On September 24 2025 22:16 goody153 wrote: Surpring series with no late game
Imo Mini got too greedy with builds. He's seen that Barracks was doing alot of timing attacks and aggression but he still went for it guess he was risking it but didnt pay off.
On September 24 2025 18:11 mtcn77 wrote:
On September 24 2025 17:44 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 24 2025 17:27 mtcn77 wrote:
On September 24 2025 15:58 prototype. wrote: surprising to see barracks advancing to ro4 but mini looked pretty weak even in the games he won
It was a done deal after Roaring Currents. It is a bad outcome, but good for the ratings.
How is it a bad outcome? Mini played bad simple as that.
Sure Snow will probably run over Barracks but the Mini we saw Monday isn't going to put up more of a fight either.
I cannot take terran players seriously. You should give me a break. 2 proxy rax Bo7? Give me a break...
Bro what are you rambling about.
4 pool, 8 rax and proxy gate are all part of the game. Otherwise we end up with only macro games and early game planning and builds die lol
Mini risked a nexus first which usually puts advantage for the protoss vs T in most cases and he got punished cause Barracks also picked the right build. Barracks read it right and Mini got punished for it
On September 24 2025 18:10 Phyanketto wrote: Who's is the protoss hero now?
Snow maybe ? Idk Best is pretty good too
On September 23 2025 07:26 Sabu113 wrote:
On September 23 2025 06:37 mtcn77 wrote:
On September 22 2025 21:42 oxKnu wrote: Snow will not die to this stuff. The run ends next round for Barracks.
Mini is not a good defending player, he always thinks from the perspective of initiating the winning play, which is not always optimal.
Let's go snow. For Mini!
If snow gets through effort. pvz is always dicey for anyone not Mini.
Snow will murder barracks though,
Honestly if Snow makes it. Barracks is pretty screwed. I have not see anybody really beat Snow in a TvP in awhile. He's like almost perfected that matchup lol
Have you any nexus first games that worked? It is different than 3-Hatch. There is no surprise element in nexus first, the enemy has to be stupid to miss it.
Wdym have you seen nexus first games working ?
There is no better player in history than flash and dude is raging against it LOL why do you think it is a viable build lmao
I dont even play protoss and I know that shits a thing.
Also calling anybody who dont counter nexus first stupid why could you counter every nexus first that you run into lol. Are you better than flash ? or half the terran progamers who lose to it ?
On September 25 2025 01:27 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote: Flash always been mentoring Barracks actually. Even from the Kespa days i remember an interview or something where he told Barracks that he has the highest APM from every progamer but need to use it smarter lol.
It's kinda notable that Barracks mechanics is kinda good
You can win with the Stove, too. Doesn't make it the norm. Nexus isn't like a hatchery, you cannot hide a full second base there. You have to make a gateway to make it work. You can only make it at the natural - that is if you still want to be able to defend them both - if your opponent isn't stupid, he scouts your base and he isn't late. Nexus first is the dumbest zerg playbook idea that protoss players copied.
On September 22 2025 21:55 TMNT wrote: Also, a, reminder to anyone who may fall for the narrative that Artosis will no doubt push in his cast later about new up and coming Terrans:
Barracks is older than Flash.
Lol, that makes no sense to me considering how Arty talks about him.
Flash was a wunderkind though.
I didn't realize that Barracks lost to Jangbi in the 2009 OSL!
It is really cool to see someone who has played professionally for over 15 years get to their first semi final.
Interestingly.. After this series Mini has switched from wide screen back to 4:3. Probably felt he need to change "something" into future and that is it for now.
On September 26 2025 19:37 Destroyer wrote: Interestingly.. After this series Mini has switched from wide screen back to 4:3. Probably felt he need to change "something" into future and that is it for now.
He always played in 4:3 before. Probably thinks since the switch to 16 his form has gone downhill, so back to 4:3 again.
On September 26 2025 19:37 Destroyer wrote: Interestingly.. After this series Mini has switched from wide screen back to 4:3. Probably felt he need to change "something" into future and that is it for now.
He always played in 4:3 before. Probably thinks since the switch to 16 his form has gone downhill, so back to 4:3 again.
hehe possibly the case yeah. Barracks is SnOw's best possible opponent and Snow's barrack's worst nightmare. Snow is like 157-42 vs barracks online
On September 26 2025 19:37 Destroyer wrote: Interestingly.. After this series Mini has switched from wide screen back to 4:3. Probably felt he need to change "something" into future and that is it for now.
He always played in 4:3 before. Probably thinks since the switch to 16 his form has gone downhill, so back to 4:3 again.
Yes I know, he was on 16 for about recent year or so. I honestly think that the ro8 was even rather successful, since in recent weeks I seen him lot mostly rather coaching the ladies and playing 2v2 fungames than any serious practicing.
Big believer in 4:3. Glad to see Mini going back. People look down on it because every screen is inherently wide, as in much wider than it is tall, so 4:3 can only have the same maximum height as 16;9. If we could give 4:3 its wings, it could actually be taller than 16;9, however we don't produce screens like this anymore. It's a beautiful aspect ratio.
Espesh for gaming, RTS in particular, I want less periph. It's better for focus and imo looks better. ASL21champMini OMG???
I should also add that aspect ratios are a fine line. 4:3 is beautiful but a cubic 3:3, a la instagram, is much less attractive. Similarly, you will never find a professional filmmaker shooting in 16;9, despite its online popularity. They typically go much wider. Just goes to show how arbitrary it is that 16;9 became a standard. It's purely commercial, and only really affected by the screen sizes companies are producing, not what is best for the art. And the fad of ultra-wide for games feels extremely bad to me. People have consumed those huge monitors and are playing their games as if watching a tennis match. No thanks. I rather play on a game boy. It's also why I expect so many RTS are quite zoomed out now, and all the infantry are like tiny specs on my screen, because people's monitors are just too fucking big. GET THE HOME THEATER OUT OF YOUR FACE, TIMMY. It's time to return to some good ol 21 inchers. that's what she said
Since BW always uses full height of the screen, it's basically 4:3 vs 5.33:3 The player using wide screen sees 1/3 more shit of what's going on. That's a huge W for large battles.
The 4:3 monitor you suggest woud be better for 12 vs 6 TvT And 16;9 for 9 vs 3 TvT
But what if 16:10 became the standard? Then we'd have a bit of both. 16:10 size is actually much nicer than 16;9.
Yeah well obviously on inherently wide screens, 16;9 has empirical advantage over 4:3. But there are other factors too that would make someone choose the “sub-optimal” setup, like personal comfort, aversion to extra noise, etc. A camera's viewfinder can be an ideal way to look at a scene instead of simply looking at a set with your naked eye. Cats also like small boxes, not large ones. The argument for designing for wide screen (16;9 or wider) over tall screen (4:3) would be that a wide object does not obstruct the vision of other units, whereas a tall object does. We don't see a whole lot of either extreme, though. Especially in Blizz universes, most objects fall in the middle and are boxy. For DORF, it looks like they are embracing some wider units. Radament from Diablo or perhaps the colossus from SC2 would be on the extreme end of what Blizz considers tall, because truly tall concepts constantly have to be made stubbier in these games to avoid a range of issues. Even in my own tests, a wide screen with tall objects has me seeing the bottoms of things a lot more and I must scroll a great deal to see the height of it. But considering you will be sticking with boxier objects—and total surface area is equal, i.e. the 4:3 isn't crammed into a 16;9 frame—then 4:3 feels good to me. All sides have that “TvT balance”. That is to say, there is far less spacial bias.
EPT
his form has gone downhill, so back to 4:3 again.![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/sRqZDOH.jpeg)
