| Forum Index > BW General |
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
On June 19 2007 18:49 GrandInquisitor wrote: Can't do that on certain bases, unless you count putting the lurker so far away that it can only hit the edge of the minline. So for example, the mains on Python. nine times out of ten you will be able to do it | ||
|
Tensai176
Canada2061 Posts
Observer on turret, i believe is not significant enough to introduce a protoss dominance. Map imbalance? Maybe they did not realize the strategy involved that favoured different races, because they are making better balanced map now to favour all races. | ||
Live2Win
United States6657 Posts
You are arguing that the reason they are banning it is because they don't want one race to be dominant over another, or the other two. Sorry but there's no way they'd do something like that in a professional league. In no way would that be justifiable and I'm sure there would be a HUGE uproar if that turned out to be even slightly true. | ||
|
gameguard
Korea (South)2131 Posts
On June 19 2007 13:46 GrandInquisitor wrote: Read first post? That's not the point, the point is that those were banned when they were present in the game, right? And rightfully so.... I created the topic hoping that either 1) I could change a mind or two; 2) find out an argument that was convincing and that I didn't know before. Neither of those have happend yet, apparently, because TL's collective debating ability appears about the level of a wasted chimpanzee (though with more toilet humor). You start by invalidating any reasonable arguements as to why allied mine should be banned. When these arguements are mentioned, you cry and whine about people not reading the OP or whatever. There is a reason these reasons are pointed out consistently. They make sense. Like Cyric pointed out, you can look at it in two ways. The effect and the means. Perhaps its a combination of both. Mentioning allied lurker is idiotic. No one uses allied lurker. Just because it happens to have the same effect as hold lurker does not matter. If allied lurker somehow gave more advantages than hold lurker, im sure it would be banned. Regardless of what you think, changing game settings is way different than manipulating game mechanics. Personally, I think OGN/MBC/Kespa or whoever is making the rules weigh the balance issues, fair play, and the wow factor and come up with a decision. Wow factor meaning how spectacular these moves will look to the spectators. Using stack worker to help defend or attack is very "cool." It helps all races and is a skill the progamers can utilize. However, using gas stack mode to attack or pass through blocks is obviously imbalanced even though it may look cool. Of course, there are many decisions that will seem iffy. Using buildings to jump units over walls, for example, give terrans an advantage. Reason why its not banned? They obviously thought it does more good than harm to the overall sport. | ||
Chosi
Germany1302 Posts
Now focusing on those points.. 1. Lurker Hold: - It requires less then 5 clicks or one second to prepare and even less to let the trap go. - If done correct it can deal extreme damage, killing whole CG of MnM or even more. - Situations for it are given in any TvZ Match and sometimes in TvP 2. Scv Hold - It requires the same amount of attention as a lurker hold - If done correct it cane save you against an early lingrush, 9 pool etc - Only in TvZ and only if Z goes early agression 3. Allied Mines - It requires a lot of attention since none of your units will attack during that time, and a clever player will notice it if you dont attack manual with some of your units. - If done correct it can maximize the mines damage - Situations where you can focus your whole attention on one spot mined up, have absolutley no other units that should fight your opponent and could alert him of your tactic, your opponent has no form of detection with him and moves exactly where you predicted him to do *before* he does anything else .. very rare. From all this (only focusing on what it requires, where it can be used and what impaced it has on the game) the Lurker Hold is *by far* the best glitch, far better then hold scv oder allied mines. I agree with GI. But still I would not create a rule against lurker or scv hold. But from what it takes to execute allied mines, from all the risks and disadvantages you take from it and the time you have to focus on only that, I don't see a point in forbidding it. | ||
|
LastWish
2013 Posts
You can't tell mines what to do, stupid. And diplomacy should be resolved before the battle starts. It's only the games fault that it permits to ally(not just TvB or One on One). See like in W3, you chose teams beforehand and you can't change that in the game no more. | ||
|
Chosi
Germany1302 Posts
On June 20 2007 02:09 LastWish wrote: Why is this thread so long? You can't tell mines what to do, stupid. And diplomacy should be resolved before the battle starts. It's only the games fault that it permits to ally(not just TvB or One on One). See like in W3, you chose teams beforehand and you can't change that in the game no more. This thread is so long because nobody reads what he wrote and therefor does not understand what he is trying to say ... It's like everyone just reads "blabla allied mines .. bla bla lurker hold .. blabla forbidden!" and quickly types the first thing that comes to his mind before even reading the whole first post, not even talking about pages of other posts. | ||
|
L!MP
Australia2067 Posts
On June 19 2007 12:41 gds wrote: 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. QFT. one is possible by normal means, one is impossible. | ||
|
apan-a
71 Posts
| ||
|
Sr18
Netherlands1141 Posts
On June 20 2007 03:33 L!MP wrote: QFT. one is possible by normal means, one is impossible. Winner. | ||
|
HaFnium
United Kingdom1074 Posts
Sure, both of them can be used to ambush enemies, but when you are using allied lurkers, your whole army won't attack. Maybe this is the things that the authorities (who set the rules) dont want. I don't like my above approach in answering the question, my other approaches are being covered in the previous arguments, too lazy to say it again. =P | ||
|
silynxer
Germany439 Posts
Do you want that often to use allied mines in league games (how often are you playing 2v2 league games?)? Or do you urge to see it used by pros? If so why? If the answer to both points is no the only reason left to discuss this is the (still very righteous) fight for the right of the mine to be treated like lurker. I can't guarantee for sure but I guess mines are not too envious of lurkers. It seems the problem could be rather Protoss: Since they are so manly they want to give their opponent every advantage possible, the cheaper the enemy the better for their pride. [EDIT]: Thanks Chosi, I certainly got the wronge idea. I would still insist that it's futile to arguement that it should be allowed if hold lurker is allowed because the base for that is a righteous thought that you just can't apply in situations like this. Out of curiosity is unally allowed in 2v2? | ||
|
Chosi
Germany1302 Posts
On June 20 2007 06:05 silynxer wrote: I don't see exactly for what you are fighting. Do you want that often to use allied mines in league games (how often are you playing 2v2 league games?)? I think you have a wrong idea of allied mines, it has noting to do with 2v2 games. This is allied mines (at it's best): http://teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=55214 Direct Download: http://chsim.net/spboard/id/dong_u/files/AlliedMineOnStarleague.wmv | ||
|
~OpZ~
United States3652 Posts
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. 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.  Gj | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
--> In a true 1 on 1 game can you allie the opponent? No. How can you use allied mines when it's just 2 people. In war you do not ally your opponent and set mines so when they walk over you just pwn them. If we could do that then Bush would be more popular. --> Holding lurkers was something blizzard DID intend to have in the game. This is a normal function that all units in the game posses, and this is no different for the Zerg Lurker. You are given the option to hold your units, but you cannot ally your opponent. | ||
|
Kacas
Brazil3143 Posts
lurkers can be done with stop button....allies have to be set before game WTF????????????? the reason is simple! IS TO MAKE THE GAME BETTER! hold lurker make the game more balanced! imagine being impossible to hold lurker... terran could go out with 12rine+4medic and rape everywhere. just have to dodge the lurkers. if you dont think so i can go on this example, but i think is understandable by most people. allied mine make the game more imbalanced! i mean...txt would be only about vultures + wraiths..would be just like zxz.... ok...i know that txt could be like zxz, etc...but i think the way it is now is better then it would be. that's why hold lurker is accepted and allied mine is not! SEE THE CONSEQUENCES AND WHAT IS BETTER FOR STARCRAFT | ||
|
notdragoon
66 Posts
On June 19 2007 13:23 GrandInquisitor wrote: So you think allied lurkers should be banned, while hold lurkers shouldn't? Does that really make sense, considering they do the same thing? You don't need hold position to do that. You can just move them there and it does the same thing. 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.) And oops, I JUST SO HAPPENED to get rid of hold lurker while his mnm moved over me. That's a ridiculous argument. 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. *ding ding ding* winner... | ||
|
Kacas
Brazil3143 Posts
balance is the main thing to go into consideration or do you think argument like "ally would not occur on a real war" and "but with the future technology, mines could be controled by distance" are real arguments? its a GAME! | ||
|
anch
United States5457 Posts
| ||
|
[X]Ken~D
377 Posts
 If someone did spam S for lurkers, would u complain? What if they did hold lurkers instead? Most important is if you didn't know which they use, why does it even matter. Both are valid tactics. Good luck doing allied mines in ladder games. EDIT: someone been losing way too much to hold lurkers  | ||
| ||
WardiTV Invitational
WardiTV May Group C+B
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Weekly #91
SKillous vs PercivalLIVE!
ByuN vs TBD
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Calm Dota 2 11307Hyuk 873Zeus  674Last  426Stork 410PianO 225Mini 169Pusan 163TY 137Hyun 110[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games Organizations Counter-Strike StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Chat StarLeague
BSL Season 20
MadiNho vs dxtr13
Gypsy vs Dark
Circuito Brasileiro de…
Afreeca Starleague
BeSt vs Light
Wardi Open
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs Soulkey
WardiTV Invitational
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
.
