| Forum Index > Brood War Tournaments |
|
Purind
Canada3562 Posts
ForGG's build was awesome though, makes it seem like a 1 rax expo build. Very nicely done, sounds like something rA would do, and it totally had rA fooled. Nice strategy, owned by himself. On October 18 2007 21:52 FaCE_1 wrote: Ra will take Xellos Savior can't lose vs Free :o I haven't seen Free's PvZ much, but isn't it supposed to be the best PvZ on the planet? | ||
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On  October 19 2007 11:57 Purind wrote:I'm so glad he got disqualified!! go  rA!! fOrGG's build was awesome though, makes it seem like a 1 rax expo build. Very nicely done, sounds like something rA would do, and it totally had rA fooled. Nice strategy, owned by himself.I haven't seen free's PvZ Much, but isn't it supposed to be the BeSt PvZ on the planet?Let me introduce you to a man by the name of Bisu... | ||
|
Wizard
Poland5055 Posts
On October 19 2007 11:57 Purind wrote: I'm so glad he got disqualified!! go rA!! fOrGG's build was awesome though, makes it seem like a 1 rax expo build. Very nicely done, sounds like something rA would do, and it totally had rA fooled. Nice strategy, owned by himself. I haven't seen free's PvZ Much, but isn't it supposed to be the BeSt PvZ on the planet? one word: Bisu | ||
|
wifeH
United States127 Posts
| ||
|
Wizard
Poland5055 Posts
On October 19 2007 12:40 wifeH wrote: I just want to know: did Nal_rA request a rematch at all? who would want to?  | ||
|
hixhix
1156 Posts
On October 19 2007 12:40 wifeH wrote: I just want to know: did Nal_rA request a rematch at all? I dont think it matters at all. Rules are rules, forgg must be DQ-ed regardless of rA's opinion about it | ||
|
ForAdun
Germany986 Posts
On October 19 2007 10:39 Live2Win wrote: Call me dumb if you want, but I sort of see this guy's point of view (although imo the examples he used are horrible). The reason this move is banned if I'm correct, is because it's an unfair way to get into the opponent's base. If the opponent blocks his ramp with his units successfully to prevent you from scouting, then you shouldn't be allowed in. But let's face it. He used a "bug" that's already allowed in every other aspect of the game. The "bug" that these guys are using is that when a unit is given the "mine" command or the "return cargo" command, they automatically become able to slide through units. By clicking that and hitting "stop" as soon as possible, they are able to make the worker become transparent, and then un-transparent within half a second, which makes them overlap the opponent's units and messes up their formation. But this concept is already being used in different situations. What exactly about this move is illegal? The fact that he is able to make his worker slide and then unslide to mess up unit formation? That's used all the time in worker defense. The fact that they use mine/cargo return to slide through units? That's used all the time when you're trying to keep your scouting peon alive. They're not using a new bug, they're using an old bug in a new way. So then WHAT makes this move illegal and to be banned? It seems the only reason is because it messes with the balance of the game. Let me give an example of a similar trick. Pylon jumping. Though not used often anymore, protoss users use to be able to hop over Terran's barracks/supply wall by sticking their probe close to the supply depot, building a pylon, and "hopping" the probe over. How is this much different from the other bug? Both are using a bug that is allowed in other aspects of the game, yet both are overcoming obstacles that should be overcome. If the only reason for banning the scv's cargo return bug is that "when the ramp is blocked, you shouldn't be allowed in" then the same should go for the pylon hop bug.... if a terran walled correctly, then the probe should not be allowed in. Another example is the vulture hop. We've seen BoxeR overcome a pylon/forge wall by mining real close to the pylons, and successfully "hopping" his vultures over to the otherside. This is again another example of a "bug" being used to overcome an obstacle that shouldn't have been overcome. Of course, I agree this new "bug" does make the game incredibly gay, and I prefer it to stay banned. But I just don't see any real justification as to why it should be banned. It's the relation that justifies it. An SCV has easier times to slide through any kind of worker because it can take up to 60 damage. That SCV from ForGG was even hit by a Zealot afterwards but it was still alive. Probes or Drones die rather quick compared to SCV's so there's more room for error as a Terran player which causes a race-favoring imbalance using the bug. You compare it to the Barrack jump where you can pull units through minerals/buildings if you land another building on them, e.g. a Barrack. This is a risky move and can actually make the situation worse, imagine these units running into 3 lurkers that the Zerg prepared because of that Barrack jump. It is actually do-or-die. If i remember correctly it has made the Terran player lose in some televised games. Then you take Pylon jump as an example. Pylons cost 100 minerals to build and 25 minerals to cancel, same for Supply Depots. Besides that this move also involves some risk so it is justified. Vulture jump is another example like that, it is risky. If you don't manage to pull through your Vulture(s) using ~5-10 Spider Mines you are at a small tactical disadvantage since you cannot defend your bases or other areas of the map with Mines. In the worst case you run straight into 6 Dragoons. Summing up: move 1 is risky, move 3 and 4 are cost-efficient and risky but move 1 doesn't cost anything at all, does not involve any risk and slightly favors Terran. An example from me would be the standard slide to scout the opponent's base. Just before your first scouting worker dies you send another one by right-clicking your opponent's minerals. Now the situation is clear and if your opponent spots that scouting worker early with his own scouting units it is more or less doomed. 6 Zerglings will easily stop it, so does 1 Dragoon with good control and in TvT it is already a disadvantage to sacrifice 2 scouting workers instead of just 1 because the matchup is balanced in all ways, so even if the SCV comes past 2 Marines it is a noticable loss in gathering speed, but if there are already 3 Marines waiting (up to 4 Marines is common) they will kill the new scouting worker in time. All in all, a risky (or maybe even stupid) and "cost-efficient" move to pull off which makes it legal. | ||
|
SonuvBob
Aiur21549 Posts
| ||
|
greatmeh
Canada1964 Posts
| ||
|
SonuvBob
Aiur21549 Posts
| ||
|
wifeH
United States127 Posts
rA please prove you can go further than this "luck"! | ||
|
wifeH
United States127 Posts
a man of man <3 | ||
|
cravy
United States525 Posts
| ||
Live2Win
United States6657 Posts
That's a very vague concept to set standards on what makes bugs legal and illegal. Allowing certain bugs because of their cost-efficiency requires extreme analysis and discussion between the professional players, coaches and eSports officials. Allowing one bug because it's "risky if it fails" while banning another because it "changes the balance and has no risk" will raise hundreds of debates everytime a similar bug comes up. What sets the standard? Where do you draw the line between cost-efficiency and balance? No, a better way to determine the legality of a bug would be HOW it's being used, and if that certain "trick" involves any illegal action. Most of the bugs that are banned right now are not banned because they make the game imbalanced.... of course, I'm sure that does play some role, but their "justified" reasoning is because the method of execution that's used to execute the bugs are ruled to be illegal. A few examples: The Drone floating bug. I'm not even sure if it's possible in today's patches, but it was banned for two reasons. Obviously the first reason is the insane imbalanced advantage it would give the zerg... but the justified reason would be because it involves using a weird gas+shift combination, and makes the drone do something that it was not suppose to do. The worker stack bug. I'm talking about the one including shift+gas trick and making your workers stack while attacking. This, again, includes some gas trick and makes the workers do something that they're not suppose to do. The zerg burrow/stack bug. This is the bug where you can stack a bunch of hydras or zerglings and make them act like 1 unit. Again, a bug that includes some weird combination of keys, and results in a situation that is clearly not meant to happen. These are all bugs that obviously change the balance of the game drastically. But they all have one thing in common: they involve a combination of tricks that were never meant to be used. But this bug is different. It's using all concepts that are legal in the game. It's not using some shift+gas or burrow or anything weird like that. It's just using the old fasioned worker drill trick. The unit only needs to hold a cargo, and goes up to the unit blocking it's way, you give it the return cargo command, the worker turns around (and I guess the corner of the unit overlaps the unit in front of it), you hit stop so that the corner that was overlapped becomes solid, and breaks up the formation.... these are all moves that are not unorthodox or illegal. It's just a different approach to an already used bug. In fact, I'm not even sure if it should be qualified as a bug! | ||
|
IaniAniaN
Canada555 Posts
| ||
|
ForAdun
Germany986 Posts
On October 19 2007 16:13 Live2Win wrote: @ ForAdun That's a very vague concept to set standards on what makes bugs legal and illegal. Allowing certain bugs because of their cost-efficiency requires extreme analysis and discussion between the professional players, coaches and eSports officials. Allowing one bug because it's "risky if it fails" while banning another because it "changes the balance and has no risk" will raise hundreds of debates everytime a similar bug comes up. What sets the standard? Where do you draw the line between cost-efficiency and balance? No, a better way to determine the legality of a bug would be HOW it's being used, and if that certain "trick" involves any illegal action. Most of the bugs that are banned right now are not banned because they make the game imbalanced.... of course, I'm sure that does play some role, but their "justified" reasoning is because the method of execution that's used to execute the bugs are ruled to be illegal. A few examples: The Drone floating bug. I'm not even sure if it's possible in today's patches, but it was banned for two reasons. Obviously the first reason is the insane imbalanced advantage it would give the zerg... but the justified reason would be because it involves using a weird gas+shift combination, and makes the drone do something that it was not suppose to do. The worker stack bug. I'm talking about the one including shift+gas trick and making your workers stack while attacking. This, again, includes some gas trick and makes the workers do something that they're not suppose to do. The zerg burrow/stack bug. This is the bug where you can stack a bunch of hydras or zerglings and make them act like 1 unit. Again, a bug that includes some weird combination of keys, and results in a situation that is clearly not meant to happen. These are all bugs that obviously change the balance of the game drastically. But they all have one thing in common: they involve a combination of tricks that were never meant to be used. But this bug is different. It's using all concepts that are legal in the game. It's not using some shift+gas or burrow or anything weird like that. It's just using the old fasioned worker drill trick. The unit only needs to hold a cargo, and goes up to the unit blocking it's way, you give it the return cargo command, the worker turns around (and I guess the corner of the unit overlaps the unit in front of it), you hit stop so that the corner that was overlapped becomes solid, and breaks up the formation.... these are all moves that are not unorthodox or illegal. It's just a different approach to an already used bug. In fact, I'm not even sure if it should be qualified as a bug! I can relate your mentioned bugs, too. You did that already to the Drone floating bug saying that it gives an "insanely imbalanced advantage" to Zerg. This is why it was banned.  The worker stack bug. I know that one, it can be used to rush in with all your workers and kick the main nexus very quickly. Using SCV's the rush cannot fail afaik so it is imbalanced. Also it is easier to pull off (easier than if you have to clearly see the minerals with another scouting worker) since you only have to scout the minerals once, then you can choose any point in the game to send your worker scouting into the opponent base using only fog of war. The Zerg burrow/stack bug. I also know that one, it is another version of the worker stack bug only much stronger and stacking was different. It is impossible to beat stacked Zerglings with Zealots since you can't hold the choke. Canon defenses fail, too - the Zerglings don't have to surround the Canons and blocking Probes get kicked away in a splitsecond. ZvP would be totally imbalanced and probably Terrans would face big trouble, too. Not to mention ZvZ which would be a real mess, not what it is already. Yes that specific floating worker trick (from Nal_rA vs ForGG and go.go vs Iforgotwhohewas is different (there are some more, lacking creativity I just call it B). It is not only about how the trick works, it's about what it actually changes in the game itself. Progamers are aware of the fact that in the early game every single second and every 8 minerals count. You have to compare it specifically to the other floating worker trick (right-click on a visible mineral field, no fog of war. I call it A) which costs much more for the scouting player. He has to send the 2nd scouting worker while the 1st one is still alive. This makes it vulnerable and expensive. So the B-trick is like an improved version of the A-trick and that little bit makes it imbalanced. Of course I don't know if the KESPA followed the same arguing but it's how I explain their decision to myself. | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36372 Posts
one can argue that this makes games less predictable and more due to luck or chance, but as people have mentioned it does hurt the "hider" to put two workers on a ramp. i think KeSPA just looked at the situation and determined that if a player wants to pay the cost of blocking his ramp with workers, he should be able to accomplish hiding his base from an enemy scouting worker. edit: oh shit 10,000 | ||
|
Seku
United States313 Posts
Being able to bypass a terran wall of buildings by building a pylon is not always effective, costs money, and can only be used in a few situations (I can't remember the last time I saw it..). More importantly, though, being able to bypass buildings which generally would have been built anyways- so the placement barely, if at all, effects the economy- or being able to bypass early-game worker units is a HUGE difference. Yes, they both result in successful scouting, but obviously using early-game workers has both a much bigger impact on the economy than building placement, and requires the player to control the workers to not move around when blocking the incoming scout. The difference seems quite clear to me between blocking with units or with early-game buildings. Terran can float buildings over, zerg can use overlords, protoss can pylon-jump buildings, but no race should be able to hop their ground units over other ground units being controlled to block a scout from entering when they don't have vision; just because it is using a bug that is (kind of) used in other situations doesn't make it ok. | ||
|
bellsprout
Australia219 Posts
can't believe that was between 2 progamers | ||
ManaBlue
Canada10458 Posts
On October 19 2007 11:57 Purind wrote: I'm so glad he got disqualified!! go rA!! ForGG's build was awesome though, makes it seem like a 1 rax expo build. Very nicely done, sounds like something rA would do, and it totally had rA fooled. Nice strategy, owned by himself. I haven't seen Free's PvZ much, but isn't it supposed to be the best PvZ on the planet? Free's PvZ is insaneo. He'd give Bisu a run for his money in that matchup. However, Bisu's cold as ice and performs in clutch games in general. Free has a little midas-syndrome going on, so you can never be sure who's going to show up. It's been his biggest problem throughout his career. And as for ForGG, that was pathetic. That bug, in THAT CONTEXT, was so hyped up after gogo used it that there is no excuse to "not know". What a tool. The only thing that's worse is that gogo got away with it like a turd. Did ForGG think he would too? Lame. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Rain Dota 2 3090Calm  2762Horang2 1028Flash  954Bisu 897Hyuk 777Larva 603Jaedong 454actioN 340GuemChi 268[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games Organizations Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
WardiTV Spring Champion…
AllThingsProtoss
Online Event
BSL
Sparkling Tuna Cup
AllThingsProtoss
WardiTV Spring Champion…
Online Event
BSL
Afreeca Starleague
Soulkey vs Scan
Barracks vs Light
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
