|
On January 28 2009 05:41 Orlandu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2009 23:49 Kim_Hyun_Han wrote:
someone said that warcraft macro is harders than brood war macro?
cmon dude, the Destro Push scenario is an isolated one, just cause human need very good game sense and attention to deffend a destro push that means that in general that game is harder than this T.T
btw. awesome videos, no need to put war and brood in an arena, both games are beatiful No one mentioned the destroyer push as proof of why WarCraft 3's macro is harder than StarCraft's, or even that WarCraft 3's macro is harder than StarCraft's at all. This leads me to believe that you didn't read the thread at all and only skimmed it. Had you read, you wouldn't have posted this because in fact in one of my very own references to the example that you're referring to I made a very clear point of saying that it doesn't mean WarCraft 3's macro is even close to StarCraft's level. The only other person referring to this example was Ixion who made similar comments. Not to sound like a dick, but not reading thoroughly and then posting what you did is really doing much more harm than good and risks starting another senseless argument =[ (although I realize that even giving attention to this comment is a bad thing, I think clarification does more good than harm, hopefully) Just to clarify once more: no one is saying that WarCraft 3's macro is harder than StarCraft's, and the destroyer push example was ONLY used to illustrate that there is a deeper level to WarCraft 3's macro than most are aware of, and was most definitely NOT used to imply that WarCraft 3's level of macro is even close to StarCraft's. No such implications exist. EDIT: Ki_Do, right? =[
pardon, i really feel ashamed, i misread completely the destro push example, i could swear someone said warcrafft macro was harder cause of that scenario, now i re-read and none said that
|
grats lol that vid was pretty good
WHY GERMAN CHINA BEST WC3 PLAYERS 
|
On January 28 2009 07:16 Kim_Hyun_Han wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2009 05:41 Orlandu wrote:On January 27 2009 23:49 Kim_Hyun_Han wrote:
someone said that warcraft macro is harders than brood war macro?
cmon dude, the Destro Push scenario is an isolated one, just cause human need very good game sense and attention to deffend a destro push that means that in general that game is harder than this T.T
btw. awesome videos, no need to put war and brood in an arena, both games are beatiful No one mentioned the destroyer push as proof of why WarCraft 3's macro is harder than StarCraft's, or even that WarCraft 3's macro is harder than StarCraft's at all. This leads me to believe that you didn't read the thread at all and only skimmed it. Had you read, you wouldn't have posted this because in fact in one of my very own references to the example that you're referring to I made a very clear point of saying that it doesn't mean WarCraft 3's macro is even close to StarCraft's level. The only other person referring to this example was Ixion who made similar comments. Not to sound like a dick, but not reading thoroughly and then posting what you did is really doing much more harm than good and risks starting another senseless argument =[ (although I realize that even giving attention to this comment is a bad thing, I think clarification does more good than harm, hopefully) Just to clarify once more: no one is saying that WarCraft 3's macro is harder than StarCraft's, and the destroyer push example was ONLY used to illustrate that there is a deeper level to WarCraft 3's macro than most are aware of, and was most definitely NOT used to imply that WarCraft 3's level of macro is even close to StarCraft's. No such implications exist. EDIT: Ki_Do, right? =[ pardon, i really feel ashamed, i misread completely the destro push example, i could swear someone said warcrafft macro was harder cause of that scenario, now i re-read and none said that
hi ban dodging ki_do
|
On January 23 2009 23:23 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2009 16:13 inReacH wrote:On January 19 2009 06:35 Hazz wrote:On January 16 2009 14:31 inReacH wrote:
About the forked lightning... It's not spectacular for any reason other than it's entertaining and as I said before shows red's good zepp micro that he had both his heroes so low.
To anyone who thinks that wasn't a long forked lightning.. if it wasn't then why would red have dropped his units? I go naga very often and that shit was a STRETCH. it was just the maximum range, you're used to seeing it closer since naga has a shorter normal attack range than her forked lightning cast range and he dropped his heroes to be cute and it failed I was just trying to be an entertaining writer.. As a matter of fact the actual length of the lightning itself is longer or has the illusion of being longer than the maximum range on flat ground because it went over the trees. K THX Do you realize anyone could infer that it was the maximum range from the implications of me saying the length of it surprised me? So basically you said something that is obvious and added on something that you think makes you come off as intelligent... and even if you weren't wrong and the trees didn't add length all I was trying to do was appeal to my reader by adding some flavor to my summaries. ... You know your sick of posters who post out of their ass when you nearly write a paragraph trying to prove to someone he's an idiot. Oh give it up, the way you said it made one (likely to) assume that the range of the spell was longer than its normal max-range. Don't call someone an idiot when he makes a civil post like that, just explain what you meant to say - this is a good thread and there's no need to worsen the atmosphere in this way 
Ahhahahh, yeah the game broke itself just for that naga.. Did ANYONE think that it was longer then it's max range because that's not how computers work. FA do you really think the average TL user is that dumb or did you yourself not see how ridiculous what was said is?
|
On January 28 2009 09:12 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2009 23:23 FrozenArbiter wrote:On January 19 2009 16:13 inReacH wrote:On January 19 2009 06:35 Hazz wrote:On January 16 2009 14:31 inReacH wrote:
About the forked lightning... It's not spectacular for any reason other than it's entertaining and as I said before shows red's good zepp micro that he had both his heroes so low.
To anyone who thinks that wasn't a long forked lightning.. if it wasn't then why would red have dropped his units? I go naga very often and that shit was a STRETCH. it was just the maximum range, you're used to seeing it closer since naga has a shorter normal attack range than her forked lightning cast range and he dropped his heroes to be cute and it failed I was just trying to be an entertaining writer.. As a matter of fact the actual length of the lightning itself is longer or has the illusion of being longer than the maximum range on flat ground because it went over the trees. K THX Do you realize anyone could infer that it was the maximum range from the implications of me saying the length of it surprised me? So basically you said something that is obvious and added on something that you think makes you come off as intelligent... and even if you weren't wrong and the trees didn't add length all I was trying to do was appeal to my reader by adding some flavor to my summaries. ... You know your sick of posters who post out of their ass when you nearly write a paragraph trying to prove to someone he's an idiot. Oh give it up, the way you said it made one (likely to) assume that the range of the spell was longer than its normal max-range. Don't call someone an idiot when he makes a civil post like that, just explain what you meant to say - this is a good thread and there's no need to worsen the atmosphere in this way Ahhahahh, yeah the game broke itself just for that naga.. Did ANYONE think that it was longer then it's max range because that's not how computers work. FA do you really think the average TL user is that dumb or did you yourself not see how ridiculous what was said is?
Its how the fucking game works. Forked lightning range > naga attack range
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On January 28 2009 09:12 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2009 23:23 FrozenArbiter wrote:On January 19 2009 16:13 inReacH wrote:On January 19 2009 06:35 Hazz wrote:On January 16 2009 14:31 inReacH wrote:
About the forked lightning... It's not spectacular for any reason other than it's entertaining and as I said before shows red's good zepp micro that he had both his heroes so low.
To anyone who thinks that wasn't a long forked lightning.. if it wasn't then why would red have dropped his units? I go naga very often and that shit was a STRETCH. it was just the maximum range, you're used to seeing it closer since naga has a shorter normal attack range than her forked lightning cast range and he dropped his heroes to be cute and it failed I was just trying to be an entertaining writer.. As a matter of fact the actual length of the lightning itself is longer or has the illusion of being longer than the maximum range on flat ground because it went over the trees. K THX Do you realize anyone could infer that it was the maximum range from the implications of me saying the length of it surprised me? So basically you said something that is obvious and added on something that you think makes you come off as intelligent... and even if you weren't wrong and the trees didn't add length all I was trying to do was appeal to my reader by adding some flavor to my summaries. ... You know your sick of posters who post out of their ass when you nearly write a paragraph trying to prove to someone he's an idiot. Oh give it up, the way you said it made one (likely to) assume that the range of the spell was longer than its normal max-range. Don't call someone an idiot when he makes a civil post like that, just explain what you meant to say - this is a good thread and there's no need to worsen the atmosphere in this way Ahhahahh, yeah the game broke itself just for that naga.. Did ANYONE think that it was longer then it's max range because that's not how computers work. FA do you really think the average TL user is that dumb or did you yourself not see how ridiculous what was said is?
Obviously one would assume you were implying it was some kind of bug - for example, sunken colonies in SC can have their attack range extended if a friendly unit is being attacked nearby (a common example: protoss went for a quick cannon behind the minerals @ zergs expo, zergs sunken is out of range but if the zerg runs a ling in he can temporarily increase the range when the ling gets attacked - I'm not sure exactly how it works since I don't play zerg).
Here is what you initially wrote:
5:27 - The Longest Forked Lightning any Naga has thrown ever
The Red NE does some Zeppelin(Dropship) Harassment and when leaving he drops both heroes to take some shots at the Yellow players Zeppelin but Yellows Naga throws The longest Forked Lightning any Naga has thrown ever to Kill both heroes.
It should be noted that the fact that both of Reds heroes where so low they died to this is indicative of good Zeppelin micro. Also notice as the Zeppelin flying away it teeters to the left and right, clearly drunken with dispair for his fallen brethren.
How the hell are we - as non-WC3 players - meant to assume it means anything but an unusually long Forked Lightning?
If that's not what you meant to say - or indeed, even what was important about the sequence - then just bloody say so, don't launch into some defensive tirade about how we are all idiots when you are the one being misleading (regardless of if it was on purpose or not).
I'm getting pretty sick of your condescending attitude to be honest.
|
I should try it some day in the distant future, but it'd take a while to get as good as w/ SC. Not even the unit stats or abilities, I'd memorize them in 2 days. It'd be using them in combos.
|
On January 28 2009 10:08 FrozenArbiter wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2009 09:12 inReacH wrote:On January 23 2009 23:23 FrozenArbiter wrote:On January 19 2009 16:13 inReacH wrote:On January 19 2009 06:35 Hazz wrote:On January 16 2009 14:31 inReacH wrote:
About the forked lightning... It's not spectacular for any reason other than it's entertaining and as I said before shows red's good zepp micro that he had both his heroes so low.
To anyone who thinks that wasn't a long forked lightning.. if it wasn't then why would red have dropped his units? I go naga very often and that shit was a STRETCH. it was just the maximum range, you're used to seeing it closer since naga has a shorter normal attack range than her forked lightning cast range and he dropped his heroes to be cute and it failed I was just trying to be an entertaining writer.. As a matter of fact the actual length of the lightning itself is longer or has the illusion of being longer than the maximum range on flat ground because it went over the trees. K THX Do you realize anyone could infer that it was the maximum range from the implications of me saying the length of it surprised me? So basically you said something that is obvious and added on something that you think makes you come off as intelligent... and even if you weren't wrong and the trees didn't add length all I was trying to do was appeal to my reader by adding some flavor to my summaries. ... You know your sick of posters who post out of their ass when you nearly write a paragraph trying to prove to someone he's an idiot. Oh give it up, the way you said it made one (likely to) assume that the range of the spell was longer than its normal max-range. Don't call someone an idiot when he makes a civil post like that, just explain what you meant to say - this is a good thread and there's no need to worsen the atmosphere in this way Ahhahahh, yeah the game broke itself just for that naga.. Did ANYONE think that it was longer then it's max range because that's not how computers work. FA do you really think the average TL user is that dumb or did you yourself not see how ridiculous what was said is? Obviously one would assume you were implying it was some kind of bug - for example, sunken colonies in SC can have their attack range extended if a friendly unit is being attacked nearby (a common example: protoss went for a quick cannon behind the minerals @ zergs expo, zergs sunken is out of range but if the zerg runs a ling in he can temporarily increase the range when the ling gets attacked - I'm not sure exactly how it works since I don't play zerg). Here is what you initially wrote: Show nested quote +5:27 - The Longest Forked Lightning any Naga has thrown ever
The Red NE does some Zeppelin(Dropship) Harassment and when leaving he drops both heroes to take some shots at the Yellow players Zeppelin but Yellows Naga throws The longest Forked Lightning any Naga has thrown ever to Kill both heroes.
It should be noted that the fact that both of Reds heroes where so low they died to this is indicative of good Zeppelin micro. Also notice as the Zeppelin flying away it teeters to the left and right, clearly drunken with dispair for his fallen brethren. How the hell are we - as non-WC3 players - meant to assume it means anything but an unusually long Forked Lightning? If that's not what you meant to say - or indeed, even what was important about the sequence - then just bloody say so, don't launch into some defensive tirade about how we are all idiots when you are the one being misleading (regardless of if it was on purpose or not). I'm getting pretty sick of your condescending attitude to be honest.
Jesus Christ.. everyone except one guy thanked me for the effort I put into the OP except for this random guy who made a 2 line post to point out what he thought were flaws in the OP in an unencouraging manner...
On January 16 2009 09:37 Hazz wrote:
not only was that a normal range forked lightning, the shockwave part was good because it destroyed the tower as soon as it was put down
Do you really think that is a constructive way to communicate??
It reads "Not only were you wrong about this but you were also wrong about this"
And your taking his side because I want to tell this guy to fuck off?
Either show me the condescension in my OP, argue that his post isn't offensive or fuck off and stop singling me out as the aggressor in every thread.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
-_-
Either you've forgot how it all started or you are deliberately twisting things, let's recap:
On January 16 2009 09:05 CDRdude wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2009 15:26 inReacH wrote:
5:27 - The Longest Forked Lightning any Naga has thrown ever
6:29 - AM matrix dodges a shockwave What's so exciting about a long range forked lighting? Did he do some micro trick to break the set maximum range? Also, I don't know what you mean by AM matrix dodge. I watched it a couple times, and I have no idea what happened. 
On January 16 2009 09:20 ExaltedElegance wrote:
The Archmage matrix dodge involved using one of his Scout Towers to take the hit of the Shockwave for him.
On January 16 2009 09:29 topherthetoad wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2009 09:20 ExaltedElegance wrote:
The Archmage matrix dodge involved using one of his Scout Towers to take the hit of the Shockwave for him. Nope. The explanation is wrong as well. The shockwave clearly goes through the tower and hits the Archmage. What was nice about the clip was the shockwave killing the Ivory Tower. You can tell that the HU player was towering the Orc due to the presence of militia and the item slots of the AM (He had 3 Ivory Towers). He was putting up Ivory towers, which once placed automatically build themselves very quickly. The shockwave, not the 'dodge' was what was nice. The Orc killed the tower as soon as it was placed down. Had he not used shockwave when he did, the tower would not have been killed in one hit. And another thing I noticed quickly skimming the explanation. 2:37 - Lightning fast Staff of Preservation to save Archer from Shockwave should actually be saves TWO archers, which is even more impressive.
On January 16 2009 09:37 Hazz wrote:
not only was that a normal range forked lightning, the shockwave part was good because it destroyed the tower as soon as it was put down
Hazz was clearly responding to the guy who asked about these two very things (his post was just a few minutes after the guy who answered above him).
You CLEARLY said in your OP that it was "The longest Forked Lightning Ever". Someone (in fact, multiple someones) points out that it was a normal range Forked Lightning. You reply with this:
On January 16 2009 14:31 inReacH wrote:
About the forked lightning... It's not spectacular for any reason other than it's entertaining and as I said before shows red's good zepp micro that he had both his heroes so low.
To anyone who thinks that wasn't a long forked lightning.. if it wasn't then why would red have dropped his units? I go naga very often and that shit was a STRETCH.
Still maintaining that it was somehow unusually long, or at least it's very easy to read it that way.
Hazz replies with this:
On January 19 2009 06:35 Hazz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2009 14:31 inReacH wrote:
About the forked lightning... It's not spectacular for any reason other than it's entertaining and as I said before shows red's good zepp micro that he had both his heroes so low.
To anyone who thinks that wasn't a long forked lightning.. if it wasn't then why would red have dropped his units? I go naga very often and that shit was a STRETCH. it was just the maximum range, you're used to seeing it closer since naga has a shorter normal attack range than her forked lightning cast range and he dropped his heroes to be cute and it failed
Which is completely civil. For some reason you decide to have a complete fit over this:
On January 19 2009 16:13 inReacH wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2009 06:35 Hazz wrote:On January 16 2009 14:31 inReacH wrote:
About the forked lightning... It's not spectacular for any reason other than it's entertaining and as I said before shows red's good zepp micro that he had both his heroes so low.
To anyone who thinks that wasn't a long forked lightning.. if it wasn't then why would red have dropped his units? I go naga very often and that shit was a STRETCH. it was just the maximum range, you're used to seeing it closer since naga has a shorter normal attack range than her forked lightning cast range and he dropped his heroes to be cute and it failed I was just trying to be an entertaining writer.. As a matter of fact the actual length of the lightning itself is longer or has the illusion of being longer than the maximum range on flat ground because it went over the trees. K THX Do you realize anyone could infer that it was the maximum range from the implications of me saying the length of it surprised me? So basically you said something that is obvious and added on something that you think makes you come off as intelligent... and even if you weren't wrong and the trees didn't add length all I was trying to do was appeal to my reader by adding some flavor to my summaries. ... You know your sick of posters who post out of their ass when you nearly write a paragraph trying to prove to someone he's an idiot.
And you wonder why I'm taking his side? You refuse to give up a completely pointless argument and behave like a condescending prick in the process. Why the fuck shouldn't I take his side?
I didn't say anywhere that your OP was condescending - in fact, I said it was a very good OP. However, you've been nothing but a condescending prick since, for instance, on this very page:
Ahhahahh, yeah the game broke itself just for that naga.. Did ANYONE think that it was longer then it's max range because that's not how computers work. FA do you really think the average TL user is that dumb or did you yourself not see how ridiculous what was said is?
Yes, you made a good thread, great, it's appreciated! But if you can't take one guy criticizing.. in fact, not even criticizing but correcting, one little detail, then you shouldn't be posting.
|
On January 28 2009 06:54 cava wrote:
I've played both bw and war3 a considerable amount. I was always able to get top 50 in the ladder, on iccup I can barely get to c or c+ if I really try hard for a month. Broodwar is infinitely harder in all aspects.
I'd say that this indicates more that ICCup is a higher level ladder than the Battle.net ladders for WC3. Which makes sense really, any idiot with a copy of WC3 can play on Battle.net in a few clicks, while generally ICCup players at least have some interest in competitive SC. You can't really make an accurate judgement of how difficult the two games are to play(although I do agree that BW is harder) without having played at a very high level of competition in both of them.
|
On January 28 2009 15:48 armed_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2009 06:54 cava wrote:
I've played both bw and war3 a considerable amount. I was always able to get top 50 in the ladder, on iccup I can barely get to c or c+ if I really try hard for a month. Broodwar is infinitely harder in all aspects. I'd say that this indicates more that ICCup is a higher level ladder than the Battle.net ladders for WC3. Which makes sense really, any idiot with a copy of WC3 can play on Battle.net in a few clicks, while generally ICCup players at least have some interest in competitive SC. You can't really make an accurate judgement of how difficult the two games are to play(although I do agree that BW is harder) without having played at a very high level of competition in both of them.
This.
Only getting top50 in Asia would be considered an achievement. The rest of the ladders are choc full of inferior players.
|
The above is totally correct, but in the earlier days of TFT ladder was very competitively played.
|
do you guys know any site dedicated to warcraft3 ala TL to starcraft?
|
Sweden33719 Posts
WCReplays.com
There's already a poster called Grey or Grayfox (or f0x) or something there tho xD!! I think anyway, it seems so familiar.
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
sweet post
when i had no internet for afew days i started playing wc3 melee vs comps it was pretty fun
btw is there a most 'imba' race in wc3? so far moon and grubby sky whatever i dont see any undeads and i love UD
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I think TeD and Happy are the undeads doing the best recently.
|
I'd take FoV over Happy but Happy is third for sure.
|
Here's the deal with war3. Starcraft mentality doesn't work in this game AT ALL. Most pro replays are won and lost off one base. Humans of course will fast expo, and place many many towers to stay under 50 UPKEEP -- meaning they get their full gold income. Oh say and orc player like myself tries to take these expansions down he will be met with footies/ archmage elementals and eventually dragon hawk riders which will kill your catapults. The fact that you lose money when you make a certain amount of units just drives me crazy.
OKAY! I have to make WAY more extra units to take out this human's expansion, OH but wait we're not gonna let you do that, you will LOSE money, so I'm getting 7 gold per carry and the human 20. Catapults do literally no dmg to upgraded towers and three human peasants can repair quicker than 12 scvs!! Oh, and if you wanna expand the map and take 4 expansions that's 20 workers right there, add another 10 for wood and you're hero/units and you're already beyond no upkeep.
If they take off upkeep I know for a fact the starcraft gamers will be able to own it up.
|
On February 06 2009 03:59 GrkMagas wrote:
Here's the deal with war3. Starcraft mentality doesn't work in this game AT ALL. Most pro replays are won and lost off one base. Humans of course will fast expo, and place many many towers to stay under 50 UPKEEP -- meaning they get their full gold income. Oh say and orc player like myself tries to take these expansions down he will be met with footies/ archmage elementals and eventually dragon hawk riders which will kill your catapults. The fact that you lose money when you make a certain amount of units just drives me crazy.
OKAY! I have to make WAY more extra units to take out this human's expansion, OH but wait we're not gonna let you do that, you will LOSE money, so I'm getting 7 gold per carry and the human 20. Catapults do literally no dmg to upgraded towers and three human peasants can repair quicker than 12 scvs!! Oh, and if you wanna expand the map and take 4 expansions that's 20 workers right there, add another 10 for wood and you're hero/units and you're already beyond no upkeep.
If they take off upkeep I know for a fact the starcraft gamers will be able to own it up.
Lawl rofl lawl.
|
Here is another good video, I didn't like the one in the OP too much. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2826398269254087966&ei=L4CLSZ27IYnWqQL_59m8Cw&q=skills to pay the bills warcraft&hl=en
It was a pretty standard Fork of Lightning, I don't see what the giant fuss over it is?
On January 28 2009 06:54 cava wrote:
I've played both bw and war3 a considerable amount. I was always able to get top 50 in the ladder, on iccup I can barely get to c or c+ if I really try hard for a month. Broodwar is infinitely harder in all aspects.
Well when the next ladder season rolls around try playing on the pro ladder. The level of competition is high for a shot at the global finals. And I'm sure once they fix up iccup for war3 and people start playing on it you will see the same high level of competition as the SC ladder.
On February 06 2009 03:59 GrkMagas wrote:
Here's the deal with war3. Starcraft mentality doesn't work in this game AT ALL. Most pro replays are won and lost off one base. Humans of course will fast expo, and place many many towers to stay under 50 UPKEEP -- meaning they get their full gold income. Oh say and orc player like myself tries to take these expansions down he will be met with footies/ archmage elementals and eventually dragon hawk riders which will kill your catapults. The fact that you lose money when you make a certain amount of units just drives me crazy.
OKAY! I have to make WAY more extra units to take out this human's expansion, OH but wait we're not gonna let you do that, you will LOSE money, so I'm getting 7 gold per carry and the human 20. Catapults do literally no dmg to upgraded towers and three human peasants can repair quicker than 12 scvs!! Oh, and if you wanna expand the map and take 4 expansions that's 20 workers right there, add another 10 for wood and you're hero/units and you're already beyond no upkeep.
If they take off upkeep I know for a fact the starcraft gamers will be able to own it up.
The whole upkeep thing adds to the strategy of the game. I thought you SC elitists claim to have great strategic minds?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
