisputed GOAT. From his time in PRIME, hes been great. That is also why Inno cant be goat imo. He was always insane when Terrans were strong, but struggled when his race did. Serral and Rogue also only started to be great when Zerg were clearly overpowered (even Rogue said it) Lastly, your metaphor about football shows that either you are clueless about the NFL,or you are clueless about Maru. Maru has won again and again and again at the highest level (4 gsl in a row not enough), won Proleague (one of the most prestigious competition in Korea), SSL, OSL and many more. Peyton was a god in seasons, but only won the SuperBowl twice, and his win with Denver, even I could have won since the defense did all the job. sOs and Zest has similar result to Rogue and therefore they cant be above Rogue, but Rogue can be above them? What that doesnt't make any sense. Also saying their results are "similar" is too broad of a statement, Zest has many more trophies than Rogue, argueably just as valuable ones. Zest should be above them both if you ask me, if you want to say they have "similar" results please explain what you mean by that. While I agree Maru is the GOAT, he is not the undisputed GOAT, because that would mean there is no one else in the discussion, there is other players in the discussion and many posters disagree with Maru being the GOAT. You are underestimating Innovation a lot here, he is the clear number two after Maru and sure he mainly won Championships when terran was strong but he did not "struggle" when terran wasn't great, he struggled during those rare periods when terrans were noneexistent in RO8 and forward. SC2 is not filled with terran weak periods and terran strong periods, there are a lot of time when terran was just inbetween doing "okay" and Inno never delivered when the race was actually weak. Its the opposite of being only performing when the race is strong, he never delivered when the race was weak. Two very different things you maybe replied to the wrong person in the first part of your comment 
As for Inno, he is defenitlly in my top 3 all time, but what really made Maru stood out for me (except his obvious 4 GSL), was during the blink era. I remember raging my life, trying hard to go from top 8 master to GM, and losing almost every TvP to blink.
Then there was that kid, maru, who was always the only terran in round of 8, crushing protoss in GSL and PL. (polt and taeja were the 2 other inspiring players, but they did it at a weaker level).
Maru was the only one being able to beat the imbalance, and even before his 4 gsl wins, I was ready to put him in the top 10 all time. (granted not goat)
|
Czech Republic12128 Posts
On March 03 2020 00:48 Moonerz wrote:
Also for all that talk of the gap closing, foreigners once again had a poor showing at IEM.
Except for Serral who's in some aspects more Korean than Parting 
|
On March 03 2020 00:22 a7xEnsiferum wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2020 23:57 midhigh wrote:On March 02 2020 21:16 Charoisaur wrote:On March 02 2020 18:14 MarianoSC2 wrote:
Rogue now has to be included in a GOAT discussion right? Has to be in the top 10 / top 8 at this point. I don't think I'd place him above any of Maru, Inno, Life, soO, Stats, Zest, sOs, Dark, Mvp Maybe 10th tied with Classic. He has a few big wins but isn't consistent (not a lot of ro4 finishes compared to other players) and had success mostly in a weaker era Also I don't think you can place any of these players above Rogue without an argument. His peak was as high as the mentioned player, or even the highest ever below Serral's. I would take Rogues career any day of the week from your list, even he is not as talented as Maru or Dark. I don't want to get into balance discussion, so just based on the facts. Rogue has never lost a final, while winning 2 IEM Katowice, 1 WCS Global final and also a GSL. These are the most competitive tourneys. He performs when the stakes are the highest. That is also a very important quality/talent. So in my eyes, Dark, Stats, soO cannot be placed above Rogue just based on their performances when it matters the most. Zest and sOs are as inconsistent as Rogue, so they definitely cannot be higher, with similar results. Inno however has never won IEM Katowice or WCS Global Finals, but he can be comparable to Rogue in terms of achievements, but his peak was never that high as Maru's or Darks. We need to appreciate and enjoy his longevity, however this quality alone does not make him the GOAT. Mvp is in between Rogue and Inno in terms of achievements, peak and longevity, but most of his results came in a much different era. Maru is the most talented from the list i think, however he underperforms too many times to call him the GOAT. He is the Peyton Manning of the SC2, while Rogue is Tom Brady. Who must not be named career was too short to call him the GOAT. Sorry for my language but that comment is bullshit. First, all Serrals WCS are not worth much in terms of achievements. Id say winning 3 WCS is less impressive than winning 1 GSL. Second, one of the most, if not the most important aspect to dermine the GOAT is to analyze how they performed through different eras, patches and meta. In that category, Maru is the undisputed GOAT. From his time in PRIME, hes been great. That is also why Inno cant be goat imo. He was always insane when Terrans were strong, but struggled when his race did. Serral and Rogue also only started to be great when Zerg were clearly overpowered (even Rogue said it) Lastly, your metaphor about football shows that either you are clueless about the NFL,or you are clueless about Maru. Maru has won again and again and again at the highest level (4 gsl in a row not enough), won Proleague (one of the most prestigious competition in Korea), SSL, OSL and many more. Peyton was a god in seasons, but only won the SuperBowl twice, and his win with Denver, even I could have won since the defense did all the job.
Maybe you are the clueless here about NFL and SC after all. Maru is clearly superior in terms of talent, just as Peyton was better than Brady. However Maru's 4 GSL (Preparation tourney just like NFL regular season wins) can be compared to Peyton's regular season MVP-s, while Rogue performance when it matters the most is like Tom Brady in the playoff. He simply just wins. Sometimes it is not pretty, sometimes he plays godlike, but he does it anyway. Just like Rogue. Rogue wins the big one aka superbowls = wcs, katowice. Maybe zerg overpowered. But what is he supposed to do about it? Should he apologize? Did ever Brady apologized because he had the best coach in the game by his side for his whole career? Or when the def bailed out him from trouble? He just took advantage of the situation, and delivered, as Rogue did. Not like he had an easy road in any of his championship runs. He beat Maru. Or Maru beat himself, it depends on who you ask...
Also nobody can be the the GOAT without results. And compared to the rest of the field, Maru does not have that many tournament wins, or significantly more than the rest of the players. And i am not talking about balance here, and how a 4th place finish counts as a win since he plays terran. There were so many occasions, when he was the superior player and yet still lost. Also, you cannot be the GOAT just based on your results, you need to the best at your race/year/period. And your argument about Maru has a clear flaw. When terran was the best race, Inno dominated, not Maru. Even Byun and TY won WCS and IEM, not Maru. Why is that? Even when terran was strong (your words), he was not undisputed number 1 player at his race, let alone counting all races. Being good in all patches does not mean you are the best. It just simply means he has better/quicker adaptation skills. His qualities as a player carries over patches better than other terrans. But this does not make him the GOAT. I am not saying, Rogue is the GOAT, but he needs to be in the discussion, and not at the 10th place or below. He was the best player for a longer period of time. Check. He won the biggest tournaments. Check. He won across multiple patches. Check. He beat 3-0 the world champ Dark, who happens to play zerg. Check.
Last but not least, we simply just cannot dismiss Serrals last two year when we are talkin about GOAT. Even many top Korean players call him the best right now. He is better, than the best zergs in Korea. So you cannot call him a simply patchzerg, since the korean zerg players are playing the same f***ng game, so the playing fields are even.
|
On March 03 2020 01:59 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years. So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not. The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots.... Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2.
It's not bullshit at all. Winning a GSL in 2014 was objectively much harder than winning a GSL right now. I remember back then there was a CODE A (!) group with Zest, herO, Squirtle and Inno while nowadays we struggle to fill the GSL with 32 competitive players. You can't tell me a GSL win nowadays is worth as much as it was back then just because it has the same name. For Maru this doesn't matter much because his results in the Kespa era were only slightly behind those of Life, Zest and Inno but it's definitely an argument against Serral and Rogue and why I will never see them on the same level as the aforementioned players unless they win like 4-5 more tier 1 tournaments.
|
On March 03 2020 09:00 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 01:59 Shuffleblade wrote:On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years. So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not. The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots.... Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2. It's not bullshit at all. Winning a GSL in 2014 was objectively much harder than winning a GSL right now. I remember back then there was a CODE A (!) group with Zest, herO, Squirtle and Inno while nowadays we struggle to fill the GSL with 32 competitive players. You can't tell me a GSL win nowadays is worth as much as it was back then just because it has the same name. For Maru this doesn't matter much because his results in the Kespa era were only slightly behind those of Life, Zest and Inno but it's definitely an argument against Serral and Rogue and why I will never see them on the same level as the aforementioned players unless they win like 4-5 more tier 1 tournaments.
Well it might not be bullshit entirely but I believe most posters mentioning "the hardest era" exaggerate this a lot. More players making the game harder is only true if you actually believe the game is mostly or significantly dependent on luck.
Today, as well as in the "hardest era" there are a handful of players that are doing well or reasonably well every season. The reason for that is that they were obviously better than the other players on average even though upsets do happen, what I am saying is that even if we would have code A today the same players would rise to the occasion and climb out of it anyway which is also (mostly) what happened back in the day.
It is true there was a broader range of "low to middle" class pros, because they were training partners or scouted "talents" but those rarely upset the big fishes anyway. I will also have to mention the seeding, if you reach RO8 in GSL it didn't even matter that there was a code A. You just focus on your thing and prepare for the opponents that come out of there, as long as you reached RO8 there was equal amount of wins to be champion you needed back then as you need now.
I could also argue the opposite, there were so many low-mid tier pros because the game was so young that it was "easy" to be good. The RO16 GSL of today have refined their skills over so many years that it is much harder for anyone new to break in, because NOW is actually the higher skill era. Tbh do you really think it is easier to win GSL against all the experience, cunning and practise that the players that prowl GSL of today have compared to winning against the comparatively inexperienced and unpractised players of 2014?
Yeah yeah I know none of these arguments won't convince anyone, because you all are very set in your opinion. But consider what you are really saying here is that "It was harder to win then because then everyone was equally bad, now there are a smaller group of extremely skilled and practiced players and when we compare other players to them they obviously look weaker.".
Some player have gotten so insanely good that you believe there is a lack to fill a code A, actually there isn't. If code A actually is implemented trust me every single player there will likely be more skilled than the majority in code S of 2014. They will however clearly be weaker than the top dogs of today, because they have just become too good.
|
On March 03 2020 07:33 midhigh wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 00:22 a7xEnsiferum wrote:On March 02 2020 23:57 midhigh wrote:On March 02 2020 21:16 Charoisaur wrote:On March 02 2020 18:14 MarianoSC2 wrote:
Rogue now has to be included in a GOAT discussion right? Has to be in the top 10 / top 8 at this point. I don't think I'd place him above any of Maru, Inno, Life, soO, Stats, Zest, sOs, Dark, Mvp Maybe 10th tied with Classic. He has a few big wins but isn't consistent (not a lot of ro4 finishes compared to other players) and had success mostly in a weaker era Also I don't think you can place any of these players above Rogue without an argument. His peak was as high as the mentioned player, or even the highest ever below Serral's. I would take Rogues career any day of the week from your list, even he is not as talented as Maru or Dark. I don't want to get into balance discussion, so just based on the facts. Rogue has never lost a final, while winning 2 IEM Katowice, 1 WCS Global final and also a GSL. These are the most competitive tourneys. He performs when the stakes are the highest. That is also a very important quality/talent. So in my eyes, Dark, Stats, soO cannot be placed above Rogue just based on their performances when it matters the most. Zest and sOs are as inconsistent as Rogue, so they definitely cannot be higher, with similar results. Inno however has never won IEM Katowice or WCS Global Finals, but he can be comparable to Rogue in terms of achievements, but his peak was never that high as Maru's or Darks. We need to appreciate and enjoy his longevity, however this quality alone does not make him the GOAT. Mvp is in between Rogue and Inno in terms of achievements, peak and longevity, but most of his results came in a much different era. Maru is the most talented from the list i think, however he underperforms too many times to call him the GOAT. He is the Peyton Manning of the SC2, while Rogue is Tom Brady. Who must not be named career was too short to call him the GOAT. Sorry for my language but that comment is bullshit. First, all Serrals WCS are not worth much in terms of achievements. Id say winning 3 WCS is less impressive than winning 1 GSL. Second, one of the most, if not the most important aspect to dermine the GOAT is to analyze how they performed through different eras, patches and meta. In that category, Maru is the undisputed GOAT. From his time in PRIME, hes been great. That is also why Inno cant be goat imo. He was always insane when Terrans were strong, but struggled when his race did. Serral and Rogue also only started to be great when Zerg were clearly overpowered (even Rogue said it) Lastly, your metaphor about football shows that either you are clueless about the NFL,or you are clueless about Maru. Maru has won again and again and again at the highest level (4 gsl in a row not enough), won Proleague (one of the most prestigious competition in Korea), SSL, OSL and many more. Peyton was a god in seasons, but only won the SuperBowl twice, and his win with Denver, even I could have won since the defense did all the job. Maybe you are the clueless here about NFL and SC after all. Maru is clearly superior in terms of talent, just as Peyton was better than Brady. However Maru's 4 GSL (Preparation tourney just like NFL regular season wins) can be compared to Peyton's regular season MVP-s, while Rogue performance when it matters the most is like Tom Brady in the playoff. He simply just wins. Sometimes it is not pretty, sometimes he plays godlike, but he does it anyway. Just like Rogue. Rogue wins the big one aka superbowls = wcs, katowice. Maybe zerg overpowered. But what is he supposed to do about it? Should he apologize? Did ever Brady apologized because he had the best coach in the game by his side for his whole career? Or when the def bailed out him from trouble? He just took advantage of the situation, and delivered, as Rogue did. Not like he had an easy road in any of his championship runs. He beat Maru. Or Maru beat himself, it depends on who you ask... Also nobody can be the the GOAT without results. And compared to the rest of the field, Maru does not have that many tournament wins, or significantly more than the rest of the players. And i am not talking about balance here, and how a 4th place finish counts as a win since he plays terran. There were so many occasions, when he was the superior player and yet still lost. Also, you cannot be the GOAT just based on your results, you need to the best at your race/year/period. And your argument about Maru has a clear flaw. When terran was the best race, Inno dominated, not Maru. Even Byun and TY won WCS and IEM, not Maru. Why is that? Even when terran was strong (your words), he was not undisputed number 1 player at his race, let alone counting all races. Being good in all patches does not mean you are the best. It just simply means he has better/quicker adaptation skills. His qualities as a player carries over patches better than other terrans. But this does not make him the GOAT. I am not saying, Rogue is the GOAT, but he needs to be in the discussion, and not at the 10th place or below. He was the best player for a longer period of time. Check. He won the biggest tournaments. Check. He won across multiple patches. Check. He beat 3-0 the world champ Dark, who happens to play zerg. Check. Last but not least, we simply just cannot dismiss Serrals last two year when we are talkin about GOAT. Even many top Korean players call him the best right now. He is better, than the best zergs in Korea. So you cannot call him a simply patchzerg, since the korean zerg players are playing the same f***ng game, so the playing fields are even. Lol, you are an idiot and theres no point in arguing with you. You are comparing winning GSL with a regular NFL season, really? Thats the best thing you came up with? You dont win GSL (and multiple other tournaments) by being a ''choker'' like peyton, you do it by being one of the best like Brady. Comparing Rogue to Brady doesnt make sense. Rogue won when his race was on top. He was infamous for never being able to make it past round of 8 before. That really reminds you of Brady?
Honestly dont bother answering this. You have shown your lack of sc2 knowledge and I will certainly not bother arguing with someone whos clearly clueless on the topic.
User was warned for this post.
|
On March 03 2020 01:59 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years. So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not. The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots.... Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2.
Progamers all have their own peak time. Got that?
|
Rofl. This thread is even worse than the other IEM thread ...
|
On March 03 2020 13:49 ParksonVN wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 01:59 Shuffleblade wrote:On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years. So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not. The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots.... Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2. Progamers all have their own peak time. Got that?
So you are saying you believe that past Inno and Zest in their "peak" would be able to defeat themselves right now because they were better before? That is simply not true the players are at a much higher level now than before which is why new players are seen as not good enough, because most fo them havent had 6 years of fulltime progaming sc2. Most of them just don't seem able to catch up.
|
France12758 Posts
On March 03 2020 01:59 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years. So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not. The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots.... Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2.
You realize they are not the same age at all right?
Some are past their prime and can still put up good results, some are in their prime.
Younger INno would fare better today than actual INno, that’s for sure
Maru still GOAT because 4 GSL in a row across patches is unprecedented and probably can’t be done again, even the zergs couldn’t do it on last year patch (+ his previous achievements of course)
|
Poland3747 Posts
Damn if only there was 3rd/4th place match.
|
On March 03 2020 18:23 nimdil wrote:
Damn if only there was 3rd/4th place match.
Good thing we have WESG then... oh wait, fuck you corona
|
On March 03 2020 18:13 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 01:59 Shuffleblade wrote:On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years. So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not. The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots.... Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2. You realize they are not the same age at all right? Some are past their prime and can still put up good results, some are in their prime. Younger INno would fare better today than actual INno, that’s for sure Maru still GOAT because 4 GSL in a row across patches is unprecedented and probably can’t be done again, even the zergs couldn’t do it on last year patch (+ his previous achievements of course)
I think we are of different opinions in regards to how important age is in sc2, you make it sounds players "not in their prime" meaning old generally are worse at the game than younger players. That simply isn't true, there are way too many of the "some are past their prime can still put up good result" for that to be true, Maru is basically the only korean player in "prime" years. Stats and Zest 27, Rogue and Innovation 26, Classic is 28, TY 25, Dark 24.
So basically all the best players in the world besides Maru and Serral are "past their prime", if age really mattered as much as you say it would be the other way around. There would two players above 22 and the rest would be young but that is not how the RO8 in GSL looks at all. Younger players are breaking through and improving but just being faster is not enough.
Don't forget what Stephano said, after making his comeback he failed to get any results and was asked if he had gotten rusty after a lengthy break. He just answered no, he puts much more effort into SC2 now than he ever did when he got his great success but cant seem to reach the same level because everyone have improved as such a fast pace.
Younger Inno wouldn't even get into RO32 current GSL, the level is much much higher than before, not because of there being more players but because the same players have continued to improve their game for years. For a progamer there are much more important skills than just youth and reaction time. Clutch factor, controlling nerves on the stage, planning longer series, making your own builds. Many things are built over years of training. Sure if Inno somehow could warp his current skills into his younger body he would be better but that is not possible. We cant invest many years into a craft and then still keep our youth.
|
On March 03 2020 19:35 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 18:13 Poopi wrote:On March 03 2020 01:59 Shuffleblade wrote:On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years. So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not. The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots.... Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2. You realize they are not the same age at all right? Some are past their prime and can still put up good results, some are in their prime. Younger INno would fare better today than actual INno, that’s for sure Maru still GOAT because 4 GSL in a row across patches is unprecedented and probably can’t be done again, even the zergs couldn’t do it on last year patch (+ his previous achievements of course) I think we are of different opinions in regards to how important age is in sc2, you make it sounds players "not in their prime" meaning old generally are worse at the game than younger players. That simply isn't true, there are way too many of the "some are past their prime can still put up good result" for that to be true, Maru is basically the only korean player in "prime" years. Stats and Zest 27, Rogue and Innovation 26, Classic is 28, TY 25, Dark 24. So basically all the best players in the world besides Maru and Serral are "past their prime", if age really mattered as much as you say it would be the other way around. There would two players above 22 and the rest would be young but that is not how the RO8 in GSL looks at all. Younger players are breaking through and improving but just being faster is not enough. Don't forget what Stephano said, after making his comeback he failed to get any results and was asked if he had gotten rusty after a lengthy break. He just answered no, he puts much more effort into SC2 now than he ever did when he got his great success but cant seem to reach the same level because everyone have improved as such a fast pace. Younger Inno wouldn't even get into RO32 current GSL, the level is much much higher than before, not because of there being more players but because the same players have continued to improve their game for years. For a progamer there are much more important skills than just youth and reaction time. Clutch factor, controlling nerves on the stage, planning longer series, making your own builds. Many things are built over years of training. Sure if Inno somehow could warp his current skills into his younger body he would be better but that is not possible. We cant invest many years into a craft and then still keep our youth.
Your logic has so many flaws. First of all you cannot compare skill level across different period. For exp: Mongol was one of the greatest empire in history and their calvary would easily be destroyed by any modern army if being put in today's world.
Inno, Zest and Life were so great because they dominated in the most competitive era when there were so many champion contenders. If you take out any of Inno, Zest, Life on their prime, there were more than dozen of players who could win premier. Look at the current scene, who can win premier league beside the three strongest Zerg and possibly 1 Terran and 1 Protoss?
|
On March 03 2020 20:26 ParksonVN wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 19:35 Shuffleblade wrote:On March 03 2020 18:13 Poopi wrote:On March 03 2020 01:59 Shuffleblade wrote:On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years. So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not. The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots.... Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2. You realize they are not the same age at all right? Some are past their prime and can still put up good results, some are in their prime. Younger INno would fare better today than actual INno, that’s for sure Maru still GOAT because 4 GSL in a row across patches is unprecedented and probably can’t be done again, even the zergs couldn’t do it on last year patch (+ his previous achievements of course) I think we are of different opinions in regards to how important age is in sc2, you make it sounds players "not in their prime" meaning old generally are worse at the game than younger players. That simply isn't true, there are way too many of the "some are past their prime can still put up good result" for that to be true, Maru is basically the only korean player in "prime" years. Stats and Zest 27, Rogue and Innovation 26, Classic is 28, TY 25, Dark 24. So basically all the best players in the world besides Maru and Serral are "past their prime", if age really mattered as much as you say it would be the other way around. There would two players above 22 and the rest would be young but that is not how the RO8 in GSL looks at all. Younger players are breaking through and improving but just being faster is not enough. Don't forget what Stephano said, after making his comeback he failed to get any results and was asked if he had gotten rusty after a lengthy break. He just answered no, he puts much more effort into SC2 now than he ever did when he got his great success but cant seem to reach the same level because everyone have improved as such a fast pace. Younger Inno wouldn't even get into RO32 current GSL, the level is much much higher than before, not because of there being more players but because the same players have continued to improve their game for years. For a progamer there are much more important skills than just youth and reaction time. Clutch factor, controlling nerves on the stage, planning longer series, making your own builds. Many things are built over years of training. Sure if Inno somehow could warp his current skills into his younger body he would be better but that is not possible. We cant invest many years into a craft and then still keep our youth. Your logic has so many flaws. First of all you cannot compare skill level across different period. For exp: Mongol was one of the greatest empire in history and their calvary would easily be destroyed by any modern army if being put in today's world. Inno, Zest and Life were so great because they dominated in the most competitive era when there were so many champion contenders. If you take out any of Inno, Zest, Life on their prime, there were more than dozen of players who could win premier. Look at the current scene, who can win premier league beside the three strongest Zerg and possibly 1 Terran and 1 Protoss?
So you argue back then was the most competitive because you had 3 players "dominate" but now it's not competitive because you have ONLY 5 players "dominate".... wait what?
EDIT: Also, that metaphor... dude
How about using chess as a metaphor or sth? Did Chess evolve in the last 10 years? Are the best Chess players 10 years ago still the best (minus any AI's obviously)?
|
The "most competetive era" thing is most likely an illusion. Yes, we had more top pro players back then. But to maintain a certain skill level or to even get better, only requires a certain amount of competition. While the situation in Korea is worrying me, it still has enough great players to let them become better. This also is the opinion of every Pro i heard/read being asked about this in an interview: we are better players now than we were before.
As a top player it may have been harder to win something in 2013 just because there were more players on your level, but this doesn't mean that the champions of that time were better players. They weren't.
Also one underestimates easily how much of a factor the GSL system with up&down matches and such was back then. It was way harder to get into CodeS back then which gave quite some bad performing CodeS-regulars 2nd and 3rd chances to not fall out of CodeS.
Another point is: from Ro16 on the competition is still as tough as it always has been. One could argue about Ro32 but I think that the necessity of winning 5 matches vs top players to win a GSL is not an easier feat today than in the socalled "most competetive era".
|
On March 03 2020 21:46 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 20:26 ParksonVN wrote:On March 03 2020 19:35 Shuffleblade wrote:On March 03 2020 18:13 Poopi wrote:On March 03 2020 01:59 Shuffleblade wrote:On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years. So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not. The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots.... Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2. You realize they are not the same age at all right? Some are past their prime and can still put up good results, some are in their prime. Younger INno would fare better today than actual INno, that’s for sure Maru still GOAT because 4 GSL in a row across patches is unprecedented and probably can’t be done again, even the zergs couldn’t do it on last year patch (+ his previous achievements of course) I think we are of different opinions in regards to how important age is in sc2, you make it sounds players "not in their prime" meaning old generally are worse at the game than younger players. That simply isn't true, there are way too many of the "some are past their prime can still put up good result" for that to be true, Maru is basically the only korean player in "prime" years. Stats and Zest 27, Rogue and Innovation 26, Classic is 28, TY 25, Dark 24. So basically all the best players in the world besides Maru and Serral are "past their prime", if age really mattered as much as you say it would be the other way around. There would two players above 22 and the rest would be young but that is not how the RO8 in GSL looks at all. Younger players are breaking through and improving but just being faster is not enough. Don't forget what Stephano said, after making his comeback he failed to get any results and was asked if he had gotten rusty after a lengthy break. He just answered no, he puts much more effort into SC2 now than he ever did when he got his great success but cant seem to reach the same level because everyone have improved as such a fast pace. Younger Inno wouldn't even get into RO32 current GSL, the level is much much higher than before, not because of there being more players but because the same players have continued to improve their game for years. For a progamer there are much more important skills than just youth and reaction time. Clutch factor, controlling nerves on the stage, planning longer series, making your own builds. Many things are built over years of training. Sure if Inno somehow could warp his current skills into his younger body he would be better but that is not possible. We cant invest many years into a craft and then still keep our youth. Your logic has so many flaws. First of all you cannot compare skill level across different period. For exp: Mongol was one of the greatest empire in history and their calvary would easily be destroyed by any modern army if being put in today's world. Inno, Zest and Life were so great because they dominated in the most competitive era when there were so many champion contenders. If you take out any of Inno, Zest, Life on their prime, there were more than dozen of players who could win premier. Look at the current scene, who can win premier league beside the three strongest Zerg and possibly 1 Terran and 1 Protoss? So you argue back then was the most competitive because you had 3 players "dominate" but now it's not competitive because you have ONLY 5 players "dominate".... wait what? EDIT: Also, that metaphor... dude How about using chess as a metaphor or sth? Did Chess evolve in the last 10 years? Are the best Chess players 10 years ago still the best (minus any AI's obviously)?
How long have you been watching the game competitively mate? In Kespa era there were countless amount of players who could take series off the champion contenders and the top (Inno/Life/Zest) had to work so hard to maintain the positions, there was no back to back GSL champion and even the code A was still competitive. Team houses helped analyzing gameplay and finding counter to any player. The fact that they won that many titles over such that many strong players was truly impressive.
Now, Rogue, Serral, Dark are the only ones that can win tourney, put they any where in the bracket you want and they'd still meet in the finals. The player pool is now tiny as hell.
Chess is not comparable to Starcraft. This video game is about mechanic skill and biological peak just as it's about strategies.
|
On March 03 2020 09:51 Shuffleblade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 09:00 Charoisaur wrote:On March 03 2020 01:59 Shuffleblade wrote:On March 03 2020 01:38 parksonsc wrote:
People are starting to underestimate Innovation just because he's not smashing everyone anymore. His peak was as high as anyone else if not above. Remember his style is macro oriented and positioning which has no weakness if executes perfectly, that's what he did in his peak. He made anyone else look surprisingly bad back then.
He, among all the GOAT contenders, was dominating much longer in the Kespa era, THE MOST COMPETITIVE ERA of SC2, do not argue with me on this if you watched the game from the beginning. To me only people who dominate in such era can be considered GOAT, and they are Inno, Life and Zest. From the three obviously Inno is the best in terms of achievement. Maru was also very good back then but his Kespa success was no where near Innovaion's.
It is kinda funny, to say Zest is greater than Maru because he got his result during Kespa era. So your "greatest of all time player" is great because he got the result when it was the most competitive. Yet for some reason he has (up until this IEM) been a straight up average player for years. So Marus result doesn't matter because he got them in a time when the competition was so easy that the greater player Zest failed to get any result at all. Seriously, if your Innovation and Zest were so much greater they would be the ones winning everything in this "easy" era, they are not. The most competetive era is bullshit when judging results and GOATs. An equally bullshit argument would be if I tried to argue that any results after lotv doesn't matter. Hey WoL and HotS was the most competetive era, lotv dumbed down the economy, made creepspreading faster and easier, inject larva stackable, removed mules for terran ease (yes they reverted it pretty fast though) and made chronoboost crazy easy, protoss got recall and so on... Really the game was much too easy after lotv for the results to really count, pros that do well in lotv are simply less skilled than players that did well in wol and hots.... Its bullshit, any of these "most competetive era" arguments doesn't understand how winning works, only one player can win, only one player can be the best player. There are still a lot of players playing sc2. It's not bullshit at all. Winning a GSL in 2014 was objectively much harder than winning a GSL right now. I remember back then there was a CODE A (!) group with Zest, herO, Squirtle and Inno while nowadays we struggle to fill the GSL with 32 competitive players. You can't tell me a GSL win nowadays is worth as much as it was back then just because it has the same name. For Maru this doesn't matter much because his results in the Kespa era were only slightly behind those of Life, Zest and Inno but it's definitely an argument against Serral and Rogue and why I will never see them on the same level as the aforementioned players unless they win like 4-5 more tier 1 tournaments. Well it might not be bullshit entirely but I believe most posters mentioning "the hardest era" exaggerate this a lot. More players making the game harder is only true if you actually believe the game is mostly or significantly dependent on luck. Today, as well as in the "hardest era" there are a handful of players that are doing well or reasonably well every season. The reason for that is that they were obviously better than the other players on average even though upsets do happen, what I am saying is that even if we would have code A today the same players would rise to the occasion and climb out of it anyway which is also (mostly) what happened back in the day. It is true there was a broader range of "low to middle" class pros, because they were training partners or scouted "talents" but those rarely upset the big fishes anyway. I will also have to mention the seeding, if you reach RO8 in GSL it didn't even matter that there was a code A. You just focus on your thing and prepare for the opponents that come out of there, as long as you reached RO8 there was equal amount of wins to be champion you needed back then as you need now. I could also argue the opposite, there were so many low-mid tier pros because the game was so young that it was "easy" to be good. The RO16 GSL of today have refined their skills over so many years that it is much harder for anyone new to break in, because NOW is actually the higher skill era. Tbh do you really think it is easier to win GSL against all the experience, cunning and practise that the players that prowl GSL of today have compared to winning against the comparatively inexperienced and unpractised players of 2014? Yeah yeah I know none of these arguments won't convince anyone, because you all are very set in your opinion. But consider what you are really saying here is that "It was harder to win then because then everyone was equally bad, now there are a smaller group of extremely skilled and practiced players and when we compare other players to them they obviously look weaker.". Some player have gotten so insanely good that you believe there is a lack to fill a code A, actually there isn't. If code A actually is implemented trust me every single player there will likely be more skilled than the majority in code S of 2014. They will however clearly be weaker than the top dogs of today, because they have just become too good.
We are talking about 2014 here, not about 2010/11. The players back then were already extremely refined and imo more skilled than today because they were younger and today a lot of players have lost their motivation and don't practice as hard anymore.
|
On March 03 2020 22:43 Charoisaur wrote:
The players back then were already extremely refined and imo more skilled than today because they were younger.
Ok, got it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
