Defiler Tour #59 [75$] - Page 3

On June 12 2013 01:40 Letherebelight wrote:
it's just you guys don't have game sense. That's why you always lose to amateur korean players. Korean class is different. Imagine. How can level of korean be same with you guys? korean train with each other, and you just play on iccup where half of users are under the level of 10 years old of korean child

On June 12 2013 05:31 uT)WhistleR wrote:
would a protoss stack 2 observers and send them into terran main over 2 turrets when terran goes m&m without even scouting that there was turrets? dont know much about pvt but that in itself seems very suspicious to me

On June 12 2013 05:46 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:
i not watched any of the reps. but i guess is standard to have turrets in terran base.no ? ;;

On June 12 2013 04:11 dRaW wrote:


actually no, he did goon scout in both and had different reactions to both. I beat neagle pvp last season, and if you check his ladder history ON iccup he is not that good
http://www.iccup.com/starcraft/gamingprofile/Neagle.html

So how does a not very good player win defiler tour? Also, if you watch more of his games you will see patterns of blind counters. He won sziky once but that is one event, with a very unusual build.

I also find it funny that you mention we're losing to korean amateurs, most of them have been caught hacking. Cindy beat me 2-1 he was aka Sunday and banned from iccup. I wonder if he can win without hack? I bet not.

On June 12 2013 11:14 andreyyisbestandrey wrote:


I guess he means that it is suspicious that Neagle would send two observers to ensure he "scouts" in a game where Terran does such an unusual build.

I am watching this game right now (it is the DT #59 Final Neagle vs. Boss.Weekly) and I am not so convinced it was a hacker move. His observers did live just long enough to luckily see an additional barracks being built above the factory. A true hacker who wants to appear to not hack would have sent two observers to a vulnerable place like the very back of the Terran base.

Actually, the real reason why I don't suspect that Neagle hacks comes just after this observer move, when the Terran was moving out with his tanks. He left all of his tanks very vulnerable. It was 11 dragoons against 6 unsieged tanks at 9:20 in the game. A hacker would have destroyed the tanks and ended the game there.

I understand sometimes when you play a hacker, you can "feel" you are playing a hacker. So I look for any more hacker moves. At the ~21:00 minute mark the Terran moves out to P's ninja 12 base, toss had no observer in front of Terran to see move out but he did have zealot patrolling that did see. Did Neagle reposition his army and react to the move out a little too quickly? Not having a rewind function makes watching a specific move several times less than ideal, but necessary if one is to take such accusations seriously. It is moves like these I would find suspicious, but most any player repositions their army all the time, based only on a sense in anticipation for what the Terran is doing, without necessarily seeing with an observer.

Whistler, great game 1 vs Neagle! "There is a hatchery in his natural and that isn't normal."
Much less involved than the Weekly finals game. No sign of hacking.

Whistler game 2: ~3:00 minute mark he did not react as a hacker would to the run by. A good hacker would have sooner reacted to the runby by seeing it on the minimap.

I'm watching Neagle's (lack of) army movement and he's just not abusing like a maphacker woud. A true hacker makes consistent beneficial army trades with storms, dealing damage with goons, and moving back. With full map vision you can hit zerg army from all sides, and he's just not using to his advantage.

This game comes down to Whistler moving his whole army to fight the 4 zealot drop in his main, while Neagle masses off 8 gateways and rolls Whistler's 3rd, ending the game.

None of this I think can definitely say he hacks or not. A map hack may give the user the confidence to do something like this strategy though. As a counter to that, I believe Whistler was behind throughout the game in unit count after the early game, and Neagle knew it is a safe bet to just mass off 8 gateways.

Game 3 Neagle takes out Whistler's 3rd with 4 gate zealot. Would a hack help Neagle determine muta timing and whether 4 gate zealot is a good idea? Yes. Does his use of this strategy mean he hacks? Not necessarily.

Watching the Terror games. Don't see any sign of hack.

TL, DR: lol Iraq appears to be falling deeper into sectarian conflict as a wave of bombings and shootings killed more than 70 people Monday. Nearly 2,000 people have died since April amid rising tensions between Iraq’s Shiite-led government and Sunni militants.

On June 12 2013 12:53 dRaW wrote:



it's mostly his inconsistent moves followed by his unusual scout timing. i.e he scouted the T in last game @ that time to see the move to 12, in other games he doesnt send random zealots to scout army movement though. (unless it's convenient). I understand lightkoreankid is saying that hes good , but generally good players do consistent sneaky things to gain intel at a higher level and determine follow-ups. Neagle's mechanics are not as great as his "fish level" would correlate to nor does he do any of these scouting methods consistently. In every game he wins, he is doing an optimal build to the opponent and using a timing to gain a clear advantage furthering his lead. In any game he loses, it's just because his mechanics are not that good and gets outmacroed.

On June 12 2013 05:31 uT)WhistleR wrote:
would a protoss stack 2 observers and send them into terran main over 2 turrets when terran goes m&m without even scouting that there was turrets? dont know much about pvt but that in itself seems very suspicious to me

On June 12 2013 14:22 andreyyisbestandrey wrote:


Something to condider, but to that extent can be argued that Koreans are known to be dynamic players and fluidly play the situation by ear.

In the game he lost to Whistler, he had almost perfect micro and macro mechanics, he just did not anticipate a forward hatchery move. The other games against Whistler I can only say that choosing such builds - 4 gate mass and 8 gate mass are not indicative in themselves that he hacks. I may not have caught suspious activity but would love to see an analysis of ehether or not what did were viable, safe plays based on what he knew. But even if they were not, that still does not prive one way or the other.

Proving something based on moves from a replay is difficult. You do not know what the player is thinking. Especially so with people as weird and different as Koreans. Koreans think about this game in their Korean terms