1 |
I
went
and
watch
this
game
and
the
one
aeonios
linked.
|
1 |
I
went
and
watched
this
game
and
the
one
aeonios
linked.
|
2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
3 |
It seems like what is being complained about is an inability for big teams players to adapt to smaller teams/1v1. In big teams, plenty of players can get away with not knowing how to mex, because territory becomes more important once there's a certain player density.
|
3 |
It seems like what is being complained about is an inability for big teams players to adapt to smaller teams/1v1. In big teams, plenty of players can get away with not knowing how to mex, because territory becomes more important once there's a certain player density.
|
4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
5 |
In both cases, the things that Sap_ru and snoke did were acceptable or even good play if it was a more populated game. Hence why snoke's elo doesn't reflect how poor a mexless start is for win-rate. They likely play more big teams than small.
|
5 |
In both cases, the things that Sap_ru and snoke did were acceptable or even good play if it was a more populated game. Hence why snoke's elo doesn't reflect how poor a mexless start is for win-rate. They likely play more big teams than small.
|
6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
7 |
So I think Aeonios' criticism is kind of valid, but it's specific and unasked for, and he has no justification for calling snoke terrible. It's also not grounds for casual dismissal. Snoke is simply a better teams player despite his circumstantially suboptimal eco, and Aeonios's eco isn't so much better than Snokes that he can play the authority card. If Aeonios' was any good at eco he'd be 1700+.
|
7 |
So I think Aeonios' criticism is kind of valid, but it's specific and unasked for, and he has no justification for calling snoke terrible. It's also not grounds for casual dismissal. Snoke is simply a better teams player despite his circumstantially suboptimal eco, and Aeonios's eco isn't so much better than Snokes that he can play the authority card. If Aeonios' was any good at eco he'd be 1700+.
|