I LIKE HOW ALL MY TEAMS TOLD ME THAT I SHOULDN'T PLAY ARCANE ANYMORE BECAUSE FROST WAS "BETTER." FUCK ALL OF YOU HATERS WHO'VE BEEN HOLDING ME BACK.
FUCKING CALLED.
In all "seriousness", that was amazing, and anyone bitching about the rule is a huge nerd. In fighters, if you play a slow character and lose to a turtle/pecker because he time stalls, it's not different than healer vs dps. It's just part of the game and you plan accordingly. Honestly, giving the priest 20 minutes to go for a rez, is pretty generous as a kill on either side is not really possible.
The way the Koreans run RMP is very interesting -- their execution is just much much better. It's not just the burst/spike; spike the priest into a pain suppression and the poly on the priest is already being cast before he can get around the corner and the rogue is already onto the second target.
There are no American mages playing on the level of the Koreans right now imo. Go and watch the matches in more detail if you want to see the mage vs mage cc going on. Ice Blocking IMP CS and dropping block to cs poly even with mage armor up? I don't think many mages have the confidence in their survivability as Arcane to play as aggressively as the Koreans. The use of pom sheep on priests to enable pressure on their first target is pretty hot and not really popular at all over here. The koreans also make heavy use of imp blink + poly casts to frustrate interrupts which isn't anything new but not popular as again it is a risky way to use blink.
Awesome matches. And as much as I love OM, HON's priest Numberone had some AMAZING plays. First round in Blade's Edge was epic as fuck.
61 comments:
it's like the rogues that say muti is way better cause of the burst ^^
time to smear on the sexy-jam.
OMFG HE TURNED THAT
THE GOD MAGE
bloody hell
OM is godtiefr
HAHAHAH priceless final, oh jesus Orangemarmalade
I came, twice.
OM vs. Mage/Priest was hilarious.
Oh man I'd be so pissed.
WTB a link to one of OM's vids
maybe people will shut the fuck up now about arcane being completely skill-less, but i doubt it. it's also funny that people said over and over at the start of wotlk that haste was useless for arcane, but it's ALWAYS going to raise the skill cap for mages, and koreans are ALWAYS going to use it.
also, fuck blizzard for not giving them engineering on the server so they could bust out even more crazy shit.
Everyone on HON played so well all tourney long. The peels for numberone were just nutty.
To be fair about haste for Arcane, it is significantly better now than at WotLK's launch. (Arcane Blast buffs etc)
RMP has always transcended its individual parts. I don't think mages, rogues or priests are overpowered in any sense but the synergy is still amazing.
American teams are so focused on individual play/balance that they artificially "cap" their own skill. Every loss is met with "I did everything right" because the players felt that their play of their own class was flawless, but for the whole tournament, it felt like the Koreans had far superior understanding of match dynamics -- they knew exactly what CCs to trinket and which to ride out, when to drop a pom sheep instead of pom for burst, when to sprint los for a restealth instead of trying to continue to pressure, and they seemed to have a very good ability to deny almost kills with such high consistency that it really felt they had a better understanding of how to balance when to be offensive/defenseive. Obviously, there's RNG and this led to some pretty hilarious gibs being made against them, but for every one of those, there were five near deaths they survived.
BRB Respeccing Baller Spec
(Only to fail)
When are VoDs coming out? I want to watch and rewatch those games.
Anyone know if there any OM videos lying around? Or any from the priest's perspective?
Btw, Numberone is also amazing.
Sticking with it is the key imo. I recall someone saying that one the korean rmp's had played something like 800 games on live. I dont think that is equalled by many euro/american teams.
It kinda also explains why they are able to vary their play so much. You almost never see any of them doing the plays two times in a row.
The only OM vids are from s1/2 of TBC, they never really got much notice outside of asia but are still probably the strongest mage movies of TBC. I've got the 2nd one on my HD but the upload expired on youtube
Because in Korea they take their professional gaming seriously. It has more cultural priority so their best talent gets channeled towards gaming. In the US/Euro the best talent ends up playing baseball or starring in Hello Dolly or some other gay shit.
When I find myself in times of trouble, Orange-Marmalade comes to me,
Casting Spells of Wisdom, let it be.
And in my hour of darkness he is standing right in front of me,
speaking words of wisdom, let it be.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcArnepkhv0
did you notice his haste run-cast clipping with sheeps?
skillz
"did you notice his haste run-cast clipping with sheeps?"
What's that?
reminds me of hoodrych 1v2ing entrepid, but better.
Oh crap, its stuff like this that makes me wanna start playing again... Damn epic games
Unbelievable final. Of all classes, a mage scoring a kill against a full mage/PRIEST. Simply legendary. Mages forever!
http://img14.imageshack.us/my.php?image=orangemarmalade.jpg
thanks for the pws bro.
Now that this is over, can a top mage who knows what he's doing seriously explain why the Koreans all decided to go arcane? From what I've seen so far, frost mage's burst seems to be much more reliable than an arcane mage's with the 3.0.9 nerfs, and frost mages are just more resilient than arcane mages...
Is it because when cooldowns aren't involved, freecasting arcane blast (with sick peels and sick cc from sick rogue) arcane blast is better than freecasting frostbolts?
One of the most interesting and infuriating thing about koreans in general, and korean mages in particular, is that none of us _can_ do that.
I've been following at least 5 korean mages on armory for a long ass time now, and there have been countless decisions (in gear, specs, gems, etc) that I simply _cannot_ come up with a satisfactory explanation for.
Its one of the reasons I dont believe in the existence of a true skill cap in this game - koreans are doing stuff wildly different from us, in ways we cannot explain, which proves there exists a wildly different way of thinking about the game (and which has now been proven to be a competitive one).
I would give nearly anything to speak korean and talk to OM for like 5 hours about mages.
Well, ABlast->Abarr isn't THAT much less damage than a shatter on a high resil target and you can do it over and over much less situational-ly.
I've been a fan of Arcane since Beta (go read old entries if you don't believe me =p), and I like it better than frost for a few reasons, although not to the point where I could say it's better, nor am I sure that the reasons I like Arc are similar as to why the Koreans play it. (ability to spoof dmg, more free globals to cc while still doing dmg, ability to burst when convenient for your rogue instead of needing to be like "IM FREE TO SHATTER KIDNEY GO")
spoof damage?
So here's a question, why was HON in the Loser's Bracket?
Say you're on DR or don't want to go for a sheep on a healer (or can't cuz druid), but the target you're focusing gets a PS or BoP or whatever, instead of a full swap, you spoof a little bit of dmg, a Barrage-fblast or coc-barrage, and you can chase the healer los or get him to waste a global or two on himself when you have no real intent on doing a "real" swap.
I explained that horribly but I'm tired so f it.
Legendary. This play was beyond incredible.
The priest leaves in disgust, the announcers are calling it, I'm thinking that the remaining 6 minutes in the youtube video are going to be devoted to interviewing the teams or some shit; I'm already envisioning some boring disappointed exit interview with some Asians that don't speak English whatsoever.
Marmalade prances across Lordaeron, looking all the while to my eyes like a defeated foe - and my mind isn't even in the fight anymore. I'm thinking about something else (boobies prob) when I see a stream of missiles coming out of his fucking gnome-hands and the green bar of the other mage's health dwindling into nothing, and the only thing that can escape my mouth is:
Holy fucking shit. What just happened?
And I watch it again, and it's this gorgeous c-c-c-ombo that Marmalade had hidden literally in his fucking sleeves, and I had no idea. No fucking clue. All of a sudden, it's blast->missiles->poly->blink before you can say OUT-FUCKING-PLAYED.
I would lick penis for this man. End.
I'm never playing frost again!
PoM Poly ftw!
I didn't notice until now that OM spellstole kwanas PW:S when they got into the starting area.
And a funny thing was that OM casted slow on the priest, which prevented the priest from getting LOS and shielding Kwana in time.
The only way OM could have been better is if he played baller dragon's breath spec to fuck w/ complexity.
http://www.playforum.net/wow/board.comm?action=read&iid=10151021&pageNo=0&num=121445
That explains in detail how OM won the 2v1.
I dunno, the Korean preference for Arcane doesn't seem very strange to me. When you consider that they probably deal with far more mirror matches and less hunter/dk + paladin + x nonsense, it makes considerably more sense since I think Arcane is plainly superior for mirror as it has much better damage without exposing itself to interrupts and remaining mobile.
Plus, there is really no way that Frost can pull off the 2-3 gcd insta-kill switches that Koreans are fond of. Blast -> PoM blast can do as much damage as an entire 4 or 5 GCD Deep Freeze shatter combo and still catches opponents by surprise in a way that Frost cannot replicate even post-nerfs.
Frost's actual burst is incredibly poor when you look at just how many GCDs it's using up. It can keep a target under control, but when you compare 6.5k fb crits and 4k lance crits to 10k arcane blast and 8k arcane barrage(without AP), it's not there.
Koreans just play in a different environment than Americans and Europeans and it's really no surprise that they would dominate a RMP mirror tournament, since that is what they play against day in and day out. It's really unfortunate that there were hardly any quality alternate comps there, particularly hunters. Would've been nice to see a real hunter play against these RMPs before the 3.1 changes.
Back in Ultima Online asians used to use all sorts of nifty tricks that few US players bothered with. In a one on one or 5v5 or whatever their best would tend to win, but it wasn't some intrinsic superiority. They simply approached the game in a more dedicated, absolutist manner.
Anyway, Raddy, why do you think unions are bad for the economy?
@Tony Huynh
That site you linked forgot the slow on the priest to help seperate him from the mage.
But is that a pure pvp wow site or is it for raiding and what not as well.
And do they break down tons of replays or was this just something special?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhqRzDavPNM
Quality is shit but still lolepic.
Unions are bad for the economy for two somewhat interconnected reasons (at least imo).
Unions are, effectively, monopolies on labor - and monopolies _always_ result in inefficient distribution of resources compared to competitive markets, barring natural monopolies and public goods (neither of which labor qualifies as).
One of the ways this manifests is in wages being sticky downwards, which exacerbates problems caused by timelag in clearing of labor markets - and making sure labor markets clear is among the most important things for the economy from a macro perspective, nearly regardless of your preferred school of thought.
Unions:
1) Create DWL (maybe who care)
2) Lead to higher, potentially non-competitive prices
3) Price pressure creates inflationary pressure
4) Increase unemployment
I'm not going into details of "why" on the above in favor of a more general rant.
Basically, I think unions create a division between equity holders and employees. The union's goal is to synthetically "profit" as much as possible from the host company, and while this is a mild motivator for keeping the "host alive", it is much less effective than having all workers have an equity stake in the company's profits. Giving away equity share to employees and hiring unionized workers have similar effects, but I can't think of many situations in which the union is a better solution..
Why haven't you posted the next chapter of the Allie story?
"1) Create DWL (maybe who care)"
3) Price pressure creates inflationary pressure
4) Increase unemployment"
1) What is DWL?
3) How do artificially higher wages (I call them artificial only because if workers are able to accept less...the wages cut into profits) cause inflationary pressure? If more people have more money, inflation inevitably occurs? Economics is a very murky subject to me, but this relationship does not seem casual. Could you explain why it is?
"Basically, I think unions create a division between equity holders and employees."
This is undoubtedly true, but equity holders do not necessarily do any work for the company. An employee always does.
"The union's goal is to synthetically "profit" as much as possible from the host company, and while this is a mild motivator for keeping the "host alive", it is much less effective than having all workers have an equity stake in the company's profits."
The union must keep its host companies alive, how is that a mild motivator? Without companies, unions have nothing after all.
The problem I have with equity shares is that they...Enron. ENRON ENRON ENRON. I don't want stock in the companies I work for, because the company doesn't mean shit to me. It may not be viable in two years, or ten, as the economy keeps transforming. Just pay me more. Unions focus on here-and-now perquisites, which I think are far more valuable than stock in a company. (Equity shares more or less equals stock in the company, right?)
"Giving away equity share to employees and hiring unionized workers have similar effects, but I can't think of many situations in which the union is a better solution.."
I don't think these things are more or less equivalent.
Unions:
1) Tend to get political representation that leads to legislation that benefits workers.
2) Support the less dumb political party.
3) Get perquisites like health care, increased salaries, vacation days, injury coverage blah blah.
Stock in company:
1) You may profit if the company profits, eventually. All profit is illusory until it is $ and c imo.
2) ???
Unions also artificially bump up wages and conditions in non-unionized workplaces because of the fact of having to compete.
My last questions are:
Unions only represent maybe 12-13% of US workers, so how is it such a problem in the economy?
Aren't finance douchebags (no offense) and free trade agreements and globalization in general responsible for our megafucked status?
XOXO kisses.
Increasing wages increases labor costs - which make up the majority of most production/service costs. Companies aren't just going to eat that increase, they're going to pass it on to consumers by upping prices - which doesn't necessarily matter overall if everyone's wages went up that much, but it is nominal inflation.
Anyone have a link to OM pvp videos from TBC?
Kzn, nominal as in, 'nominal.' ^_^
Companies actually would eat that cost difference partially. It's not as if every time an employee receives a raise prices go up x%.
It's inflationary as per kzn's response.
I don't think unions nor finance douchebags are especially culpable for the current financial crisis -- Though both exacerbate the problem.
You'll have to forgive me as I'm more of a trader than an economist, but I liken equity share and unions as both mechanisms to ensure "fair" pay for workers.
What I mean is that a company's success is the sum of the employee's labor and that either a union who sees the company's success and bargains for more perks or equity share (direct benefit) are means of transferring surplus "success" to the workers. Unions are also a move behind however -- they react to previous success and demand more or respond to current crisis and ask for less but there's a lag effect there.
True, there's an optionality to the union solution. (You are synthetically long an option as you, unlike if you had stock, are not fucked if they plummet) Think about whether you're long a call or put with the union solution.
I might sound ultra conservative and anti-worker but I'm really not. I support national policy to protect workers over union policy.
To me the question is simply: How do protect individual workers from being exploited by companies?
As for perks that come from unions such as severence/medical/comp etc -- these are dangerous and generally not very well "priced."
raddy im back, lemme know whats up with TR/live
wb rajde <3
I work euro/azn hours right now so I'm basically only on weekends >.<
(For another week or so)
I think it's fair to say that no unions is better for the economy. Giving employees an equity share gives them a somewhat more concrete incentive to work harder, get more profit for the company etc, since it will flow on directly to them. Productivity as a whole would go up.
However, what's best for the economy is imo not what's best for the people sometimes. Unions provide a level of job security and fair treatment that generic laws can't really cover. My current job is absolute shit (I'm a student), the employers treat most of the employees like shit. We have a union that fights them whenever they try to dismiss someone unfairly, but in a way that *technically* follows the letter of the law. Our union also gets us the little things, like a water cooler in the break room ^^ Just the stuff that makes the day to day life more beareable.
Maybe it's just me, but I'd value that for workers across the country over the benefits to gdp and general economy stability provided by a lack of unionisation.
I get how equity share would provide incentive, but isn't the incentive lost when the worker turns it in for cash? Shares don't put food on the table.
All I've got to say to equity shares is ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON. Can you guys prove that equity shares provide the same benefits unions do to employees?
Employment law requires that unions and companies negotiate in good faith. If a company can show that some perquisite or raise is unfeasible due to business necessity, it won't go through. Companies aren't required to do everything a union tells them to.
That kind of tension (between employers and unions) is what is supposed to protect a worker from people who are, essentially, douchebags.
No unions are better for large companies' numbers and CEOs, definitely. This doesn't translate into 'better for the economy,' because if more people have more money our overall strength as a nation is far higher. The people who make obscene money off non-unionized press-the-employees-to-their-limits are not their workers, nor the public who buys their goods. We can buy more cheaper shit from Wal-Mart as a whole, but Wal-Mart is shit to its employees/suppliers/etc. It doesn't translate into overall economic strength.
I see the whole thing (since I know little about economics/finance) as a simple math question. What yields the highest product between any two numbers that yield the same sum? The set that has the highest average value.
So let's say 10 is our max:
1+9=10. 9*1=9.
5+5=10 5*5=25.
This may be totally facile but it's all I've got.
As to the cost of perquisites the expensive ones are the result of our shitty government. I.e. Healthcare. So many other perquisites that unions protect (like being able to speak to other employees while on the job) cost nothing. (Both in terms of lost production and $ to allow/implement).
Also OM, Minaegi, and Clazzi are great mage-players but I think Alca/Trigz/Another's 3v3 fffrostmage video was way more entertaining than a guy 1v2'ing two low-mana bitches with 1 cc and arcane burst.
peoples time (ie work) is like most other resources limited meaning that there will be competition for it. Unions are bad because they put an end to the competition between companies to attract better workers through salary. As long as its profitable companies will keep bidding up the price for qualified time. Remember unions cant give you anything you couldnt get on your own since the companies wont give more then the value your work poses to them and unions come with an administrative cost. They are momentarily good for some (pros), bad for other (baddies) but in the end they artificially tilt the supply and demand balance which means less value creation and is bad for everyone.
tl;dr it messes with the free market forces which is usually bad news
whoops i switched baddies and pros in my last post - it shouldve said:
*good for some (baddies), and bad for others (pros)
im tired sorry :S
I don't understand why you say unions end competition. Unions simply raise the bar for worker's rights. Are you arguing that anyone can get unionized conditions without being in a union? That may be true for high-skilled people in certain job sectors, but it clearly isn't true for 'unskilled' workers. (Note: If there are no unskilled workers good luck buying anything).
De-regulation and a free market = the mess we're in now.
If unions "inflate" unskilled salaries, doesn't this mean the spread between skilled and unskilled becomes unfairly priced? With globalization where it is, inflating unskilled salaries just leads to the export of labor to cheaper/better-priced regions.
It seems the end game of your argument is socialism; you're arguing that both skilled and unskilled labor are necessary for society and you feel the gap is too wide and you don't want to let markets define the width of that spread.
That gap between high-skill and low-skill labor is maintained also through taxation -- if you increase the marginal tax rates significantly, you certainly communize wealth. However, at some point, people like me will say "fuck it" and take their enterprises outside of the United States. (Who cares if we do? Well the top 1% of Americans already pay 25% of all the taxes)
I do believe in worker's rights and I think every American is entitled to a certain standard of living provided they do their reasonable best to be a productive member of society. I think this is just cheaper and better protected by federal law.
Less finance, moar wow
You going back to arc, rad?
raddy play with me on tr nobody wants to play with me :(
OM's TBC video was added back to WarcraftMovies. <3
Post a Comment