july vs mania mu is hard to pick it would be nice to see yet another cj player become a monster but also nice to see july in contention for another title
Do they play all 5 of the 2nd round matches first and then play the necessary 3rd matches after, or do they play 1 of the 2nd round matches and immediately following with a third if necessary before moving on to the next two players? .. sorry if that's confusing.
On October 18 2007 07:51 Hold-Lurker wrote: Do they play all 5 of the 2nd round matches first and then play the necessary 3rd matches after, or do they play 1 of the 2nd round matches and immediately following with a third if necessary before moving on to the next two players? .. sorry if that's confusing.
(C'mon Nal Ra!)
if a series is 1-1 they'll play the decider right after, that's how they did it last season
hmm....there's a possibility for each (or all) of these 5 matches to have closers for them (meaning 3rd matches). why would they broadcast at 1830 when clearly you're gonna need more time to cover. i'd think it would start earlier, like at 1400 or 1330.
진호]sick life says: haha [진호]sick life says: dan [진호]sick life says: na do Dan says: --;? [진호]sick life says: bet Dan says: hahahahahah [진호]sick life says: stork vs savior Dan says: 128noma Dan says: 3:1 he jo Dan says: 3:1 he jo [진호]sick life says: dspojgfvpojadfgoj [진호]sick life says: xcvbojapojdfpojcxvjad [진호]sick life says: ffuck [진호]sick life says: haha [진호]sick life says: jcxvbpadsf Dan says: call? Dan says:
[진호]sick life says: 2.5:1 [진호]sick life says: 40/100 Dan says: 콜 [진호]sick life says: call? [진호]sick life says: ㅋㅋㅋㅋ [진호]sick life says: ㅇㅋ [진호]sick life says: ok Dan says: 40//100 [진호]sick life says: ok [진호]sick life says: hm [진호]sick life says: suck out no [진호]sick life says: savior gogo` Dan says: suck out plz Dan says: 1 time
memory getting gas, with a 3rd rax at the same proxy spot. i believe he's trying to fake july into thinking he went for 1 rax cc. july almost loses scouting overlord. memory's acad is out already. july scouting with lings at memory's nat but sees just 4 rines. lair morphling for july. 3rd hatch out at back nat already. no sunkens/creep yet.
july lair out, starting spire at this 3rd hatch at his back nat. memory moving out with 2 medics 1 firebat and about 10 marines. july's only sunken went down. the other killed before it morphed. MM in july's main now. july trying to get sunkens ready there, but MM takes them out. july GG.
That's why Savior is so strong. He always has a few lings to scout potential proxy locations... (Ironically he didn't vs FBH on the 5th games of their bo5 series, though.)
Despite Mania's been around since ages, he never made anything big...he caught my eye last PR season, taking some unexpected games, and seems he's improving like a whirlwind...tricking July like that (even when he's not in his superb form ofc) is an impressive feat.
lomo scouting across map. and will not find free. factory started for lomo. and he's not scouting across map. he's sent an scv to bottom right corner expo to start a fac there. free starting robotics, no range yet. goon out blocking ramp. marine and scv block free's scout from entering lomo's main as well. looks like free will be going for reaver, and might get hit by a 2fac attack before his reaver is out.
free going reaver. his probe scouted 4 rine and tank moving out of lomo's base. very good fake FD there. 3 vult out for lomo. making it a total of 4 rine 1 tank 3 vult vs 3 goon 1 zealot. free micros well on his ramp and takes out most of the rines, then later drags a mine into tank, pushing back the attack. but he makes micro mistake on his ramp, and loses 2 goon to mine, leaving his ramp undefended. vultures push into his base, but reaver is out and can defend. but free decides to attack lomo with his reaver, and kills like 7 scv in lomo's base before losing the reav to tanks. continuously rallied vultures take out a lot of free's probes, and free loses more goons to mines at his gateways and mineralline. vultures owning many of his probes, free's reaver pops, but can't do much vs speed vult. free decides to do a last ditch attack on lomo's base vs 4 tanks. reaver dies with dealing damage, free gg.
free maynards his probes late, in my opinion, but shield bat warps in time for him, in addition to second gate. what looked like poor micro by lomo there gets like 7 marines raped (with 12 scv to support), killing only 2 or 3 zealots. after the battle, 2 mining probes left for free. 2 scv for lomo. 2 goon vs 3 marines.
imo lomo had a chance after he killed many probes + the 2-3 zealots, but lost most of his marines. he should've just retreated his scvs back to his main and bunkered his ramp. he had like 10 left after the battle.
On October 18 2007 19:23 pangshai wrote: imo lomo had a chance after he killed many probes + the 2-3 zealots, but lost most of his marines. he should've just retreated his scvs back to his main and bunkered his ramp. he had like 10 left after the battle.
savior loses a drone to scouting probe. stork with nexus and cannon started. 4lings out of savior chasing the scouting probe. savior's nat also started.
gateway and nexus out for stork now. ling speed up for savior. he's got about 8 lings now. stork trying to scout, but savior's lings keep killing the scout probe. i'm not sure if he has seen the hatchery at his mineral only. stargate warping in for stork now.
stork with robotics warping in. looks like his build from the previous game. savior with lair out 4th hatch spawning at his nat, hydra den out, spire morphing. hydras out to defend his overlords.
hydra and overlord speed both up for savior. he's looking to take out stork's shuttle again like last game. hits with 1 scourge, but stork micros away from the other 3. 2reav 4 corsair now.
2 gateways for stork, and he's moving out with 4 zealots, his 2 reav and his corsairs, vs savior's hydras. he's taken out all of savior's defending hydras at his nat, but savior has another army coming down. reavers and zealots all down. but savior lost many hydras and overlords.
stork attacks savior's mineral only. and savior's hydra army is out of position to defend it. about 8 zealots 1 dragoon and reaver takes it out. savior saves all the drones though, and he's taking his own mineral only. savior looks low on drone, and stork's zealot speed is up, his corsairs still raping.
stork has reinforced his zealot army, so there's about 1.5 groups of zealots now. accompanied by 2 reavers in shuttle. somehow savior stops that attack. but now stork is up to templar tech, and is taking his mineral only, with 7 corsairs raping overlords.
savior's storm dodging is surreal, and he somehow stops that attack with minimal casualties. any other Z would've GGed there. but now stork is taking bottom right gas expo, and has a new army of zealot/archon/templar out.
Lol, Stork's micro is nonexistant, he's just a-moving everything into sAvior overpowering him slowly...if he microed this battle would be the last one^^
Corsairs scored so many ovies kill, that was such a big help for Stork. Savior just couldn`t do anything against corsairs. Stork also had great macro. Nice game.
Don't care who wins 3rd game. I got my liquibet points. And Savior and Stork are 2 of my least favourite players. Trust me. Nada will win everything in 2008.
3 zealots out now. savior sending his first 4 lings to stork's base. he has a sunken in his own main, and he's getting a lair. speed up for savior. stork retreating his zealots. 7 lings in stork's main now. not rdealing much damage harass wise.
savior going in to kill as many ling as he can before stork\'s cannon warps in, and takes out all but 6-7 probes. stork now in savior\'s main trying to do the same. but sunken/ling/ muta rapes the attack and savior has about 8 drones.left.
stork looks disappointed. savior played a very nice game. reacting perfectly to stork's build with the sunken and then lings to counter. stork could've taken out savior's spire with a guerrilla attack with his 5 zealots before the mutas spawned though.
On October 18 2007 20:08 pangshai wrote: stork looks disappointed. savior played a very nice game. reacting perfectly to stork's build with the sunken and then lings to counter. stork taken out savior's spire with a guerrilla attack with his 5 zealots before the mutas spawned though.
Lol? The spire wasn't even close to falling down. He just tried and failed, miserably.
On October 18 2007 20:08 pangshai wrote: stork looks disappointed. savior played a very nice game. reacting perfectly to stork's build with the sunken and then lings to counter. stork taken out savior's spire with a guerrilla attack with his 5 zealots before the mutas spawned though.
Lol? The spire wasn't even close to falling down. He just tried and failed, miserably.
i meant while it was still spawning. those 5 zealots were just sitting around on the ramp doing nothing.
On October 18 2007 20:08 pangshai wrote: stork looks disappointed. savior played a very nice game. reacting perfectly to stork's build with the sunken and then lings to counter. stork taken out savior's spire with a guerrilla attack with his 5 zealots before the mutas spawned though.
Lol? The spire wasn't even close to falling down. He just tried and failed, miserably.
i meant while it was still spawning. those 5 zealots were just sitting around on the ramp doing nothing.
Oh I see. But your post doesn't state that, thought you were watching some other game
On October 18 2007 20:08 pangshai wrote: stork looks disappointed. savior played a very nice game. reacting perfectly to stork's build with the sunken and then lings to counter. stork taken out savior's spire with a guerrilla attack with his 5 zealots before the mutas spawned though.
Lol? The spire wasn't even close to falling down. He just tried and failed, miserably.
i meant while it was still spawning. those 5 zealots were just sitting around on the ramp doing nothing.
Oh I see. But your post doesn't state that, thought you were watching some other game
somehow the word "could've" got deleted from my post. editted it back in though.
and that late scout means ra isn't going to get into the main of forgg who has 3 rines on his ramp already. 1 fac with machineshop, probably a normal FD build.
forgg starting early acad instead of ebay. robotics warps in. robotics support started. ra with about 8 goon now. forgg getting scan and 2nd fac. ra with 2 reavers for his shuttle i suppose, ferrying goons into a hidden part of forgg's main.
all th egoons in main dead as well. forgg has goliath out to stop the reaver harass. not looking good for ra as he loses his reaver to tanks, killing a mere 1 tank and 1 gol. ra going in with 4 goon on forgg's nat vs 4 tanks on the ramp, and it obviously fails. gg by ra.
nal_rA was a little bit unlucky, because the other guy saw the goons with a tank that popped out of the fac... 20 secs later rA would have shuttle with reaver.
On October 18 2007 20:39 AyOnY wrote: ROFL he got disqualified? LMFAO why would anyone be that dumb to use a bug like that, unless he didnt know of it?
ForGG told the ref that he didnt know but the rules are rules.
XFD Genuis Great one terran out,Go ra go, we have enough terrans, i dont want this to be a TvT final, like the last MSL where it was a PvP,well go Hwasin vs Savior Finals
On October 18 2007 20:39 AyOnY wrote: ROFL he got disqualified? LMFAO why would anyone be that dumb to use a bug like that, unless he didnt know of it?
ForGG told the ref that he didnt know but the rules are rules.
Man ForGG must be so pissed, he had the game too >.< .
and he already started the 2 rax anyway. so he already committed to the strategy despite not knowing what ra's build was. scouting the FE after that was just a bonus.
He can't say he didn't know. There was a situation involving Ever)P(TT and it was made clear that the bug is forbidden. Much better reaction from the referees now, btw.
EDIT: Catyoul, I can't remember the terran, but the toss was TT. Referees decided for the game to proceed, and TT lost miserably, clearly mismicroing due to frustration. The referees have improved.
ForGG, you're a stupid idiot, you had that game in your hands.
On October 18 2007 20:41 Puosu wrote: I was under the impression that you can use the way of clicking on enemys minerals if you've already seen them and the CC float one wasn't.. Bleh..
Only fOrGG hadn't seen Nal_rA's minerals yet. So he wouldn;t have been able to do that to get through.
On October 18 2007 20:41 The Storyteller wrote: All this could be avoided by making players go for a briefing, and then signing a document that lays out exactly what is allowed and what is not.
Sure thats one way to do it,or put it on the contract becoming a progamer.
The sad thing is it had been done in a game before, on Blitz. I don't remember the players nor the ruling at the time. Anyone can ?
go.go vs ever)TT, they ruled it okay and continued the game and TT lost. he got so mad he threw off his headphones and stormed out before the camera even panned to him
Pro practices 10 hours a day but doesn't know the rules...
Did he think he could get away with it or something? Or did he just do it without thinking as a reflex? Like a football player sometimes making hands instinctively?
On October 18 2007 20:41 Taiche wrote: Could anyone stop laughing for a sec and tell us what kind of bug happened, please ?
Nal_rA had blocked his ramp with 2 probes and ForGG went through the blockade anyway. You can do that pretty easily actually, you need to have gathered minerals, then press "return cargo" and spam move a bit and you'll go through other units.
yeah, the first time it was new so they just ruled a rematch for now but this time it's already in the book so they had no choice but to disqualify him.
On October 18 2007 20:41 Taiche wrote: Could anyone stop laughing for a sec and tell us what kind of bug happened, please ?
forgg mines a chunk of mineral from ra's nat. proceeds onto ra's ramp with the scv that's holding mineral. ra's ramp is blocked by 2 probe. but he manages to get up the ramp. they showed FP of forgg doing it. but my stream buffered so i didn't catch it fully.
what i thought it looked like was, spamming move on the probe, then stop, then return cargo, so that the scv pushed the probe away. then he got through the gap. but there was a bit of the return-cargo "gliding" through the probe.
The sad thing is it had been done in a game before, on Blitz. I don't remember the players nor the ruling at the time. Anyone can ?
go.go used the bug against TT during the survivor league for the previous MSL. At the time the bug was not banned and go.go ended up winning the game. Afterward Kespa banned the return cargo bug to prevent future abuse.
On October 18 2007 20:41 Puosu wrote: I was under the impression that you can use the way of clicking on enemys minerals if you've already seen them and the CC float one wasn't.. Bleh..
Only fOrGG hadn't seen Nal_rA's minerals yet. So he wouldn;t have been able to do that to get through.
1) workers have stack mode and standard mode. as you can guess, workers are on stack mode when they are mining (they can stack on top of eachother and can pass through other units). in standard mode, workers have size and can't pass through other units as normal
2) a long long time ago, someone realized you could get workers to go onto stack without having vision of minerals. so, i could go outside someone's ramp (that's blocked w/ 2 workers), i could spam the vespene gas geyser, and voila my worker would be on stack mode (don't worry about these details) and i could then pass over the 2 workers blocking the ramp and enter the base
3) KeSPA disallows this bug, as it is obviously bullshit to get a worker on stack mode to go WHEREVER it wants w/o having vision
4) Recently, go.go[GsP] (player on OGN SparkyZ) found that if your SCV was holding some money, you could walk up to the ramp, and hit "return cargo" then "stop" then "return cargo" etc etc, forcing the worker to go into stack mode and then out and then stack and then out etc etc which effectively forces the worker up the ramp, similar to #2.
5) Although go.go was NOT penalized at the time, KeSPA immediately made this a disallowed bug after the game
6) forGG was not informed and fucks himself over vs Nal_rA just now
7) ow god damnit i just stubbed my toe. holy fuck that hurts
On October 18 2007 20:41 The Storyteller wrote: All this could be avoided by making players go for a briefing, and then signing a document that lays out exactly what is allowed and what is not.
Sure thats one way to do it,or put it on the contract becoming a progamer.
You can't put it on the contract as these rules change all the time. But before a tournament, there should be a set of rules that apply. The players can be briefed on them and then given a hard copy which they sign on. If there is a change of rules halfway, another document can be signed. That way, nobody can use the excuse that he didn't know.
On October 18 2007 20:46 Day[9] wrote: 4) Recently, go.go[GsP] (player on OGN SparkyZ) found that if your SCV was holding some money, you could walk up to the ramp, and hit "return cargo" then "stop" then "return cargo" etc etc, forcing the worker to go into stack mode and then out and then stack and then out etc etc which effectively forces the worker up the ramp, similar to #2.
go.go isn't the inventor, it's been in micro tricks UMS maps for years.
I actually feel bad for Nal_rA because his win is like an "empty" win, he probably doesn't feel that he earned it, and after seeing the replay he should realize that he would have lost otherwise.
There is no excuse for not knowing, contract or not. It's MSL, televised game. The very least the players could do is take 30 minutes out of there 10 hour practice schedule and read the rules. It's there duty to read the rules as long as MBC provides them in any way.
On October 18 2007 20:53 Jetamania wrote: There is no excuse for not knowing, contract or not. It's MSL, televised game. The very least the players could do is take 30 minutes out of there 10 hour practice schedule and read the rules. It's there duty to read the rules as long as MBC provides them in any way.
and my dinner is here, so i'm going to abandon reporting for the xellos canata game. everyone seems to be watching it anyway. and canata has 7-1 87.5% TvT.
i'm sorry but i wanna know which song is the opening bgm? i did search old thread which said it was Papa Roach's To Be Love, but after downloading i found it wasn't.
On October 18 2007 20:55 NovaTheFeared wrote: That's so funny. ForGG had an autowin situation 3 rax vs. 1 gate nex and gives it up by using a banned bug and DQs himself.
Obviously God decided that Ra must win even though logic says the opposite
i think what forgg wanted to do with that scv was so he can click on the mineral of ra's and send all scv's like lomos did (but failed).. obviously he wasnt thinking about the bug and said "i don't know, never knew that was disallowed"
i'm pretty disgusted by lecaf team's play today.. lomo tryin to gay free with proxy fact + 8 rax cheese rush, and forgg tryin to gay ra with 3 rax -_- and probably scv's too
On October 18 2007 20:58 Emlary wrote: i'm sorry but i wanna know which song is the opening bgm? i did search old thread which said it was Papa Roach's To Be Love, but after downloading i found it wasn't.
It was Papa Roach's To Be Loved, but it has changed now for some reason.
On October 18 2007 20:58 Emlary wrote: i'm sorry but i wanna know which song is the opening bgm? i did search old thread which said it was Papa Roach's To Be Love, but after downloading i found it wasn't.
It was Papa Roach's To Be Loved, but it has changed now for some reason.
yep, i know. i had the former version of S3 opening. so how about the new bgm?
Nice play by Xellos! Expertly foiled the double starport (which he lost to quite a bit last season), then held off until his mass expos kicked in and then just shat all over Cananta's troops.
On October 18 2007 21:40 GoogleIt wrote: if xellos advances, that 3 CJ players at ro8
Don't jump the gun just yet... Kwanro could make it to and then half of the round of eight could be CJ... and then its possible for all four to make the final four.
Xellos pulled ahead right at the start with a gol drop that slaughtered four of Canata's gols and several SCVs. Then he pulled ahead again by dropping Canata's base to draw his reinforcements, and then having his tanks kill them from below the cliffs. Finally, he killed Canata's expo at 2. That pretty much sealed it. Shortly after he went for the kill in Canata's base.
I don't understand about the bug thing, if its part of the game then why should it be banned? This is almost as saying we should ban terran floating land to get units pass by a mineral wall on monty hall. Seriously its part of the game, deosn't matter if its too imba, using this logic we should get rid of the defiler because swarm is imba lol.
On October 18 2007 23:07 Thegreatbeyond wrote: ForGG vs Ra
I don't understand, if its part of the game then why should it be banned? This is almost as saying we should ban terran floating land to get units pass by a mineral wall on monty hall. Seriously its part of the game, deosn't matter if its too imba, using this logic we should get rid of the defiler because swarm is imba lol.
On October 18 2007 23:07 Thegreatbeyond wrote: ForGG vs Ra
I don't understand about the bug thing, if its part of the game then why should it be banned? This is almost as saying we should ban terran floating land to get units pass by a mineral wall on monty hall. Seriously its part of the game, deosn't matter if its too imba, using this logic we should get rid of the defiler because swarm is imba lol.
rofl this is the dumbest post i've ever seen in tl.net. If you fail to understand why it's forbidden then you shouldn't play starcraft at all
Me too. I have to dig elsewhere to get results. Oh wait! There's the results and standings page DUH. Excuse my sarcasm, but yeah generally OPs shouldn't make this unless they intend to follow the whole thing through.
It's not just everyday you would vote against SumoZerg. I catch myself a lot of times voting for the old school just because I want to see them successful again. If I liquibet on them, does that mean they're successful? No. Does it make me feel better? Yes.
0/5 baby! Would have gone 1/5 if I had voted for Forgg like I should have. The rest... are quite surprising. Also, sucks to be dqed for Forgg (but he shouldn't have done that).
On October 19 2007 02:43 Wizard wrote: great results, what I wanted minus July
Same here, but maybe Savior is the new July? These games, he seemed to rely on his micro which was awesome in both games. But he plays really risky and the proxy hatch build just didn't make sense to me.
Wow from what I have been reading, the games were awesome, some really fresh and funny games. I can't wait to go home and watch them all. Good job Savior!
On October 18 2007 23:07 Thegreatbeyond wrote: ForGG vs Ra
I don't understand about the bug thing, if its part of the game then why should it be banned? This is almost as saying we should ban terran floating land to get units pass by a mineral wall on monty hall. Seriously its part of the game, deosn't matter if its too imba, using this logic we should get rid of the defiler because swarm is imba lol.
Doesn't matter if it's part of the game, it matters what the rules are.
On October 18 2007 23:07 Thegreatbeyond wrote: ForGG vs Ra
I don't understand about the bug thing, if its part of the game then why should it be banned? This is almost as saying we should ban terran floating land to get units pass by a mineral wall on monty hall. Seriously its part of the game, deosn't matter if its too imba, using this logic we should get rid of the defiler because swarm is imba lol.
rofl this is the dumbest post i've ever seen in tl.net. If you fail to understand why it's forbidden then you shouldn't play starcraft at all
First of all you and the person above you don't have to insult me, I understand why its forbidden as because if your trying a risky strategy and its discovered then its GG, and plenty of other stuff. However its part of the game. I'm only trying point out that if you try to stop that, then why don't we stop players from getting past mineral walls or better yet get rid of defilers as I already pointed out? I believe there was a defiler imba thread, and defilers in some cases gave free wins in particular battles.
of course it's arbitary what "parts of the game" are allowed. it's been discussed, and this is the consensus. you think that defilers are imbalanced, fine. but you're pretty much alone on that which is why defilers are not banned.
On October 18 2007 23:07 Thegreatbeyond wrote: ForGG vs Ra
I don't understand about the bug thing, if its part of the game then why should it be banned? This is almost as saying we should ban terran floating land to get units pass by a mineral wall on monty hall. Seriously its part of the game, deosn't matter if its too imba, using this logic we should get rid of the defiler because swarm is imba lol.
rofl this is the dumbest post i've ever seen in tl.net. If you fail to understand why it's forbidden then you shouldn't play starcraft at all
First of all you and the person above you don't have to insult me, I understand why its forbidden as because if your trying a risky strategy and its discovered then its GG, and plenty of other stuff. However its part of the game. I'm only trying point out that if you try to stop that, then why don't we stop players from getting past mineral walls or better yet get rid of defilers as I already pointed out? I believe there was a defiler imba thread, and defilers in some cases gave free wins in particular battles.
Hatchery bug is also part of the game, but that doesn't mean it should be allowed.
On October 18 2007 23:07 Thegreatbeyond wrote: ForGG vs Ra
I don't understand about the bug thing, if its part of the game then why should it be banned? This is almost as saying we should ban terran floating land to get units pass by a mineral wall on monty hall. Seriously its part of the game, deosn't matter if its too imba, using this logic we should get rid of the defiler because swarm is imba lol.
rofl this is the dumbest post i've ever seen in tl.net. If you fail to understand why it's forbidden then you shouldn't play starcraft at all
First of all you and the person above you don't have to insult me, I understand why its forbidden as because if your trying a risky strategy and its discovered then its GG, and plenty of other stuff. However its part of the game. I'm only trying point out that if you try to stop that, then why don't we stop players from getting past mineral walls or better yet get rid of defilers as I already pointed out? I believe there was a defiler imba thread, and defilers in some cases gave free wins in particular battles.
lol you must be retarded. do you seriously not recognize the difference between a formally banned bug and normal function of a SC unit?
ps defilers aren't imba. for evidence check out savior's latest proleague games
On October 19 2007 08:04 Jyvblamo wrote: I can already see next week's MSL headlines: "Free beats Lomo's cheese thnx to shield battery" "ForGGot about go.go?" And so on and so forth.
On October 19 2007 08:04 Jyvblamo wrote: I can already see next week's MSL headlines: "Free beats Lomo's cheese thnx to shield battery" "ForGGot about go.go?" And so on and so forth.
On October 18 2007 23:07 Thegreatbeyond wrote: ForGG vs Ra
I don't understand about the bug thing, if its part of the game then why should it be banned? This is almost as saying we should ban terran floating land to get units pass by a mineral wall on monty hall. Seriously its part of the game, deosn't matter if its too imba, using this logic we should get rid of the defiler because swarm is imba lol.
rofl this is the dumbest post i've ever seen in tl.net. If you fail to understand why it's forbidden then you shouldn't play starcraft at all
First of all you and the person above you don't have to insult me, I understand why its forbidden as because if your trying a risky strategy and its discovered then its GG, and plenty of other stuff. However its part of the game. I'm only trying point out that if you try to stop that, then why don't we stop players from getting past mineral walls or better yet get rid of defilers as I already pointed out? I believe there was a defiler imba thread, and defilers in some cases gave free wins in particular battles.
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.
Apart from messing with gameplay (blocking a ramp w/2 workers is a pretty even tradeoff of economy vs ninjatude, making it a good game mechanic), it just seems fundamentally different from other uses of the bug. It's using return cargo to basically go in the complete opposite direction of the CC. I guess it only even works because the SCV and probes overlap a bit.
although I think mineral jumping(vults and workers) in general is gay.. This is pretty clearly a bug rather than something put in place on purpose like worker sliding.
He could not see through fog of war and Ra is putting units on his ramp for the sole purpose of denying scouting. If Forgg happened to go through the trouble of lifting an ebay or rax to see the nat minerals and then slides through.. Thats FINE. But the way he did it is simply taking advantage of a bug, why would anyone ever block their ramp with workers if this was allowed?
Its like the drone slide that used to exist in the 1.08. Just because that happened to be IN the game doesnt mean it was something someone should use in gameplay as it was clearly a bug. "Oh nydus in my base that I couldnt see at all, its in the game.. gg"
Uh, a bit late but HOLY CRAP Free's final game was fucking epic. I was sweating bullets throughout the entire game and was freaking so relieved when Lomo typed out.
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.
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?
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.
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.
On October 18 2007 23:07 Thegreatbeyond wrote: ForGG vs Ra
I don't understand about the bug thing, if its part of the game then why should it be banned? This is almost as saying we should ban terran floating land to get units pass by a mineral wall on monty hall. Seriously its part of the game, deosn't matter if its too imba, using this logic we should get rid of the defiler because swarm is imba lol.
rofl this is the dumbest post i've ever seen in tl.net. If you fail to understand why it's forbidden then you shouldn't play starcraft at all
First of all you and the person above you don't have to insult me, I understand why its forbidden as because if your trying a risky strategy and its discovered then its GG, and plenty of other stuff. However its part of the game. I'm only trying point out that if you try to stop that, then why don't we stop players from getting past mineral walls or better yet get rid of defilers as I already pointed out? I believe there was a defiler imba thread, and defilers in some cases gave free wins in particular battles.
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.
oh well rules are rules, after all a progamer should know about that, he only has himself to blame (or his coach). rA please prove you can go further than this "luck"!
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!
After savior's wacky build, do you think we might see it again if he runs into bisu? It'd be funny to see Bisu get 1 hatch muta'd then 4pooled in the finals.
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.
i'd also add that there's a policy reason for this, that it makes games more exciting if a player can hide his early build order from the other player.
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.
I think you really have to look at bugs like this on a case by case basis. Obviously, returning cargo and stopping to break up enemy formations is a commonly used strategy (although I'm not so sure about how often it's used in a direction away from where it is returning), but clearly every race should have some way to block ground units with ground units- for balance and for more interesting games.
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.
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.
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?
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?