There hasn't been any tournaments in a very long time. TS and it's players has changed an evolved quite a bit since the last tournament, learning more quirks, advantages, and weaknesses, as the game aged. While tourneys are generally a valid source of good tactics and play, players are now more competent and would beat old play-styles used previously... just as MMA in the old days is completely different than today.
What? Your response isnt even relevant to what I said about comebacks being inherently built within the TS engine. TS is based on comebacks and its within the design. What does your statement have to do with anything? And no offense you are still a random, never heard of you a day in my life. Only as a mapper, not a TS'er. These people whom I have mentioned more or less have been on the TS scene for quite awhile, defined the metagame, and have been in tournaments. Seriously, who are you again?
The "old style" that you so dubiously name, still has huge merit especially when you have guys running around still saying the following:
I have a hatred for mutant. He's picked in every game. He's not easily countered.
Assault: probably the only counter, even then it's not much of a counter, as you still need multitasking skills to play well
Medic: stalemate early game. Mutant after l3/4
Assasin: is owned
Warrior: Instant death if he l2s. In general, going melee with mutant is asking for death, and warrior is only melee.
Volt: another decent counter, I suppose. Hard to hit with l1 though.
LM: stalemate early game. Mutant after l3/4. Mutant very early game.
Archer: About even
Summoner: can't train well
DM: easy to dodge curses, hard to hit with a mael.
Mech: big l2 target when not in vult. Can usually run away easily, so pretty much a stalemate.
Special ops: About even
Of the counters, volt is sickeningly weak vs archer and mech, and many other units. Nothing can survive a perfectly placed l2, and often times you only have to take 1-2 hits when setting it up, so you can have 200 life and kill something with ease if they don't have many hp ups. I rather think a nerf wouldn't be hard (take away some of the l2/l3 units). However, my skill with dealing with mutant is irrelevant. Point is he's always picked. How about playing someone else for a change? Banning pick is an easy way to balance the game, regardless, and tell which characters need balancing.
*/facepalm*
"Evolved" you say Flashbeer? I've been trying to teach strategy to guys like this since 08-09.
This whole post is full of noob trash and misconceptions. And this statement was made in late 2010. "Evolved" indeed.
You can have the "New Style" while I'll stick with the "OLD PRO STYLE". Anybody with a half of brain would lol at this.
TS is the only game I play on SC. I play 3-6 days a week, for 2-5 hours each session. I usually play with a bunch of regulars online. However, I believe that the fundamental difference in reasoning of almost all of our dispute, comes from a tournament style vs causal style attitude. You believe that choosing your hero is an essential part of strategic planning for countering and teamwork, where not strategically choosing is associated with lacking the general knowledge of the game. I, and most of the others I played with, tend to look down upon choosing, favoring improvised teamwork with whatever group you are dealt- in which, the general attitude of picking to purposely counter, is associated with lacking skill to overcome a "fair" fight. In your scenario, the countered should lose due to a poor setup, assuming similar playing skill on both ends. In my scenario, I believe the countered should still be at a disadvantage, just not as wide of a gap as it currently is, since both ends are given a "fair random". I don't have anything against a game of selecting teams, I just don't usually play in games that do.
Another gotcha statement.
I have been through this argument Billions of times so im going to keep it brief. There is no skill in picking random. I say "Evolved" because this argument has been put to rest awhile back, yet you are bringing it up like its new. This is not evolution, this is pubstar nonsense resurfacing again. It was and has determined random is, so aptly named, for randoms. Is this coincidence that you are bringing this up? I would hope so.
This is why your skills are questionable as is your perception. Again, i'm trying to be as civil as I can when I say the following statement so don't mod me or flame me:
-->EVERYONE in TS who i have encountered who advocates random has been more-or-less bad to absolute trash<-- "Improvised Teamwork" a.k.a Picking random a.k.a lowering the skill ceiling. Look up a post Fashioned has written a VERY LONG WHILE back it should still be on here. It was very good, in summary he says randoms/pubs love to choose randomly simply because with the luck factor involved it throws any sort semblance of skill out the window. You know why 99% of pubs hated me, because I picked to win. "Luck" is pretty much the direct opposite of "Skill".
I will always pick to win, I know I'm not good with every hero nor do I pretend to be, but Im really good with 3-4 Heroes which can cover my other teamates imbalances in their hero picks. If you want to random to lose go for it, however every person that said I'm trash because "I pick" I proceed to faceroll them, then I either get dropped, raged, or they bring their friends and then I faceroll them too. Ironically this the same crowd who usually rush SpecOps and Mutant when given the chance to pick. Also the same crowd who says they are both overpowered.
If you random and you get something like Assault, Archer, SpecOps >VS< LM, Medic, War. Who do you think is going to win? Is there any skill involved. No, because you got bad picks vs good picks, made by the computer. This is also exacerbated because the godly team got +10 minerals to boot. Skill is picking a solid team, solid heroes, and random is for pubs who can't think and want a chance at a free win.
I don't care what you say, not everyone is good at every hero. Only one person I've encountered who can play nearly every hero decently sans DM was Iceman16, he also didnt like medic so he never chose it. When I play and the pubs cry "OMG DOLLE PICKED LULZ NOOB" and I'm alive at rines/lots/hydras supermanning the whole enemy team, while the noob who randomed DM is dead at first night still raging at me for not going in 1v3 mid. You'll see why random is trash.
Especially when the guy at the start of the match is screaming "RANDOM IS FOR PROS YOU NOOB!", then when he randoms DM and feeds orbs/lives and ask "Why did you random if you are not good with every hero?" and he responds either in two of the following ways:
- "SHUT UP NOOB"
or
- "DM IS MY WORST HERO, I HATE DM! XD"
And now for the meat and potatoes:
In your scenario, the countered should lose due to a poor setup, assuming similar playing skill on both ends. In my scenario, I believe the countered should still be at a disadvantage, just not as wide of a gap as it currently is, since both ends are given a "fair random". I don't have anything against a game of selecting teams, I just don't usually play in games that do.
Ah ok now I see why you actually want this system implemented, because you don't like to pick and when you are hard countered when you randomed you dont like it. You want to reward no-skill random play. So you want this handicap system.
So Flashbeer, The +10 minerals and a decent shot at a free win due to F'd up hero choices potentially made by the comp wasn't alluring enough?
You want this terrible system of yours because you play random. When you are countered you are countered get over it. Here's an idea, pick smart and you wont be hard countered so badly and you will close this gap you speak of. Balancing because you are so hard countered when randoming heroes in pubstar games is not the way to fixing or adding to a game. You chose randomly deal with the consequences, you already get +10 minerals and a shot at a free win. Is this not enough? No I suppose it isn't, you wan't experience for failing to kill someone and landing skills.
In conclusion, Im going to put this bluntly: You should not touch the next generation of temple siege. Period. This statement you have so kindly provided us, right here just proves you are uniquely unsuited to do so.
"Evolved" indeed, Eh Flashbeer? I didn't keep it brief but i'm tired of hearing this same nonsense being brought up again.
Heres the mental checklist everyone should for determining skill level of someone in TS, lets run through it shall we?
(Correct me on any if I'm wrong and I'll apologize and retract the statements as I am a fair man)
-Have you said pubstar statements? Yes.
-Have you advocated for random? Yes.
-Have you ever been in a tournament or won one? No.
-Is your name well known in the TS circuit? No.
-Bad ideas stemming from lack of gameplay fundamentals and understanding? Yes.
-Mainly play random in pubs? Yes.
-Said you look down upon picking as "lacking skill"? Yes
-Have you said the following: LM/LING/SPECOPS IS OP'D!? No.
-Questioned the validity of tournament strategies?: Borderline
Congratulations, The only thing missing here from this list is the obligatory noob statement saying "OMG SPECOPS/MUTANT/LM NEEDS A NERF! SO OP'D" or "][cy is PRO!". Lacking skills indeed Flashbeer.
Now going through this list, is it fair to say that you are a pub/random? I don't know, I'll let the whomever reading decide. I'm done talking to you about this.
Post has been edited 19 time(s), last time on Mar 5 2011, 9:07 am by DoLLe.
None.