Congratulations, esoc

[dietschlander]

IMO last tourney was carried by Radex, spring tourney by kaiserQueen and the one before that one by Ede/Chrissie.

[momuuu]

Personally I prefer when there are two casters and they have some chemistry/are just generally enjoyable to listen to. Game knowledge is not always all that interesting

I'd agree, but listening to misinformation does annoy me, a lot actually. The easy work around is for casters to only speak with certainty when that's warrented.

[edeholland]

I think it's hard to know when you know you are 100% telling the truth or just for 99%. At least, I think that's hard. I am open to all criticism, but perhaps not in this thread. I think my mic static already improved and my mini maps seemed popular, so now I want to work on my game knowledge, camera work, wording etc. My accent will never really disappear, so I understand for some (like Jerom) that will always be an issue.

[dietschlander]

^to me your accents is one of the reasons I love you

[Kaiserklein]

Yeah I also find it really infuriating when casters say wrong stuff. It's just so bad to mislead newer players, and it also makes ESOC ridiculous when their casters say bullshit and the whole chat makes fun of them. I'd rather have simple and safe information, or "I'm not sure", than misinformation. A typical example is casters saying at the start of the game "civ x wins this match up", when it's in fact not true.

[gibson]

Yeah I also find it really infuriating when casters say wrong stuff. It's just so bad to mislead newer players, and it also makes ESOC ridiculous when their casters say bullshit and the whole chat makes fun of them. I'd rather have simple and safe information, or "I'm not sure", than misinformation. A typical example is casters saying at the start of the game "civ x wins this match up", when it's in fact not true.

Most of this game is very subjective though. You think one thing, garja thinks something completely different, but neither of you are necessarily wrong. There are some things that are pretty much common knowledge at this point but much of the game is in a gray area.

[Snuden]

I personally think casters mostly should stick to reporting what is happening.

[lemmings121]

Imo, coments like "france should just win this mu" or "the player is playing wrong" shouldt happen in tournament game. Game knowledge is always good, but streamers should limit themselves to the game in question.

I think the casters saying "oh hes going 700f first as france? I believe it will be a very agressive oppening!" is a good exemple good game knowledge+entertainment+respect for the players.

while a caster saying: "what? 700f first? this is just wrong, you should go 700w for this build to work" is what I consider bad casting. yea its more precise when it comes to pure game knowledge, but also disrespecs the players and removes part of the enternainment and professionalism.

[Kaiserklein]

Imo, coments like "france should just win this mu" or "the player is playing wrong" shouldt happen in tournament game. Game knowledge is always good, but streamers should limit themselves to the game in question.

Yeah, saying "france should win this mu" is not very useful. It's something you can usually say before the game starts, for the context, or after the game, as a conclusion. Mostly I'd say you shouldn't talk too much about this during the game, even though it can happen from time to time.
Saying "this is wrong play" is not very useful either, but explaining what went wrong is definitely useful, for educational purposes.

I think the casters saying "oh hes going 700f first as france? I believe it will be a very agressive oppening!" is a good exemple good game knowledge+entertainment+respect for the players.

That's an example of basic knowledge actually. Plus, saying a player made an obvious mistake is not disrespectful. You're not flaming him or something, just explaining how this could have been done better.

Not pointing out mistakes is actually how you prevent people from learning from their mistakes/other people's mistakes. If your only analysis about a garbage 700f shipment is just "it's gonna be aggressive", you actually don't help anyone over pr 20. It's maybe good for entertaining and for informing, but it's not really educative. And I believe that's an important part of casting. I've been asked so many times by mates to obs/watch a rec in order to point out the mistakes, I think it's fair to assume people enjoy it. And this works also for other people's mistakes, since a lot of mistakes are common.

Out of curiosity, what do you think should be said when a player goes under his opponent's tc and loses 20 musks to cav + mm? Should it be called an "overcommit", or is that disrespectful? Should casters just say "oh, he lost 20 musks!"?

while a caster saying: "what? 700f first? this is just wrong, you should go 700w for this build to work" is what I consider bad casting. yea its more precise when it comes to pure game knowledge, but also disrespecs the players and removes part of the enternainment and professionalism.

Well again, I don't think it's disrespectful at all. It kills entertainment? How?! And professionalism? If anything, a pro caster should be able to spot and explain the mistakes, and not just say obvious stuff.

[edeholland]

While I agree with you on some points, Kaiser, most people in this thread say they prefer casters pointing out obvious stuff over casters drawing conclusions too fast. You can say a pro caster should be able to spot the mistakes, but we aren't talking about pro casters here, we don't have those anymore.

[WickedCossack]

Out of curiosity, what do you think should be said when a player goes under his opponent's tc and loses 20 musks to cav + mm? Should it be called an "overcommit", or is that disrespectful? Should casters just say "oh, he lost 20 musks!"?

Well again, I don't think it's disrespectful at all. It kills entertainment? How?! And professionalism? If anything, a pro caster should be able to spot and explain the mistakes, and not just say obvious stuff.

For the most part you can just stick to explaining the advantages and disadvantages. For example rather than saying "aging with the 6 skirm politician is a mistake right now" you just phrase it as "the other guy could have a window to do some serious damage but if so and so distracts him for long enough it could pay off etc." Then when the guy gets attacked early and rekt you've already explained it, and if he doesn't you've explained it too. Especially for the high level games when the player watches it back and hears the caster say "this is bad" but at the same time is thinking "well I knew he wouldn't attack for such and such reason they never even talked about so I thought I could get away with it."

Having said that it's a lot easier talking about engagements, if one guy walks into the others army and gets crushed then yea it's fine to say he over-committed or w/e etc Ofc there can still be reasons behind it in that they thought it was their last chance to win and and they had to push anyways even if it probably wasn't going to work etc but you can explain that.

In general though when casting good players just explain rather than call things bad, I kinda agree with lemmings that it takes away from the cast when I'm watching a later round of a supposedly high level tournament and every other phrase is "this is bad, he should've done this etc".

[lemmings121]

...

About comenting on wrong moves: Is something questionable, I'm not certain whats the ideal aproach. When someone is casting a 1st lt game, they might say "what 700f? this player sux." and then the next series is boneng vs aiz, and you have to say "omg 700f! amazing! I wonder what he will do!".. in the end this game is really complex, and its hard to comment on unusual moves.

About disrespect/professionalism: Imo it kinda kills the hype watching a game where the caster says "oh well, this build sux, lets just watch him lose." but I agree, pointing out ineficiencies and alternative good BOs is nice.

[Kaiserklein]

While I agree with you on some points, Kaiser, most people in this thread say they prefer casters pointing out obvious stuff over casters drawing conclusions too fast. You can say a pro caster should be able to spot the mistakes, but we aren't talking about pro casters here, we don't have those anymore.

I also prefer someone who doesn't say something when he's not sure, that's what I said earlier. My point is that pointing out mistakes is not a bad thing, as long as it was indeed a mistake. It's not disrespectful, it's not unentertaining, and it's not unprofessional.
I just talked about professionalism because lemmings said it's professional to avoid talking about the mistakes, which imo is wrong generally speaking.


@WickedCossack @lemmings121 I don't think a lot of casters are negative to the point that we hear a ton of "this is bad" "that's wrong" etc. It happens sometimes, because well, some moves happen to be clearly bad. However, whenever something is probably bad, but might be fine in some situations (like 6 skirms age up, or shipping 700f), I think most casters try to explain the possible reasoning behind that decision, and the cases where it could be good. At least I hope so

I think what you guys mean is not that pointing out mistakes is bad, but rather that formulating it in a too negative way is bad. If it's what you mean, then we agree. I know that when I cast it sometimes happens to me to be too negative, that's one of my faults, but I'm aware of it and I don't believe it's good.

[TheInvincibleJannisary]

goddamn Kaiser.... reading your comments you must be a lawyer

[Kaiserklein]

Lol why?
I'm an engineer btw

[evilcheadar]

Any caster who volunteers should be allowed to cast the finals

[lemmings121]

Lol why?
I'm an engineer btw

everyone in esoc is an engineer, or engineer student.

[deleted_user]

Lol why?
I'm an engineer btw

everyone in esoc is an engineer, or engineer student.

Unfortunately.

[evilcheadar]

I'm not so it's not true

[Gendarme]

duck is lawyer enough to cover for the rest of the community, actually. On average we're all lawyers.

[TheInvincibleJannisary]

Lol why?
I'm an engineer btw

Trump is paying top dollar for people to build a wall if you're looking for a job.

[j_t_kirk]

While I agree with you on some points, Kaiser, most people in this thread say they prefer casters pointing out obvious stuff over casters drawing conclusions too fast. You can say a pro caster should be able to spot the mistakes, but we aren't talking about pro casters here, we don't have those anymore.

We have kaiser

[HUMMAN]

kaiser is a good caster wish many were like him.

[Mr_Bramboy]

Lol why?
I'm an engineer btw

Trump is paying top dollar for people to build a wall if you're looking for a job.

Implying he's not going to hire illegal mexicans to do his work for him

[deleted_user0]

Lol why?
I'm an engineer btw

Trump is paying top dollar for people to build a wall if you're looking for a job.

Implying he's not going to hire illegal mexicans to do his work for him

As far as I have understood, the idea of the wall is legalizing those current illegal mexicans so they can work. However, if they do so without wall then it is going to create a huge incentive for new people illegally move to big-mac-murica.