|
On March 27 2021 06:25 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2021 05:59 dbRic1203 wrote:On March 27 2021 05:44 deacon.frost wrote:
Ehm, I don't want to be mean to Lambo, but if any Zerg is on my tactics and strategy watch lists it's actually Dark. Followed by Serral. Yeah sure, Lambo is only the guy behind the tactics of the IEM Katowice winner, 3 points in tactics is about right  Yeah sure. Dark is only the guy who actually won multiple titles, who gathered multiple second places and all of this in spite of what the master tactician Lambo says about his strategy. I don't know Kev, probably Dark is just bad at strategy and can bend space and time Oh man, that would be cool if Dark could do that. If he can do that Lambo can keep his puny tactics superiority.
Dark won his titles in 2019 mostly by playing better than his opponents; he "outstrategized" Serral in TSL by going for mutas almost every game the way Maru was doing at a certain point in 2018 when he proxied 24/7, relying on his opponents not having an answer for the strategy.
Not surprisingly, when presented with reliable counters played by strong opponents both lost very important series.
Dark surely isn't lacking in strategy and tactics but I wouldn't say it's the reason he is a top player; I would prefer Lambo over him every day if I had to ask for a strategical advice, Dark is just a stronger player overall.
I also don't think Serral's main selling point is his strategic prowess.
|
On March 27 2021 16:30 sneakyfox wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2021 15:46 Husyelt wrote:
Why does TY, the greatest SC2 strategist of all time not have maxed out tactics score? His recent performance at Katowice against PartinG did not exactly ooze tactical brilliance.
Strategy and tactics are also not the same thing
|
Northern Ireland25045 Posts
On March 27 2021 23:11 Xain0n wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2021 06:25 deacon.frost wrote:On March 27 2021 05:59 dbRic1203 wrote:On March 27 2021 05:44 deacon.frost wrote:
Ehm, I don't want to be mean to Lambo, but if any Zerg is on my tactics and strategy watch lists it's actually Dark. Followed by Serral. Yeah sure, Lambo is only the guy behind the tactics of the IEM Katowice winner, 3 points in tactics is about right Yeah sure. Dark is only the guy who actually won multiple titles, who gathered multiple second places and all of this in spite of what the master tactician Lambo says about his strategy. I don't know Kev, probably Dark is just bad at strategy and can bend space and time Oh man, that would be cool if Dark could do that. If he can do that Lambo can keep his puny tactics superiority. Dark won his titles in 2019 mostly by playing better than his opponents; he "outstrategized" Serral in TSL by going for mutas almost every game the way Maru was doing at a certain point in 2018 when he proxied 24/7, relying on his opponents not having an answer for the strategy. Not surprisingly, when presented with reliable counters played by strong opponents both lost very important series. Dark surely isn't lacking in strategy and tactics but I wouldn't say it's the reason he is a top player; I would prefer Lambo over him every day if I had to ask for a strategical advice, Dark is just a stronger player overall. I also don't think Serral's main selling point is his strategic prowess.
Yeah Dark and Serral are just all-round monsters really.
If we’re talking tactics being in-game reads and smart decisions then they’re obviously very good at all that.
I guess tactics, strategy, planning and theorycrafting all kind of overlap to some degree, and some folks use tactics and strategy interchangeably.
I guess for the purpose of the prestigious power hexagon I’d have this stat be more about the combination of all of them, with a really high rating being for a player who gets wins based on their brain vs mechanics etc, gaining an advantage or closing mechanical or meta gaps with strength of planning.
A TY in GSL last year or latter day Classic etc.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On March 27 2021 23:34 Elentos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2021 16:30 sneakyfox wrote:On March 27 2021 15:46 Husyelt wrote:
Why does TY, the greatest SC2 strategist of all time not have maxed out tactics score? His recent performance at Katowice against PartinG did not exactly ooze tactical brilliance. Strategy and tactics are also not the same thing
Considering we never agreed on what's what it doesn't matter.
|
I think if you define strategy as picking builds, compositions, etc., while you define tactics as how an existing army is used, e.g. nydus/runby, how to split the army, when to counterattack where, then I think Dark has to have a strong case for being one of the top tactical players. He pioneered bane drops against Stats in SSL in 2016, brought a lot of the typical ZvT late game harassment into the meta (ultras for runbys, heavy nydus play (which he later dropped)), and continues to have some of the most ridiculous comeback. Moreover, all of his comebacks are "tactical" in the sense that they can't be encapsulated by a strategic motif alone, "turtle to BL and take one good fight" but are instead mostly backed by strong army positioning, counterattacking, and forcing the opponent to make mistakes.
I think Dark has the strategy of a potato, but if you give him an army he is comfortable with, he will squeeze more mileage out of it than anybody else in the world. It's a subjective definition, but I think Dark is one of the players who really highlights the difference between "tactics" and "strategy" the most.
|
On March 28 2021 03:50 yubo56 wrote:
I think if you define strategy as picking builds, compositions, etc., while you define tactics as how an existing army is used, e.g. nydus/runby, how to split the army, when to counterattack where, then I think Dark has to have a strong case for being one of the top tactical players. He pioneered bane drops against Stats in SSL in 2016, brought a lot of the typical ZvT late game harassment into the meta (ultras for runbys, heavy nydus play (which he later dropped)), and continues to have some of the most ridiculous comeback. Moreover, all of his comebacks are "tactical" in the sense that they can't be encapsulated by a strategic motif alone, "turtle to BL and take one good fight" but are instead mostly backed by strong army positioning, counterattacking, and forcing the opponent to make mistakes.
I think Dark has the strategy of a potato, but if you give him an army he is comfortable with, he will squeeze more mileage out of it than anybody else in the world. It's a subjective definition, but I think Dark is one of the players who really highlights the difference between "tactics" and "strategy" the most.
This was very well put. Tactics is not the same as strategy in English language. I wonder how it is in Mandarin and how it could change in translation. For all I know, Mandarin has 5 different words which describes different aspects where the English only has 2 aspects.
Also, "Dark has the strategy of a potato" was poetry.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On March 28 2021 03:50 yubo56 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I think if you define strategy as picking builds, compositions, etc., while you define tactics as how an existing army is used, e.g. nydus/runby, how to split the army, when to counterattack where, then I think Dark has to have a strong case for being one of the top tactical players. He pioneered bane drops against Stats in SSL in 2016, brought a lot of the typical ZvT late game harassment into the meta (ultras for runbys, heavy nydus play (which he later dropped)), and continues to have some of the most ridiculous comeback. Moreover, all of his comebacks are "tactical" in the sense that they can't be encapsulated by a strategic motif alone, "turtle to BL and take one good fight" but are instead mostly backed by strong army positioning, counterattacking, and forcing the opponent to make mistakes. I think Dark has the strategy of a potato, but if you give him an army he is comfortable with, he will squeeze more mileage out of it than anybody else in the world. It's a subjective definition, but I think Dark is one of the players who really highlights the difference between "tactics" and "strategy" the most.
Or you don't understand the depth like Dark does thus you're unable to see it.
|
On March 28 2021 04:23 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2021 03:50 yubo56 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I think if you define strategy as picking builds, compositions, etc., while you define tactics as how an existing army is used, e.g. nydus/runby, how to split the army, when to counterattack where, then I think Dark has to have a strong case for being one of the top tactical players. He pioneered bane drops against Stats in SSL in 2016, brought a lot of the typical ZvT late game harassment into the meta (ultras for runbys, heavy nydus play (which he later dropped)), and continues to have some of the most ridiculous comeback. Moreover, all of his comebacks are "tactical" in the sense that they can't be encapsulated by a strategic motif alone, "turtle to BL and take one good fight" but are instead mostly backed by strong army positioning, counterattacking, and forcing the opponent to make mistakes. I think Dark has the strategy of a potato, but if you give him an army he is comfortable with, he will squeeze more mileage out of it than anybody else in the world. It's a subjective definition, but I think Dark is one of the players who really highlights the difference between "tactics" and "strategy" the most. Or you don't understand the depth like Dark does thus you're unable to see it.
I don't think there's strategic depth to losing 10 drones more to harassment than every other Zerg, or managing to die to solved cannon rushes haha, but maybe that's just the sad Dark fan within being salty every time he does stupid things. I'm mostly harping on his early game since that's the part that's the easiest to see by comparing to some of the other KR and even EU zergs playing against the same opponents. I agree that I probably don't understand his strategy in the mid and late game, but that's where his tactical brilliance is able to shine a lot more, and it's a bit harder to separate game plan from execution.
Maybe it's telling that some of the compositions he has been pioneering, like the heavy roach investment in ZvT with very late banes, or the straight to roach hydra lurker, haven't really caught on despite his reasonable individual success with it. I think strategy the way I've defined it is very easy to learn from other players ("what are they playing for here, what is their win condition?"), and apparently very few people have taken Dark's strategies. To then make the leap that "Dark's strategies are only good because of his tactics" to "Dark's tactics salvage his bad strategies" is not so difficult, in my opinion, especially since he's only looked quite good in his games and is only very rarely in unbeatable form.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On March 28 2021 04:55 yubo56 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2021 04:23 deacon.frost wrote:On March 28 2021 03:50 yubo56 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I think if you define strategy as picking builds, compositions, etc., while you define tactics as how an existing army is used, e.g. nydus/runby, how to split the army, when to counterattack where, then I think Dark has to have a strong case for being one of the top tactical players. He pioneered bane drops against Stats in SSL in 2016, brought a lot of the typical ZvT late game harassment into the meta (ultras for runbys, heavy nydus play (which he later dropped)), and continues to have some of the most ridiculous comeback. Moreover, all of his comebacks are "tactical" in the sense that they can't be encapsulated by a strategic motif alone, "turtle to BL and take one good fight" but are instead mostly backed by strong army positioning, counterattacking, and forcing the opponent to make mistakes. I think Dark has the strategy of a potato, but if you give him an army he is comfortable with, he will squeeze more mileage out of it than anybody else in the world. It's a subjective definition, but I think Dark is one of the players who really highlights the difference between "tactics" and "strategy" the most. Or you don't understand the depth like Dark does thus you're unable to see it. I don't think there's strategic depth to losing 10 drones more to harassment than every other Zerg, or managing to die to solved cannon rushes haha, but maybe that's just the sad Dark fan within being salty every time he does stupid things. I'm mostly harping on his early game since that's the part that's the easiest to see by comparing to some of the other KR and even EU zergs playing against the same opponents. I agree that I probably don't understand his strategy in the mid and late game, but that's where his tactical brilliance is able to shine a lot more, and it's a bit harder to separate game plan from execution. Maybe it's telling that some of the compositions he has been pioneering, like the heavy roach investment in ZvT with very late banes, or the straight to roach hydra lurker, haven't really caught on despite his reasonable individual success with it. I think strategy the way I've defined it is very easy to learn from other players ("what are they playing for here, what is their win condition?"), and apparently very few people have taken Dark's strategies. To then make the leap that "Dark's strategies are only good because of his tactics" to "Dark's tactics salvage his bad strategies" is not so difficult, in my opinion, especially since he's only looked quite good in his games and is only very rarely in unbeatable form.
Well that's the issue, I don't see losing 10 drones or failing to defend a cannon rush as a strategic fail but as a tactic fail. Stategy to me is the grand scheme, the big plan. Stategy defines the long term plan while tactics are the small pieces.
If we gonna talk about his early game - he fails tactically, he's unable to use predefined tactics to defend some rushes, cheese, w/e. Edit> Which may be because he's sticking to his greater plan and thus is weaker to some things. That's the part of risking and playing risky strategies. Or not having a good day
And that's exactly the reason why I wrote it's pointless because we don't have defined what's strategy and we haven't agreed upon this and as such we cannot discuss whether Dark is strategic mastermind or not. Because we are not basing this on the same definition of strategy.
|
Can’t have a hexagon thread without the most powerful hexagon of all. 
![[image loading]](https://i.postimg.cc/0zX0gJf5/A076755-B-0-AA1-4-A09-B693-0-E3-EC34-A4-C22.jpg)
|
France12790 Posts
On March 28 2021 00:03 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2021 23:34 Elentos wrote:On March 27 2021 16:30 sneakyfox wrote:On March 27 2021 15:46 Husyelt wrote:
Why does TY, the greatest SC2 strategist of all time not have maxed out tactics score? His recent performance at Katowice against PartinG did not exactly ooze tactical brilliance. Strategy and tactics are also not the same thing Considering we never agreed on what's what it doesn't matter.
Isn't strategy the macro part of the game / game plan, whereas tactics are like micro decisions / tricks in battles?
Like using your warp prism to do pick-up micro is a "tactic", whereas deciding to go for a 2 archons drop in PvZ is the "strategy".
|
On March 27 2021 00:01 sneakyfox wrote:Amazing thread. Show nested quote +On March 26 2021 23:51 WombaT wrote:
How is TY not maxed for tactics? Outrageous! I'm outraged they think TY only has tier 3 micro. Feels like they never actually watch him play. Ok I'm also outraged about him not being maxed for tactics. And some times his game sense is also in shambles, pure John Sun. They actually need to make a gif to accurately represent TY, it should show game sense at zero once in a while.
I do agree that TY's micro is often underrated, just because it's sometimes overshadowed by ByuN and Maru, but many times he had just wonderful micro and being 3rd is not too bad.
However, I think his mentality score should be lower. He has suffered with many throws and reverse sweeps where he played much worse towards the end of it. He's better now, but still below average
|
On March 27 2021 23:11 Xain0n wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2021 06:25 deacon.frost wrote:On March 27 2021 05:59 dbRic1203 wrote:On March 27 2021 05:44 deacon.frost wrote:
Ehm, I don't want to be mean to Lambo, but if any Zerg is on my tactics and strategy watch lists it's actually Dark. Followed by Serral. Yeah sure, Lambo is only the guy behind the tactics of the IEM Katowice winner, 3 points in tactics is about right Yeah sure. Dark is only the guy who actually won multiple titles, who gathered multiple second places and all of this in spite of what the master tactician Lambo says about his strategy. I don't know Kev, probably Dark is just bad at strategy and can bend space and time Oh man, that would be cool if Dark could do that. If he can do that Lambo can keep his puny tactics superiority. Dark won his titles in 2019 mostly by playing better than his opponents; he "outstrategized" Serral in TSL by going for mutas almost every game the way Maru was doing at a certain point in 2018 when he proxied 24/7, relying on his opponents not having an answer for the strategy. Not surprisingly, when presented with reliable counters played by strong opponents both lost very important series. Dark surely isn't lacking in strategy and tactics but I wouldn't say it's the reason he is a top player; I would prefer Lambo over him every day if I had to ask for a strategical advice, Dark is just a stronger player overall. I also don't think Serral's main selling point is his strategic prowess.
You sound like Dark and Maru are "one-trick pony" and when get found out will get smashed or something. Sure they abuse the build if they can just use the same build over and over to win, but they can do standard build and just win with better composition and reaction.
And what the point of having a good or great strategy if you dont have the ability to pull it off? Lambo probably knows every single build in the game and can come up with all the perfect counter, but the question would be how he can scout for it and make the proper adjustment to those builds? You cant just strategy on paper, it has to be carried out in actual gametime and succeed. To say a guy knows more meaning he is a better strategist is not true IMO.
|
United States33340 Posts
updated with (most) from day 2
lemme know what im missing
|
On March 28 2021 12:11 tigera6 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2021 23:11 Xain0n wrote:On March 27 2021 06:25 deacon.frost wrote:On March 27 2021 05:59 dbRic1203 wrote:On March 27 2021 05:44 deacon.frost wrote:
Ehm, I don't want to be mean to Lambo, but if any Zerg is on my tactics and strategy watch lists it's actually Dark. Followed by Serral. Yeah sure, Lambo is only the guy behind the tactics of the IEM Katowice winner, 3 points in tactics is about right Yeah sure. Dark is only the guy who actually won multiple titles, who gathered multiple second places and all of this in spite of what the master tactician Lambo says about his strategy. I don't know Kev, probably Dark is just bad at strategy and can bend space and time Oh man, that would be cool if Dark could do that. If he can do that Lambo can keep his puny tactics superiority. Dark won his titles in 2019 mostly by playing better than his opponents; he "outstrategized" Serral in TSL by going for mutas almost every game the way Maru was doing at a certain point in 2018 when he proxied 24/7, relying on his opponents not having an answer for the strategy. Not surprisingly, when presented with reliable counters played by strong opponents both lost very important series. Dark surely isn't lacking in strategy and tactics but I wouldn't say it's the reason he is a top player; I would prefer Lambo over him every day if I had to ask for a strategical advice, Dark is just a stronger player overall. I also don't think Serral's main selling point is his strategic prowess. You sound like Dark and Maru are "one-trick pony" and when get found out will get smashed or something. Sure they abuse the build if they can just use the same build over and over to win, but they can do standard build and just win with better composition and reaction. And what the point of having a good or great strategy if you dont have the ability to pull it off? Lambo probably knows every single build in the game and can come up with all the perfect counter, but the question would be how he can scout for it and make the proper adjustment to those builds? You cant just strategy on paper, it has to be carried out in actual gametime and succeed. To say a guy knows more meaning he is a better strategist is not true IMO.
No, I wanted to point out that Dark is not a strategical genius(Maru isn't either); they are of course astonishing players.
Lambo's reputation as a strategist made Reynor ask for his coaching and win Katowice, partly thanks to the ability of effectively carrying out said strategies.
|
On March 28 2021 12:14 Waxangel wrote:
updated with (most) from day 2
lemme know what im missing
I think Dream is missing, but thanks for the great job on this.
|
On March 28 2021 03:50 yubo56 wrote:
I think if you define strategy as picking builds, compositions, etc., while you define tactics as how an existing army is used, e.g. nydus/runby, how to split the army, when to counterattack where, then I think Dark has to have a strong case for being one of the top tactical players. He pioneered bane drops against Stats in SSL in 2016, brought a lot of the typical ZvT late game harassment into the meta (ultras for runbys, heavy nydus play (which he later dropped)), and continues to have some of the most ridiculous comeback. Moreover, all of his comebacks are "tactical" in the sense that they can't be encapsulated by a strategic motif alone, "turtle to BL and take one good fight" but are instead mostly backed by strong army positioning, counterattacking, and forcing the opponent to make mistakes.
I think Dark has the strategy of a potato, but if you give him an army he is comfortable with, he will squeeze more mileage out of it than anybody else in the world. It's a subjective definition, but I think Dark is one of the players who really highlights the difference between "tactics" and "strategy" the most.
bane drops vs toss were first done by Rogue in a proleague match vs herO in 2015
|
On March 27 2021 23:11 Xain0n wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2021 06:25 deacon.frost wrote:On March 27 2021 05:59 dbRic1203 wrote:On March 27 2021 05:44 deacon.frost wrote:
Ehm, I don't want to be mean to Lambo, but if any Zerg is on my tactics and strategy watch lists it's actually Dark. Followed by Serral. Yeah sure, Lambo is only the guy behind the tactics of the IEM Katowice winner, 3 points in tactics is about right Yeah sure. Dark is only the guy who actually won multiple titles, who gathered multiple second places and all of this in spite of what the master tactician Lambo says about his strategy. I don't know Kev, probably Dark is just bad at strategy and can bend space and time Oh man, that would be cool if Dark could do that. If he can do that Lambo can keep his puny tactics superiority. Dark won his titles in 2019 mostly by playing better than his opponents; he "outstrategized" Serral in TSL by going for mutas almost every game the way Maru was doing at a certain point in 2018 when he proxied 24/7, relying on his opponents not having an answer for the strategy. Not surprisingly, when presented with reliable counters played by strong opponents both lost very important series. Dark surely isn't lacking in strategy and tactics but I wouldn't say it's the reason he is a top player; I would prefer Lambo over him every day if I had to ask for a strategical advice, Dark is just a stronger player overall. I also don't think Serral's main selling point is his strategic prowess.
That is plainly wrong. People is trying to build the narrative that Dark won vs Serral at TSL pure on BO wins and if you look a the games well truth is different. Dark may won just one of those games by BO win, then again, is ZvZ. The rest were just plain better play. Second, Maru 2018 was not just in the back of proxying. Yeah sure he proxy a lot but even after his proxies got completely blind counter he was able to recover and win. To the point that I looked like proxing was just an opening for him, and honestly still is by looking at some of his games.
|
curious why Macro didnt make it as an attribute
|
On March 28 2021 23:26 Argonauta wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2021 23:11 Xain0n wrote:On March 27 2021 06:25 deacon.frost wrote:On March 27 2021 05:59 dbRic1203 wrote:On March 27 2021 05:44 deacon.frost wrote:
Ehm, I don't want to be mean to Lambo, but if any Zerg is on my tactics and strategy watch lists it's actually Dark. Followed by Serral. Yeah sure, Lambo is only the guy behind the tactics of the IEM Katowice winner, 3 points in tactics is about right Yeah sure. Dark is only the guy who actually won multiple titles, who gathered multiple second places and all of this in spite of what the master tactician Lambo says about his strategy. I don't know Kev, probably Dark is just bad at strategy and can bend space and time Oh man, that would be cool if Dark could do that. If he can do that Lambo can keep his puny tactics superiority. Dark won his titles in 2019 mostly by playing better than his opponents; he "outstrategized" Serral in TSL by going for mutas almost every game the way Maru was doing at a certain point in 2018 when he proxied 24/7, relying on his opponents not having an answer for the strategy. Not surprisingly, when presented with reliable counters played by strong opponents both lost very important series. Dark surely isn't lacking in strategy and tactics but I wouldn't say it's the reason he is a top player; I would prefer Lambo over him every day if I had to ask for a strategical advice, Dark is just a stronger player overall. I also don't think Serral's main selling point is his strategic prowess. That is plainly wrong. People is trying to build the narrative that Dark won vs Serral at TSL pure on BO wins and if you look a the games well truth is different. Dark may won just one of those games by BO win, then again, is ZvZ. The rest were just plain better play. Second, Maru 2018 was not just in the back of proxying. Yeah sure he proxy a lot but even after his proxies got completely blind counter he was able to recover and win. To the point that I looked like proxing was just an opening for him, and honestly still is by looking at some of his games.
I watched that series and there was one map out of four in which Dark outplayed Serral, the last; the rest were either bo wins or reckless, risky tactical decisions that paid out(unlike the series they played at IEM in which, I have to say, Dark played better); in general, tho, Dark doesn't stand out for his strategic prowess.
I am not saying Maru's victories in 2018 were all due to proxying but towards the end of the season he became fixated with it to the point his strategic plan became kinda obvious to everyone(and in the end sOs punished for that at BlizzCon).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
