Yesterday's Draco afreeca replays. - Page 3

On July 06 2006 22:43 zulu_nation8 wrote:
yea but how hard is pvt compared to pvz at pro level, pj still cant pvz after a year or so while having world class pvt. I think Draco will have a much easier time because of that

On July 07 2006 11:05 {88}iNcontroL wrote:


War Hammer is almost 30 years old whereas Aliens / Predator was made in early 80's. Original book for Star Ship troopers originated MOST of the swarming alien concepts that are seen in science fiction. Star Ship troopers originated some concepts for perhaps Tyranids -> Aliens -> Zerg but nothing really more.

Released in 1987, the name was sub-titled 'Warhammer 40,000' in order to clearly differentiate it from 2000 AD's Rogue Trooper comic series. The game featured rules that were closely modelled on those of its older sister, Warhammer Fantasy Battle.

On July 07 2006 11:15 Mentos wrote:
he failed in the first game because of sloppy scouting, not build order, timing, or micro/macro.
he had his units divided in the moment terran pushed to the south expos, and it was already too late to gather it up and fight off. thats the moment where he lost the game, up to then it was even.
he uses a lot of build orders vs t. atm, if I was him, I'd use the safest one to test what those guys can do. once he gets used to their style of play, he will be able to adapt something else, right now its impossible.

On July 07 2006 11:34 Mortality wrote:
Easy to see where progamers mess up? I'd say that's far from true.

Sometimes it is easy to see where someone fails -- where someone fails to capitalize on a hole in his opponent's timing, where someone just has bad luck (scouts wrong direction and opponent cheeses on a large map, so doesn't see cheese until way too late), or where somebody's mechanics (control, macro, w/e) just aren't as good. But often times it's little things that compose themselves into a steady lead. Sometimes still a player does absolutely nothing wrong and loses because his opponent won the build war.

And then people on tl.net have the nerve to say retarded things like "so-and-so's build was horrible," blah blah blah blah blah. They don't understand why the progamer chose the build because they don't have the insight to understand all the options the progamer's opponent had and how that particular build countered those options.

Consider Boxer vs Pusan in this past OSL. Pusan went FE into DT's. Boxer used a fact/acad/fact build. Boxer won, so everyone on tl.net said Boxer was a genius and Pusan was retarded for using that build. Had Pusan won, everyone would have said Boxer was retarded and Pusan was a genius. The people making those remarks really have that crappy an understanding of the game.

The reality is just like Boxer said. Boxer lost in build orders and won in strategy (the strategy of getting faster scan at the cost of a slightly reduced army). Sometimes that just happens and its nobody's "fault."

On July 07 2006 13:05 Jathin wrote:
Trust me, Pusan didn't make a mistake in the So1 semifinals when he lost all his units to Boxer's army in ROV, despite the fact that his arbiter was seconds away from reaching his army. He's a pro gamer, I think he knows best.

On October 21 2005 04:39 Rekrul wrote:
lol gg pathetic build by boxer 3-0

On October 21 2005 04:40 Rekrul wrote:
PUSAN WHY ARE YOU 3 gATING just EXPO

though it doesn't matter, he'll still run over boxer i think, as long as he gets a robo soon

On October 21 2005 04:45 Rekrul wrote:
PUSAN STOP FISHING

PUSAN WITH SLIGHT ADV, BOXER NOT MANY SCVS

On October 21 2005 04:56 Rekrul wrote:
OMG WHAT A FISH LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

SUCKOUT

SICK SICK SICK

On October 21 2005 04:57 FireBlast! wrote:
... 2-1 Boxer's still alive and kicking

(but Pusan had this game 70% won, 3 gate was too much with pointless unit losses -_-;; )

On July 07 2006 16:11 FrozenArbiter wrote:


- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_Trader_(Warhammer_40,000)