|
How could you blame a player for playing the way that he believes maximises his chance of winning? Isn't that the whole point of competition? Don't you think it would be sad if e.g. fruitdealer won the GSL because terrans were too polite to do a particular strategy?
As a spectator, I want strategies like this to become rare. But I think that will only happen if players learn to play well enough against them that they're not worth doing, or Blizzard manages to patch the game so it's not worth doing.
In the mean time, TvZ is sometimes very boring!
|
Nestea's defense is what lost him those games, it's nothing Rain should be apologizing for. Marine + scv rushing isn't unstoppable, even if it can be tremendously difficult. On steppes he had time to make a spine cralwer but didn't, and then when he engaged he wasn't attacking the marines. On xel'naga he misplaced his spine crawler and didn't attack the bunker when it was at like 40 health and let his spine fall. On blistering he could have got a baneling nest(a blind response but it could have prevented the loss).
Yea it feels unsatisfying to watch these cheesy 6 min games sometimes, but Nestea could have won those games if he played better. Rain doesn't need to be saying sorry because Nestea didn't have a good enough response to them.
|
To people who are saying zergs should stop going FE every game, look at BW. 12 Hatch is the standard opening and has always been the go to opening for almost every situation. Any opening that's not a 12 hatch puts enormous pressure on the zerg to do damage with initial zerglings, and almost relies on the terran either not walling or walling improperly to have a significant effect. At least 80%, if not more of the games played in ZvT are 12 hatch openings.
That being said that was of course a fair amount of bunker rushing in BW, but a good zerg always had a very good chance of defending against it with a 12 hatch and still coming out even handed. Especially when the zerg player is better overall, the terran rarely could straight up win or gain an advantage by bunker rushing against a 12 hatch.
The biggest contributor to this is probably the fact that marines are much better against zerglings now. Not only do the 5 extra hp is a matter of life and death at times, kiting with marines is infinitely easier to execute, while zergling AI in small numbers is hardly better. I played a game yesterday against my friend who bunker rushed me. I destroyed the bunker with drones and lings no problem because I saw it super early, but then he sent 4 marines. I had 6-7 slow zerglings at the time. In BW, 4 marines against 6 slow zerglings would be an easy victory unless the terran had amazing micro, and even then it will probably turn out even. Here I engaged his marines on open ground, and he just took them all and shot, moved back, shot, moved back repeatedly until he killed all 6 lings without losing a single marine. Imagine 4 marines killing 6 lings on open ground with zero casualties in BW.
Zergs have blings, roaches, infestors, blords to beat marines later on, but early game when there's nothing but drones and zerglings, marines reign supreme and IMO that's a big reason why bunker rush against hatch first is so much more powerful against zergs in SC2 than in BW.
|
I can understand the frustration of viewers, especially foreign ones who tune in during odd hours to watch the games for entertainment. It's obnoxious to see an "unskilled" player beating a "better" player, especially when you were hoping for awesome matches.
However, I agree with Chill's take on the issue, the desire to win at any cost should be the primary reason for playing games. Playing for showmanship isn't what we should be encouraging in a fledgling scene. The drive to win, and the results it produces should be the focus. If NesTea had acknowledged TSL_Rain's constant early aggressive play/all'ins and adapted his play style to them, the games would have been very different.
For American's I'll liken the results to Football (not soccer, America football). In the old days, teams lined up with perception of "we'll go head to head, and may the best man win." As the sport naturally developed, teams began to scheme against specific players and try to shut them down. Quarterbacks need pressure applied to them to reduce their throwing potential, Defenses choke up to prevent runs, etc. While it limited the potential of certain favorite players of the time, it pushed the overall sport further along, evolving it into something greater.
Now bring this back to Broodwar/gaming. Most teams have players who are MU specific "snipers." It's the job of the "more skilled" player to demonstrate the gap in their abilities and overcome whatever the threat is. Cheezing also isn't entirely indicative of a player's potential or skill set, and I would be careful about drawing preemptive conclusions.
Remember when Flash cheezed our favorite players out of MSL/OSL? God what a scrub, kid had no skill and wasn't going anywhere. Go back and read the LR threads of those games, and compare them to this GSL match.
Remember when a legendary rivalry series(BoxeR vs YellOw) was decided with Bunker rushes? What kind of scrub would do that? No respect for the game.
Cheezing is a valid part of the game that adds an early dynamic, and shouldn't be restricted but embraced. If anything, the blame should be shifted to NesTea for failing to react to the obvious.
|
On December 07 2010 03:51 Everlong wrote:So what.. Remove Steppes of War and make Metalopolis cross spawn? There is a reason why all Terrans are trying their best patch after patch to end games that early.. If you make bigger maps, you will see Zergs dominating absolutely everything as Terran just cant keep up with Zerg macro.
I think that's bull. terrans are trying their best to end the games that early because that's easiest. everything i've seen shows that terran is capable of having an awesome late game. they have units to deal with anything, and planetary fortress/sensor towers are the ultimate in map control.
there is a reason maps weren't tiny in sc1
|
On December 07 2010 03:48 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 03:38 Seide wrote:On December 07 2010 03:33 IdrA wrote:On December 07 2010 03:31 Lonyo wrote:On December 07 2010 03:28 Maggeus wrote: I stand to my opinion when the match finished : going hatch first in every game on every map cost Nestea the game. 2 rax into 4 rax marines is absolutely unstoppable on some maps if you are going to hatch first, coupled with some SCVs.
As Artosis said, going all-in is something every pro do. But what's important is when you do it. Just like when JD goes fast pool against Flash to punish a 14 CC, Rain went for a 2 into 4 rax against a 14 hatch. What's so wrong with that ? But an early push beats a macro opening. That's wrong. Zerg should be able to open with their best macro game without any fear of a terran push. Clearly the game is broken because zergs can't safely manage to go for their most economic opening every game. Also, like others have said, don't blame Rain for trying to win. One problem here is one which doesn't even need Blizzard intervention. It's called custom maps. Instead of using maps with short rush distances where early pressure/all-ins are easier due to short distances, or where there are choke 'issues' etc, make maps which don't necessarily have these features. dont be stupid, the 'best macro opening' is the only chance at beating the build because terran barely has to sacrifice anything to do it. means if you do anything but hatch expand it doesnt matter if you live, you'll never catch up in econ. Well doesnt this sound like you are playing a pretty badly designed game. Where one build is the only chance you have to beat another build. I respect you as a player man, but there is never only 1 way to handle something. Why we gotta be so negative. ... the whole point is that it is badly designed, in this regard at least. really in general, warpin and mules make allins too strong. just about every single zerg has opened hatch first. me and ret who spent a week exclusively preparing for zvt's came to the conclusion that you have to open hatch first. it makes sense logically. what more do you want? I want to see you 6 pool. Do it for the fans.
But in all seriousness, You have more insight than me.
After thinking about it more, if you don't go hatch first, Terran has already accomplished what he wanted to do with the all-in anyway. He prevents that crucial early expo and setting up your econ for midgame, doesn't even have to all-in when he sees no hatch, as he knows he can just sit there and go into econ and be ahead.
|
United States238 Posts
On December 07 2010 03:53 Inkcrow wrote: wait.. Rain gets stick for fighting 2 fair games and winning while he can, but Marine King gets nothing but praise for his (admitedly skillful) use of only tier one units, ever.?
He doesn't always go Marines though, nor does he go early cheese every game. He just likes to mass Marines.
See) GStar 2010 SC2 All-Stars
|
most comments are not negative at all on playxp...where is this "reaction" coming from.
most comments are: "unfortunate but shows a good game on ro4!" "its ok, ro4 fighting!" "it happens, its the way of pro-gaming" "why apologize? not ur fault that terran's late game sucks"
and i agree, this is nothing to be upset about. hatch first is a risk and rain took advantage of that regardless of if he planned the cheese for hatch first or not.
|
There's nothing you like more then to scout zerg and see that there's no hatch... 1. You block the expand 2. Scan main gives all the intel you require if you can't scv scout because you know theres no creep in other locations (unless he does a hatchery trick but that's not even worth to mention)
Long story short, everything a zerg does out of one base is easy to scout and react well to. I mean you still have those two barracks making marines so he's still making lings, cant use spines for defense while the hatch is morphing(more lings).
So would advice against pool first in most cases ;o (even Artosis stopped being critical about it) This will lead to more scv rushes on these maps. I do it and I love to macro in rts games
|
regarding hatch first, i think it's totally understandable build from zerg
however on ladder i often see these zergs who hatch first and build their pool like 10 million years later while they drone up, and then complain when u punish them for it
(im playing shitty players though. but i think this has some insight into the mindset of a lot of complainers)
i really think hatch first can handle pretty much anything if ur build is good/fast and u have really awesome control
|
On December 07 2010 03:29 DoubleReed wrote: I'm not familiar with the BW scene. Are cheesey upsets really that uncommon?
I thought people were used to this sort of thing.
OSL 2010 S2 Final between Jaedong & Flash, iirc: normal game 4pool. proxy rax vs 4pool. 5rax.
-> Jaedong & Flash are obviously bad players who can only do cheese/allins!
GSL1: Fruitdealer won against Inca with a 6pool - OMG the heresy. He doesnt deserve his GSL1 champion title!
Look at GSL2 - a lot of games of Foxer who just used early Marine agression to beat good (better?) Zergs (Fruitdealer). Those actions & his micro (not his strategy / gameplan) made him popular. Look at DaviT. Look at Actionjesus. Those players showed that when the better players dont pay attention they will lose. And I think that's good. Because if not - we could just skip all matches between "normal" player and "good" player:
Foxer vs Fruitdealer ? Sry, Fruitdealer is the better player. Nestea in GSL S2 RO64/32? Oh Nestea that player who sucked in GSL1. Let his opponent advance. Oops - both GSL2 finalists out early.
Cheese & AllIns are part of the game. They are defendable. Maybe Nestea is old so he cannot micro at the same level as his opponent (Rain). He was attributed with great game sense - well that doesnt help him in a high micro / low econ situation.
|
On December 07 2010 03:46 Scar wrote: Wow I'm stunned at the amount of people blaming the game and defending TSL_Rain here. Rain himself knows damn well he robbed spectators and nestea of a good game and a fair game right there and it's absolutely ridiculous for so many people to state terran can't win a macro war against zerg because this is simply not true.
Nestea definately could have done a better job defending these all ins but we all know this wasn't a fair game and that has nothing to do with race balance in the lategame, not wanting to play a full on macro game is not the only alternative, you can have timing pushes and slow push towards the zerg base. It's not one or the other.
1) When GSL started, did the sign-up require you to sign something saying "I promise to give spectators and my opponent a good game"? No? Is there a rule in the tournament that requires you to play macro games? No? Well, then, Rain did not rob anyone. He played by the rules, and it's ridiculous for you to suggest he robbed anyone. Terran can win macro war against zerg, and zerg can win against all-in. See how that works?
|
On December 07 2010 03:51 Everlong wrote:So what.. Remove Steppes of War and make Metalopolis cross spawn? There is a reason why all Terrans are trying their best patch after patch to end games that early.. If you make bigger maps, you will see Zergs dominating absolutely everything as Terran just cant keep up with Zerg macro. I think everyone forgot what 3-4 base terran mech looked like in the last few months! ^^
(even though Jinro is still pulling it off! see vs Moon)
|
On December 07 2010 03:53 IdrA wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 03:51 Everlong wrote:On December 07 2010 03:46 travis wrote: MAPS So what.. Remove Steppes of War and make Metalopolis cross spawn? There is a reason why all Terrans are trying their best patch after patch to end games that early.. If you make bigger maps, you will see Zergs dominating absolutely everything as Terran just cant keep up with Zerg macro. ya obviously theyre doing a build this build solely because macro tvzs impossible. or maybe its because the build is ridiculously strong?
I dont like, how strong this build is and honestly I find it retarded. But why on Earth it is all-in after all-in? Like - you had this pathetic 5rax Reaper build. So they nerfed it to death. And now we got what - another all-in/cheese? So whats the next build after they let this early rax pressure die?
|
The solution is obvious : bigger maps.
The implementation, not so easy. They need to come from blizzard since GOM has stated it won't disadvantage players who mostly practice on the ladder by adding their own custim maps.
Also I see Chill is still raging over the miss-usage of meta-game :D
+ Show Spoiler +On December 07 2010 04:02 Everlong wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 03:53 IdrA wrote:On December 07 2010 03:51 Everlong wrote:On December 07 2010 03:46 travis wrote: MAPS So what.. Remove Steppes of War and make Metalopolis cross spawn? There is a reason why all Terrans are trying their best patch after patch to end games that early.. If you make bigger maps, you will see Zergs dominating absolutely everything as Terran just cant keep up with Zerg macro. ya obviously theyre doing a build this build solely because macro tvzs impossible. or maybe its because the build is ridiculously strong? I dont like, how strong this build is and honestly I find it retarded. But why on Earth it is all-in after all-in? Like - you had this pathetic 5rax Reaper build. So they nerfed it to death. And now we got what - another all-in/cheese? So whats the next build after they let this early rax pressure die? Not to argue semantics but... Most versions of the reaper build used vs zerg weren't anywhere near all in, they actually set up a strong economy, with a slight tech disadvantage. I massivly prefered the reaper play over the current 2 rax play. Which is so strong it makes zergs prepare for that even before the game starts, somewhat form their build around it, hence dominating the META-GAME (I did it!)
|
The only one who should be blamed is Blizzard because of they are the ones who come up with stupid maps and gimmicky gameplay.
|
Blaming someone for doing whatever's in his power to win is absolutely ridiculous.
As far as balancing goes, I don't see any need for immediate action from Blizzard's side either. 8 rax bunker rushes were thought to be impossible to hold for a 12 hatching Zerg for a while when BW strategy was already much more involved than SC2 strategy is now. We even had Yellow complaining about it on forums, much like Idra is now.
If it turns out that 2 rax play is still as ridiculous as it is now in a few months, when we'll know more about the game and (hopefully) have better maps, then of course Blizzard should do something about it, but patching the game every time a race has a problem with a strategy isn't helping the game evolve.
|
On December 07 2010 04:02 Everlong wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 03:53 IdrA wrote:On December 07 2010 03:51 Everlong wrote:On December 07 2010 03:46 travis wrote: MAPS So what.. Remove Steppes of War and make Metalopolis cross spawn? There is a reason why all Terrans are trying their best patch after patch to end games that early.. If you make bigger maps, you will see Zergs dominating absolutely everything as Terran just cant keep up with Zerg macro. ya obviously theyre doing a build this build solely because macro tvzs impossible. or maybe its because the build is ridiculously strong? I dont like, how strong this build is and honestly I find it retarded. But why on Earth it is all-in after all-in? Like - you had this pathetic 5rax Reaper build. So they nerfed it to death. And now we got what - another all-in/cheese? So whats the next build after they let this early rax pressure die?
5rax reaper wasn't really allin was it?
|
On December 07 2010 03:55 travis wrote: planetary fortress/sensor towers are the ultimate in map control.
Even just reading this sends chills down my zerg spine. 100% agree that terran mid-late game is not hopeless against zerg. Pro terrans are rushing because rushing is so powerful and costs relatively little, not because they can't play a macro game.
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On December 07 2010 03:55 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 03:51 Everlong wrote:On December 07 2010 03:46 travis wrote: MAPS So what.. Remove Steppes of War and make Metalopolis cross spawn? There is a reason why all Terrans are trying their best patch after patch to end games that early.. If you make bigger maps, you will see Zergs dominating absolutely everything as Terran just cant keep up with Zerg macro. I think that's bull. terrans are trying their best to end the games that early because that's easiest. everything i've seen shows that terran is capable of having an awesome late game. they have units to deal with anything, and planetary fortress/sensor towers are the ultimate in map control. there is a reason maps weren't tiny in sc1 MAPS MAPS MAPS
People underestimate the power of maps to balance the game. BW balance came from maps. These games aren't balanced given an open plain. Maps aren't for flavor. Maps are for balance. Maps need to be designed to make it easier for zergs to defend an early hatchery via rush distance, and maps need to be designed with late-game push routes for terran that will allow them to maintain a positional advantage if their control is good enough. Similarly maps should allow protoss to FE. The only map in the current pool worth anything is Shakuras, really. The rest are garbage.
|
|
|
|