EPTLuckyfool: this is why I always try to push the issue early
Luckyfool:
Luckyfool: gg
All-in vs Cheese vs Strategic Play - Page 2
| Blogs > LuckyFool |
|
chomsky
Canada97 Posts
Luckyfool: this is why I always try to push the issue early Luckyfool: Luckyfool: gg | ||
|
jimminy_kriket
Canada5516 Posts
| ||
|
chomsky
Canada97 Posts
| ||
|
LuckyFool
United States9015 Posts
 we're doing it a little after providence so I have time to actually practice some. I'm scared though...bw is so hard. T_T | ||
|
MaRiNe23
United States747 Posts
On October 30 2011 09:47 LuckyFool wrote: after mlg providence I actually plan to practice bw for a couple weeks in order to play a grudge/show match vs caucasianasian(TL Staff/bw player) so you guys better be on the lookout for that !! we're doing it a little after providence so I have time to actually practice some. I'm scared though...bw is so hard. T_T It's not that hard | ||
|
hooktits
United States972 Posts
| ||
|
Ecrilon
501 Posts
A build where you need to kill something to break even instead of being able to stay somewhere (like the natural) and simply contain is all in. I don't know what strategic play is. I always assumed it was just what the Koreans called the two things above. | ||
|
Louuster
Canada2869 Posts
Look at something like this. It is clearly an all-in by JD, but done in response to the 14 cc he scouted. Im curious what people think of this game. | ||
|
Froadac
United States6733 Posts
| ||
|
skatbone
United States1005 Posts
Imo, people need a word to express that element in SCII that is exploitable...that thing that has little to do with skill. And here, you note that certain "all-ins" do have follow-up plans (hence, they're not all-in in a pure sense). And you also note the grey area where a player might be all-inning due to something he has scouted. In general, playing at a lowly diamond level, I tend to see my opponents practicing mindless all-ins. But I have no proof of this. tl;dr I think there are various motivations and various levels of skill and planning that go into the various build and strats that people call "all-in." I don't think there is any resolution to this ambiguity; however, I don't think the frustrations will end. At the end of the day, we all have been beaten by players who seem to lack skill--and there is something about SCII (be it easy mechanics, or difficulty of scouting) that allows for the less-skilled to exploit the more skilled for wins. Call it what you will. For now, we call it an "all-in." | ||
|
courtpanda
866 Posts
| ||
|
SpoR
United States1542 Posts
On October 30 2011 15:02 alexlw92 wrote: whats the difference between, say, a "2 base push", "2 base timing attack" and a "2 base all in"? a push is undefined really, everyone just throws the term around now for anything. Being a guy from BW, A 2 base push has always been a slow progression across the map towards your opponent (such as Tank/turret/mine pushing in TvP). But these days people seem to be using it mostly as a term that SF players call a poke. It's just an attack or fake attack that is used to keep the opponent on their toes or kill them if they skimped on units/defenses. 2 base timing and 2 base all in are pretty much synonymous imho, The minor difference arguable is that the all in is an uneducated attack such as 'the destiny build' in ZvZ. By uneducated, I mean that they go into the matchup with the mentality of doing the all in build regardless of what they scout or see the opponent do. And in fact, with the Destiny build, he actually advocated no need for scouting, and cited the build being super gay because its all ZvZ is and everyone was doin it. A 2 base timing then would obviously be the same or similar build adapted to the opponents build's weakness to strike and kill them right on the timing when they are weakest. | ||
| ||
