Posts from Nomination for "Player of the Year 2013"

Maybe CIS is a good indicator for you?
Alex deserves to participate, but he won't win, people like other players more.

Before CIS-2013, I thought that Alex was just one of the top players, capable of doing roughly the same as the others, but at the same time more focused, assertive, and goal-oriented, hence the results.

But, after watching his replays, I realized that the difference between him and the other top players lies in their knowledge and understanding of the game - giving away 2-3K for a color from the start, he managed to maintain the pace or even take the lead from the very first days, develop no worse, or even better than his opponent by the end of the first week, and noticeably overtake him in power, hero development, and explored territory in the second week.

Each time, he planned a red rush on 131, and he bought the color specifically for it, but in reality, he didn't have to red rush, his army was stronger even without it.

Therefore, I think that in mirror matches (both in Wargames and hypothetical SoDs), Alex will give a hard time to all three of the aforementioned players. Not with a clean sweep, of course, but with a noticeable advantage, approximately 2 to 1.

Specifically regarding the players:

- Maretti plays too safely, tries to score a goal, starts attacking a day or two later than necessary. That is, he doesn't lose games on his own, but he doesn't use the temporary advantage in development effectively enough.

- Stinger, to put it in chess terms, "makes too many moves" - makes quick, superficial moves, which is why he often loses small things despite having a correct strategic plan. This is good for blitz, but not very good for long control. And sometimes he "misses" things, doesn't take into account fatal coincidences or hidden reserves of the opponent, here the situation is the opposite of Maretti.

- I can't say anything about Homunculus, I've only seen a couple of his games.

As for Alex, I don't see any obvious weaknesses in his playing style, he is strong in all components.

It's clear that there are three leading players, but none of them has a significant advantage. We could resolve this with a vote, but I have an idea: a tournament featuring Stinger, Maretti, and Gomunguls – each playing two or three games against each other. This would definitively determine who is the best, and it would be incredibly entertaining for the viewers. I could take on the organization.

Regarding the ranking, I'm all for it! :D

I'd like to offer an objective opinion: GoD and Stinger! I wouldn't even consider comparing who is stronger; I'll just mention their achievements this year. Zhenya won 2 major tournaments (Jebus and Lyubimchiki), and Artem also won 2 tournaments (2v2 and First Snow + he played in the Jebus final). Regarding Maretti, yes, he plays well, and he has many victories, but most of them are not against strong opponents (IMHO) + you can't compare him in terms of the number of victories, because GoD hasn't posted many victories this year, and Stinger doesn't seem to have many either.

ATG also has its drawbacks, but people who care about it simply don't notice them!

And considering the frequency of their training, this trio plays more often, and skill in any esports game is about training and constant grinding.

Before CIS-2013, I thought Alex was just one of the top players, capable of roughly the same things as the others, but more focused, assertive, and goal-oriented, which is why he achieved such results.

But after watching his mirror matches, I realized that the difference between him and the other top players lies in his knowledge and understanding of the game. By giving up 2-3K gold for a color at the start, he managed to maintain the pace or even pull ahead from the very beginning, developing as well as, or even better than, his opponent by the end of the first week, and noticeably surpassing him in power, hero development, and explored territory by the second week. Every time, he planned a red rush on day 131 and bought the color specifically for it, but in reality, he didn't need to red rush; his army was stronger even without it.

P.S. Regarding the "battle" to determine the strongest player, it's pointless, in my opinion. This is a summary of the year 2013, and it's being done by the viewers. The players have already done what was required of them in 2013.

Or maybe I didn't quite understand the point of the nomination? Isn't it the player who is the most skilled and lucky? If not, then of course you can vote based on personal preferences.

Indeed, strong and skilled. There will be other nominations for the rest.

Luck and skill are demonstrated in tournaments, but here it's specifically the audience's favorite award.

2Juristis, just to make it clearer for you: strong and skilled, according to the viewers. Is that okay?