|
Please pay attention, Q-tip
The game lasted for over an hour, and for most of it it was diffiicult to tell who would win it. It was a close long game, where one of the players used some very unusual tactics effectively, and the other dealt with them impressively.
I don't understand hw you can say the game "sucked". You can point out dumbass mistakes in almost every single replay, be it a "Pimpest Play" or a 3-minute-long 4 pool game. 90% of all games can end much sooner than they do if players make the right decisions at the right times. But they don't, because we play in a fog of war... because concentration is the third resource of SC and there is never enough of it.
The zerg CHOSE to play like he did because he felt it was a strong enough method to win. I felt so too. The fact that it was effective is evidenced by the length of the game (during which the zerg wasn't putting off his death - it was the terran who was trying to stay alive).
So we have a one hour long, high level game full of action, featuring some unusual tactics. What else makes a great game? If this "sucked" show a good game... I'm sure I'll be able to come up with some arrogant comment about how the losing player was a dumbass for not doing _____
|
Okey, the last 20 minutes were amazing=D
the beginning was kinda repetitevly boring tho=D
|
On March 21 2005 11:01 MPXMX wrote:
Please pay attention, Q-tip
The game lasted for over an hour, and for most of it it was diffiicult to tell who would win it. It was a close long game, where one of the players used some very unusual tactics effectively, and the other dealt with them impressively.
I don't understand hw you can say the game "sucked". You can point out dumbass mistakes in almost every single replay, be it a "Pimpest Play" or a 3-minute-long 4 pool game. 90% of all games can end much sooner than they do if players make the right decisions at the right times. But they don't, because we play in a fog of war... because concentration is the third resource of SC and there is never enough of it.
The zerg CHOSE to play like he did because he felt it was a strong enough method to win. I felt so too. The fact that it was effective is evidenced by the length of the game (during which the zerg wasn't putting off his death - it was the terran who was trying to stay alive).
So we have a one hour long, high level game full of action, featuring some unusual tactics. What else makes a great game? If this "sucked" show a good game... I'm sure I'll be able to come up with some arrogant comment about how the losing player was a dumbass for not doing _____
If you CHOSE to play like the zerg you are obviously an idiot and have offically lost all credibility with that post.
|
People always criticize Oov's pgt games, and how his macro is so bad and blah blah blah.
So is it really unusual for some random guy to pick apart Evisu's game?
|
This zerg is my hero <3 incredible macro. Terran has no choice but to defense like a bitch lolz. Jaw-dropping game ! !
|
If you CHOSE to play like the zerg you are obviously an idiot and have offically lost all credibility with that post.
who cares about credibility
grow up
|
On March 21 2005 10:46 Q-Tip wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2005 10:42 ronhaak wrote:Now you are just trolling. Stay on topic  For fuck sakes i'm not trolling, im defending myself.If you want me to stop posting then stop fucking flamming me for my own opinion.
you must be new here if you think that tlnet is a democracy. you can get banned for posting just your opinion if its full of stupidity. repeatedly saying that u can say whatever you like here is just not true. just a heads up
edit* and with that last post you're already there =/
|
Canada9720 Posts
If you don't like the replay, just fuck off and let the people who do appreciate it discuss it's finer aspects.
|
On March 21 2005 11:11 Q-Tip wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2005 11:01 MPXMX wrote:
Please pay attention, Q-tip
The game lasted for over an hour, and for most of it it was diffiicult to tell who would win it. It was a close long game, where one of the players used some very unusual tactics effectively, and the other dealt with them impressively.
I don't understand hw you can say the game "sucked". You can point out dumbass mistakes in almost every single replay, be it a "Pimpest Play" or a 3-minute-long 4 pool game. 90% of all games can end much sooner than they do if players make the right decisions at the right times. But they don't, because we play in a fog of war... because concentration is the third resource of SC and there is never enough of it.
The zerg CHOSE to play like he did because he felt it was a strong enough method to win. I felt so too. The fact that it was effective is evidenced by the length of the game (during which the zerg wasn't putting off his death - it was the terran who was trying to stay alive).
So we have a one hour long, high level game full of action, featuring some unusual tactics. What else makes a great game? If this "sucked" show a good game... I'm sure I'll be able to come up with some arrogant comment about how the losing player was a dumbass for not doing _____ If you CHOSE to play like the zerg you are obviously an idiot and have offically lost all credibility with that post.
I was gonna comment on your stupidy with this post but it is not worth it, you will just go and say i lost "all official credibility" or some other pitiful argument.
The zerg chose a style with a lot of action and it ended up being a very entertaining game in which he could have won many times if he had a maphack on or if he could keep himself 100% concentrated in an hour long game. By the time he could have switched to any other unit mix, the terran was too ahead in upgrades and it had an even bigger chance of failing.
|
I wrote with bold font in hopes that you'd pay attention, Q-Tip, but it seems that you've missed all the reason I tried to convey to you.
By the way, you've failed to come up with a "good game" by your definition. One that cannot be ignorantly criticized in your own manner.
|
On March 21 2005 10:58 (s)Wing wrote:
great replay and i wasted 10 min of my life reading qtips posts.
likewise . Q-Tip would fit over at the b.net s&t forum.
|
On March 21 2005 11:25 Elvin_vn wrote:Show nested quote +
If you CHOSE to play like the zerg you are obviously an idiot and have offically lost all credibility with that post.
who cares about credibility grow up
credibility is important VERY important any noob can have their opinion which is like 99% of the people who post in this thread
|
please none of you know what a good game is so just be quiet you don't know shit so just quit sc.....and life while your at it.I'm just gonna stop now im taking Elvin's quote to heart.
|
strategically, this game was like 3/10. mechanically, probably 9.5/10.
|
On March 21 2005 12:18 WhizKid77 wrote:
strategically, this game was like 3/10. mechanically, probably 9.5/10.
notice how everyone with a brain agree's with me
|
|
|
I'm guessing Q-Tip's idea of a good game is a 13-minute rape with nada at 400 apm and playing perfectly while his opponent goes fast ultra-crack? You may not have enjoyed this game, but you'd be a retard for not seeing that this game was extremely gosu. It was clear that evisu's large-scale unit control and macro was near-perfect, and Akaraka knew this and knew that he wouldn't stand a chance in a game of large army vs large army. If he played less passively and rushed out with his huge army when he had a lot of units, I guarantee the zerg would've raped the terran blob every single time.
|
the people who think that this game sucke got two more votes: that game TOTALY sucked. It was so boring and so lame. I know im maybe not that good but it wasnt that good. we watch it with friend and after game we both tell : hmm good usage of ds but it was a bit boring and lame (as i said before).
The strategy of that z sucked. If he would make larger army and not sending 12 units to atack it would be better.
flame me
|
Well i gotta say that the zerg did have good late game usage of darkswarm. Although he didnt really understand the fact that if you use swarm, use lurkers and lings as the main stay of the army. Terran had 6-7 tanks placed on the field and hydras werent going to break through anything. I was suprised how much the terran defended and actually expanded when the zerg let up a little.
As for Q-tip i understand what you're trying to say. This game wasnt EXTREMELY GOSU, only idiots would say something like that. This was entertaining, thnx for the person who shared!
|
On March 21 2005 12:49 iamke55 wrote:
I'm guessing Q-Tip's idea of a good game is a 13-minute rape with nada at 400 apm and playing perfectly while his opponent goes fast ultra-crack?
fast rape games mean either 1) luck or 2) strategical awareness and execution. usually it's the latter. i find that people with good scouting and good perception of the game usually end the game a lot more quickly. it's painful to watch a game that could have ended in 15 minutes last 40+ minutes.
You may not have enjoyed this game, but you'd be a retard for not seeing that this game was extremely gosu. It was clear that evisu's large-scale unit control and macro was near-perfect, and Akaraka knew this and knew that he wouldn't stand a chance in a game of large army vs large army. If he played less passively and rushed out with his huge army when he had a lot of units, I guarantee the zerg would've raped the terran blob every single time.
while i agree that evisu's unit control was very very good, and his macro extremely good (mainly due to good econ/drone management), very trivial mistakes cost him the game, like not protecting his islands, which imo is far far more important than his "near-perfect" mechanics. he can swarm and plague all he likes, but the critical point of securing his islands made all his defiler micro a moot point.
another point i should make is that dark swarm use is much much harder with a mobile terran army than a turtling terran, thus making it less effective. at one point, the zerg should have stepped back and looked at the big picture. he should have told himself "wait, my swarms aren't pushing far enough into T base to do enough econ damage. with him taking his min only, and probably all of 12, can i really keep swarming and plaguing to either 1) starve him out or 2) do enough econ damage to win the game?" and he should have realized the answer is no. he then should have reacted to this realization by securing his islands, getting his macro going, and building up a huge ultra ling hydra defiler scourge army and just waited it out.
while many of zerg's attacks were cost efficient due to defilers, i think a majority of them were not. the terran race is infamous for being able to sustain lots of damage by zerg attacks by running scvs and floating buildings. had zerg accumulated more men before attacking, his chances of winning would increase drastically. kinda like gorush style.
having said all that, this game comes down to what i said eariler - all mechanics, little strategy. a somewhat entertaining replay nonetheless, and this zerg is obviously very good, as well as the terran. maybe he just didn't think too much during this game. happens to everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
