If the build time is increased from for example 100 seconds to 120, how would that affect TvZ?
The patch that will be uploaded this evening. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=304955¤tpage=318#6359
Forum Index > SC2 Maps & Custom Games |
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
July 05 2013 09:57 GMT
#6361
If the build time is increased from for example 100 seconds to 120, how would that affect TvZ? The patch that will be uploaded this evening. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=304955¤tpage=318#6359 | ||
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
July 05 2013 10:36 GMT
#6362
On July 05 2013 18:57 Kabel wrote: @Spire build time If the build time is increased from for example 100 seconds to 120, how would that affect TvZ? The patch that will be uploaded this evening. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=304955¤tpage=318#6359 Spire build time doesn't matter atm, cus mutas bad due to medi healing IMO. Nerf medi healing and noone will notice it has increased if they aren't told. Anyway I also updated the previous post. | ||
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
July 05 2013 10:59 GMT
#6363
On July 05 2013 18:20 Kabel wrote: - Zergling build time increased from 24 to 27 seconds. - Hydralisk build time increased from 30 to 33 seconds. - Queen attack cooldown nerfed from 1 second to 1,25 seconds. The point of this is to make Zerg more vulnerable when not having units. It will be a slightly larger risk in playing greedy, which might make it easier for Protoss to punish Zerg. (Since it will be harder to pop a large amount of Zerg units so quickly.) Is this a problem? I rather have the feeling that zerg already cannot play like that in Starbow, simply due to the Starbow larva dynamic. A Zerg that sits on larva usually just loses imo. At least from how I play, I'd say I tend to have quite a few units out anyways in the early game to deny scouting and be safe vs zealot pokes. On July 05 2013 18:20 Kabel wrote: - Spider mine reworked as descriped in the post on the previous page. Mostly it is an AI change. - Irradiate has 6 casting range instead of 8. - Shock has been pimped even more. - Banshee range increased from 4 to 5. - Sentinels attack is now more microable, which might make it stronger for early harassment. - Speed Zealots and speed Hydralisks now have the same movement speed. (Earlier, speed Hydras were faster!) Some bug fixes. I think this was all.. Hmm Sounds reasonable. | ||
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
July 05 2013 11:12 GMT
#6364
Is this a problem? I rather have the feeling that zerg already cannot play like that in Starbow, simply due to the Starbow larva dynamic. A Zerg that sits on larva usually just loses imo. At least from how I play, I'd say I tend to have quite a few units out anyways in the early game to deny scouting and be safe vs zealot pokes. Mostly I agree with this. Though on many maps, you don't actually need to start speedling production before you see zealot/stalker comming out of base (this is very early game of course). But I think this will still help as it will reduce the assymetry of the protoss and zerg production and help make it easer for protoss to not die. Not a huge gamechanger by any means, but a (very) small step in the right direction. Btw, this is how I see the desired PvZ dynamic. Protoss can opt between two types of overall strategies/unit compositions in the midgame; 1) Zealot/corsair or 2) Gateway heavy into tech With the former, the toss has map control untill at least the 15 min mark, with the latter it goes something like this (assuming both players play "standard"); - First 11 minutes: Protoss can harass the zerg with sentinel/warp prism, pure gateway units. This is mostly very light harass through the concept of low risk/low return. -11-16 minute mark: Zerg pokes at the protoss with hydras and then later on lurkers. Heavy microbattling and army trading occurs (this is the part that doesn't work at the moment in Starbow) - 16-22 minute mark (late midgame): Protoss gets reavers/HT's out around 16 minute mark, and wants to take a 3rd. Zerg realizes that he can't attack straight on anymore so he opts for muta tech switch and/or drop play. So instead of heavy micro battling, game now turns into more of a multitaskbased dynamic. - 23 min + (late game); At this point no race really has clear map control. Protoss can harass all over the map and so can the zerg player. | ||
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
July 05 2013 11:16 GMT
#6365
Is this a problem? I rather have the feeling that zerg already cannot play like that in Starbow, simply due to the Starbow larva dynamic. A Zerg that sits on larva usually just loses imo. At least from how I play, I'd say I tend to have quite a few units out anyways in the early game to deny scouting and be safe vs zealot pokes. It is not a huge problem. But I look at small solutions to weaken Zergs early defence, especially in PvZ. Right now it looks like they can play greedy and still be safe vs early aggression. When the enemy early army advances, Z can get up a decent army quite quickly. This change might help to make Zerg more needed to keep up in unit production and not "wait till the last second." | ||
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
July 05 2013 11:30 GMT
#6366
| ||
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
July 05 2013 11:48 GMT
#6367
| ||
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
July 05 2013 12:01 GMT
#6368
On July 05 2013 20:48 Kabel wrote: Nooooooooo, baneling dmg vs buildings is half the fun. Maybe nerf it 50% less damage will maybe do it. But even then, not completely sure. | ||
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
July 05 2013 12:03 GMT
#6369
60 per building? Requires one more Baneling to blow up a cannon. (They can also be chrono boosted which kills banelings before they detonate) | ||
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
July 05 2013 12:12 GMT
#6370
On July 05 2013 21:03 Kabel wrote: Currently 80 vs any building, as in SC2. 60 per building? Requires one more Baneling to blow up a cannon. (They can also be chrono boosted which kills banelings before they detonate) 40. It is completely broken at the moment. Both stalkers and zealots gets owned by blings so they absolutely needs to be behind walls. The threat of banelings killing the wall rewards bad type of gameplay IMO. | ||
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
July 05 2013 12:22 GMT
#6371
40 would make them useless in TvZ for busting bunkers, depots etc? Anyway, here is an updated patch note: - Zergling build time increased from 24 to 27 seconds. - Hydralisk build time increased from 30 to 33 seconds. - Queen attack cooldown nerfed from 1 second to 1,25 seconds. - Spire build time increased from 100 to 120 seconds. - Lurker den cost up from 100/100 to 150/150. (Dont know why it was so cheap!) - Spider mine reworked as descriped in the post on the previous page. Mostly it is an AI change. - Irradiate has 6 casting range instead of 8. - Shock has been pimped even more. - Banshee range increased from 4 to 5. - Medic healing reduced from 3 to 2.5 life gained per tick. - Sentinels attack is now more microable, which might make it stronger for early harassment. - Speed Zealots and speed Hydralisks now have the same movement speed. (Earlier, speed Hydras were faster so Zealots could not reach them!) - Robotics bay build time increased from 70 to 80 seconds. - 10 mineral patches at each main base, 9 mineral patches at the natural expansion, 8 at all other expansions. Anything else minor worth to consider before I upload this? | ||
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
July 05 2013 12:52 GMT
#6372
On July 05 2013 21:22 Kabel wrote: 50 is my last bet! ^^ 40 would make them useless in TvZ for busting bunkers, depots etc? Anyway, here is an updated patch note: - Zergling build time increased from 24 to 27 seconds. - Hydralisk build time increased from 30 to 33 seconds. - Queen attack cooldown nerfed from 1 second to 1,25 seconds. - Spire build time increased from 100 to 120 seconds. - Lurker den cost up from 100/100 to 150/150. (Dont know why it was so cheap!) - Spider mine reworked as descriped in the post on the previous page. Mostly it is an AI change. - Irradiate has 6 casting range instead of 8. - Shock has been pimped even more. - Banshee range increased from 4 to 5. - Medic healing reduced from 3 to 2.5 life gained per tick. - Sentinels attack is now more microable, which might make it stronger for early harassment. - Speed Zealots and speed Hydralisks now have the same movement speed. (Earlier, speed Hydras were faster so Zealots could not reach them!) - Robotics bay build time increased from 70 to 80 seconds. - 10 mineral patches at each main base, 9 mineral patches at the natural expansion, 8 at all other expansions. Anything else minor worth to consider before I upload this? I would wait with robo bay BT untill we can finally say that toss midgame is strong enough to survive without reavers. These changes are definitely good steps in the right direction though, but it will probably require more before it feels completely right. Right now these changes will make it easier for protoss to survive untill reavers are out, but I think it will still require a reaver "rush". | ||
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
July 05 2013 13:45 GMT
#6373
| ||
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
July 05 2013 14:21 GMT
#6374
Introduction + Show Spoiler + For some time now, I wanted to write a long post discussing the problems with the protoss midgame in PvT and PvZ. Since this is probably the area where Starbow have a lot of problems both in terms of entertainment value and unforgivngness. I think small changes (as the patch notes from above) will lead to a more balanced game, but (especially) to make PvT a better matchup in the midgame, larger changes are needed. Characteristica of a great matchup + Show Spoiler + According to my personal preferences, I want see the following things in a matchup - Action in early game, midgame and late game - Early game action should work through the concept: Low risk/ low return for both players. - Midgame action should mostly consist of army trading and mulittasking. - Late game action should primarily consist of tier 2/3 units with AOE, big positional battles with lots of harassment all over the map - A Variety of strategies and build orders should be viable for both players - A dynamic game, both players should have viable options to be in the offense. I don't want to see games where one player just attacks throughout the entire game (TvZ hots for instance). - A balanced game in the amount of skills it requires for both players to win. The rest of my post will discuss where PvX lack in these areas and how to solve the problems. Problems - PvZ + Show Spoiler + Over the last page or so, the issues of the PvZ matchup have been discussed quite intensly, so I won't go into detail of the problems in this matchup, but briefly I would say that 1) It is indeed actionpacked, 2) it is not particularly dynamic (it is mostly zerg that is in the offensive) 3) it is easier to play zerg 4) Protoss midgame is too weak so they need to rush for reavers Problems - TvP + Show Spoiler + To create a dynamic TvP matchup, I want terrans to have the option of choosing whether they want to be the one that is on the offensive (Bio), or whether they should be playing more defensively (mech). TvP bio heavy + Show Spoiler + At the moment though, pure bio isn't viable in themidgame for two reasons; 1) Map control can easily be denied by stalkers kiting your army and 2) Reaver tech comes relatively early. If you want to force your opponent to stop sitting outside your base, you need to force him to go home by sending out dropships to his base while having tanks to defend against counterattacks. Unlike in sc2, you don't have "natural map control" as bio, but you need to manipulate your way into having map control by forcing his units into his own base by dropping him. In Sc2 you would just move your bio force out on the map and then start dropping, in Starbow you need to load up the dropship from your own base. This is slightly problematic. First of all, new players aren't aware of this, and they are likely to feel frustrated the first time they try out bio in Starbow. As I don't see how it improves gameplay that terran needs to manipulate there way into gaining "map control" instead of having it of natural reasons, I don't think this is optimal design. All it seems to accomplish is to make terran harder to learn. I think Starbow should easy to learn - difficult to master. Secondly, and perhaps more important, It is highly doubltfull whether you can actually use that map control for anything. In Sc2 you would drop some portion of your army and then still have a relatively mobile army that could be used to target another location. In Starbow, drops should in theory be shut down very quickly by mobile and strong stalkers, and since the remaining of your army is pretty immobile, as it consist heavily of tanks, you can only use that army to set up a contain. However, if the contain is to be succesful it has to be an all-in, since the protoss will just outproduce you, if you don't commit heavily to it. The problems with tanks in the midgame (from a design perspective) is that they are 1) Good at denying action and 2) Bad at creating action. In lategame they are awesome because they the positional battles become very exciting, however once on 2-3 bases, their mobility disadvantage isn't significiant enough for action to occur, and they do a good job of making sure the opponent can't attack you. TvP mech + Show Spoiler + Despite the problems with TvP bio (+tank), it still has a bit more potential than TvP mech. I can at least see some ways TvP bio heavy can be an okay'ish mathcup in the midgame, however pure mech is an absolutely awfull matchup. Chances are that if you happen to watch a random TvP mech game between 2 diamond/master starbow players, then this will occur; - Protoss player has his whole army in a ring outside the terran players 3rd. In this proces he makes it dificult for the terran to take expos and also prevent any dropplays and vultures from slipping behind. - The terran uses turrets/vikings to deny warp prism harass, since a warp prism hanging over the main can be so damaging for the terran player. In theory if you don't prevent it from ever entering your base, then an infinitive amount of protoss units can enter your main/natural. The terran player obviously can't allow this from occuring and therefore a smart player invests in infastructure/vikings to nullify the drop threat. - Since the terran player knows he can't vulture harass efficiently, and since the blink all in threat is quite large, he is likely to be more tank heavy than vulture heavy. This makes engaging/army trading as a protoss player pre 15 minute mark quite impossible. - Basically nothing will happen in the first 15 minutes as long as both players are somewhat smart and decent mechanics. If the terran player is better than decent (say good), then he will also make sure that he easily can secure a 4th. That implies a stalemale for at least the first 20 minutes. So the question is, how did BW mech becomes something that was awesome while Starbow mech (at least in the midgame) kinda sucks? Was it all just nostalagy or what are the differences. Below, I found an interesting vod between Flash and Best, which highlights the differences between Starbow and BW Around the 10 minute mark, Best retreats with his dragoons from Flash's base and never once return. Thus we don't get the same type of "surround" scenario in BW, which actually opens up for potential harassment for the terran player. While Flash still chooses to go into turtlemetode, at least that seems to be a voluntary decision. I could imagine Starbow terrans choosing to abuse that situation in BW to drop/banshee harass or make vulture runbys. Im definitely not an BW expert, so I can't really give a solid answer to why Best chooses to retreat with dragoons, but possible explanations could be; - Starbow economy hurts the immobile race too a larger extent than in BW. Further, protoss has more stuff since they get chrono for free while terrans have to pay 100 mins to get a OC and they pay 50 mins for scv calldown. - The stalker is much much easier to have out on the map than the dragoon, and with its bad AI you were probably vulnerable to vulture runbys if you tried to set up a "contain". - Warp ins used for defensive reasons reduces the threat of vulture runbys. - The threat of a warp prism warp ins increases the neccesity of terrans to invest in a lot of static defense/vikings in the midgame, which means their army value is less. - The blink threat punishes heavy vulture play (you need spread out tanks). Overall, it seems that the tools of protoss are so strong that they can outright just end the game. And the tools of the terran to prevent harass from occuring are also really strong (vikings + turrets), so since a solid terran player doesn't wanna lose the game, he needs to take a "prevent-strategy". Since the protoss player can't really do anything against the terran mech player, he uses his stalker in a "prevent-role" as well. The solutions + Show Spoiler + So first of all, there seems to be one unit that indirectly/directly seems to problematic in both bio vs toss, mech vs toss and zerg vs toss. That unit is obviously the stalker, and even though it may be quite fun to use with protoss as it is a strong mobile unit, it seems to be so problematic for the gameplay, that I strongly suggest a larger design. To be more specific, I want to suggest that we adopt the Onegoal approach by adding an anti-armored unit, the "immortal" at gateway and designs the stalker as a more mobile anti-light (+normal armor) unit. Both the immortal and the stalker should be relatively high DPS compared to their HP as this will open up the role for the zealot as the tank/buffer unit. These changes will IMO work very well if/when the maurauder gets added into the game. If the maurauder gets added into the game (but not the immortal), we will likely see map control switch in favor of the terran player (when going bio), however the stalker (if there is no immortal) still needs to be relatively good against bio - Otherwise it would be UP. So you'll still get lots of them, and they will be really good at preventing anything from happening. Besides, I think this will further incentive protoss players too rush for reavers while turtling on 3 bases. So I don't actually think the matchup will be more fun or actionpacked - I think the opposite will happen: Terran player will "surround" the protoss player and prevent anything from happening, while taking more bases. But by implementing the immortal, it makes it possible to nerf the strenght of the stalker, which will reduce the overall mobility of the protoss army but maintain/increase its cost efficiency vs bio. Suggested stats + Show Spoiler + Gateway/warpgate; Zealot: HP:100/60, there is an upgrade available at cybercore which increases HP by 20 Damage: 8 Stalker: HP: 100/50 Damage: 15 to light. 15 vs normal. 10 vs armored. Range: 5(7). Movement speed: 2.95 Immortal: Cost: 125/75 HP: 100/100 (no hardened shield or anything) Damage: 12 + 8 vs armored. Range: 6 Movement speed: 2.5 Stats to maurauder; Cost: 100/25 Damage: 8 + 7 vs armored. Range: 5 HP: 110 (can be this high due to immortals + zealot now being very cost efficient vs maurauders - on the other hand maurauders in dropships are much more mobile). What it will add in terms of gameplay value + Show Spoiler + In PvZ this will make zealot + stalker a lot more cost efficient vs zerg lair units if they have the right unit composition and control. Stalkers are slightly less beefy (10 less HP), but deal more damage to hydras, lings and mutas (2 more to hydras and 4 more to lings), and 2 more to mutas. Zealots will be more tanky once the upgrade is researched which allows to work better as a tank. The immortal will have two roles in the matchup; 1) Target firing lurkers. 2) Vs ultras Overall this will make it less of a neccesity for protoss to rush to reavers in the midgame. At the same time it will reward a bit more micro and diverse unit composition. In TvP bio heavy, it will grant the terran player "natural map control". Since the protoss want a mix between zealots, stalkers and immortals (and possibly sentinels), instead of just pure blink stalkers, his overall army will be much less mobile, and he can't just kite all day long against the terran player. Further, against dropplays he can't just blink 4-5 stalkers and deny the drop. Instead he will need to be careful about battling maurauders with stalkers and instead use stalkers to target the dropships while using the zealot or immortal to assist in the proces. The addition of the maurauder will make pure bio viable in the midgame, but that is mostly in terms of an increased mobility advantage. We won't see the Sc2 type of gameplay where the protoss gateway army is laughable wihtout AOE support. Instead, protoss gateway will be farily even in terms of cost efficiency against the terran player in the early midgame and too a large extent the outcome will depend on micro. Regardless of who wins, I expect bio vs protoss (in the midgame) to be very fast paced and actionpacked. Later on in the game though, terran will and should have to transition to tanks which adds the whole positional element to the game. In TvP mech, I believe the effect will be smaller (but still improve gameplay), and other changes are needed. Nevertheless, you will likely need more immortals than stalkers vs mech (to kill tanks), and you'll use stalkers to kill off vulturues. This will decrease the overall efficiency of the "surround-effect" for protoss, as immortals are worse at "preventing" than stalkers. Other changes I believe are neccesary + Show Spoiler + - Warp in for warp prism should either be an upgrade or come later in the game, as it right now is to big of a threat for the terran to allow. - Viking damage reduced from 12 vs eveyrthing to 8 + 4 vs light (less efficient at denying warp prisms). - Turret redesign - Slightly more mineral patches than 10/9 (don't think this is enough - at least not on some maps). - Increased BT of robo bay (but only if immortal is added to the game). Chances are, that with these changes TvP mech will feel a bit more BW'ish. Thoughts? | ||
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
July 05 2013 16:05 GMT
#6375
On July 05 2013 20:48 Kabel wrote: Nooooooooo, baneling dmg vs buildings is half the fun. Maybe nerf it How about nerfing Baneling HP instead? Makes it easier for canons / units to snipe them before detonation. Be more careful! Also, maybe they could even get a buff in dmg output then ![]() Also, I am back from the trip and will be playing tonight! ![]() Come and watch if you want to see who Xiphias really is ![]() http://europeanspeedsterassembly.com/ @HideR's last post It seems that one of the problems is that queen larvae injection and chorno is both superiour to the SCV-call down as well. Like you said, the immobile player should have a greater economy. How about lowering cost/cooldown for calldown SCV's? I could do some math on this if needed. Should not hurt TvZ as well. I suggested the same solution some pages back with immortal/stalker OG approach. I still feel iffy about the marauder though. I think we can work with marines/reapers/ghost/medic and give bio what it needs from those units instead. | ||
Kabel
Sweden1746 Posts
July 05 2013 16:41 GMT
#6376
First of all, good job on your post. I love well thought out analyses like this. Your thoughts are not a suprise for me since you and I have discussed these topics anyway quite a lot. I will think some more on this before I write a bigger reply. Would be nice to hear what you others have to say on this. - Do you share his views on the match-ups? - Are there any aspects missing? @Xiphias Glad to have you back online : ) I´m online now if anyone wanna join us on EU! | ||
Hider
Denmark9389 Posts
July 05 2013 17:12 GMT
#6377
On July 06 2013 01:05 Xiphias wrote: Show nested quote + On July 05 2013 20:48 Kabel wrote: Nooooooooo, baneling dmg vs buildings is half the fun. Maybe nerf it How about nerfing Baneling HP instead? Makes it easier for canons / units to snipe them before detonation. Be more careful! Also, maybe they could even get a buff in dmg output then ![]() Also, I am back from the trip and will be playing tonight! ![]() Come and watch if you want to see who Xiphias really is ![]() http://europeanspeedsterassembly.com/ @HideR's last post It seems that one of the problems is that queen larvae injection and chorno is both superiour to the SCV-call down as well. Like you said, the immobile player should have a greater economy. How about lowering cost/cooldown for calldown SCV's? I could do some math on this if needed. Should not hurt TvZ as well. I suggested the same solution some pages back with immortal/stalker OG approach. I still feel iffy about the marauder though. I think we can work with marines/reapers/ghost/medic and give bio what it needs from those units instead. The problem with scv calldown is that its overpriced given the fact that you oversaturate your bases so quickly. If terran eco is a problem, then 25 minerals is a better chance than nerfing cooldown. Immortal won't really matter that much if maurauder isn't introduced (why would you produce maurauder vs bio). That would mean that you would still do stalkers vs only vs bio which just would rape pure bio even harder. At this point, I think immortal and maurauder go to together. If one of them is introduced, then the other needs to be there as well. | ||
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
July 05 2013 17:17 GMT
#6378
This was mainly due to worker bouncing, but it is still present in an SC2 style worker system. You just need to make sure 16 workers is optimal, but give a small bit of benefit to adding on workers (but a benefit so small you'd always rather expand unless forced onto a smaller base count). | ||
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
July 05 2013 17:22 GMT
#6379
On July 06 2013 02:12 Hider wrote: Show nested quote + On July 06 2013 01:05 Xiphias wrote: On July 05 2013 20:48 Kabel wrote: Nooooooooo, baneling dmg vs buildings is half the fun. Maybe nerf it How about nerfing Baneling HP instead? Makes it easier for canons / units to snipe them before detonation. Be more careful! Also, maybe they could even get a buff in dmg output then ![]() Also, I am back from the trip and will be playing tonight! ![]() Come and watch if you want to see who Xiphias really is ![]() http://europeanspeedsterassembly.com/ @HideR's last post It seems that one of the problems is that queen larvae injection and chorno is both superiour to the SCV-call down as well. Like you said, the immobile player should have a greater economy. How about lowering cost/cooldown for calldown SCV's? I could do some math on this if needed. Should not hurt TvZ as well. I suggested the same solution some pages back with immortal/stalker OG approach. I still feel iffy about the marauder though. I think we can work with marines/reapers/ghost/medic and give bio what it needs from those units instead. The problem with scv calldown is that its overpriced given the fact that you oversaturate your bases so quickly. If terran eco is a problem, then 25 minerals is a better chance than nerfing cooldown. Immortal won't really matter that much if maurauder isn't introduced (why would you produce maurauder vs bio). That would mean that you would still do stalkers vs only vs bio which just would rape pure bio even harder. At this point, I think immortal and maurauder go to together. If one of them is introduced, then the other needs to be there as well. But.... if immortals are introduced we can nerf stalkers so they cannot deal that well with bio..... | ||
decemberscalm
United States1353 Posts
July 05 2013 17:22 GMT
#6380
A big part of why you couldn't just run someone over so easily in BW was because you actually needed the right units in the right position to break through. You had to get that siege tank up to start hammering down the spine crawlers, or you wanted to get the reaver out. Mobile lower tier units that are high damage vs buildings are problematic, it exasperates the "I am ahead, I'm going to roll you over now" syndrome that is present in SC2. Perhaps it might not be a problem in SBOW context or depending on how you build them, but it is something you should consider if you are doing something as introducing new revised immo and marauder into the game. | ||
| ||
![]() StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Stormgate![]() ![]() Rain ![]() Bisu ![]() Jaedong ![]() Shuttle ![]() EffOrt ![]() Larva ![]() BeSt ![]() Mini ![]() ggaemo ![]() [ Show more ] Last ![]() Zeus ![]() ZerO ![]() Hyun ![]() Snow ![]() Free ![]() Soma ![]() TY ![]() Rush ![]() Aegong ![]() Pusan ![]() ToSsGirL ![]() Soulkey ![]() sSak ![]() soO ![]() Backho ![]() Sharp ![]() Icarus ![]() sorry ![]() yabsab ![]() Sexy ![]() JulyZerg ![]() scan(afreeca) ![]() ![]() ajuk12(nOOB) ![]() Noble ![]() HiyA ![]() IntoTheRainbow ![]() Terrorterran ![]() SilentControl ![]() Bale ![]() ivOry ![]() Yoon ![]() Hm[arnc] ![]() zelot ![]() sas.Sziky ![]() Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games gofns7957 FrodaN2949 singsing2191 B2W.Neo1196 DeMusliM445 crisheroes396 hiko339 Fuzer ![]() SortOf81 ZerO(Twitch)13 rGuardiaN4 Organizations StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
The PondCast
WardiTV Summer Champion…
Replay Cast
LiuLi Cup
Online Event
SC Evo League
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
CSO Contender
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Summer Champion…
[ Show More ] SC Evo League
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Afreeca Starleague
Sharp vs Ample
Larva vs Stork
Wardi Open
RotterdaM Event
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
JyJ vs TY
Bisu vs Speed
WardiTV Summer Champion…
Afreeca Starleague
Mini vs TBD
Soma vs sSak
WardiTV Summer Champion…
|
|