|
http://www.sclegacy.com/showthread.php?t=774
SCLegacy is partnering up with euphNET to bring you a StarCraft: BroodWar 1v1 Tournament in Sunnyvale, California.
SCLegacy Thanksgiving Tournament
Date: Saturday, November 26
Time: Sign-ups are at 11:30am, Matches begin at noon
Location: euphNET v1 at 612 S. Mary Avenue, Sunnyvale, CA
Price: $12 entry fee
Number of Players: 16 maximum
Prizes:
1st Place = 50% of entrance fees
2nd Place = 25% of entrance fees
3rd Place = 10% of entrance fees
Every person will receive one raffle ticket with a chance to win an nVidia GeForce 6600GT OC graphics card (a $250 value). Chances to win are 1 in 200.
Maps:
1.) Lost Temple 2.4
2.) Luna
3.) Neo Forbidden Zone
4.) Ride of Valkyries
5.) Nostalgia
6.) Neo Forte
Rules:
- Double Elimination.
- Best out of 3.
- First match will be on Lost Temple 2.4
- Second and third match maps will be chosen using the following method: Each player interchangeably chooses two maps to eliminate from the last five listed maps above. The last map left will be the map to play on.
- Random Seeding.
- Any other intentional practice that is determined as unfair and/or usage of a program bug, at the sole discretion of the board of referees, can result in a warning at the minimum or loss by default for the offending player.
- The following are not allowed: allied mines, stacked peons, turret stalling, flying templar.
- In case of disconnection, a restart may occur unless there is a clear winner agreed upon by both players.
Upon discovery of any player committing any violations regarded as unfair play, that player will be disqualified from the tournament.
If you are interested in participating in the tournament and/or you would like a reminder the day before the tournament, email mnm@sclegacy.com.
Check out www.euphnet.com for more information.
Update: Results and pictures are here - http://www.sclegacy.com/showthread.php?t=815
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
cali always has awsome tourneys!
/end envy
|
|
|
51515 Posts
eh you should allow hold lurker
|
i doubt anyone was planning on using that anyway
|
United States4991 Posts
Let's have some of these at UW please 
|
Yeah I don't see why hold lurker should be banned
|
i copied wcg rules thats why. i pasted this everywhere already n i dont see much reason to change it.
|
United States4991 Posts
So can people use the attack building in the fog of war to let the lurkers not attack?
Edit: Fixed the ? since I forgot which keyboard setting I was on T_T
|
how is the above any different from the other bugs - "allied mines, stacked peons, ol/lurk stop position bug, turret stalling, flying templar"? I believe that falls under "Any other intentional practice that is determined as unfair and/or usage of a program bug, at the sole discretion of the board of referees, can result in a warning at the minimum or loss by default for the offending player."
In general, if I see something that seems unfair in the tournament, we're probably going to get a rematch going or figure out what is the most fair thing to do.
|
I have plans for giveaways... ^^ Everyone who participates will get something out of this.
|
hold lurkers is a completely legit and fair strategy. ure being ignorant and noob by not allowing it.
|
These are world cyber games rules god damnit. -_- I doubt anyone who goes was planning to use it anyway. When was the last time YOU used it?
|
On November 09 2005 14:45 mnm wrote:
how is the above any different from the other bugs - "allied mines, stacked peons, ol/lurk stop position bug, turret stalling, flying templar"?
In a real game battle, do you think you can just tell your mines to not attack until you tell it to? No
In a real game battle, do you think you can just tell your peons to stack on top of each others and attack? No
In a real game battle, do you think you can just tell your enemy's turrets to not attack? No
In a real game battle, do you think you can just tell your templars to fly? No
In a real game battle, do you think you can tell your lurkers to not attack until you tell it to? Yes
|
United States37500 Posts
On November 10 2005 09:17 tfeign wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2005 14:45 mnm wrote:
how is the above any different from the other bugs - "allied mines, stacked peons, ol/lurk stop position bug, turret stalling, flying templar"? In a real game battle, do you think you can just tell your mines to not attack until you tell it to? No In a real game battle, do you think you can just tell your mines to stack on top of each others and attack? No In a real game battle, do you think you can just tell your enemy's turrets to not attack? No In a real game battle, do you think you can just tell your templars to fly? No In a real game battle, do you think you can tell your lurkers to not attack until you tell it to? Yes
Oh, the irony of "real game battle" as a way to prove a point. ;x
|
we don't live in the real world buddy.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 09 2005 14:45 mnm wrote:
how is the above any different from the other bugs - "allied mines, stacked peons, ol/lurk stop position bug, turret stalling, flying templar"? I believe that falls under "Any other intentional practice that is determined as unfair and/or usage of a program bug, at the sole discretion of the board of referees, can result in a warning at the minimum or loss by default for the offending player."
In general, if I see something that seems unfair in the tournament, we're probably going to get a rematch going or figure out what is the most fair thing to do.
On November 09 2005 14:45 mnm wrote:
how is the above any different from the other bugs - "allied mines, stacked peons, ol/lurk stop position bug, turret stalling, flying templar"? I believe that falls under "Any other intentional practice that is determined as unfair and/or usage of a program bug, at the sole discretion of the board of referees, can result in a warning at the minimum or loss by default for the offending player."
In general, if I see something that seems unfair in the tournament, we're probably going to get a rematch going or figure out what is the most fair thing to do.
The only tournament that doesn't allow hold lurkers = WCG.
EVERY korean league allows them, hell, koreans used them in the WCG prelims ; [
And almost everyone thinks it's fair +_+a
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On November 10 2005 09:12 mnm wrote:
These are world cyber games rules god damnit. -_- I doubt anyone who goes was planning to use it anyway. When was the last time YOU used it?
Last time I played zerg I think ;P!!!!!!
I use them all the time ;p
|
you = collegebored (i was referring to him). but really can someone explain to me how it is different from other bugs that are not allowed? in this case, should every exploitable bw bug be allowed in tournaments?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
this one is just traditionally accepted :/
|
On November 10 2005 09:33 mnm wrote:
we don't live in the real world buddy.
It doesn't mean that we have to make it more fake.
Lurker hold is not a bug. Why should you not be able to tell your lurker not to attack until you want it to? PGT allows lurker hold, WGT allows lurker hold. Every Korean league allows lurker hold.
It's not that big of a deal though so whatever
|
United States4991 Posts
Yeah I'm not even going, and I certainly don't have any reason to care about the rules in it. I just don't see any reason not to allow it 
|
claiming that holding lurkers is a bug is like saying holding workers is a bug. It is isnt a bug because it is fairly obvious that these units are meant to hold, just a little bit more difficult..
|
can we get our qa game testers over here? a bug is something that happens in game that isnt intended by the developer(programmer/level designer/etc). My question is not whether or not this is a bug. It doesnt matter if it is or not. Its just like a gene mutation in a human. If it doesn't have huge effects then maybe its not a big deal but if there are dangerous consequences then something should be done.
Now regardless of whether or not you are going, I'd like feedback on this matter. Why is the hold lurker bug accepted but others arent?
I think the big reason why these bugs are not allowed is because even if some people think its ok, there are also some people who don't think it is. Thus, to even things out, it isn't allowed just so nobody would complain of unfairness.
One example is that bug where reaver scarab upgrades were able to be upgraded more times than intended and a lot of people thought it was unfair that reach did this at the blizzcon match and wondered why blizzard didn't do anything about it. This is a bug that occurs in this particular map and any protoss player could do it. Why is this case unfair and not others?
Along those lines, why is it fair that Nada was allowed to push his mnms through the mineral line with his barracks in his game vs yellow. This is also a bug but it is accepted by people and even thought of as pimpest play. Why is this case fair and not others?
|
nada's rax push isnt a bug. its game mechanics MEANT to be in the game so units dont get stuck under buildings.
sc engine allows 200upgrades (i think, whatever the number is) so it depends on how u intend the map to work. in blizzcon's particular case it was a MAP bug, not a game bug.
flying templar wasnt meant to be in the game. period
allied mines arent always possible (1v1 mode) thus its an illegal manipulation of the game
stacked peons are only supposed to happen when in process of gathering resources. thus peon defense vs ling/zlot or whatever is fine, however when they run off stacked and kill your shit its an obvious bug.
turret bug is the only thing im unsure about. because logicaly its possible that in that particular spot turret cannot target the obs, however the fact that it cant target any other shit shows that its prolly a bug.
hold lurkers are always possible, make perfect sense, and can be a game winning move, why would anyone argue against it?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
It was a map bug caused by using a non-staredit map editor wasn't it ;o?
|
hold lurkers is not a bug its the same thing as choking you ramp with say a zealot and a probe and hitting hold position. normally a probe cannot do this but with a zealot he can. Not a bug but simply the way the game works.
|
Lets try a different approach to this...
Do you think allied mines should be allowed? Why or why not?
Do you think stacked peons should be allowed? Why or why not?
Do you think the OL/lurk stop position should be allowed? Why or why not?
Do you think turret stalling should be allowed? Why or why not?
Do you think flying templar should be allowed? Why or why not?
Please answer all and not just one. kthx.
|
|
|
im not arguing im inquiring. can someone send me rules for korean leagues then? im trying to do research here to figure out the best solution and not just change rules because a bunch of kids are whining. =p
|
Screw the argument, I'm going. LoL.
|
|
|
How about people just respect and play by a tourney's rules? Michelle's putting a lot of effort into setting this up, and she doesn't have to. Honestly, who cares if hold lurker sub-rule 1.1518 b section C is a no instead of a yes?
|
does anyone know who named "manner pylon" first time?
|
On November 10 2005 15:55 mnm wrote:
Do you think allied mines should be allowed? Why or why not?
No, you have to open a menu to get to how you do it.
On November 10 2005 15:55 mnm wrote:Do you think stacked peons should be allowed? Why or why not?
If it is where you defend with them and they just get in the way, sure why not? You don't really have to do anything out of the way to do it, and it might be the only possible way to stop a rush you weren't expecting.
On November 10 2005 15:55 mnm wrote:Do you think the OL/lurk stop position should be allowed? Why or why not?
Yes, you can do it to a peon, you can do it to a lurker. Also, you don't have to really go out of your way to get your lurkers to hold position.
On November 10 2005 15:55 mnm wrote:Do you think turret stalling should be allowed? Why or why not?
No only one unit can do this.
On November 10 2005 15:55 mnm wrote:Do you think flying templar should be allowed? Why or why not?
No, this is obviously an exploit. You have to go out of your way to do it.
Holding a turret is something only an obs can do. Holding position with something that doesn't have it on the menu is something that everybody can do.
|
On November 10 2005 15:25 cava wrote:
hold lurkers is not a bug its the same thing as choking you ramp with say a zealot and a probe and hitting hold position. normally a probe cannot do this but with a zealot he can. Not a bug but simply the way the game works.
quoted for truth. its EXACTLY the same thing
|
WGTour Rules -
Disallowed bugs:
Hydralisk Stack
Allied Mines (using optical flare on them is fine)
Observer on turret
SCV/Drone/Probe stack
Allowed bugs:
Hold Lurker
hmmm... (pgtour is down i cant check =/)
btw, I added a poll on the front page. kthx.
|
aside from the lurker hold position debate, who from TL is going?
I'll be in berkeley during thanksgiving weekend so i'll be there, despite the fact that I play war3  . Hope to have lots of fun, thanks to mnm for hosting this event, it takes a lot of effort.
|
People always say if allied mines is illegal, so should hold lurker. The argument I heard from a long time ago is this:
The 1v1 tournament games should be played in "one on one" mode. The only reason they are made in UMS is so the judge can ob the game. It's still supposed to be played the same as the one on one mode. In this mode, you can not ally/vision/ally victory your opponent. In this mode, allied mines would not be possible, while hold (or stop) lurkers would still be possible.
This is what I'd like to add on:
Anyway, lurkers have the stop command, while mines do not. The game never intended for you to control when the mine detonates, but it does let you stop the lurker from attacking manually.
|
On November 10 2005 19:52 PanoRaMa wrote:aside from the lurker hold position debate, who from TL is going? I'll be in berkeley during thanksgiving weekend so i'll be there, despite the fact that I play war3 . Hope to have lots of fun, thanks to mnm for hosting this event, it takes a lot of effort.
i have 7 ppl who are currently almost sure to go not including me but including you (counting from ppl who told me or ppl im gonna kill if they dont go.. i hope they dont change their minds later). 3 others that have a high likelihood of going. 9 people who are extremely flaky sounding maybes. 3 ppl who flat out rejected me. 9 people I havent heard from. and.. a few ppl here and there who said they might go in the diff forums but they didnt gimme their emails.
My goal is 16 people.
|
Lurker Hold is a bug.
There is no debating this fact, it is a bug because no other unit in this game stops firing simply from being on the hold position. Hold position is not supposed to stop a unit from firing, it's to stop the unit from moving. Since burrowed Lurkers are already stationary, they don't have a hold command when they are burrowed since there is no need for one. "hold" was never meant to facilitate non-attacking.
The real debate is whether or not you want to ban it from your tournament as it does add a VERY SLIGHT something more strategical to the game. I'm sure that's why WGT allows it, since the bug doesn't detract that much from the game.
It's up to you, if you want to ban all known bugs for the sake of consistency in your policy and play it the way the creators wanted you to play it, then by all means ban lurker hold as it is a bug. If you want to be lenient, then go ahead and allow it. It's really not that big of a deal.
But for everyone here who's saying that it was intended, you are wrong because it is definitely a bug.
|
Okay, according to research, arguments and majority vote, I will allow stop lurk bug. Now stop complaining -_-.
|
I would have to have some doubts about your statement that the bug is not intended by Blizzard. If it is not intended by Blizzard, the lurker hold "bug" would most likely have been patched by Blizzard a long time ago.
It's true that originally, lurker hold was not intended. However, when the "bug" was found, it added a new dimension of strategy to the game and I think Blizzard agrees with it to the point where they've actually intended on keeping the bug, due to the lack of any effort to patch the bug when it could have most likely been very easily patched a long time ago.
I can see why allied mines, stacked peons, and turret stalling has not been patched, simply because patching these would be incredibly difficult, and would most likely involved some major rehash to the unit AI system. However if Blizzard intended the game to be lurker-hold-free once the bug was found, they could have easily made a patch to fix this a long time ago when the bug was first discovered.
|
On November 10 2005 23:35 tfeign wrote:
I would have to have some doubts about your statement that the bug is not intended by Blizzard. If it is not intended by Blizzard, the lurker hold "bug" would most likely have been patched by Blizzard a long time ago.
It's true that originally, lurker hold was not intended. However, when the "bug" was found, it added a new dimension of strategy to the game and I think Blizzard agrees with it to the point where they've actually intended on keeping the bug, due to the lack of any effort to patch the bug when it could have most likely been very easily patched a long time ago.
I can see why allied mines, stacked peons, and turret stalling has not been patched, simply because patching these would be incredibly difficult, and would most likely involved some major rehash to the unit AI system. However if Blizzard intended the game to be lurker-hold-free once the bug was found, they could have easily made a patch to fix this a long time ago when the bug was first discovered.
Honestly not to be rude, but you'd have to be an idiot to assume Blizzard "intended" for you to hold position with another unit selected to prevent your lurker from attacking. At most it is a non-game breaking bug with the unintended side effect of making StarCraft more interesting, you can at least admit that.
|
Would it be any different if someone just repeatedly hit S in order to emulate Hold-Lurker? Would that be wrong too?
|
On November 08 2005 19:32 mnm wrote:http://www.sclegacy.com/showthread.php?t=774Every person will receive one raffle ticket with a chance to win an nVidia GeForce 6600GT OC graphics card (a $250 value). Chances to win are 1 in 200.
6600 GT is not worth $250
GL in that tourney :D
|
On November 10 2005 21:03 XG3 wrote:
Lurker Hold is a bug.
There is no debating this fact, it is a bug because no other unit in this game stops firing simply from being on the hold position. Hold position is not supposed to stop a unit from firing, it's to stop the unit from moving. Since burrowed Lurkers are already stationary, they don't have a hold command when they are burrowed since there is no need for one. "hold" was never meant to facilitate non-attacking.
The real debate is whether or not you want to ban it from your tournament as it does add a VERY SLIGHT something more strategical to the game. I'm sure that's why WGT allows it, since the bug doesn't detract that much from the game.
It's up to you, if you want to ban all known bugs for the sake of consistency in your policy and play it the way the creators wanted you to play it, then by all means ban lurker hold as it is a bug. If you want to be lenient, then go ahead and allow it. It's really not that big of a deal.
But for everyone here who's saying that it was intended, you are wrong because it is definitely a bug.
No you're wrong.
Long story cut short, your theory is
"Hold Lurker is a bug because no other attacking units seize firing/attacking when it's in hold position."
You're basically assuming it is a bug because it is the 'only' unit that acts differently when it is in hold position.
Just because it is the minority, you can't argue that it is a bug. It obviously has different capabilities and functions since it is one of the few units added when expansion set was introduced and since it is the only unit that attacks from underground.
Your theory is only correct if lulker itself is a bug unit to start with.
Because it is the only attacking unit that does not hold by pressing h and since it is the only unit different it is a bug unit? hell no.
Probes and drones don't hold by pressing H, but they hold when selected with either overlords or attacking units therefore it is a bug? I don't think so. Different units require different commands, that's all.
Banning Hold lurkers is ridiculous. Every units are awarded with hold function, don't take that right away from lurkers which equally share the same right.
OGN had a discussion about it before and they concluded that hold lurkers should be allowed in tourney. They know 28975294542 times more about starcraft then some random WCG organisers.
|
Forget about the word "bug" or "intended by blizzard or not". ANYTHING you do in game aside from using a secondary program is legal. Whether you use allied mines, hold lurker, float templar it doesn't matter. All are part of the game. And until a patch changes it thats just too bad. Therefore it is unfair to ban any of these since they are are all part of the game we know and love, Starcraft.
|
Lurkers don't have a hold button because they're stuck in place when they can attack. I think I'm gonna go with the Blizzard employee's thoughts on this as opposed to someone who saw a discussion about it.
|
you guys are morons if you think hold lurker isn't a bug.
Hold position does not stop things from attacking. Yet the idea is to stop a lurker from attacking, not to stop it from moving
It is however an accepted bug. You can stop with your "in REAL LIFE my science fiction video game unit would be able to do this!"
If you follow that completely retarded logic, then it isn't far fetched for <insert favorite race> to have developed a technology to make them see everything, therefore I can maphack
|
On November 11 2005 00:39 XG3 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2005 23:35 tfeign wrote:
I would have to have some doubts about your statement that the bug is not intended by Blizzard. If it is not intended by Blizzard, the lurker hold "bug" would most likely have been patched by Blizzard a long time ago.
It's true that originally, lurker hold was not intended. However, when the "bug" was found, it added a new dimension of strategy to the game and I think Blizzard agrees with it to the point where they've actually intended on keeping the bug, due to the lack of any effort to patch the bug when it could have most likely been very easily patched a long time ago.
I can see why allied mines, stacked peons, and turret stalling has not been patched, simply because patching these would be incredibly difficult, and would most likely involved some major rehash to the unit AI system. However if Blizzard intended the game to be lurker-hold-free once the bug was found, they could have easily made a patch to fix this a long time ago when the bug was first discovered. Honestly not to be rude, but you'd have to be an idiot to assume Blizzard "intended" for you to hold position with another unit selected to prevent your lurker from attacking. At most it is a non-game breaking bug with the unintended side effect of making StarCraft more interesting, you can at least admit that.
Blizzard did NOT intend lurker hold originally.
But I cannot see why by any stretch it can be idiotic to assume that when the bug was discovered, Blizzard intended to keep it due to lack of any effort to patch it.
|
Okay okay! stop argueing! MnM already said she will allow hold lurker, what are we doing here?! 
We should be discussing who's going to bring camera, beer, popcorn and other craps right now, it's a fun event that we should be happily anticipating, not shouting over. 
|
mr happy man run if ur going could you email me or pm me ur email so i can keep a somewhat accurate count of people who are most likely going and/or interested and i can send you an email reminder before the event.
I also need help finding the latest and most accepted/bug free/etc versions of these maps to use at the tournament:
1.) Lost Temple 2.4
2.) Luna
3.) Neo Forbidden Zone
4.) Ride of Valkyries
5.) Nostalgia
6.) Neo Forte
Please link me or send it to me through email. I would much appreciate it. Thanks!
PS. I already stated my case on the bug thing and feel no need to reiterate. I still hold to my original opinion.
|
On November 10 2005 21:03 XG3 wrote:
Lurker Hold is a bug.
There is no debating this fact, it is a bug because no other unit in this game stops firing simply from being on the hold position. Hold position is not supposed to stop a unit from firing, it's to stop the unit from moving. Since burrowed Lurkers are already stationary, they don't have a hold command when they are burrowed since there is no need for one. "hold" was never meant to facilitate non-attacking.
The real debate is whether or not you want to ban it from your tournament as it does add a VERY SLIGHT something more strategical to the game. I'm sure that's why WGT allows it, since the bug doesn't detract that much from the game.
It's up to you, if you want to ban all known bugs for the sake of consistency in your policy and play it the way the creators wanted you to play it, then by all means ban lurker hold as it is a bug. If you want to be lenient, then go ahead and allow it. It's really not that big of a deal.
But for everyone here who's saying that it was intended, you are wrong because it is definitely a bug.
IIRC, cloaked ghosts dont shoot when stopped or in hold position. This was built into the game to not give away the position of a cloaked ghost, because sometimes you don't want your opponent to know that the ghost is there so u can surprise them with a nuke without giving them extra warning by accidentally attacking.
the line of thinking is the same with hold lurkers, u dont want to let your opponent know they are there, so ur attack can be a surprise and not give them warning.
|
On November 11 2005 12:04 88)WhyYouKickMyDog wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2005 21:03 XG3 wrote:
Lurker Hold is a bug.
There is no debating this fact, it is a bug because no other unit in this game stops firing simply from being on the hold position. Hold position is not supposed to stop a unit from firing, it's to stop the unit from moving. Since burrowed Lurkers are already stationary, they don't have a hold command when they are burrowed since there is no need for one. "hold" was never meant to facilitate non-attacking.
The real debate is whether or not you want to ban it from your tournament as it does add a VERY SLIGHT something more strategical to the game. I'm sure that's why WGT allows it, since the bug doesn't detract that much from the game.
It's up to you, if you want to ban all known bugs for the sake of consistency in your policy and play it the way the creators wanted you to play it, then by all means ban lurker hold as it is a bug. If you want to be lenient, then go ahead and allow it. It's really not that big of a deal.
But for everyone here who's saying that it was intended, you are wrong because it is definitely a bug. IIRC, cloaked ghosts dont shoot when stopped or in hold position. This was built into the game to not give away the position of a cloaked ghost, because sometimes you don't want your opponent to know that the ghost is there so u can surprise them with a nuke without giving them extra warning by accidentally attacking. the line of thinking is the same with hold lurkers, u dont want to let your opponent know they are there, so ur attack can be a surprise and not give them warning.
Actually, cloaked ghosts attack in hold position
But if you don't put them on hold position, they don't acquire targets.
|
I just wanted to inform you of the following updates regarding the tournament:
- We will be using the WGTour maps in the tournament. You have two weeks to practice! Here a link to the map pack that will be used: http://www.sclegacy.com/maps/SCL_1126_Tournament_Maps.zip
- We will be giving away goodies/raffle prizes. EVERYONE who participates in the tournament is guaranteed to walk away with something.
- We are allowing the hold lurk bug.
- If you wish to reserve a spot, you can pay the entry fee ahead of time. Use this link to do so: http://www.euphnet.com/paypal.php
If you have any questions, let me know.
|
If hold lurker was meant, why did they make it so you have to have other units to hold them?
|
Same reason why probes and scvs need other units to hold them.
|
Well that should tip you off that holding position by selecting two different units is a bug. If they intended for probes and scvs to hold position, logically they would give them that command. I honestly can't comprehend your train of thought here that it isn't a bug.
Also, the concept some of you aren't grasping is that "hold position" has nothing to do with attacking. Hold position is meant to keep a unit stationary, as in not move even when provoked.
So if you stop and think about it, not only is Hold Lurker a bug, it is actually TWO BUGS IN ONE:
1) you are able to hold position by grouping it with another unit
2) your lurker doesn't attack for some reason while it's in hold position
It is such a blatant/obvious bug that I shall now give it SUPER-BUG status. Two wrongs don't make a right; two bugs do not make it not a bug. Everything points to it being a programming oversight that won't be fixed because it's not game breaking enough to warrant anyone's time or energy.
By the way, why is everyone so adamant about this being legal? Someone else pointed out that there is already a way to do this with "legal" game mechanics: by spamming "stop". Did you want hold lurker simply because it makes it easier for you to pull off? There is a difference between StarCraft and Warcraft III you know, I'll let you figure out what that is for yourself..
|
On November 13 2005 02:02 XG3 wrote:
Well that should tip you off that holding position by selecting two different units is a bug. If they intended for probes and scvs to hold position, logically they would give them that command. I honestly can't comprehend your train of thought here that it isn't a bug.
Also, the concept some of you aren't grasping is that "hold position" has nothing to do with attacking. Hold position is meant to keep a unit stationary, as in not move even when provoked.
So if you stop and think about it, not only is Hold Lurker a bug, it is actually TWO BUGS IN ONE:
1) you are able to hold position by grouping it with another unit
2) your lurker doesn't attack for some reason while it's in hold position
It is such a blatant/obvious bug that I shall now give it SUPER-BUG status. Two wrongs don't make a right; two bugs do not make it not a bug. Everything points to it being a programming oversight that won't be fixed because it's not game breaking enough to warrant anyone's time or energy.
By the way, why is everyone so adamant about this being legal? Someone else pointed out that there is already a way to do this with "legal" game mechanics: by spamming "stop". Did you want hold lurker simply because it makes it easier for you to pull off? There is a difference between StarCraft and Warcraft III you know, I'll let you figure out what that is for yourself..
Well, since XG3 gives hold lurker super bug status debate OVER.
1) As said before, miners act in the same way. Do you think that hold probes should be banned?
2) Lurkers are different from every other unit in the game. Vastly different. Your line of reasoning is that since it acts differently from other units in hold position, then it is a bug. But it also acts differently when it's not on hold position.
I think the real debate is whether it IS (not was) intentionally allowed by blizzard, not because they're just too lazy to patch. And the only way to figure that out is to ask them.
|
whatever the fuck ever you newbs. Hold lurker is a fuckin bug and shouldn't be allowed in anything. I think it's ridiculous that people whine and cry about allied mines being bad.."because you have to go to the menu and ally the player". News flash, if it wasn't for a BUG in the game, you'd have to do that with lurkers too. Yes, you tards, it is obviously a bug.. lurker is the ONLY unit that won't attack when being held in posistion with overlord, yada yada. "omgomgomg they have it in starleague!!" who gives a shit. This isn't the starleague, and no one there is a high enough calibur terran that someone would have to use hold lurker to stand a chance. Hold lurker is the prayer of newbs trying to get lucky if you ask me..there's no art or skill required in abusing the BUG.
oh well, i just skimmed through the posts and it's pretty much been said. However, I'd just like to point and laugh at the ridiculousness of what -_- said in the post before mine.
Should hold pos on workers be banned? No, you puts. Hold posistion, when used with a worker, DOES THE CORRECT EFFECT. It makes the unit HOLD POSISTION like every other unit on hold posistion does.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
EXCEPT THAT THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO HOLD POSITION EITHER D S D S A S D F
|
Gotta love TEH caps. Hold lurkers should be allowed since every pro uses it. Valid point!
I agree though.
|
|
|
You can also stop the lurker from attacking it by telling to to attack a building out of range in fog of war. I guess this makes it set its target on that unit and that unit only, so it won't attack any other units. In this case, it's not a matter of hold position bugging out and not serving its original purpose of keeping a unit in place.
Hasuwar, allied mines is a lot more devastating, but I never complained about it being banned either. The only thing I said before this was an argument I read about it before that might give more insight to it.
|
On November 13 2005 10:46 dronebabo wrote:
you cant really argue that is a correct effect, seeing as theres no hold position command for workers either. braindead? hold posistion is the act of making a unit hold its posistion.. a worker on hold posistion, holds its posistion...there is no arguement, it is a -fact-..
just like it's a fact that hold lurker is a bug
you guys realize that the reason there is no hold posistion on lurkers, is because they're automatically in hold posistion when they're burried, because that's the only thing they're supposed to do
and blind, how is it more devistating?
|
On November 13 2005 06:15 -_- wrote:
Well, since XG3 gives hold lurker super bug status debate OVER.
1) As said before, miners act in the same way. Do you think that hold probes should be banned?
First of all I never said hold lurker should be banned, I simply proved that it is a bug. MINERS holding position is part of THE SAME BUG. It is also a bug. They are not supposed to be able to hold position, which is why they don't have a hold position command. Wow people like you never cease to amaze me.
2) Lurkers are different from every other unit in the game. Vastly different. Your line of reasoning is that since it acts differently from other units in hold position, then it is a bug. But it also acts differently when it's not on hold position.
The fact that lurkers "act different from every other unit" is irrelevant. Every unit stops when you use the "stop" command. Every unit attacks when you use the "attack" command. Every unit stays where he's at when you use the "hold position" command. Hold position again has NOTHING TO DO WITH ATTACKING, it's only purpose is to keep a unit stationary. Thus any other abnormal behavior caused by hold position (the only known one being hold lurker) is a bug.
You can also stop the lurker from attacking it by telling to to attack a building out of range in fog of war. I guess this makes it set its target on that unit and that unit only, so it won't attack any other units. In this case, it's not a matter of hold position bugging out and not serving its original purpose of keeping a unit in place.
Having a lurker attack a building under the fog of war making it stop attacking nearby enemies is also a bug. The lurker is a buggy unit because its attacks are very different than others. Arguments like this can be avoided if everyone uses common sense instead of giving irrational reasons why you think you're right.
And again, there is a perfectly legal way to create the same effect: spamming Stop. It takes a little more effort and skill but it works so why not use that instead of exploiting a bug?
|
On November 13 2005 14:19 hasuwar wrote:
and blind, how is it more devistating? TvT. Pretty sure it was banned in OSL for a reason.
|
*bump*
Reminder: my tournament is this Saturday! I need more players!
|
*bump* last reminder. this shit is goin down tomorrow. come!
|
lemme see ya body go bump bump bump
|
It isn't really a bug. You are just issuing the hold position command to a unit. It is just harder to issue the command to a lurker than say, a zeal, for instance =p
|
cry babies, all of you.
I use Protoss, and I dont have a problem with hold lurker & allied mines.
|
yeah and im terran, who gets fucked over teh most by hold lurkers, i also advokate for it
|
What's the progress of this tournament? Who's there?
|
United States12240 Posts
On November 26 2005 22:47 Blind wrote:
What's the progress of this tournament? Who's there?
Yosh got first place.
Froz got second.
Some guy Dizzle who cheesed every game got third =]
mnm was there, collegebored was there, sMaq was there, Aeterna[TmG] was there, and can't remember who else.
|
So you were Dizzle?
|
United States12240 Posts
On November 26 2005 23:49 Blind wrote:So you were Dizzle?
No I wish I got third! I was Excal_Z (duh).
|
Damn, i was going to go with a friend but then we woke up too late =[
sorry
|
i really hope newyork will have this kinda tourney around christmas ;; i will be in NY atm
|
I would've went to this one but it's in North Cal., around 6 hours from me. That would be cool if someone organized one for Christmas, though. It is bigger than Thanksgiving afterall.
|
|
|
yay yosh !!! too bad no wcg though >=(
|
make sure to announce the replays
|
United States12240 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.sclegacy.com/mnm/images/SCLtourney.jpg)
