• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 17:34
CEST 23:34
KST 06:34
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Classic Games #3: Rogue vs Serral at BlizzCon9[ASL20] Ro16 Preview Pt1: Ascent10Maestros of the Game: Week 1/Play-in Preview12[ASL20] Ro24 Preview Pt2: Take-Off7[ASL20] Ro24 Preview Pt1: Runway13
Community News
SC4ALL $6,000 Open LAN in Philadelphia7Weekly Cups (Sept 1-7): MaxPax rebounds & Clem saga continues29LiuLi Cup - September 2025 Tournaments3Weekly Cups (August 25-31): Clem's Last Straw?39Weekly Cups (Aug 18-24): herO dethrones MaxPax6
StarCraft 2
General
Weekly Cups (Sept 1-7): MaxPax rebounds & Clem saga continues #1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time Team Liquid Map Contest #21 - Presented by Monster Energy Classic Games #3: Rogue vs Serral at BlizzCon What happened to Singapore/Brazil servers?
Tourneys
Maestros of The Game—$20k event w/ live finals in Paris RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series WardiTV TL Team Map Contest #5 Tournaments Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament SC4ALL $6,000 Open LAN in Philadelphia
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 491 Night Drive Mutation # 490 Masters of Midnight Mutation # 489 Bannable Offense Mutation # 488 What Goes Around
Brood War
General
Pros React To: SoulKey's 5-Peat Challenge BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion ASL20 General Discussion BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams
Tourneys
[IPSL] ISPL Season 1 Winter Qualis and Info! Is there English video for group selection for ASL [ASL20] Ro16 Group B [ASL20] Ro16 Group A
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Muta micro map competition Fighting Spirit mining rates [G] Mineral Boosting
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Borderlands 3 Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile General RTS Discussion Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion LiquidDota to reintegrate into TL.net
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
Canadian Politics Mega-thread US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Big Programming Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine
Fan Clubs
The Happy Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Linksys AE2500 USB WIFI keeps disconnecting Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread High temperatures on bridge(s)
TL Community
BarCraft in Tokyo Japan for ASL Season5 Final The Automated Ban List
Blogs
The Personality of a Spender…
TrAiDoS
A very expensive lesson on ma…
Garnet
hello world
radishsoup
Lemme tell you a thing o…
JoinTheRain
RTS Design in Hypercoven
a11
Evil Gacha Games and the…
ffswowsucks
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1492 users

Explain to me why allied mines is banned

Forum Index > BW General
Post a Reply
1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 Next All
GrandInquisitor *
Profile Blog Joined May 2005
New York City13113 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-06-19 04:34:20
June 19 2007 03:28 GMT
#1
...or why hold lurker isn't. It seems either both should be allowed, or neither.


UNACCEPTABLE ANSWER: in order to use allied mines you have to go into the Diplomacy screen, for hold lurker you don't.

I mean, that should have nothing to do with it. You can do hold lurker by going into the Diplomacy screen too; does that mean that "allied lurker" is banned but "hold lurker" isn't? If you don't believe that, why would allied lurker be okay but allied mines not be? (Please don't say that ZvT is imbalanced otherwise.) If you DO believe that allied lurker is meaningfully different from hold lurker, how do you reconcile that with the fact that the two do the exact same thing, are almost identically easy to do, and provide the exact same unfair advantage? We should be banning unfair actions based on their effects on the game, not how they are carried out.

Like, hold lurker is obviously unintended by the developers, in much the same way that gas stack attack and observer over a turret are unintentional. Just because they don't involve going into the diplomacy screen shouldn't mean that it's okay.


To those of you that say that if we ban hold lurker then we have to ban workers on hold position and workers patrolling because they are equally unintentional - you missed the point. The whole idea is that we should be banning based on effect and not mode of execution. Workers on patrol and hold position aren't really gamebreakers, and their effect is minimal. Hold lurker, gas stack attack, and observer on a turret are vastly different, and affect the game much more than using a worker instead of a ling to patrol between expansions. They confer significant advantages to whichever side abuses the bug.

That's why, for example, repeatedly pressing stop on a burrowed lurker shouldn't be banned even if hold lurker is. (Maybe you can make a case for banning it, but it's a pretty offensive notion, telling players that they can't keep spamming stop with certain units - it'd feel like NR15.) Rather, I'd say that there isn't that much of an unfair advantage to be gained when someone spams stop on lurkers; in cases like that, the amount of effort you have to invest and the macro / time you give up negate, to a large extent, any potential benefit.

What fun is it being cool if you can’t wear a sombrero?
Koldblooded
Profile Joined July 2006
United States661 Posts
June 19 2007 03:31 GMT
#2
I agree
By.Flash fighting
rpf
Profile Blog Joined January 2007
United States2705 Posts
June 19 2007 03:32 GMT
#3
That's why I immediately leave the game if someone abuses game mechanics.
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity." - Sigmund Freud
1sd2sd3sd
Profile Blog Joined November 2004
660 Posts
June 19 2007 03:39 GMT
#4
early game tvp would change a lot and protosses would be going 1 gate obs a lot more. in pro games allied lurkers works best early to early mid game. It can work late game but they wont usually do that much damage since the terran will have vessels floating around and firing off scans enough to detect them. i think that allied mines would be much more gamebreaking then hold lurker but i think it would be kinda cool to have it legal for a bit just to see toss's incorporating mass archon into their builds ;p
gds
Profile Blog Joined February 2007
Iceland1391 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-06-19 03:42:23
June 19 2007 03:41 GMT
#5
the answer is simple : you can stop lurker in game by spaming the S key (stop) while you cant stop a mine to "attack". So stop lurker by using hold with an overlord or aiming a distant building is just a easiest way to do it.
Naib
Profile Blog Joined November 2004
Hungary4843 Posts
June 19 2007 03:44 GMT
#6
It would be cool if you could hotkey 10 mines and simultaneously spam stop, that way copying ally mine without allying it!
Too bad it's not possible, the APM freaks would <3 it ;D
Complete the cycle!
QuanticHawk
Profile Blog Joined May 2007
United States32075 Posts
June 19 2007 03:46 GMT
#7
Hah, I thought you were saying ban all forms of lurk stop/hold. Banning hold (with ol or however peolpe do it now adays) seems like a legitimate complaint. But s-spamming should certainly be allowed. You can still do it and be effective too ! =]

I assume the only way you could check this would be bw chart??
PROFESSIONAL GAMER - SEND ME OFFERS TO JOIN YOUR TEAM - USA USA USA
.dragoon
Profile Joined May 2007
United States749 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-06-19 03:57:28
June 19 2007 03:55 GMT
#8
Mines are not suppose to be controllable, for christ's sake they have no command menu.

Lurker on the other hand does. The tech for lurkers also happens to coincide with terran getting academy (early to mid game-ish), so with a little diligence terrans are fine.

You can't possibly be asking this. Terran doesn't need another cheap shot.
If you can, then do. If I can, I will.
Sr18
Profile Joined April 2006
Netherlands1141 Posts
June 19 2007 03:56 GMT
#9
Preventing lurkers from attacking is totally different from preventing mines from attacking. Lurkers are units and supposed to be under the direct control of the player. Mines are not supposed to be controllable. Hold lurkers is simply part of controlling the unit, allied mines is cheating.
If it ain't Dutch, it ain't Park Yeong Min - CJ fighting!
GrandInquisitor *
Profile Blog Joined May 2005
New York City13113 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-06-19 04:05:15
June 19 2007 04:03 GMT
#10
On June 19 2007 12:55 .dragoon wrote:
The tech for lurkers also happens to coincide with terran getting academy (early to mid game-ish), so with a little diligence terrans are fine.


And mine tech coincides with obs tech and is after overlord tech. What are you trying to say?

You can't possibly be asking this. Terran doesn't need another cheap shot.


You can't possibly be suggesting that getting rid of hold lurker is a 'cheap shot' for Terran. As for allied mines - well, why do you defend the hold lurker cheap shot but not the Terran cheap shot?

On June 19 2007 12:56 Sr18 wrote:
Preventing lurkers from attacking is totally different from preventing mines from attacking. Lurkers are units and supposed to be under the direct control of the player. Mines are not supposed to be controllable. Hold lurkers is simply part of controlling the unit, allied mines is cheating.


Obs on turret is part of controlling the unit. Gas stack is part of controlling the unit. Your line of argument is insufficient to just leave it at "you have control over the unit, so you can do anything you want with them".
What fun is it being cool if you can’t wear a sombrero?
GrandInquisitor *
Profile Blog Joined May 2005
New York City13113 Posts
June 19 2007 04:06 GMT
#11
Look, I don't sway particularly strongly towards banning allied mine AND hold lurker or not banning either; but I think it's abhorrent that we ban one but not the other. It's an ideological and philosophical inconsistency.
What fun is it being cool if you can’t wear a sombrero?
joeki
Profile Joined June 2004
Sweden292 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-06-19 04:10:35
June 19 2007 04:08 GMT
#12
First of we have the arguments of realism. It is just common sense to have a rule that forbids you from allying your enemy. There is a war, you fight til the death. Allying your opponent is just wrong. You are the commander of your troops. You can order your your troops to hold their attacks, but mines aren't supposed to be controlled by you.

Okay then some other arguments. It's hard since every argument that makes sense you reply with "don't say that" in your first post. You say that "Workers on patrol and hold position aren't really gamebreakers."

I say they can very well be gamebreakers. You scout a lingrush, drag some SCVs to your ramp and put a marine behind. Hold position and your safe. No hold position and there is a chance the lings can come up if your not careful and you die. I think I've seen more gamebreaking "scv-holdposition on ramp" stuff than gamebreaking "hold lurker" stuff actually... Just because lings not coming up a ramp doesn't look as spectacular as lurkers killing 20 marines doesn't mean hold-lurkers change the game more.

Mostly I think it's just annyoing to have a rule that prohibits hold lurker though. That means someone has to watch the first person vod afterward and check if the zerg really used stop instead of hold before he can be declared as the winner. It's just to annyoing. Also, if you have lings and lurkers and overlords in the same controlgroup and hold (ok doesn't happen often, but still) should the zerg be declared loser just because he accidently hold his lurker? Even if it's hard you can make an innocent mistake to hold a lurker, but you sure as hell can't accidently change from enemy to ally.

I think lurker is allowed and allied mines not, just because it's easy and doesn't hurt the balance in any matchup. T can fight P okay without allied mines and T can fight Z good even with hold lurkers. If you think it's unfair, then you have to except to have balance brought up. T owns Z statwise in, if not all, then almost all starleagues.

So to sum it up: Allied mines change the game too much and are easy to ban. Hold lurkers doesn't change the game too much and are hard to ban.
KlaCkoN
Profile Blog Joined May 2007
Sweden1661 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-06-19 04:19:47
June 19 2007 04:09 GMT
#13
Yeah sure ban holding lurkers with overlords, just make sure you ban held scv with marines (another "obviously" unintended move) at the same time.

Certain glitches are simply frowned upon, while others are not. This is just something to accept i think, (since brood war has more or less moved beyond beeing just a computer game.) Other example: workers stacked by minerals contra workers stacked by shift clicking gas...

edit: got owned by simply skimming the OP first time around =P sry about that.

But seriously how can you claim that held workers are not a game breaker while held lurkers are ????
Held lurkers are used in relativly few games and decide the outcome in even fewer.
Held scv on ramp is used as often the terran possibly can (aka he scouted early enough) whenever he is either pool first rushed or 2 gated.
And more often than not it will also win him the game, or at least give him a big advantadge the times he manages to perform it flawlessly.
9 and 11 pool would be soo much stronger vs t if held scv where banned. While banning hold lurkers would hardly change zvt at all.
Except that it would probably bring new popularity to 2 fact 4 rax timing push.

And gas stack contra mineral stack, both of these are used in a way that the devs did NOT intend. Yet we choose to keep one but not the other simply because one breaks the game, the other one does not. The line between them is entirly arbitrary.

//edit
"Voice or no voice the people can always be brought to the bidding of their leaders ... All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."
Cadical *
Profile Joined September 2005
United States469 Posts
June 19 2007 04:10 GMT
#14
I think you answered your own question

On June 19 2007 12:28 GrandInquisitor wrote:
The whole idea is that we should be banning based on effect and not mode of execution.


They decided that hold lurkers and its effects are acceptable.

and obs on turret is not banned anyways
IMBA
PePe QuiCoSE
Profile Blog Joined March 2006
Argentina1204 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-06-19 04:13:19
June 19 2007 04:11 GMT
#15
"in order to use allied mines you have to go into the Diplomacy screen, for hold lurker you don't." and you are behaving like a fag lately.* Hope your period is over soon.
Iirc there was said by that time that allied mines you con only achieve it off game, while hold lurker you use game mechanics.

*http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=38446

edit: my, 7 posts while opening and reading the topic, and writing a reply
geometryb
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
United States1249 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-06-19 04:13:31
June 19 2007 04:12 GMT
#16
you can't use allied mines in One vs One mode. i think that's why it's not allwed?
GrandInquisitor *
Profile Blog Joined May 2005
New York City13113 Posts
Last Edited: 2007-06-19 04:25:51
June 19 2007 04:18 GMT
#17
On June 19 2007 13:09 KlaCkoN wrote:
Yeah sure ban holding lurkers with overlords, just make sure you ban held scv with marines (another "obviously" unintended move) at the same time.

Certain glitches are simply frowned upon, while others are not. This is just something to accept i think, (since brood war has more or less moved beyond beeing just a computer game.) Other example: workers stacked by minerals contra workers stacked by shift clicking gas...

edit: got owned by simply skimming the OP first time around =P sry about that.

But seriously how can you claim that held workers are not a game breaker while held lurkers are ????
Held lurkers are used in relativly few games and decide the outcome in even fewer.
Held scv on ramp is used as often the terran possibly can (aka he scouted early enough) whenever he is either pool first rushed or 2 gated.
And more often than not it will also win him the game, or at least give him a big advantadge the times he manages to perform it flawlessly.
9 and 11 pool would be soo much stronger vs t if held scv where banned. While banning hold lurkers would hardly change zvt at all.
Except that it would probably bring new popularity to 2 fact 4 rax timing push.

And gas stack contra mineral stack, both of these are used in a way that the devs did NOT intend. Yet we choose to keep one but not the other simply because one breaks the game, the other one does not. The line between them is entirly arbitrary.

//edit


I don't get it. Do SCV's in front of marines on ramp on STOP instead of HOLD POS just like, not do anything? I don't believe that. And I think hold lurker - losing a control group of mm - has potential to change the game much more than SCV's on a ramp on HOLD instead of STOP.

Moreover, if banning hold lurkers would hardly change ZvT at all, let's do it and reconcile this ideological self-contradiction then.
What fun is it being cool if you can’t wear a sombrero?
KlaCkoN
Profile Blog Joined May 2007
Sweden1661 Posts
June 19 2007 04:20 GMT
#18
haha you responded while I was editing =P
"Voice or no voice the people can always be brought to the bidding of their leaders ... All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."
GrandInquisitor *
Profile Blog Joined May 2005
New York City13113 Posts
June 19 2007 04:23 GMT
#19
On June 19 2007 13:08 joeki wrote:
First of we have the arguments of realism. It is just common sense to have a rule that forbids you from allying your enemy. There is a war, you fight til the death. Allying your opponent is just wrong. You are the commander of your troops. You can order your your troops to hold their attacks, but mines aren't supposed to be controlled by you.


So you think allied lurkers should be banned, while hold lurkers shouldn't? Does that really make sense, considering they do the same thing?

Okay then some other arguments. It's hard since every argument that makes sense you reply with "don't say that" in your first post. You say that "Workers on patrol and hold position aren't really gamebreakers."

I say they can very well be gamebreakers. You scout a lingrush, drag some SCVs to your ramp and put a marine behind. Hold position and your safe. No hold position and there is a chance the lings can come up if your not careful and you die. I think I've seen more gamebreaking "scv-holdposition on ramp" stuff than gamebreaking "hold lurker" stuff actually... Just because lings not coming up a ramp doesn't look as spectacular as lurkers killing 20 marines doesn't mean hold-lurkers change the game more.


You don't need hold position to do that. You can just move them there and it does the same thing.

Mostly I think it's just annyoing to have a rule that prohibits hold lurker though. That means someone has to watch the first person vod afterward and check if the zerg really used stop instead of hold before he can be declared as the winner. It's just to annyoing.


Almost no one uses spam stop. It's too hard. But given that more people might try to do that afterwards, this is still a small harm I'm willing to bite if I'm banning hold lurk. (Personally, I think just allowing allied mine is fine.)

Also, if you have lings and lurkers and overlords in the same controlgroup and hold (ok doesn't happen often, but still) should the zerg be declared loser just because he accidently hold his lurker? Even if it's hard you can make an innocent mistake to hold a lurker, but you sure as hell can't accidently change from enemy to ally.


And oops, I JUST SO HAPPENED to get rid of hold lurker while his mnm moved over me. That's a ridiculous argument.

I think lurker is allowed and allied mines not, just because it's easy and doesn't hurt the balance in any matchup. T can fight P okay without allied mines and T can fight Z good even with hold lurkers. If you think it's unfair, then you have to except to have balance brought up. T owns Z statwise in, if not all, then almost all starleagues.


This is an even worse argument. Balance considerations should have nothing to do with our rules; otherwise, should we institute rules like "Zerg cannot use hold lurker on Z >> T maps"? Should we not allow P users to use gas stack trick in PvZ because PvZ is imbalanced?

And point to me an example of any Starleague game where the only way Z could win was Hold Lurker. I guarantee you it would not have changed the outcome of any professional game.
What fun is it being cool if you can’t wear a sombrero?
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42954 Posts
June 19 2007 04:25 GMT
#20
I know you don't wanna hear this but using the diplomacy thing is external to the game engine. It is outside the game commands. Hold lurker is not. As for banned on effect, not execution. Hold lurkers is legal in progames and balance is fine. Allied mines is illegal and balance is still fine. So change nothing.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL Team Wars
19:00
Playoff - 4th vs 3rd
Team Bonyth vs Team Sziky
ZZZero.O77
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
JuggernautJason132
Nathanias 32
Lillekanin 5
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 13739
ZZZero.O 77
sSak 27
NaDa 4
Dota 2
NeuroSwarm136
LuMiX1
Counter-Strike
fl0m1431
Stewie2K483
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu531
Other Games
Grubby3899
FrodaN2398
ToD438
KnowMe175
Sick142
SortOf111
Organizations
Other Games
BasetradeTV41
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 20 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• musti20045 43
• StrangeGG 31
• RyuSc2 13
• Kozan
• Migwel
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
StarCraft: Brood War
• Airneanach48
• HerbMon 18
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota22647
League of Legends
• Doublelift4884
Other Games
• imaqtpie1160
• Scarra864
• Shiphtur196
Upcoming Events
Afreeca Starleague
12h 26m
Snow vs Sharp
Jaedong vs Mini
Wardi Open
13h 26m
OSC
1d 2h
Sparkling Tuna Cup
1d 12h
Afreeca Starleague
1d 12h
Light vs Speed
Larva vs Soma
PiGosaur Monday
2 days
LiuLi Cup
2 days
RSL Revival
3 days
Maru vs Reynor
Cure vs TriGGeR
The PondCast
3 days
RSL Revival
4 days
Zoun vs Classic
[ Show More ]
Korean StarCraft League
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
[BSL 2025] Weekly
5 days
BSL Team Wars
5 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Online Event
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-09-10
SEL Season 2 Championship
HCC Europe

Ongoing

BSL 20 Team Wars
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Points
ASL Season 20
CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
LASL Season 20
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1

Upcoming

2025 Chongqing Offline CUP
BSL Polish World Championship 2025
IPSL Winter 2025-26
BSL Season 21
SC4ALL: Brood War
BSL 21 Team A
SC4ALL: StarCraft II
EC S1
SL Budapest Major 2025
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
Thunderpick World Champ.
MESA Nomadic Masters Fall
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.