EPT"Overlord+Lurker "Stop Position" bug not allowed" - OMG!
Didn't know it's a bug. It seems guys in starleague dind't know it too.
What do you think?
WCG bw rules: stop lurker not allowed
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Esp1noza
Russian Federation481 Posts
"Overlord+Lurker "Stop Position" bug not allowed" - OMG! Didn't know it's a bug. It seems guys in starleague dind't know it too. What do you think? | ||
|
Sky101
United States1758 Posts
| ||
|
nortydog
Australia3067 Posts
| ||
|
Esp1noza
Russian Federation481 Posts
On November 13 2005 19:58 Sky101 wrote: It's always been disallowed in WCG, where have you been? Hmm, my bad, didn't know it. | ||
|
artofmagic
United States1951 Posts
| ||
|
Esp1noza
Russian Federation481 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:09 nortydog wrote: Do you think Lurker stop was intended by blizzard? if it was there would be a button for it. I don't know if it was intended, but it it seems logical to me - you can control your lurkers, unlike mine for example. And then they shoud disallow marines+scv hold (useful against rush at choke), unit + peon patrol. | ||
|
zergc1
Zimbabwe961 Posts
| ||
|
greatmeh
Canada1964 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:13 artofmagic wrote: can somebody tell me how to execute the bug or provide it's function?? seem to be useful.. click on lurker and a overlord and press hold position.... its is hella cheap ass | ||
|
T______T
United States538 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:15 Esp1noza wrote: I don't know if it was intended, but it it seems logical to me - you can control your lurkers, unlike mine for example. And then they shoud disallow marines+scv hold (useful against rush at choke), unit + peon patrol. The difference with hold+scvs is that it can't rip an entire army apart in 2 shots. | ||
|
exalted
United States3612 Posts
I mean, they ARE "lurkers" - you should be able to wait until the opportune time to strike  | ||
|
exalted
United States3612 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:18 zergc1 wrote: and spam ssssssss is allowed ? Is this allowed? What about unit + worker patrol? | ||
|
Sadist
United States7291 Posts
| ||
|
Esp1noza
Russian Federation481 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:27 T______T wrote: The difference with hold+scvs is that it can't rip an entire army apart in 2 shots. Hold+scvs can save you against, say, 5pool. This means win instead of lose. Pretty big impact on game imho. | ||
|
a-game
Canada5085 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:15 Esp1noza wrote: I don't know if it was intended, but it it seems logical to me - you can control your lurkers, unlike mine for example. And then they shoud disallow marines+scv hold (useful against rush at choke), unit + peon patrol. yea if one is disallowed all should be | ||
|
PanoRaMa
United States5069 Posts
 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=33357 | ||
|
Painter
353 Posts
PS - say I had a scout ling chillin outside T base and 1/8 of the way down the path from his base to mine form the ling I had some lurkers and I watched as he came closer to the lurkers chasing my ling or just walking to me then started spammin 'S' on my lurkers. Thats basically the same thing as any other method. you have to watch the minimap and then use the tactic. | ||
|
Leejungterran
Korea (South)572 Posts
bug and should not be allowed anywhere . | ||
|
Random()
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
| ||
Manifesto7
Osaka27154 Posts
If you make a group of 5 HT and one zealot in order to move them forward with attack move, is that a bug? If you group your science vessels with your tanks in order to move them is that a bug? By definition, these units should not be able to move with attack move, because they dont have that command, yet they can when in a control group with other units. Should we ban that because they do not have the command? A lurker not attacking as part of a control group under the hold command i not a bug, it is strategy. Just because it does a lot of damage does not dispute the logic. Period. | ||
|
Abang_Zealot
Indonesia866 Posts
If so then this 'bug' doesn't seems so much like a bug anymore.... | ||
|
MaGnIfIcA
Norway2312 Posts
| ||
|
RowdierBob
Australia13293 Posts
And this is BS basically. Quick tank+mnm+scan fast exp terrans are so much harder to beat without hold lurks =[ | ||
BroOd
Austin10833 Posts
On November 13 2005 23:19 Manifesto7 wrote: I know it has never been allowed, but it is total bullshit. Let me reiterate what I posted at GG.net If you make a group of 5 HT and one zealot in order to move them forward with attack move, is that a bug? If you group your science vessels with your tanks in order to move them is that a bug? By definition, these units should not be able to move with attack move, because they dont have that command, yet they can when in a control group with other units. Should we ban that because they do not have the command? A lurker not attacking as part of a control group under the hold command i not a bug, it is strategy. Just because it does a lot of damage does not dispute the logic. Period. I have to disagree. The consequence of an action should always be taken into consideration. I'm intoxicated, but I find I oft think on a higher plane during such states. Anyway, follow me on this. Imagine you're holding a baseball. In instance A) you throw the ball at someone's lawn. In B), you throw it at their glass door. Disregarding intent, you're essentially performing the same action, only the result differs. The same applies to the "hold" command. Holding workers on your ramp in order to prevent access is a far cry from holding lurkers to tear apart a terran army. I have to agree with sadist in the fact that is very unfair. Lurkers weren't given a hold command for a reason, and I believe it's because it severely handicaps terran's early mobility vs smart zergs. We all saw what happened to Boxer. He played like a god damned GOD, and then got torn apart because he didnt expect hold-lurkers. I'm fully open to counter arguements, but the fact that people hold workers on ramps is completely irrelevant. | ||
|
EarthSHaKe
Sweden73 Posts
| ||
|
SuperJongMan
Jamaica11586 Posts
On November 13 2005 23:19 Manifesto7 wrote: A lurker not attacking as part of a control group under the hold command i not a bug, it is strategy. Just because it does a lot of damage does not dispute the logic. Period. True, but Hold has a different effect on a lurker than other units. A lurker stops attacking period under the hold command. No other attacking unit in the game does that. That makes hold lurker a special feature and a "bug" ... right? | ||
|
NovaTheFeared
United States7229 Posts
Scenario 2: Hold SCV bug saves a game early by preventing a ramp break. How is it that we should allow 2 but ban 1? When you ask that the same action be judged only on its consequences you get into illogical situations like this. Plus you have a million problems with line drawing. The emphasis should NOT be placed on what may happen in the worst case/best case (as Brood did and I did to illustrate) it should instead be placed on what allowing it does overall for matchup balance. I believe it brings things closer to even. It's a move that's used infrequently (games/games played?) and it DEFINITELY does not tip the balance of TvZ away from T favor. Even in the games it is used it rarely results in an overwhelming advantage. What it really does is bring the matchup closer to overall balance. I wish there was something like this in PvZ. A little quirk that takes a reasonably balanced matchup and nudges it a little more in the even direction. EDIT: @superjongman Don't cloaked units like ghosts have strange behavior on stop and isn't it similar to the burrowed lurkers? | ||
|
mnm
United States4493 Posts
| ||
|
XG3
United States544 Posts
On November 13 2005 23:19 Manifesto7 wrote: I know it has never been allowed, but it is total bullshit. Let me reiterate what I posted at GG.net If you make a group of 5 HT and one zealot in order to move them forward with attack move, is that a bug? If you group your science vessels with your tanks in order to move them is that a bug? By definition, these units should not be able to move with attack move, because they dont have that command, yet they can when in a control group with other units. Should we ban that because they do not have the command? A lurker not attacking as part of a control group under the hold command i not a bug, it is strategy. Just because it does a lot of damage does not dispute the logic. Period. Your argument would make sense if not for the fact that hold position does not stop any other unit from attacking enemies. It's a bug. | ||
|
RowdierBob
Australia13293 Posts
Exploit the loophole WCG zergs!! | ||
|
hasuwar
7365 Posts
| ||
|
NoName
United States1558 Posts
| ||
|
mnm
United States4493 Posts
It is a bug. That shouldn't even be disputed. Can someone contact one of them StarCraft progammers please? The game was not created so that you are supposed to hold lurkers with other units. Granted lurkers can be stopped by pressing s repeatedly. That is not a bug. But the fact that to keep the lurkers from attacking you have to use some roundabout way of doing it and Blizzard did not design it this way (its a side effect of the programming and not a direct effect/intentional) means it is a bug. (I'm curious as to what Excal's view on this is.) I think other people have different definitions of bugs.. as in.. the allowable moves in gameplay as opposed to those that shouldn't be allowed. That, however, is a whole nother issue. That isn't questioning whether or not it is a bug. It questions whether it should be outlawed or not. People have different opinions on this just as people have different opinions on many rules. Ultimately, it is the tournament director who gets to decide. | ||
|
Mora
Canada5235 Posts
hold lurker is bad. my personal view~ | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 13 2005 21:36 Sadist wrote: hold lurker is bullshit, terran basically cant laeve his base until vessel if you allow it, its really lame =) Scv-> build supply depot -> click -> scv -> build supply depot click, + there's really not a lot of places where a zerg could put his hold lurkers so you don't even have to check everywhere ;o Hold lurks are allowed in progaming leagues, they set the standards ;( | ||
|
MadneZz
Sweden234 Posts
They fire as soon as enemies comes within range... Therefore the hold position lurker is a bug and should not be (ab)used. | ||
|
Hot77.iEy
Finland1486 Posts
| ||
|
Hwoarang
Korea (South)235 Posts
I tend not to use it cos i am bad at multi tasking and keeping an eye on the minimap and don't even realise the army has walked past it, so am better off just leaving the lurkers so they at least get some kills when the army first approach but whether it's intended or not (most likely not), it does give zerg a significant advantage, and as someone said, T gotta get a sci-ves before they can move out.. so I don't mind it being disallowed.. the scv under floating rax is also unfair in my view..and alsothere's the turret under the eng bay.. it's hard to draw the line.. as long as the rules are made well and clear before games should be ok PS but yeah allied mines should be banned ! | ||
|
Raidern
Brazil3811 Posts
| ||
|
RiSE
United States3182 Posts
WCG won't allow it, get over it. | ||
|
DevAzTaYtA
Oman2005 Posts
hold position lurks maybe should not be allowed, but pressing S repeatedly should be, and since it's an offline event, they should be able to see this and make sure no one is cheating, or maybe bwchart can be used? -.- doing the same with goons under an arbiter is allowed, right?  oh and if you think stopping your lurks from firing creates significant imbalance, then why is it used in pro-gaming leagues? imo it only adds depth to the game. | ||
|
DevAzTaYtA
Oman2005 Posts
| ||
|
Manifesto7
Osaka27154 Posts
PS. To reiterate, maybe lurkers were given a roundabout way to hold for a reason. Im a little intoxicated, but I cant imagine they would eliminate one without taking away the other. | ||
|
RaGe
Belgium9949 Posts
| ||
|
Gandalf
Pakistan1905 Posts
If people are arguing that hold lurker with overlord should not be allowed, while the spam S technique should be, what about the attack-building-in-fog-of-war method? | ||
|
PhilGood2DaY
Germany7424 Posts
On November 14 2005 05:07 RaGe wrote: lol there are worse things, like in 2002(?) they obligated random players to tell their race in the first minute of the gameor something roflcopter ! lool ! wtf !? | ||
|
SchOOl_VicTIm
Greece2394 Posts
it's not like the observer over turret bug which prevents the turret from firing at all, it's not like the floating drone bug or whatever like these. i'm not sure, but i don't think this is a rule that was ever in use in any other tournament. i can't believe how they took this decision, it's totally stupid. and unfair. | ||
|
a-game
Canada5085 Posts
| ||
|
CoralReefer
Canada2069 Posts
On November 13 2005 23:19 Manifesto7 wrote: I know it has never been allowed, but it is total bullshit. Let me reiterate what I posted at GG.net If you make a group of 5 HT and one zealot in order to move them forward with attack move, is that a bug? If you group your science vessels with your tanks in order to move them is that a bug? By definition, these units should not be able to move with attack move, because they dont have that command, yet they can when in a control group with other units. Should we ban that because they do not have the command? A lurker not attacking as part of a control group under the hold command i not a bug, it is strategy. Just because it does a lot of damage does not dispute the logic. Period. I think the difference is that the high templar still don't attack, they are just given a move command instead, an ability they already have on their own. Whereas with the hold lurker command, lurkers are given a new ability. I guess it depends on what race you use. I know that when I play terran, it can be frustrating to lose a buttload of marines without using detection (which is sort of similar for PvT and mines except obs are much cheaper and mines don't kill you over and over again  ). | ||
|
superjoppe
Sweden3685 Posts
On November 13 2005 23:16 Random() wrote: Stop lurker is a bug How the fuck is that a bug? You can hold positions with any units, such as marines+scv. Isnt that the same bug then? But that is allowed.. noob | ||
|
Cloud
Sexico5880 Posts
When you go out, vessel in your army or not, you always scan for flanking from the zerg, for lurkers ahead, etc. (thats what i do and think its the most logical thing to do). Imo, hold position lurkers are just a way to exploit either the stupidity and overmechanics or the unawareness and unpreparedness of the terran; theres a reason to why this is allowed in korean tournaments. I myself play tvz more than pvz and i really havent in my whole life had any trouble with stop lurkers even not from lack of trying from my zerg opponent. | ||
|
racebannon
Canada1225 Posts
Hold position, on any unit, does not stop them from attacking. It stops them from moving. On the lurker, it stops them from attacking. That is breaking what hold position does. There is no way to stop any other units from attacking, save for spamming S. That's why it's a bug. That's why its not like grouping things without attack move with things that do. That unit is following the order with the rest, and if it could attack it would. A lurker being issued with hold reacts differently from every other unit being issued the hold command. If hold position worked on a lurker it would respond the exact same way as without it because it is rooted to the ground. What you want is a hold attack, which does not exist in the game of the starcraft except through this bug. It's not the same as holding other units | ||
|
Sadist
United States7291 Posts
Terran 2 rax exps, zerg goes 2-3 hatch relatively fast lurker, so by the time your first group of marines with medics get their, the eggs have hatched for maybe 10 seconds already. Zerg puts lurkers outyside of their base far away from their sunks, you put your marines outside their base, right ontop of their bullshit hold lurkers, then they unhold and all of your units die. Then they rape you with their ling lurker Or what kimwanchul did quite often, 1 hatch lurker on mercury with hold, which beat androide a few times because really its quite gay and youc ant leave your base vs hold lurker. | ||
|
Overlord
Romania651 Posts
On November 14 2005 06:24 racebannon wrote: You guys seriously don't know what hold POSITION is if you think it's a fine bug. Hold position, on any unit, does not stop them from attacking. It stops them from moving. On the lurker, it stops them from attacking. That is breaking what hold position does. There is no way to stop any other units from attacking, save for spamming S. That's why it's a bug. That's why its not like grouping things without attack move with things that do. That unit is following the order with the rest, and if it could attack it would. A lurker being issued with hold reacts differently from every other unit being issued the hold command. If hold position worked on a lurker it would respond the exact same way as without it because it is rooted to the ground. What you want is a hold attack, which does not exist in the game of the starcraft except through this bug. It's not the same as holding other units You miss a thing: there are units that do not attack, when holding position: for example overlords. So there are two types of "hold position": for attacking and for non-attacking units. When you select your lurk together with your overlord, you "give" him the ability to hold position without attacking. When you select scv and marine, u give the scv the ability to hold position and attack. If you would select overlord and scv then scv's would hold position and don't attack. This could be usefull when doing the rax over scv trick, cause sometimes scv's attack their units which the backfire and get in your base. In conclusion there are two types of hold position, and hold lurker shoudl be allowed imho. Also SSSS shoud be allowed. Fog of war method, and shift+click methods are obviously bugs on the other hand. | ||
|
Overlord
Romania651 Posts
On November 14 2005 06:37 Sadist wrote: why is this even a debate, heres a clear cut reason why hold lurker shoudl be banned. Terran 2 rax exps, zerg goes 2-3 hatch relatively fast lurker, so by the time your first group of marines with medics get their, the eggs have hatched for maybe 10 seconds already. Zerg puts lurkers outyside of their base far away from their sunks, you put your marines outside their base, right ontop of their bullshit hold lurkers, then they unhold and all of your units die. Then they rape you with their ling lurker Or what kimwanchul did quite often, 1 hatch lurker on mercury with hold, which beat androide a few times because really its quite gay and youc ant leave your base vs hold lurker. This could happen when the zerg is using 20-30 burrowed lings too, wtf. Why is one ok and the other not? There ARE counters to this, u are welcome to use them: eng bay cancel, scan, firebat splash (in case of lings). And no, i'm not zerg, am an impartial random player | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28706 Posts
so it's not the same as allied mine at all, even tho I know people didn't make the comparison here, but imo, the possibility of hold lurk helps balance tvz, while allied mine breaks tvt. and that's why I think it's bullshit that it's not allowed. | ||
|
greatmeh
Canada1964 Posts
| ||
|
racebannon
Canada1225 Posts
On November 14 2005 07:14 Overlord wrote: You miss a thing: there are units that do not attack, when holding position: for example overlords. So there are two types of "hold position": for attacking and for non-attacking units. When you select your lurk together with your overlord, you "give" him the ability to hold position without attacking. When you select scv and marine, u give the scv the ability to hold position and attack. If you would select overlord and scv then scv's would hold position and don't attack. This could be usefull when doing the rax over scv trick, cause sometimes scv's attack their units which the backfire and get in your base. In conclusion there are two types of hold position, and hold lurker shoudl be allowed imho. Also SSSS shoud be allowed. Fog of war method, and shift+click methods are obviously bugs on the other hand. That is not two types of hold position at all, that's a ridiculous conclusion that very conveniently serves zerg players. There is one hold position. It stops a unit from moving. Any unit with an attack continues to attack, but will not move. The lurker is the only unit with an attack component that will not use it when the hold command is issued to him. Why should a unit that doesn't even have hold position get this special treatment, and have a command work differently ONLY for it, for a reason other than it being a bug in the game? The fact is that there is way more reason to ban it than to allow it. I don't mind it either way, but I really hate poorly thought out reasons to keep it in the game and people desperately trying to make it appear as though it's not a bug in the game. If ladders and tournaments want to ban this bug, zerg players should accept it. If they want to allow it, rejoice and use it to your heart's content. But you cannot argue it and you should be grateful it is so widely accepted as it is because it is a huge bug in the game. | ||
|
CCHS
United States614 Posts
On November 13 2005 23:19 Manifesto7 wrote: I know it has never been allowed, but it is total bullshit. Let me reiterate what I posted at GG.net If you make a group of 5 HT and one zealot in order to move them forward with attack move, is that a bug? If you group your science vessels with your tanks in order to move them is that a bug? By definition, these units should not be able to move with attack move, because they dont have that command, yet they can when in a control group with other units. Should we ban that because they do not have the command? A lurker not attacking as part of a control group under the hold command i not a bug, it is strategy. Just because it does a lot of damage does not dispute the logic. Period. Tru Dat | ||
|
Beast_Bg
Bulgaria1623 Posts
The only reason why there is controversy on this matter is because there are several different ways to do it, and since it doesn't really hurt the game, it's usually allowed. | ||
|
sundance
Slovakia3201 Posts
IMO they let it be b/c they realized it's good for game balance. | ||
|
Overlord
Romania651 Posts
| ||
|
puLs.ReADy
Bulgaria1301 Posts
| ||
|
CoralReefer
Canada2069 Posts
it could be that since starleague lets the players use hold position lurker, they don't fix it but lets see.. they still haven't fixed the shift-click-gas-testie-like-scout-up-through-the-ramp bug yet right ?  | ||
|
2dd
Belgium421 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:18 zergc1 wrote: and spam ssssssss is allowed ? it should be alowd, it isn't a bug at all. i'm sure they will accept it because it's just a part of the gameplay | ||
|
[X]Ken_D
United States4650 Posts
Anyways.. WCG's stance of stop lurker probably won't change since there aren't any Korean pro zerg participating and WCG isn't as important to them as other Korean tournaments (OSL/MSL). WCG = $, but FAME = $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ | ||
|
Overlord
Romania651 Posts
On November 14 2005 10:06 ml1710 wrote: blizzard picks and chooses bugs to fix it could be that since starleague lets the players use hold position lurker, they don't fix it but lets see.. they still haven't fixed the shift-click-gas-testie-like-scout-up-through-the-ramp bug yet right ? You have speaked of my heart I wanted to mention that stupid bug, but forgot it :D | ||
IntoTheWow
is awesome32277 Posts
On November 14 2005 06:37 Sadist wrote: why is this even a debate, heres a clear cut reason why hold lurker shoudl be banned. Terran 2 rax exps, zerg goes 2-3 hatch relatively fast lurker, so by the time your first group of marines with medics get their, the eggs have hatched for maybe 10 seconds already. Zerg puts lurkers outyside of their base far away from their sunks, you put your marines outside their base, right ontop of their bullshit hold lurkers, then they unhold and all of your units die. Then they rape you with their ling lurker Or what kimwanchul did quite often, 1 hatch lurker on mercury with hold, which beat androide a few times because really its quite gay and youc ant leave your base vs hold lurker. Xellos (?) vs Yellow was so scared of this hold thing, and started building random eng bays around map to see held lurkers. often T's can escape a hold lurker without getting all his army raped. I think its ok, T would be very strong early game if not... | ||
|
Leejungterran
Korea (South)572 Posts
On November 14 2005 06:07 superjoppe wrote: How the fuck is that a bug? You can hold positions with any units, such as marines+scv. Isnt that the same bug then? But that is allowed.. noob if you come near the marine , the marine will fire . retard... | ||
|
exalted
United States3612 Posts
| ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
| ||
|
mitsy
United States1792 Posts
| ||
|
jtan
Sweden5891 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:09 nortydog wrote: Do you think Lurker stop was intended by blizzard? if it was there would be a button for it. I think you should be allowed to have units not attacking whenever they can | ||
|
DaRkReBeL
United States30 Posts
On November 13 2005 23:19 Manifesto7 wrote: tell that to the newb boy who can't macro for his life in tvz and has never heard of using comstats I know it has never been allowed, but it is total bullshit. Let me reiterate what I posted at GG.net If you make a group of 5 HT and one zealot in order to move them forward with attack move, is that a bug? If you group your science vessels with your tanks in order to move them is that a bug? By definition, these units should not be able to move with attack move, because they dont have that command, yet they can when in a control group with other units. Should we ban that because they do not have the command? A lurker not attacking as part of a control group under the hold command i not a bug, it is strategy. Just because it does a lot of damage does not dispute the logic. Period. | ||
|
HeavenS
Colombia2259 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:15 Esp1noza wrote: I don't know if it was intended, but it it seems logical to me - you can control your lurkers, unlike mine for example. And then they shoud disallow marines+scv hold (useful against rush at choke), unit + peon patrol. Thats different because all 3 races can do it. And the opponent knows about it, hold lurk is cheating IMO, especially when its too early for science vessels. Its like ally mining. Not the same, but like it. | ||
|
greatmeh
Canada1964 Posts
| ||
|
DaRkReBeL
United States30 Posts
| ||
|
Zeller
United States1109 Posts
| ||
|
Overlord
Romania651 Posts
I mean: u can use it more than once | ||
|
Painter
353 Posts
On November 13 2005 23:19 Manifesto7 wrote: I know it has never been allowed, but it is total bullshit. Let me reiterate what I posted at GG.net If you make a group of 5 HT and one zealot in order to move them forward with attack move, is that a bug? If you group your science vessels with your tanks in order to move them is that a bug? By definition, these units should not be able to move with attack move, because they dont have that command, yet they can when in a control group with other units. Should we ban that because they do not have the command? A lurker not attacking as part of a control group under the hold command i not a bug, it is strategy. Just because it does a lot of damage does not dispute the logic. Period. Also you can't attack move when you have a Lurker in a group of zerglings or hydras or anything for that matter. Its really really really really really annoying. On November 14 2005 10:28 Overlord wrote: You have speaked of my heart I wanted to mention that stupid bug, but forgot it :DBlizzard has said that they cannot fix this bug because it would destroy Worker AI when mining normally. | ||
|
Painter
353 Posts
As someone compared earlier that terrans can put SCV on their ramp with Marines and click hold position it enables them to not worry about controlling the units and multitask/micro other things. It is a very crucial move during a do-or-die time. It is not a cheap move though because in order for terran to do this they either have to scout the attack coming and/or lose SCV's from mining. If the SCV are not on hold in front of the ramp the terran would have to micro them and make sure that they stay in the front like a shield otherwise they lose their entire army usually resulting in Game Over. The same goes for Lurker Hold. The zerg has to scout and pay attention to the minimap. It instead just requires you to use another method which is unfair in comparison. Zergs cannot macro/multitask while spamming SSSSSS the legal way. Good terrans should be aware of such tactics and be very cautious when moving out. In fact if terran scans the lurkers and the zerg doesn't see him scan he can get the first strike on the lurkers or just avoid them all together giving him an equal chance to take advantage of the situation. Lurkers on hold can kill and Terran army and the terran can easily recover from and go on to win the game. SCV on hold can save a terran army from losing the game. Where is the logic? WCG is biased for Terrans. | ||
|
Silverado
121 Posts
I don't see how for lurker is any different. If this is a bug, then all should be a bug. It is foribidden because of balance changes, not because it is a bug. | ||
|
Esp1noza
Russian Federation481 Posts
| ||
|
Redstorm[MFx]
Norway258 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:09 nortydog wrote: Do you think Lurker stop was intended by blizzard? if it was there would be a button for it. acctually they did intend the overlord to work this way and heres why: im a bit of a story freak so i have read some zerg story on scl and it says about the overlords function that the swarm eventually got to big for the overmind to control all by himself. he therfor needed someone who could act on hes behalf on the battlefield and heres where the overlord comes in. call him sort of a general that takes hes orders form the overmind. thats u when u play if u didnt realise this this is all on sclegacy.com and it supports that the ol+lurk hold is an intended action cus in theory all ur commands go trough the overlord so why shouldent u be able to hold control a lurker with the overlord? | ||
|
XG3
United States544 Posts
On November 14 2005 13:16 Silverado wrote: Ohter range units also don't fire when using hold command. I don't see how for lurker is any different. If this is a bug, then all should be a bug. It is foribidden because of balance changes, not because it is a bug. Would you like to point out which units you're talking about that "don't fire when using hold command"? | ||
|
Kacas
Brazil3143 Posts
u guys keep discuting if its a bug or not if starleague, the most valiable starcraft tournament uses it, if blizzcon, the blizzard official tournamnet uses it, why should be considered a bug??? and oh...Wcg is wcg...bla bla blaa... if wcg said games = 10min no rush would u say...wcg rules = for wcg...bla bla bla... .... So we should complain.. | ||
|
dronebabo
10866 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28706 Posts
| ||
|
Overlord
Romania651 Posts
On November 14 2005 15:23 dronebabo wrote: lol this is so pointless for both sides to continue arguing about | ||
|
CoralReefer
Canada2069 Posts
| ||
|
Sadist
United States7291 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28706 Posts
| ||
|
XG3
United States544 Posts
On November 14 2005 16:16 Sadist wrote: the people who have said it should be allowed obviously dont play terran or have ever experienced it, its definately on par with allied mines =) The thing is, there's already a perfectly good and legal way to do this: spamming stop. The zerg users who are trying to convince themselves this isn't a bug are all like "OMG THAT TKAEZ MICRO" | ||
|
sundance
Slovakia3201 Posts
Blizzard made this game so if Blizzard doesn't consider it as a bug then it's not a bug Period | ||
|
skyglow1
New Zealand3962 Posts
On November 14 2005 06:18 BCloud wrote:Imo, hold position lurkers are just a way to exploit either the stupidity and overmechanics or the unawareness and unpreparedness of the terran; theres a reason to why this is allowed in korean tournaments. I just watched a VOD of xellos vs gorush where xellos went fast expo on luna. Xellos' 2 teams of mm got raped within seconds by 2 lurkers which were using the hold lurker bug. I guess Xellos is really stupid and unaware and unprepared then. I believe the sssssss way should be allowed but not the fog of war or the group with overlord way as many have explained how hold position is not meant to hold the unit's attack. skyglow1 | ||
|
Cloud
Sexico5880 Posts
lol spelled goodfried | ||
|
BinGBonG[gamei]
Netherlands514 Posts
| ||
|
SolaR-
United States2685 Posts
| ||
|
Grass.nS)
United States121 Posts
| ||
Live2Win
United States6657 Posts
| ||
|
Camila_br
Brazil529 Posts
On November 15 2005 19:54 Grass.nS) wrote: The only unit that Blizzard intended to not fire when units are within range is the ghost and only when cloaked and in the stop or move command, but it DOES fire when put under hold position. actually, it DOES NOT. except if it was not cloaked. when cloaked, the only way to make ghosts attack is right-clicking or clicking "A" and then left-clicking a unit/building. | ||
ManaBlue
Canada10458 Posts
On November 13 2005 23:19 Manifesto7 wrote: I know it has never been allowed, but it is total bullshit. Let me reiterate what I posted at GG.net If you make a group of 5 HT and one zealot in order to move them forward with attack move, is that a bug? If you group your science vessels with your tanks in order to move them is that a bug? By definition, these units should not be able to move with attack move, because they dont have that command, yet they can when in a control group with other units. Should we ban that because they do not have the command? A lurker not attacking as part of a control group under the hold command i not a bug, it is strategy. Just because it does a lot of damage does not dispute the logic. Period. Mani, debating symantical definitions of what a "bug" is is completely irrelavent in the context of this arguement. HP lurks break the game just as bad as allied mines. In fact, they work almost identically in terms of consequence. That is a good comparison, not HTs being able to attack move. If you really believe that's the case, make lurks move with attack move and patch HP lurk so it can't be done. Fixed right? | ||
|
Grass.nS)
United States121 Posts
On November 15 2005 21:04 Camila_br wrote: actually, it DOES NOT. except if it was not cloaked. when cloaked, the only way to make ghosts attack is right-clicking or clicking "A" and then left-clicking a unit/building. You're wrong. They do attack anything in range when cloaked and under hold position. | ||
|
jeddus
United States832 Posts
With that said, Blizzard does not own WCG and WCG are free to make their own rules as they see fit as they are the entity which promotes the event and awards the prizes. If someone said "Hey, I'll give you a few grand if you win a few starcraft matches without using Hold Lurkers" would you take the chance to get the money? Sure, why not? Many people posting are not competing in the WCG finals. Let those competing petition for it to be allowed to the promoters. Their voices are the only voices who count in the matter besides those who run the event and if they choose to be silent then let them. | ||
|
jeddus
United States832 Posts
I think some of the other players have played in korean leagues, but unless XellOs is after the nickname "The Cheesy Zerg" then I don't think we'll be seeing him play as a Hold Lurk Zerg-master. | ||
|
Manifesto7
Osaka27154 Posts
It is perfectly relevant to this discussion. In fact it is the only relevant thing. This isnt being disallowed because it is an "unfair advantage" or that "it is too powerful", it is being banned as a bug. So, me giving my opinion that it is NOT a bug is my argument for why it should be allowed. Allied mines breaks the rules of the game because the player goes into an OUT OF GAME menu and manipulates settings already laid out in the rules. ie. one on one matchup. That is completely different than using in game AI to prevent a unit from firing. Lastly, you say patch etc, to make it fixed. I dont think it is broken. | ||
|
Manifesto7
Osaka27154 Posts
This means that the fog of war hold lurker is just fine. | ||
|
Chris307
3095 Posts
On November 14 2005 01:34 XG3 wrote: Your argument would make sense if not for the fact that hold position does not stop any other unit from attacking enemies. It's a bug. I wish I'd gotten to this thread earlier so I could be the one making this comment. XG3 works for Blizzard now, so let's all consider this an official statement. | ||
|
Manifesto7
Osaka27154 Posts
| ||
|
Chris307
3095 Posts
DTs attack when holding position. So do Wraiths, Ghosts unfortunately, so do units cloaked by Arbiters.... To stop attacking is obviously not a feature that the Hold Position command was meant to have. Therefor, it is a bug. Hold Positioning worker units, though, isn't a bug. Attack-moving with 4 HTs and a Zealot isn't a bug either. Enabling these commands for all units when group-selected is a feature that Blizzard deliberately put into the game to relieve the inconvenience of grouping all units separately. As for whether or not I believe these kind of bugs should be banned, I definitely don't. These kind of minor glitches can easily be replicated by accident in everyday play, so I think it's ridiculous to ban them. | ||
|
Manifesto7
Osaka27154 Posts
| ||
|
Blind
United States2528 Posts
Just a thought. Tell me if what I said is wrong. | ||
|
nOob
Spain120 Posts
If u want to be good u must be prepared for this tricks, its just my opinnion | ||
KorvspaD
Sweden468 Posts
| ||
|
oHInsane
France727 Posts
When i was playing, i started seeing some reps with this hold lurker thing, i always thought people was doing that by spamming "S". So i did it that way. You just place some random lings around your group of lurkers then when you see some units coming, you can start spamming waiting for your opponent to walk thru your lurker, then you release the "S" button. I think it is not a bug when you do that by controlling lurker+overlord since you can do it by some other ways. In fact, an average terran can deal with that, and as many of you said, it is just usefull until vessels come out. Anyways, i think it is up to wcg players to discuss about this.... | ||
|
LastWish
2015 Posts
If I move my entire army through the minefield the front units will take the damage only and the mines will eventually blow each other decreasing the effect, while when allied u may wait until his units are in the middle and crush them from all sides. Also no zealot minefield runthrough would be possible which is very useful in PvT. Mines cannot be controlled, alliance changes it. Imho every burrowed unit should have a bonus button for hold attack or position or whatever. The reason is that if a unit is burrowed and attacked it auto unburrows which is a bullshit - this can also abused by firebats. Also workers could have a Hold button I don't see why not. | ||
|
Patriot.dlk
Sweden5462 Posts
| ||
|
koehli
Germany350 Posts
On November 16 2005 04:31 Patriot.dlk wrote: blizzard patch it plz It was a bug that was found almost instantly because of the eae it happens in a normal game by accident. People used it and it was great fun and helped balancing the Terran/Zerg matchup. So Blizzard accepted it as a quirk and made it legal by not fixing a widely known and routinely used in TV matches quirk for several years. Some people are either to young to know the saying: "If it ain't broken, don't fix it." or they just don't understand the consquences. Anyhow, WCG disallowing it is just plainout wrong, they create their own version of BW for scrubs that is less balanced and less fun and also creates a hell of a difficulty to referee. Among higher level players there seems to be an understanding to just ignore teh great power of the WCG rule masters anyhow. | ||
|
SuperJongMan
Jamaica11586 Posts
And I still think stop lurk is diff cuz of the hold position - not attack deal. All other units attack in hold , yes even ghosts to those tryin to lie and bs their argument in. As for whatever WCG allows and disallows, it is their rules and I don't think stop lurker is that big a deal. How actively have we seen it in tournament play lately? It's being used in decreasing rates. | ||
|
Konni
Germany3044 Posts
| ||
|
koehli
Germany350 Posts
On November 16 2005 07:51 Konni wrote: With your arguments, Mani, allied mines should be allowed too. They're not even a bug. There exist game modi that do not allow allied mines (1v1 or FFA I think). So banning it to be able to use observer slots is not really that big a change from 1v1 mode, just a convenience wrapup. | ||
|
SuperJongMan
Jamaica11586 Posts
| ||
|
ComunistHobo
Canada208 Posts
| ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28706 Posts
first of all allied mine is impossible to do on ladder setting which is the setting blizzard intended for competitive play, in fact it's also impossible on pgtour. second of all, which imo is by far more important ; allied mine breaks tvt. hold lurk does not break anything. in fact in my opinion, it balances shit out. it's not that allied lurk wins games. I've won less than 5 games ever because of hold lurker, and I've lost less than 5 games ever due to hold lurker. (hold lurker was however part of the reason why I lost against Day in wcg last year! the biggest part was that I played fucking horrible after the first 7 minutes tho. ) the thing is just that I don't think tvz would be as balanced as it is if terrans did not have to fear hold lurker, because they could then fast expand and just make a whole lot of units and then attack the zerg earlier than he is able to attack at the time being because at the time being he has to wait for vessels. and like someone else said, if it ain't broken, don't fix it. and in this case I think fixing it might break it. | ||
|
Kacas
Brazil3143 Posts
the discussion is not if its a bug or not its balancement issues, | ||
|
mitsy
United States1792 Posts
how? i guess they could change the game types around. the only reason people wouldn't use 1v1 in theory is because they can't ally victory. therefore blizz should add an "offer draw" ability to all games so that people can do the equivalent of the current "ally victory" in a more professional way. melee should just be removed (renamed). we should see game types reflecting the different kinds of games people actually want to play: a 1v1. no changing alliances, but can offer draw. ob slots would be nice. a 2v2. no changing alliances, but can offer draw. ob slots would be nice. a 3v3. no changing alliances, but can offer draw. ob slots would be nice. a 4v4. no changing alliances, but can offer draw. ob slots would be nice. these all can fall under TvB, but you shoudl be able to choose how many max players when making the game (the rest ob, ideally), i.e. TvB (max: 2 players, N ob). setting max ob would be nice too (for bandwidth issues). change the name of this tVb tho to something more general, like Standard Play. this would only allow a standard map list in public as well, so money maps don't ruin this game type. then add, for the fuck of it, Money Play. this would be just like Melee, except the game type would make sure mineral patches, gas, never run out, or just give the players a shitload of money really fast. whatever makes the tards happy, and now they don't even have to open up the map editor. let all the shit sit in this type. actually i'd rather money play be forced into the dung pile of "UMS", but that deserves a better name. and good UMS maps could be a diff game type. those games could even be eLO rated. Competitive UMS maybe. then for custuom play, UMS, whatever. they really could be divded up at least into two catagories, one with a map list, one open. in summary: -add hold to lurker menu -allow "offer draw" -rename TvB to Standard Play and disallow non-good maps in pub games for this type. elo rate these for the fuck of it, optional i guess (rated or non-rated game). -add feature to set max players and max obs of a game ur creating -add Competitive UMS, elo rated (different elo rating for this), rated or non-rated, maint a map list for this -could add a Money Type, but I don't care, let them all be in UMS, which should be renamed, at this point, to "Shit" money type should still have a map list. its not like money maps are that original and there's too many to DL. money type would make things never run out but maybe have a time limit of 1 or 2 hours on the games (defeat for all!). these could have a seperate elo ratings as well. whatever. | ||
|
CoralReefer
Canada2069 Posts
| ||
|
CoralReefer
Canada2069 Posts
| ||
|
Locked
United States4182 Posts
| ||
|
Konni
Germany3044 Posts
On November 16 2005 12:38 Locked wrote: how can you break a mirror matchup ~_~ (allied mines tvt) very good point sir | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28706 Posts
although I personally wouldn't mind cause I don't like tvt in the first place so I always go vulture anyway. but allied mine kills diversity and that's a bad thing. | ||
|
Alan Schezar
France44 Posts
| ||
|
Locked
United States4182 Posts
On November 16 2005 13:26 Liquid`Drone wrote: well I think it's "broken" if vulture is the only viable strat although I personally wouldn't mind cause I don't like tvt in the first place so I always go vulture anyway. but allied mine kills diversity and that's a bad thing. but its not, you can still wall + go wraith or drop or expo or something it will only be "broken" in the way zvz is "broken" and even still its a little similar to hold lurkers in the way that both are only effective for a certain period of time in tvt after a point it just doesn't make sense to be allying your enemy in hopes that he will go over that particular spot with a tank/gol army | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28706 Posts
and on certain maps it would be fine, but it does not add anything and only ruins tvt on certain maps. like I have previously stated, I believe hold lurker adds something to the game and makes it more balanced. doesn't matter to me if it's a bug or not, I just think it's good for the game. likewise I think mannerpylon is not a bug, but it can ruin the game and thus I feel it should not be allowed. you could make the same arguement for 4 and 5pools but obviously having a rule for how early you can make spawning pool isn't viable. (and honestly, neither is having a rule that mannerpylon shouldn't be allowed, however we could at least make sure that every starting location is equally unmannerpylonable. ) | ||
|
mitsy
United States1792 Posts
do you think it would be unfair if workers no longer "stacked" when "first" on their way to minerals (if they were told to do something else, they don't start stacking until after they scrape the mineral off and turn to return it, from then on they stay "stackable", but this resets if they are given another command. | ||
|
123bangbang
United Kingdom83 Posts
Im sure they can come to an agreement. For the rest of us who play for fun...well we can just curse any zerg players that do use this to beat us. Hell, why not find out bugs for terran and toss that kicks zerg ass? | ||
|
Kacas
Brazil3143 Posts
On November 16 2005 14:36 123bangbang wrote: How about they let the games be played to however people want to play it? It IS a GAME after all. However i realise that pro-gamers play for money and losing to some bug can be a real...pain (to say the least). So how about all the pro-gamers (that actually matter ie earn significant amounts of money) get together and debate what can be used and what can't be. Ongamenet and MbC? allied mines not allowed manner pylon allowed hold lurker allowed and i think its right =) | ||
|
Wspc.zsS
China7 Posts
On November 13 2005 20:18 zergc1 wrote: and spam ssssssss is allowed ? Hahahahahah good idea | ||
|
Mora
Canada5235 Posts
On November 16 2005 14:36 123bangbang wrote: How about they let the games be played to however people want to play it? It IS a GAME after all. However i realise that pro-gamers play for money and losing to some bug can be a real...pain (to say the least). So how about all the pro-gamers (that actually matter ie earn significant amounts of money) get together and debate what can be used and what can't be. Im sure they can come to an agreement. For the rest of us who play for fun...well we can just curse any zerg players that do use this to beat us. Hell, why not find out bugs for terran and toss that kicks zerg ass? you are dumb | ||
| ||
