• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 02:31
CEST 08:31
KST 15:31
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202562RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension5
StarCraft 2
General
#1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Server Blocker Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond)
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign BW General Discussion Dewalt's Show Matches in China
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance
Strategy
[G] Mineral Boosting Does 1 second matter in StarCraft? Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Total Annihilation Server - TAForever Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread Post Pic of your Favorite Food!
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Eight Anniversary as a TL…
Mizenhauer
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 705 users

Down with Deathball: Oracle, MSC, and Sentry Ideas

Forum Index > Legacy of the Void
Post a Reply
NinjaDuckBob
Profile Joined March 2014
177 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-07-08 01:13:47
July 07 2015 20:48 GMT
#1
Often people mention the damage-dealers of Protoss Gateway needing improvement for a core composition that isn't a deathball, and that has the capability to defend and engage on multiple fronts. I'm certainly for such, but I also believe the early- and mid-game support units could be of great use for that purpose.

Additionally, many say that the Sentry is in need of some love due to Forcefields having more counters. The MSC is still complained about design-wise, and while the Oracle has been developing to be a better unit than it once was, I still believe it could be further improved to help support a non-deathball Protoss army.

I believe these units allow for some great design potential to improve the Protoss situation. I don't think they alone could outright solve it, but changes to them could help.

I will first present the ideas themselves, then go into more detail about why I believe they would be beneficial.

Bare List of Changes:

+ Show Spoiler +
Oracle:
-Time Warp moved to Oracle.
-- Time Warp is now the size of Forcefield, and costs 50 energy to cast.
-Stasis Ward moved to MSC.

MSC:
-Forcefield moved to MSC.
-- Costs 25 energy to cast.
-Stasis Ward moved to MSC.
-- Time Warp moved to Oracle.
-- Photon Overcharge removed.
-- MSC speed increased.
-- MSC attack reduced/removed (maybe).

Sentry:
-Ability "Energize" added
-- Rapidly increases Sheild replenish rate, does not affect time before Shields start replenishing.
-- Sentry is immobile while using Energize, but it may be deactivated.
-- Is a "bubble" around the Sentry, similar to Guardian Shield.
-- Does not stack.
-- Costs 50 energy to activate, drains energy while active.
-Forcefield moved to MSC.
-Sentry speed increased.
-Guardian Shield radius slightly reduced (maybe).


Oracle Reasoning:

+ Show Spoiler +
The Oracle to me is in a strange -- not necessarily bad, but strange -- spot right now. It acts as a detection, positional tactics, and harassment unit.

I am particularly interested in its potential as a positional tactics unit. Stasis Ward is an interesting ability, but it cannot actively be cast in engagements for obtaining advantages -- you pretty much lay it, wait for the opponent to be hit by it, and then engage the lesser army.

My idea for the Oracle is an ability that can be more actively used in combat scenarios. It's pretty simple -- Time Warp. Except not the large Time Warp that the current MSC has. I'm thinking Time Warps that are more Forcefield-sized (taking less energy to cast, of course) that can affect both enemy and allied units.

The reason for the small size over the large is that it help break up clumps of units, while the large Time Warp often just keeps the entire enemy army from going through it, or is simply cast on a large portion of it. Smaller Time Warps allow the Protoss to choose whether they want to discourage an engagement with a wall of them, or simply split up the army clumps as the armies could still easily split around them. Both the Protoss and the opponent would benefit from not balling up their armies through a Time Warp.

Also, if a player does decide to simply a-move a ball of units through the Time Warp(s), the smaller size means that the whole army isn't affected -- an army a-moving through would automatically become less clumped due to a portion of it simply being slower than the rest of the army.

Additionally, when Time Warp -- or any ability that can easily be utilized in combat -- can only be used by a single unit (the MSC), the rest of the army will tend to stay with that unit instead of splitting apart. Contrasting, by having an ability that can be used in active combat on a unit that you can have more than one of, you allow more opportunity for combat on multiple fronts utilizing it.

As a little bonus, it fits Oracle fantasy better. :-)

There could be an issue of having too many spells on one unit. Stasis Ward could be moved to the MSC since Time Warp would now be on the Oracle. Reasoning explained below.


MSC Reasoning:

+ Show Spoiler +
I honestly think at this point that Forcefield would be better put on the MSC, for less of an energy cost, replacing Photon Overcharge (reasoning for PO removal explained below). This means that you have more Forcefields available early for a cheaper gas cost, but you cannot simply spam them offensively in the midgame (though you could still use them in a key engagement). They would be used for early-stage defense against Zergling all-ins and the like, while aiding expansions against runbys.

I would also like to see Stasis Ward become a midgame upgrade for the MSC and Mothership. It makes more sense to me personally that an ability that is cast outside of combat but can have such a strong effect if successful would make more sense on a unit that shouldn't be designed for use in main engagements (single "hero units" in combat contributes to the deathball, causing most combat units to be used alongside that one unit, but a single unit that can be used outside of engagements might not be so bad).

I would not be against increasing the MSC speed significantly if these changes were implemented as that would further allow it to function apart from the main Protoss army and more easily assist in expansion defense. Even if this required its attack be removed to avoid overpowered early harassment, but I'm not convinced that would be an issue given its low range and DPS, combined with economy changes.

A well-desgined core Protoss army I don't think would require Photon Overcharge for defense, so an MSC with Recall, Forcefield, and Stasis Ward I think could be better than the current MSC, and those spells together on the unit would make sense to me for some positional defense and other utility that doesn't involve the entire Protoss army being with it (example: going around to certain areas of the map by itself laying Stasis Wards).


Sentry Reasoning:

+ Show Spoiler +
The Sentry

Now for the Sentry. With Forcefield on the MSC, this allows room for a different spell to make the Sentry more useful.

Guardian Shield is an ability that improves the durability of Gateway units in combat. I would like to continue with the durability theme of the Sentry, though not with another directly in-combat ability.

Energize would be an ability that rapidly increases the Shield restoration rate of Protoss units. This does not affect units that have just taken damage, so it is best used soon after an engagement or in a prolonged one where lots of micro is involved. This type of ability would reward Protoss for conserving their units -- including Gateway units -- as it would allow damaged Protoss units to enter combat again more quickly with full Shields. This increases decisions that can be made by both sides -- should the Protoss go for as much damage as possible while sacrificing units, or pause to retreat and replenish to go back in soon after? Should the opponent chase the Protoss units to inflict damage before they can recharge and come at me again, or can my reinforcements come in time?

Energize would be in the form of a bubble around the Sentry (like Guardian Shield). It would not stack. It would have a moderate initial cost (followed by draining energy, like Guardian Shield) and cause the Sentry to be stationary while using it, making good positional and timing choices important to fully benefit from it and use it efficiently. This also allows opportunities for counterplay from the opponent.

I would also like to increase the speed of the Sentry to be on par with the rest of the Gateway units. Forcefield would no longer be a factor in mobility restraints, and Guardian Shield would be more beneficial to mobile armies. You could also reduce the radius of Guardian Shield slightly to support smaller unit groups as opposed to large unit clumps, though I'm not entirely sure this would be necessary with other anti-deathball changes implemented.

Massing Sentries in one army would no longer be an efficient way to use them if these changes were implemented, but rather having a few or a small handful of them spread out across a large front or multiple fronts, due to none of their abilities stacking. Micro from both sides would be rewarded to keep Sentries alive or kill them, but they are not unreplacable so you don't need your whole army protecting them. This also allows more gas and Warp Gate cycles (if Warp Gate ends up remaining the same or similar) to be used on other units, further allowing for a more dynamic Protoss army that can stand its ground without requiring Forcefields.

Because of the general effects and no need to mass them for them to be effective, the Sentry would have utility throughout the whole game (even more so if a non-deathball core Protoss army is the norm), rather than becoming largely insignificant past the midgame.


These changes I believe could greatly help towards supporting a core Protoss army that does not need to be in deathball form.

Any civil feedback and ideas of your own are appreciated!
NinjaDuckBob ~ Fear the fuzzy!
ChristianS
Profile Blog Joined March 2011
United States3188 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-07-08 00:54:55
July 07 2015 21:06 GMT
#2
Some ideas (like putting FF on MSC) seem awesome if you could get them to work. The obvious problem is that a lot of this negates some of the design Blizzard has already put into this – why have ravagers that can bust FF's if you're limiting someone to a maximum of, like, 8 FF's stored up at once anyway? Not to mention fancy new abilities like stasis ward can hardly get used much in the game.

Energize, in the form you indicated, seems not good enough. I think it's supposed to be used for hit-and-run tactics, right? Where you just take damage on the shield, then pull back, get your shield back and go in again? But put it this way – I'm not sure it would be overpowered for sentry to have that as a passive. One thing would be to make it more like a shield battery from SC1 – directly spend energy to heal shields – but that makes it a bit of a weird click-spam heal.

This is opening a whole big can of worms, but what about removing the oracle's harassment ability instead and replacing it with time warp? Then photon overcharge remains on the MsC, and the oracle is left with Revelation, Stasis Ward, and Time Warp. It fully reverses the HotS trend where oracles are super useful in the first 8 minutes of the game and then not good for much after that (maybe the occasional revelation, but mostly you either kill workers with them in the early game or they weren't worth it). They could even have a bit of a cost reduction if they weren't such an early-game threat.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." -Robert J. Hanlon
FrkFrJss
Profile Joined April 2015
Canada1205 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-07-07 21:13:58
July 07 2015 21:10 GMT
#3
First, I do not play LotV, and thus all of this is based on what I have observed and also from watching HotS games.

I think that these ideas are (in general), fairly well thought out. I definitely sympathize with the notion of having a more interesting Protoss army--especially one that does not rely on such annoying abilities. However, I think the problem that this suggestion (and others) falls into is that it is necessarily narrow in its scope but in an area that needs to be broad. That is, you focus on three units, and that is best because you can think very carefully about those units.

However, the implications of these changes affect the entire Protoss structure with regards to attacking and defending. Thus, I think it is a bit of a catch twenty-two where you cannot feasibly argue changes for the entire Protoss army without venturing too far out into theory.

I think the idea of using the sentry as a bit of healer is a good idea, but Protoss shields regenerate very quickly as it is. I think it would be better if the ability perhaps provided a flat increase to the amount of shields but only within a certain proximity to the Nexus.

The idea of putting a small time warp on the Oracle is very interesting, but I feel that it would somewhat become like the Sentry, as you mass oracles and then spam them over the entire army.

As for the mothership core, I just don't see what difference it would make to put the FF on her. You would have a maximum of eight forcefields early game when Protoss (I think) would probably have more than 8 forcefields.

The biggest problem that I see (keeping in mind that I have not played LotV yet) is that Protoss would need significant buffs to their core army. The point of FF is to keep the enemy at bay and/or to ensure that you can pick off small portions of the enemy army. Without the ability to do so, Stalkers would lose quite a bit of their power as in straight engagements without blink (I'm thinking earlyish game) they do not fare too well. Zealots sometimes need forcefields to engage enemies, and especially against Zerg, Protoss use forcefields to block key areas while they build up their army. Zealots without speed are especially vulnerable to being kited, and without lots of FF, Terran would be able to micro a bit more easily against Protoss w/o many FF.

So, TL;DR, I like the idea of the changes, but there needs to be significant thought towards the rest of the Protoss army as well in conjunction with these changes.

EDIT: I agree that putting the FF on the MSC does limit the design of breaking forcefields, but I imagined the ravager shot to be more than just a FF buster.

EDIT2: Also, I feel that you would have to put some ability from the Oracle on the MSC in exchange for time warp, as an Oracle with Revelation, Time Warp, and Stasis ward would probably be too much.
"Keep Moving Forward" - Walt Disney
JCoto
Profile Joined October 2014
Spain574 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-07-07 22:06:59
July 07 2015 21:28 GMT
#4
Well, if you want my opinion, I should think that MSC should be removed in almost all the cases.

Protoss is the race marked with the "have this or die" tech (Warpgate, MSC) which makes the design not specially funny, even if it works quite decently.

In my opinion, they have to go back to some Alpha design, re-standarize Protoss macro, and give powerful macro abilities and viable Gateways without being tied to Crhonoboost + Proxy Gate or Warpgate Timings.

With the introduction of the Adept, Protoss can be much more competent vs Bio early game and standarizing access to spells early game for Nexus (after gateway at 150min) could give and some additional defensive mechanics (such as Cannons being able to be chronoboosted) or new spells to stay in game. Photon cannon then becomes innecesary, and MSC more dispensable. Also back in HotS Alpha, Recall was a Nexus spell as well as Photon Overcharge. Generating energy tension between CB and Recall it's also a good way to limit all-ins while having more army mobility (possibility to recall more than 1 group). You can have a very expensive Recall powered by the same energy that boosts your production, so that's balanced.

They never took the time to really fix Protoss macro in an standard scheme, and that has consequences. Recall, Energyze and Photon Overcharge are three spells that could be just given to the Nexus, and Oracle can just take a nerfed Time Warp (they are nerfing it in LotV on the MSC anyways).

MSC is just a band-aid that has empowered deathballs, instead of promoting skirmish play, because of the simple fact of being a heroic unit. It doesn't achieve nothing that couldn't be achieved without it via Nexus (upgraded or not) + Sentry/Oracle splitting their abilites. It also limits defending at various positions because of the same fact. Also Photon Overcharge design had to be done that way because if not, it could not be usable against air (reason why they moved the cannon to the nexus)

Edit: I managed to find a fan video of HotS Alpha Nexus abilities (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrr71THLb1E) Anyways, the full sesion of Blizzcon 2011 should be on youtube.


Polishing Macro-related mechanics and design has never been done outside some WoL beta patches, and it should happen in LotV because if not, racial core weaknesses are going to stay in.
RoomOfMush
Profile Joined March 2015
1296 Posts
July 07 2015 21:32 GMT
#5
Have a look at what I did with the MSC in my mod SC2 Custom Craft because it comes close to what you propose:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/sc2-maps/485664-sc2-custom-craft

I made the MSC a regular unit instead of a hero and gave it the Force Field from the Sentry. I also gave it an ability to recharge shields of a unit but removed the Time Warp and Photon Overcharge.
In my opinion Time Warp is not a very good ability since instead of buffing your own units it makes enemies weaker and harder to micro. It does not create micro opportunities, it takes them away. It does not encourage army movement and retreats, it encourages death balls and fighting to the end.
TronJovolta
Profile Joined April 2013
United States323 Posts
July 07 2015 23:21 GMT
#6
You're clearly a toss player. the last thing the oracle needs is more power LOL.
[UoN]Sentinel
Profile Blog Joined November 2009
United States11320 Posts
July 08 2015 02:01 GMT
#7
I do like the redesign of the Sentry as a shield battery on steroids. Seems more fitting for its role.

How would you imagine your new MSC transitions to the Mothership? Does it keep everything it has plus the cloaking field, or would you make other changes there?
Нас зовет дух отцов, память старых бойцов, дух Москвы и твердыня Полтавы
NinjaDuckBob
Profile Joined March 2014
177 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-07-08 02:53:40
July 08 2015 02:23 GMT
#8
@ChristianS:

To me it seems like the FF-destroying aspect of the Ravager was mainly implemented because it was so annoying to deal with mass FFs from Sentries. Basically mostly just a patch-up for that particular issue. It might actually be beneficial to remove that aspect if FFs became more scarce as you would want each individual Forcefield to have more value -- in fact, I wouldn't be against testing of making each Forcefield larger or last longer or both if these changes were implemented.

A core Protoss army that does not rely on offensive FFs would be much better design, in my opinion. But that doesn't mean FFs couldn't still be in the game as a "clutch" defense option.

I think you could simply raise the Energize recharge rate higher and higher until it became useful for its purpose. Making it a passive ability eliminates a good portion of the choice-making strategies for both players, though, as that eliminates the stationary and energy-consuming aspects of it.

I wouldn't be against the idea of having an Oracle with Time Warp, Stasis Ward, and Revelation. Definitely defines it as a positional unit. That would actually probably be my second choice of testing if Blizzard really didn't want to remove PO. But I still think the ability to defend without PO would be the ideal situation. Honestly I don't like reducing the cost of them though as that just makes them more massable. A moderate cost means you have a few of them for utility but it's not a huge blow to your mid and especially lategame economies. I wouldn't even mind if you bumped the gas cost up to 175 or 200.

@FrkFrJss:

Please understand that I am totally for looking at other Protoss units as well to improve the race as a whole. I'd be okay if only one or two of these ideas could be implemented, but if they more were, I do understand other changes to the race would also need to be implemented. I don't claim these changes alone would completely fix the problems, but I do think they could help going towards that goal.

I would be willing to see the MSC go and design the Protoss early game without it, but I just don't think Blizzard is going to do that. The next best thing is to give it some utility that doesn't contribute as much to the deathball and allows other Protoss units to be buffed to aid in defense (though it could still be a defensive unit, you would still require damage output that is lost from PO, giving room for core unit buffs).

@JCoto:

As stated earlier in this post, I'd be just fine with designing Protoss to where it doesn't need the MSC. I simply don't see that happening at this point. I still think the MSC could be designed to be better than it is now, though, as a utility unit that can enhance Protoss but can't really do much just by itself (as in PO) without other units.

I do believe the Adept has potential as a core unit, and could probably already be considered one against Bio, but Protoss still needs a non-deathball core against other compositions as well.

@RoomOfMush:

Interesting concept, I wouldn't mind it being tried out. I just don't see the MSC, Sentry, and Mothership all being removed at this point. One issue that might come up is the slow speed -- with the ability to effectively heal Protoss units in-combat, it could be used with a large lategame Protoss army. That's not necessarily horrible -- even well-designed units can be put in a deathball -- but the slow speed means that if it was it would require the slow Protoss army to stay together even more. I do understand that if it wasn't slow that it would be usable in the early and midgame on the battlefield -- I'm not sure if that's actually bad though.

I don't think every ability needs to buff your own units to be well-designed and support your army -- the Sentry would take that role in these ideas. I think much of the reason Time Warp in its current form is like you say it is, is due to the large size and energy cost of it. A small Time Warp still allows units to go around it without having to find a whole other path, while a wall of small Time Warps wouldn't completely cut off pieces of the opponent's army like Forcefield does. This further allows buffs to core Gateway units as the positional advantage of the spell wouldn't be as rigid -- particularly since this version would affect allied units as well.

@TronJovolta:

I don't feel obligated to respond to that comment, but I will anyway.

For your information, I am a Random player. If you knew me from the Battle.net forums, you would know I've suggested things for all races over the last couple years of SC2. I was an advocate for a unit for Zerg that would have had an attack almost just like the Ravager's Corrosive Bile before the Ravager was even known by anybody. I was an advocate for Valkyries before the Liberator was introduced. I suggested a warm-up time for a higher-damage Snipe before they said they were testing such a thing for the return of Snipe. I made a thread about addressing community concerns shortly before the weekly updates from DK started coming out. I'm not claiming I am the reason for these changes, but that should be credit for relatively little bias and a history of suggestions that sooner or later came to fruition in concept, whether it was because I suggested them or not.

I also don't see how giving Oracles Time Warp is in any way related to Pulsar Beam -- even if you want to use it in conjunction with Pulsar Beam to slow units trying to go through a narrow path to kill the Oracles (I don't know why it would need to be a narrow path unless the defender has 0 forces to defend his main already and needs to go up the ramp), that's a good 50 energy per Time Warp that they can't use for Pulsar Beam. It's mainly something to make them useful support units in the midst of an engagement, while not being massed -- in fact, I'd be willing to increase the gas cost and/or supply cost to avoid them being massed.
NinjaDuckBob ~ Fear the fuzzy!
NinjaDuckBob
Profile Joined March 2014
177 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-07-08 02:55:35
July 08 2015 02:30 GMT
#9
On July 08 2015 11:01 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
I do like the redesign of the Sentry as a shield battery on steroids. Seems more fitting for its role.

How would you imagine your new MSC transitions to the Mothership? Does it keep everything it has plus the cloaking field, or would you make other changes there?

Honestly I was just thinking keep the same spells, maybe less energy cost or setup time for Stasis Ward. I really don't want to make the Mothership that powerful lest it support a deathball too well.

Maybe it could be made faster and in the place of the MSC's Recall it could place "Recall Wards" where a limited number of units under the Mothership could teleport to a single time, using up the "Recall Ward" (and maybe a limited amount of units could go to one unused "Recall Ward" to teleport to another one, using both of them up). That would essentially make the Mothership a tool to use for multi-front positioning as opposed to a clumpy deathball unit.
NinjaDuckBob ~ Fear the fuzzy!
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 3h 29m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
WinterStarcraft720
Nina 241
StarCraft: Brood War
Sea 3729
firebathero 298
ggaemo 153
Noble 42
Dewaltoss 22
League of Legends
JimRising 698
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K1671
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor118
Other Games
summit1g5364
Fuzer 164
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick936
BasetradeTV51
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH252
• Adnapsc2 20
• intothetv
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• LUISG 0
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
StarCraft: Brood War
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota2110
League of Legends
• Doublelift4355
• Lourlo1088
Other Games
• Scarra1613
Upcoming Events
CranKy Ducklings
3h 29m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
7h 29m
CSO Cup
9h 29m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
11h 29m
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
1d 2h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 7h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 11h
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
Online Event
3 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
4 days
[ Show More ]
The PondCast
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Korean StarCraft League
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Esports World Cup 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
BSL Team Wars
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.