|
On October 18 2011 00:10 buldermar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2011 23:00 kcdc wrote:On October 17 2011 21:58 buldermar wrote:On October 17 2011 02:48 Excludos wrote:On October 17 2011 01:05 buldermar wrote:On October 02 2011 12:30 the p00n wrote:
My handle is HUARGH and I play at the grandmaster level.
Could you elaborate on how someone who has never been in grandmaster league play at the grandmaster level? If you had bothered to read the first page, you'd find out  He was in gm, but got demoted before season end because of inactivity. If you had bothered to use your brain, you'd find out that he was never in GM, therefore also never getting demoted due to inactivity or for any other reason *smiley that blinks*. Firstly, I've had him on my friendslist (the one that shows real name) since season 1. He was never in GM, and would most certainly brag about if it he was. Furthermore, I know he has been trying to get into GM unsuccesfully several times. Secondly, the question was pointed at him, as in "could you elaborate" rather than "could someone elaborate". Finally, I'd definitely argue that "playing at the grandmaster level" is a phrase that, with no further elaboration, suggests being in GM league. However, seing that he never was in GM league, it's an outright lie, which is relevant for the situation as it increases perceived reliability and therefore negating possible skepticism about the strategy; "Well, he's GM, so he probably know better... 90% winrate in GM league, it must be really strong (as opposed to if it was in a lower league)" One could argue that this isn't of high enough significance for me to act on it, and I'll respect that point of view, but being in a position with superior information about the author of the thread to most of the readers of this thread, I think that intentionally not informing this thread mislead readers of his intentional deception would be wrong of me. That being said, I'm not going to spend time proving myself, so feel free to disregard the above. I'll put my own credibility on the line stating that he, to this point in time, has never been in GM league with the accountname HUARGH. People need to chill out about this. There are a lot of good players that aren't in GM. Minigun is one of the best P players on the NA ladder, and he's not in GM. I stopped taking SC2 as seriously at the start of this year, so now I'm not close to GM, but I still occasionally play (and beat) pros. There's not much of a skill gap between high masters and low GM. If your build beats GM players, then you can say it works at the GM level. Since we're into the GM title, here's a rep against GM #145. ![[image loading]](http://www.gamereplays.org/community/uploads/repimgs/repimg-33-237260.jpg) I'm not debating the skilllevel of non GM players, nor am I debating the skillgap of the GM league and master league and their respective players. I'm stating that the author of this thread was never in GM league and therefore, per definition, cannot be playing at the GM level, because the later serves as a direct reference to former league distinction (read: skilldistinction). Therefore, claiming to be playing at the GM level is a lie both rhetorically and logically. What are the defining criterium for playing at the GM level? If you don't have to, at the very least, at some point having been in GM league, then, at the very least, any master league player can claim to be playing at the GM level by having beaten x amount of GM players in their y amount of played games. That negates the whole point of making such claim in the first place, as it serves to distinguish oneself from those who "do not" play at the GM level, which, in effect, will be nobody in the master league. The same line of thought applies to all leagues. As such, the effect of neagting defining criterium for playing at any league level results in anyone from any league being able to rightfully claim to be playing at the GM level. If your build beat x amount of GM players, you can directly and rightfully state so, but that does not translate into you playing at the GM level in either tautology. EDIT: a random typo.
I don't want to argue about this because it's irrelevant to the topic and not very interesting. I'm just going to say that you can be as good as GM players without being in GM. It's okay if you don't believe me.
|
On October 18 2011 01:37 Nyast wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 00:10 buldermar wrote:
I'm not debating the skilllevel of non GM players, nor am I debating the skillgap of the GM league and master league and their respective players. I'm stating that the author of this thread was never in GM league and therefore, per definition, cannot be playing at the GM level Of course he can play at the GM level, since the GM league has limited places. As long as a good amount of his opponents are GMs. I don't know if that's the case or not, but check his match history first. If a lot of his opponents are GMs, his MMR is one of a GM despite him being in Master's.
Out of the last 20 games, he played a GM player once and lost that game.
Furthermore, as I believe I explained, stating that one can play at the GM level without ever having been in GM league is tautologically a self-contradiction, both rhetorically and logically.
Finally, I'd appreciate if you'd quote anything relevant for that on which you're commenting in the future. In this case you seperated my statement from its respective argumentation. Thanks.
|
On October 18 2011 01:41 kcdc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 00:10 buldermar wrote:On October 17 2011 23:00 kcdc wrote:On October 17 2011 21:58 buldermar wrote:On October 17 2011 02:48 Excludos wrote:On October 17 2011 01:05 buldermar wrote:On October 02 2011 12:30 the p00n wrote:
My handle is HUARGH and I play at the grandmaster level.
Could you elaborate on how someone who has never been in grandmaster league play at the grandmaster level? If you had bothered to read the first page, you'd find out He was in gm, but got demoted before season end because of inactivity. If you had bothered to use your brain, you'd find out that he was never in GM, therefore also never getting demoted due to inactivity or for any other reason *smiley that blinks*. Firstly, I've had him on my friendslist (the one that shows real name) since season 1. He was never in GM, and would most certainly brag about if it he was. Furthermore, I know he has been trying to get into GM unsuccesfully several times. Secondly, the question was pointed at him, as in "could you elaborate" rather than "could someone elaborate". Finally, I'd definitely argue that "playing at the grandmaster level" is a phrase that, with no further elaboration, suggests being in GM league. However, seing that he never was in GM league, it's an outright lie, which is relevant for the situation as it increases perceived reliability and therefore negating possible skepticism about the strategy; "Well, he's GM, so he probably know better... 90% winrate in GM league, it must be really strong (as opposed to if it was in a lower league)" One could argue that this isn't of high enough significance for me to act on it, and I'll respect that point of view, but being in a position with superior information about the author of the thread to most of the readers of this thread, I think that intentionally not informing this thread mislead readers of his intentional deception would be wrong of me. That being said, I'm not going to spend time proving myself, so feel free to disregard the above. I'll put my own credibility on the line stating that he, to this point in time, has never been in GM league with the accountname HUARGH. People need to chill out about this. There are a lot of good players that aren't in GM. Minigun is one of the best P players on the NA ladder, and he's not in GM. I stopped taking SC2 as seriously at the start of this year, so now I'm not close to GM, but I still occasionally play (and beat) pros. There's not much of a skill gap between high masters and low GM. If your build beats GM players, then you can say it works at the GM level. Since we're into the GM title, here's a rep against GM #145. I'm not debating the skilllevel of non GM players, nor am I debating the skillgap of the GM league and master league and their respective players. I'm stating that the author of this thread was never in GM league and therefore, per definition, cannot be playing at the GM level, because the later serves as a direct reference to former league distinction (read: skilldistinction). Therefore, claiming to be playing at the GM level is a lie both rhetorically and logically. What are the defining criterium for playing at the GM level? If you don't have to, at the very least, at some point having been in GM league, then, at the very least, any master league player can claim to be playing at the GM level by having beaten x amount of GM players in their y amount of played games. That negates the whole point of making such claim in the first place, as it serves to distinguish oneself from those who "do not" play at the GM level, which, in effect, will be nobody in the master league. The same line of thought applies to all leagues. As such, the effect of neagting defining criterium for playing at any league level results in anyone from any league being able to rightfully claim to be playing at the GM level. If your build beat x amount of GM players, you can directly and rightfully state so, but that does not translate into you playing at the GM level in either tautology. EDIT: a random typo. I don't want to argue about this because it's irrelevant to the topic and not very interesting. I'm just going to say that you can be as good as GM players without being in GM. It's okay if you don't believe me.
You quoted me initially, making comments that in no way were relevant to the ones I made.
The points I'm making are relevant to what I quoted from the topic. Since what I quoted from the topic is from the header of the topic, the subject of the topic so to speak, it is as relevant as it can possibly get. If you want to fault the author for including a statement in his initial post that seems to be irrelevant to its remaining content, I'm not holding you back.
It goes without saying that a non-GM player can potentially be a better player than a GM player. However, that does not contradict anything I've said thus far.
|
@buldermar
What's the point of debating this for 2 pages ? You prove nothing saying that the Op lost to the last gm he played... and you d be helpfull to a lot more people trying the build and critizing it rather than the Op's level
|
noooo kcdc 
|
On October 18 2011 18:38 Lordcamel wrote:
@buldermar
What's the point of debating this for 2 pages ? You prove nothing saying that the Op lost to the last gm he played... and you d be helpfull to a lot more people trying the build and critizing it rather than the Op's level
I'm not debating anything, I'm answering questions like the one you just made. I initially asked OP one question and have only been responding to people quoting me.
If you think I'm looking to prove anything other than that OP is lying, you're mistaking. I checked the most recent 20 matches on the request of someone else.
I'm also not discussing OP's level of play. My personal opinion is that he's a very good player, but it's absolutely irrelevant for my points.
Please stop making absurd assumptions about my motivations, goals etc. I wanted to make one simple point: that OP was never in GM and therefore cannot be playing at the GM level, which, in effect, makes him a liar about this matter both rhetorically and logically.
I have tried the build, although not thoroughly. I think one of its weaker points is against two base hydra busts.
I also think its succesrate is a lot higher amongst lower level players fighting than what is the case between two higher level players. That is because it requires much lower APM to execute than what is required by zerg to counter. Therefore, it might be countered more consistently between two very high level players (like MC vs NesTea or something similar). However, this is nothing but guesses and speculations.
I can definitely see someone have a 90% winrate using this build only against zerg if it is against mainly master league players, in particular on NA ladder.
|
Hope blizz removes vortex in the hands of a skilled Protoss player this build is unbeatable as Zerg. Honestly people who use this archon toilet build are abusing a mechanic of the game that blizzard neve considered how powerful 2 vortexes then throw a few archons in and watch zergs air army melt to nothing. The patch didn't help much watch vs kiwikaki game.
This builds essentially a cough abusive mechanic that people use to beat a player they could never defeat Ina straight up game.
I've got few replays of my army perfect comPositioon higher upgrades against his abusive build it's basically auto loss for the Zerg in most situations look at the win rate it has
The win rate says it all
I know that makes some Protoss angry obviously but I've faced this on ladder a ton and feel it's imbalanced
Sorry for mistakes on phone
|
On October 19 2011 07:23 birdkicker wrote:noooo kcdc
Hah, sorry dude. If it makes you feel any better, I'm pretty sure I'm like 1-10 against you.
|
On October 19 2011 10:10 XRaDiiX wrote:
Hope blizz removes vortex in the hands of a skilled Protoss player this build is unbeatable as Zerg. Honestly people who use this archon toilet build are abusing a mechanic of the game that blizzard neve considered how powerful 2 vortexes then throw a few archons in and watch zergs air army melt to nothing. The patch didn't help much watch vs kiwikaki game.
This builds essentially a cough abusive mechanic that people use to beat a player they could never defeat Ina straight up game.
I've got few replays of my army perfect comPositioon higher upgrades against his abusive build it's basically auto loss for the Zerg in most situations look at the win rate it has
The win rate says it all
I know that makes some Protoss angry obviously but I've faced this on ladder a ton and feel it's imbalanced
Sorry for mistakes on phone
I do lose games with it though, yesterday I lost a game vs. a basic 3base roach/hydra push (had only 7 gates, 2k minerals when he attacked :p) and a few days ago I lost to a tunneling claws timing push because I forgot my robo ._.
You could argue that I'm not supposed to make these mistakes, but you could also argue that my opponent isn't supposed to make mistakes either then.
|
yo im not rank 14 gm, though i wish lol...
|
On October 19 2011 09:11 buldermar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 18:38 Lordcamel wrote:
@buldermar
What's the point of debating this for 2 pages ? You prove nothing saying that the Op lost to the last gm he played... and you d be helpfull to a lot more people trying the build and critizing it rather than the Op's level Please stop making absurd assumptions about my motivations, goals etc. I wanted to make one simple point: that OP was never in GM and therefore cannot be playing at the GM level, which, in effect, makes him a liar about this matter both rhetorically and logically.
this is a really dumb argument so i probably shouldn't add to it, but this is a really dumb thing to post. its very possible to be at a "gm level" as the op described it without actually being in gm currently. actually, its possible to be at "gm level" without even playing a ladder game, ever. i have a hard time believing you actually think the stuff you post is correct, and i think everyone can agree that its irrelevant.
|
its a ladderbuild, whoever you face 2 or 3 times you cant play it, cause hydra kill it...
|
On October 19 2011 09:11 buldermar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2011 18:38 Lordcamel wrote:
@buldermar
What's the point of debating this for 2 pages ? You prove nothing saying that the Op lost to the last gm he played... and you d be helpfull to a lot more people trying the build and critizing it rather than the Op's level I'm not debating anything, I'm answering questions like the one you just made. I initially asked OP one question and have only been responding to people quoting me. If you think I'm looking to prove anything other than that OP is lying, you're mistaking. I checked the most recent 20 matches on the request of someone else. I'm also not discussing OP's level of play. My personal opinion is that he's a very good player, but it's absolutely irrelevant for my points. Please stop making absurd assumptions about my motivations, goals etc. I wanted to make one simple point: that OP was never in GM and therefore cannot be playing at the GM level, which, in effect, makes him a liar about this matter both rhetorically and logically. I have tried the build, although not thoroughly. I think one of its weaker points is against two base hydra busts. I also think its succesrate is a lot higher amongst lower level players fighting than what is the case between two higher level players. That is because it requires much lower APM to execute than what is required by zerg to counter. Therefore, it might be countered more consistently between two very high level players (like MC vs NesTea or something similar). However, this is nothing but guesses and speculations. I can definitely see someone have a 90% winrate using this build only against zerg if it is against mainly master league players, in particular on NA ladder.
buldermar needs a ban or a warning
On October 19 2011 13:38 rycho wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2011 09:11 buldermar wrote:On October 18 2011 18:38 Lordcamel wrote:
@buldermar
What's the point of debating this for 2 pages ? You prove nothing saying that the Op lost to the last gm he played... and you d be helpfull to a lot more people trying the build and critizing it rather than the Op's level Please stop making absurd assumptions about my motivations, goals etc. I wanted to make one simple point: that OP was never in GM and therefore cannot be playing at the GM level, which, in effect, makes him a liar about this matter both rhetorically and logically. this is a really dumb argument so i probably shouldn't add to it, but this is a really dumb thing to post. its very possible to be at a "gm level" as the op described it without actually being in gm currently. actually, its possible to be at "gm level" without even playing a ladder game, ever. i have a hard time believing you actually think the stuff you post is correct, and i think everyone can agree that its irrelevant.
It's easy to disprove people. You know how in math you just say your statement can be proven right by contradiction proofs? EG.Huk's in Master's league. He's not in NA GM. GG ... you can play beyond GM level and not be GM.
Anyway, I have come to confirm that this build works *really* *really* well. However, about that hydra counter, some people actually mass phoenix into ... carriers O_o, which are apparently very good against hydras. HuK was doing this to colStandard today, and the mothership later helped a lot into having him win the final battle.
The mothership helps in one major aspect: Helping Toss hard to kill and easier to retain units. The point is that, you're going to have a pretty good final deathball of archon, immortals, void rays (maybe even carriers) that will melt Zerg, and that is ridiculous IF you can get to it.
Because you're cloaked, you can literally inch your way throughout the whole entire game until the end when you've mind out the map and your army is so much more resource retainable than the Zerg's army. Hell, you don't even have to have any working bases except for two (I guess you can let Zerg destroy your mined out bases in multi pronged attacks)
|
I just tried this out 6 times on the ladder. Worked every time. I love the idea of getting that voidray to force defensive measures while you get out your ship.
And i really dig the idea of getting a mother ship on 2nd base as it can crush timing pushes as your nexus pops and zerg goes to kill it. (as they can't see it without detection)
I've only lost the mother ship in one game but still won and rebuilt it.
Great write up - Hope you refine it even more!
|
On October 19 2011 10:10 XRaDiiX wrote:
Hope blizz removes vortex in the hands of a skilled Protoss player this build is unbeatable as Zerg. Honestly people who use this archon toilet build are abusing a mechanic of the game that blizzard neve considered how powerful 2 vortexes then throw a few archons in and watch zergs air army melt to nothing. The patch didn't help much watch vs kiwikaki game.
KiWiKaKi played near perfect that game and still won by the smallest margin imaginable. Had Stephano for example spread out his units when he saw the mothership approach he would've won that engagement. This is basically the only proper counter Protoss has against brood+infestor deathball.
Claiming something is unbeatable when you clearly lack tons of knowledge, experience and competence is really annoying.
|
On October 19 2011 22:30 bikefrog wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2011 10:10 XRaDiiX wrote:
Hope blizz removes vortex in the hands of a skilled Protoss player this build is unbeatable as Zerg. Honestly people who use this archon toilet build are abusing a mechanic of the game that blizzard neve considered how powerful 2 vortexes then throw a few archons in and watch zergs air army melt to nothing. The patch didn't help much watch vs kiwikaki game. KiWiKaKi played near perfect that game and still won by the smallest margin imaginable. Had Stephano for example spread out his units when he saw the mothership approach he would've won that engagement. This is basically the only proper counter Protoss has against brood+infestor deathball. Claiming something is unbeatable when you clearly lack tons of knowledge, experience and competence is really annoying.
Claiming kiwikaki played near perfect is pretty dumb too, I saw a lot of mistakes that game.
|
On October 19 2011 13:42 ThisGS wrote:
its a ladderbuild, whoever you face 2 or 3 times you cant play it, cause hydra kill it...
Actually hydras are pretty shit against it.
But yes it's a lot easier to deal with once you've practiced against it. I'm 6-1 or 7-1 against Mothership builds after losing my first two games against it (I played 5 games against a practice partner doing this build), all but one coming out of 1gate expand (the other was a FFE)
Honestly most people recommend corrupters, I personally like mutalisks on any map that is bigger (I even did it on midsize maps like Antiga) because you can win ANY base race against a protoss, just mass up the hatcheries in various locations around the map and use a mutaling army to really tear apart their base (or part of their army if they try and split, kill the part without the mothership).
|
On October 19 2011 22:45 the p00n wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2011 22:30 bikefrog wrote:On October 19 2011 10:10 XRaDiiX wrote:
Hope blizz removes vortex in the hands of a skilled Protoss player this build is unbeatable as Zerg. Honestly people who use this archon toilet build are abusing a mechanic of the game that blizzard neve considered how powerful 2 vortexes then throw a few archons in and watch zergs air army melt to nothing. The patch didn't help much watch vs kiwikaki game. KiWiKaKi played near perfect that game and still won by the smallest margin imaginable. Had Stephano for example spread out his units when he saw the mothership approach he would've won that engagement. This is basically the only proper counter Protoss has against brood+infestor deathball. Claiming something is unbeatable when you clearly lack tons of knowledge, experience and competence is really annoying. Claiming kiwikaki played near perfect is pretty dumb too, I saw a lot of mistakes that game.
Name some major mistakes.
|
Man buldermar im not gonna quote your mountain of worthless shit but its clear you're arguing just for the sake of arguing now. He played against GMs, and beat them. That is playing at a GM level. It doesnt fucking matter if it took place on ladder, in customs, or if he never fucking played a placement match. If he was playing against a GM that was making an effort to win, and he beat him, it means that he is playing the game AT THE LEVEL of a grandmaster
But you fucking know this already, you're arguing semantics because you cant stand being wrong
|
On October 19 2011 22:30 bikefrog wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2011 10:10 XRaDiiX wrote:
Hope blizz removes vortex in the hands of a skilled Protoss player this build is unbeatable as Zerg. Honestly people who use this archon toilet build are abusing a mechanic of the game that blizzard neve considered how powerful 2 vortexes then throw a few archons in and watch zergs air army melt to nothing. The patch didn't help much watch vs kiwikaki game. KiWiKaKi played near perfect that game and still won by the smallest margin imaginable. Had Stephano for example spread out his units when he saw the mothership approach he would've won that engagement. This is basically the only proper counter Protoss has against brood+infestor deathball. Claiming something is unbeatable when you clearly lack tons of knowledge, experience and competence is really annoying.
Lol kiwikakai didnt go archons till the last 10 minutes of the game when he was running out of mins. the majority of the game he went stalker void colossi which is hugely inefficient against the billions of broodlords that stephano had that game. The moment he landed a good vortex with his archons, he came out ahead against a higher supply army.
If you're going to call someone out for lacing knowledge, try to actually back up your post with facts. I dont understand why everyone is so worked up about him being or not being GM, the build is cool and its that which should discussed lol, not his credentials
Also, i lost a game the other day where the zerg threw buttloads of infested terrans right outside the vortex and ran away. It seems like if you keep your infestors separate, the infested terrans can decimate your army but it all comes down to a micro fight and landing clutch vortexes imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
