|
On December 04 2007 21:43 kramus wrote:
Cmon game_no stop arguing, you know Nova is right. I'm a big Bisu fan too but I don't go around calling every PvZ order he uses the "Bisu Build".
i'm not a bisu fan i'm making an observation. I've responded to everything that has quoted me does that mean i'm arguing? and I didn't call every pvz order bisu uses as "bisu build" read my comments.
|
I think that both sair/dtdrop and sair/reavers can be considered bisu builds, since the concept is always the same, harras with corsair at first and with something else after while you add gates and mass
|
How can a build that has been used for years be named after a player who just recently came onto the scene? It can't and shouldn't. That's why we have a new name for this influx of sair play, and a name for the specialized innovation that Bisu made and popularized.
|
Bisu may be using it the best right now, but that's accredited to his vastly superior multitasking ability. I believe nal_ra was the first one to really popularize it.
|
On December 04 2007 21:55 NovaTheFeared wrote:
How can a build that has been used for years be named after a player who just recently came onto the scene? It can't and shouldn't. That's why we have a new name for this influx of sair play, and a name for the specialized innovation that Bisu made and popularized.
nobody is saying he invented the build. just because I was the first to click "build tank" back then doesn't mean I was the first to invent fast machine tech. what he did was made this build his build order which makes even the greatest zergs confused and feel weak, and other protoss gamers are catching on. it is what it is
bisu build
|
Do you really think Stork will be able to beat Savior in a Bo5 by copying this "bisu build"?
|
On December 04 2007 22:01 game_no wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2007 21:55 NovaTheFeared wrote:
How can a build that has been used for years be named after a player who just recently came onto the scene? It can't and shouldn't. That's why we have a new name for this influx of sair play, and a name for the specialized innovation that Bisu made and popularized. nobody is saying he invented the build. just because I was the first to click "build tank" back then doesn't mean I was the first to invent fast machine tech. what he did was made this build his build order which makes even the greatest zergs confused and feel weak, and other protoss gamers are catching on. it is what it is bisu build
Ok as long it's not being named after Bisu, and we're only talking about Bisu using some previously created tech well then I suppose everything is fine.
It's insulting to longtime gamers to have a strategy that we've been fighting for years be named after a newcomer.
|
Stork to save the day, once again.
|
On December 04 2007 22:05 NovaTheFeared wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2007 22:01 game_no wrote:On December 04 2007 21:55 NovaTheFeared wrote:
How can a build that has been used for years be named after a player who just recently came onto the scene? It can't and shouldn't. That's why we have a new name for this influx of sair play, and a name for the specialized innovation that Bisu made and popularized. nobody is saying he invented the build. just because I was the first to click "build tank" back then doesn't mean I was the first to invent fast machine tech. what he did was made this build his build order which makes even the greatest zergs confused and feel weak, and other protoss gamers are catching on. it is what it is bisu build Ok as long it's not being named after Bisu, and we're only talking about Bisu using some previously created tech well then I suppose everything is fine. It's insulting to longtime gamers to have a strategy that we've been fighting for years be named after a newcomer.
No you don't have it at all. if they've been fighting it for years then there's no reason that it should be just recently coined by bisu as "the build that zerg has no answer for." Because it wasn't fought for years. It's not an insult and new build orders and how they're played out can arise. this game is evolving.
bisu build.
|
On December 04 2007 21:51 UbRi wrote:
I think that both sair/dtdrop and sair/reavers can be considered bisu builds, since the concept is always the same, harras with corsair at first and with something else after while you add gates and mass
I missed this comment but this sums up everything in 1 sentence 
|
Hungary11305 Posts
As for the beesuit build: I think it does not only refer to some kind of build order but rather to a specific playstyle which is made possible by using that build order. Getting a fast expansion with forge and getting tech units while hiding behind this shield is hardly anything which deserves the label "innovation".
However, using this build and the units in the way Bisu pioneered, with constant puncturing of the zerg at vital spots, overlord hunting, drop harassing with reaver / DT / HT, essentially forcing the zerg into a passive, defending position until the protoss army has reached a critical mass and can tackle the zerg head-on, THAT is what is commonly referred to as the "bisu build" or rather bisu style of PvZ. If you reread the "Revolutionary Magic" final edit by Hot_Bid, you will know what it is about.
+ Show Spoiler +(from that arcticle: ) The "Beesuit Build" itself is not special. The build that beat Savior, the build that is basically a modified Protoss FE that slightly delays its storm and intermittently cuts probes for early DT/Corsair, is only good because Bisu does it. Other players have tried it and failed where Bisu succeeded. His Corsairs do not die. His DTs act like there is someone watching them at all times, finding holes that no other player can find. You could just drop the "-Build" part of that designation altogether and simply call it "Bisu," because it's all him.
So it is entirely possible that the style in which Bisu plays PvZ is being copied, but that is FAR more than just a build order, and therefore the term "bisu build" is hardly warranted. Bisu style / philosophy / w/e. is far more appropriate.
|
United States20661 Posts
There is no way using corsairs and reavers = bisu build.
... I'm not even...
AUGH your sheer ignorance boggles the mind. It really does.
|
On December 04 2007 23:36 Aesop wrote:As for the beesuit build: I think it does not only refer to some kind of build order but rather to a specific playstyle which is made possible by using that build order. Getting a fast expansion with forge and getting tech units while hiding behind this shield is hardly anything which deserves the label "innovation". However, using this build and the units in the way Bisu pioneered, with constant puncturing of the zerg at vital spots, overlord hunting, drop harassing with reaver / DT / HT, essentially forcing the zerg into a passive, defending position until the protoss army has reached a critical mass and can tackle the zerg head-on, THAT is what is commonly referred to as the "bisu build" or rather bisu style of PvZ. If you reread the "Revolutionary Magic" final edit by Hot_Bid, you will know what it is about. + Show Spoiler +(from that arcticle: ) The "Beesuit Build" itself is not special. The build that beat Savior, the build that is basically a modified Protoss FE that slightly delays its storm and intermittently cuts probes for early DT/Corsair, is only good because Bisu does it. Other players have tried it and failed where Bisu succeeded. His Corsairs do not die. His DTs act like there is someone watching them at all times, finding holes that no other player can find. You could just drop the "-Build" part of that designation altogether and simply call it "Bisu," because it's all him. So it is entirely possible that the style in which Bisu plays PvZ is being copied, but that is FAR more than just a build order, and therefore the term "bisu build" is hardly warranted. Bisu style / philosophy / w/e. is far more appropriate.
Mostly agree, although there isn't anything necessarily spectacular about his gameplay during his opening in general, something that any pro-gamer at that skill can do they just need to use bisu's build or 'playstayle' (both can be interchanged) with a non-imitatio sed amelioratio style and it works. just look at this game stork vs july, there isn't anything close to "omg that was boxer micro!" with the corsair use or unit massing, Stork used the standard bisu build and the results were exactly familiar with the games we saw vs savior.
There is no way using corsairs and reavers = bisu build.
... I'm not even...
AUGH your sheer ignorance boggles the mind. It really does.
what is mind boggling is your primitive outlook on his build. making corsairs and reavers is not the whole build, not even close. It's only part of his build. If you wanted to only make corsairs and reavers and expect to win the game, then you don't deserve to be in the proleague sorry to say.
It's the same as saying nada's build isn't unique because he is using marines and medics and that has been invented before!
bisu build
|
Uh Corsair-Reaver is not the Bisu build by any means.
The Bisu build is categorized by its relentless Corsair/DT harass WHILE doing the tech to a ground army consisting of the usual Zeal/Goon + Temp. Corsair-Reaver, for a large part of the game, relies completely on Corsairs and Shuttles and has little ground force (if only to defend).
Bisu's build is centered on the fact that he can multitask like a motherfucker and kill overlords, harass with DTs, and still keep up his macro at the same time.
Corsair-Reaver is rA, not Bisu.
|
|
|
damn Stork raped everything, July and iloveoov? amazing <3
|
You're one thick-headed viking, game_no...
|
The Reason this build against Savior in their first finals was called bisu-build, is because he kept building corsairs and didn't stop after one or two, which is what people usually do/did when they saw their opponent doing a lurker or hydra build. It seemed common sense that "wasting" vespine for corsairs while being unable to prevent your opponent from containing and mass expanding was the wrong thing to do, so players rather spent their vespine on goons/templars and observer tech, in order to either do a timed attack, or break the zerg's contain and take one or two more expansions.
But, as mentioned above, bisu is the god of multitasking, thus he is able to use his corsairs and dts so efficiently that he can harass the zerg a lot more than anyone else could with that unit mix.
You don't name an old, often-used build order after someone just because he is good at using it or uses it often, you only name it after him if it's something that has not been seen before in that certain way. So reaver/sair is neither bisu-build nor nal_ra-build, neither is fe to 1-2 corsairs and 1-2 DTs called the bisu-build, for the reasons i mentioned above..
on a sidenote, I think our beloved dutchman Nazgul was one of the very first to use reaver/sair efficiently on landmaps, he was certainly one of the first players i faced who did it, and that way before i had anyone else try it against me. It must've been somewhere around early 2002.
|
On December 05 2007 01:36 Naib wrote:
You're one thick-headed viking, game_no...
He's not that thick-headed. Just too adamant about labeling it as Bisu-build.
Nal_rA: corsair/reaver -> corsair/carrier
Bisu: corsair/reaver/dt -> corsair/ground
They are very different styles. Nal_rA spends all his money on corsairs, cannons, and reavers. Thus, his unit count is very low compared to zerg's unit count for most of the game. He transitions to carriers slowly in marathon games. Otherwise, he keeps using corsair reavers throughout the entire game.
The point of Bisu's game is to slowly build up a huge ground force while preventing the opponent from doing the same. Thus, corsair/reaver/DT is used to harass and get free points and keep expansions from running at full power. Bisu's unit count stays high. Then he rolls out with a huge army.
|
Why do you write "bisu build" at the end of every post ? Extremely annoying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.forumspile.com/Ban-Unleash_moderators.jpg)
