• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 17:16
CEST 23:16
KST 06:16
  • 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
[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Rough Waters9[ASL22] Ro24 Preview: Siren's Call8[ASL22] Ro24 Preview: Summer's End9Serral wins HomeStory Cup 2915Serral wins Maestros of the Game 244
Community News
Weekly Cups (Aug 30-Sep 7): herO thrives amid growing schism6Official StarCraft website teases new content ahead of BlizzCon?119Stellar Fest TWO the Moon (Dec 16-20)9Weekly Cups (August 24-30): Patches' balance mod takes over3New 3v3 BGH Ladder (and more) on ShieldBattery!46
StarCraft 2
General
Weekly Cups (Aug 30-Sep 7): herO thrives amid growing schism SC4ALL: II Winner Will Earn a Spot at HSC 30! SC4ALL II: StarCraft 2 Player Announcement 7/8 Nexon wins bid to develop StarCraft IP content, distribute Overwatch mobile game Balance hotfix patch 5.0.16b (July 16)
Tourneys
Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) 2026 GSTL Announcement Stellar Fest TWO the Moon (Dec 16-20) IntoTheTV X SOOP SC2 League : Weekly & Monthly
Strategy
[G] Having the right mentality to improve
Custom Maps
Nexus Wars 2021 GUIDE [M] (2) Industrial Park
External Content
Mutation # 542 The Ascended Mutation # 541 Binary Choice The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 540 Dodge This
Brood War
General
Official StarCraft website teases new content ahead of BlizzCon? [ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Rough Waters ASL22 General Discussion Pros React To: Calm's Big Brain Play Vs Mini New 3v3 BGH Ladder (and more) on ShieldBattery!
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL22] Ro16 Group A BWCL Season 65 Announcement [ASL22] Ro16 Group B
Strategy
Replay Review Process - What do you do? Simple Questions, Simple Answers Odyssey Mineral Stack Saturation Game Theory for Starcraft
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread EVE Corporation Diablo IV [Maplestory Hardcore] Let's Play~!! General RTS Discussion Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
[TL LoL EUW IHs] Teemo shall perish TSM pausing esports and CLG Dead
Heroes of the Storm
Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Power Rank TL Mafia Community Thread NeO.D_StephenKing vs This Guy From 1 Million Dance
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread Trading/Investing Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine
Fan Clubs
MarineLorD Fan Club The Creator Fan Club The ShoWTimE Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! Anime Discussion Thread
Sports
Football (Soccer) Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List Northern Ireland Global Starcraft
Blogs
F* the Children and Get Off …
TrAiDoS
Dreaming of BW patches (mod…
c3rberUs
Regacy Esports: The Bh…
regacyesports
LOCKPICKING NOOB
LUCKY_NOOB
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 6643 users

[G] Comparison of PvP Builds - Page 2

Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next All
Moosegills
Profile Joined March 2011
United States558 Posts
October 23 2011 02:37 GMT
#21
I would heavily agree with the statement that this is way too oversimplified for players that are good at, and understand the matchup. On the other hand, for anyone diamond and even masters could find this very helpful to understand "normal" builds in pvp, what they are good against and bad against to create a better decisions as a whole in the matchup
#1 HuK fan, zerg player playing for http://www.complexitygaming.com - @coL_Moosegills
sjschmidt93
Profile Joined April 2010
United States2518 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-10-23 03:04:49
October 23 2011 03:00 GMT
#22
No immortal drop? I feel it'll be just as common as it great vesus many things - and if you're going up against up against phoenix or blink you'll easily scout it with your observer.
My grandpa could've proxied better, and not only does he have arthritis, he's also dead. -Sean "Day[9]" Plott
rEalGuapo
Profile Joined January 2011
Germany832 Posts
October 23 2011 10:43 GMT
#23
On October 23 2011 11:37 Moosegills wrote:
I would heavily agree with the statement that this is way too oversimplified for players that are good at, and understand the matchup. On the other hand, for anyone diamond and even masters could find this very helpful to understand "normal" builds in pvp, what they are good against and bad against to create a better decisions as a whole in the matchup


On October 23 2011 11:21 mage36 wrote:
wait a minute. this says fast expo is the best build to do, generally. As all the other builds are less than that except for blink. :O


how about you read the post before making one urself!?
Markwerf
Profile Joined March 2010
Netherlands3728 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-10-23 11:11:33
October 23 2011 11:10 GMT
#24
This seems like such an oversimplification that the information isn't useful anymore. Like anihc and others said there are too many variations for the builds which vastly change how each build is working. Also many things are too map dependent. Capturing this information in a scheme like this as it will either get way too complex by adding all variables or it will say nothing which is pretty much the case now.
Also immortal expand > colo push on any map. Colo's on one base are a huge investment and non-range colo's don't do well against range 6 immortals.. Colo's aren't too good in low number fights either as the oppurtunities for surrounds etc are much bigger. Their slow movement also makes it terrible to pus early with as by the time you arrive at your opponents expo they'll have 1 more robo unit extra already.
Edit:
excluding 3 or 4 gates is also a odd choice, as they are still reasonably popular and impact the choices by quite a bit.
Chaosvuistje
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands2581 Posts
October 23 2011 11:19 GMT
#25
Amazing guide and write up, easy to understand with the chart too!

Its a pleasure to see this pop up on the strategy forum, bravo
monk
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
United States8477 Posts
October 23 2011 11:20 GMT
#26
On October 23 2011 20:10 Markwerf wrote:
This seems like such an oversimplification that the information isn't useful anymore. Like anihc and others said there are too many variations for the builds which vastly change how each build is working. Also many things are too map dependent. Capturing this information in a scheme like this as it will either get way too complex by adding all variables or it will say nothing which is pretty much the case now.
Also immortal expand > colo push on any map. Colo's on one base are a huge investment and non-range colo's don't do well against range 6 immortals.. Colo's aren't too good in low number fights either as the oppurtunities for surrounds etc are much bigger. Their slow movement also makes it terrible to pus early with as by the time you arrive at your opponents expo they'll have 1 more robo unit extra already.
Edit:
excluding 3 or 4 gates is also a odd choice, as they are still reasonably popular and impact the choices by quite a bit.


Immortal expands can't hold equally greedy colossi allins. Excluding 3 or 4 gates is because every build except fast expand can be played either safely to hold 4 gates or greedily to not hold 4 gates that there's not much of a point including those into the chart.
Moderator
Amornthep
Profile Blog Joined September 2011
Singapore2605 Posts
October 23 2011 11:52 GMT
#27
Very useful post considering how everyone is lost in PvP after the recent patch.
Markwerf
Profile Joined March 2010
Netherlands3728 Posts
October 23 2011 12:21 GMT
#28
On October 23 2011 20:20 NrGmonk wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 23 2011 20:10 Markwerf wrote:
This seems like such an oversimplification that the information isn't useful anymore. Like anihc and others said there are too many variations for the builds which vastly change how each build is working. Also many things are too map dependent. Capturing this information in a scheme like this as it will either get way too complex by adding all variables or it will say nothing which is pretty much the case now.
Also immortal expand > colo push on any map. Colo's on one base are a huge investment and non-range colo's don't do well against range 6 immortals.. Colo's aren't too good in low number fights either as the oppurtunities for surrounds etc are much bigger. Their slow movement also makes it terrible to pus early with as by the time you arrive at your opponents expo they'll have 1 more robo unit extra already.
Edit:
excluding 3 or 4 gates is also a odd choice, as they are still reasonably popular and impact the choices by quite a bit.


Immortal expands can't hold equally greedy colossi allins. Excluding 3 or 4 gates is because every build except fast expand can be played either safely to hold 4 gates or greedily to not hold 4 gates that there's not much of a point including those into the chart.


kcdc explained it pretty well, colossi allins are too costly to have a chance against immortal expand. If you don't get range your expensive colossi are just victim to immortals, if you do get range the economy of the expo will have paid off and they can simply swarm you with units. Expansion has always been quite popular in robo vs robo scenario's because of this and is now even safer since robo -> blink builds are slower and immortals got buffed (helping both against robo-blink and fast colossi)..
With the same argument your excluding 3 or 4 gates you could exclude DT builds as well as any build can be adapted to stop that and almost any build can lose against it given no detection..
monk
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
United States8477 Posts
October 23 2011 12:31 GMT
#29
On October 23 2011 21:21 Markwerf wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 23 2011 20:20 NrGmonk wrote:
On October 23 2011 20:10 Markwerf wrote:
This seems like such an oversimplification that the information isn't useful anymore. Like anihc and others said there are too many variations for the builds which vastly change how each build is working. Also many things are too map dependent. Capturing this information in a scheme like this as it will either get way too complex by adding all variables or it will say nothing which is pretty much the case now.
Also immortal expand > colo push on any map. Colo's on one base are a huge investment and non-range colo's don't do well against range 6 immortals.. Colo's aren't too good in low number fights either as the oppurtunities for surrounds etc are much bigger. Their slow movement also makes it terrible to pus early with as by the time you arrive at your opponents expo they'll have 1 more robo unit extra already.
Edit:
excluding 3 or 4 gates is also a odd choice, as they are still reasonably popular and impact the choices by quite a bit.


Immortal expands can't hold equally greedy colossi allins. Excluding 3 or 4 gates is because every build except fast expand can be played either safely to hold 4 gates or greedily to not hold 4 gates that there's not much of a point including those into the chart.


kcdc explained it pretty well, colossi allins are too costly to have a chance against immortal expand. If you don't get range your expensive colossi are just victim to immortals, if you do get range the economy of the expo will have paid off and they can simply swarm you with units. Expansion has always been quite popular in robo vs robo scenario's because of this and is now even safer since robo -> blink builds are slower and immortals got buffed (helping both against robo-blink and fast colossi)..
With the same argument your excluding 3 or 4 gates you could exclude DT builds as well as any build can be adapted to stop that and almost any build can lose against it given no detection..


You won't be able to target the colossi with immortals versus a player who controls well. The expansion also will not pay for itself by the time a 2 colossi push comes.
Moderator
UberDrive
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States144 Posts
October 23 2011 18:15 GMT
#30
On October 23 2011 05:46 blooblooblahblah wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 23 2011 03:14 mizU wrote:
Phoenix = all Stargate builds?
What about Archon Chargelot builds?


Chargelot Archon is more of a midgame composition rather than a build. You can transition into it from a lot of these builds.



I've been using this build with reasonable success: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=233994

I'd say it beats most expansion/robo openings, aside from fast Colossus, as well as DTs (which is why gas stealing is great).
Xujhan
Profile Joined July 2010
Canada65 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-10-23 23:50:27
October 23 2011 23:50 GMT
#31
On October 23 2011 21:31 NrGmonk wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 23 2011 21:21 Markwerf wrote:
On October 23 2011 20:20 NrGmonk wrote:
On October 23 2011 20:10 Markwerf wrote:
This seems like such an oversimplification that the information isn't useful anymore. Like anihc and others said there are too many variations for the builds which vastly change how each build is working. Also many things are too map dependent. Capturing this information in a scheme like this as it will either get way too complex by adding all variables or it will say nothing which is pretty much the case now.
Also immortal expand > colo push on any map. Colo's on one base are a huge investment and non-range colo's don't do well against range 6 immortals.. Colo's aren't too good in low number fights either as the oppurtunities for surrounds etc are much bigger. Their slow movement also makes it terrible to pus early with as by the time you arrive at your opponents expo they'll have 1 more robo unit extra already.
Edit:
excluding 3 or 4 gates is also a odd choice, as they are still reasonably popular and impact the choices by quite a bit.


Immortal expands can't hold equally greedy colossi allins. Excluding 3 or 4 gates is because every build except fast expand can be played either safely to hold 4 gates or greedily to not hold 4 gates that there's not much of a point including those into the chart.


kcdc explained it pretty well, colossi allins are too costly to have a chance against immortal expand. If you don't get range your expensive colossi are just victim to immortals, if you do get range the economy of the expo will have paid off and they can simply swarm you with units. Expansion has always been quite popular in robo vs robo scenario's because of this and is now even safer since robo -> blink builds are slower and immortals got buffed (helping both against robo-blink and fast colossi)..
With the same argument your excluding 3 or 4 gates you could exclude DT builds as well as any build can be adapted to stop that and almost any build can lose against it given no detection..


You won't be able to target the colossi with immortals versus a player who controls well. The expansion also will not pay for itself by the time a 2 colossi push comes.


Is there any chance we could get replays from some of your test games to see the builds and timings for ourselves? Otherwise this is just going to be an endless repetition of "No, I'm right!"
"I'm so bad at this."
rd
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States2586 Posts
October 24 2011 00:01 GMT
#32
On October 23 2011 10:42 Selendis wrote:
Yeah I don't agree with this chart. It's very pretty and has the potential to be very useful but in my experience fast expands in pvp are a quick way to lose.

In fact I win pretty much all of my pvps by waiting for my opponent to expand then killing him with my 400mineral stronger army.


I agree that FE's in PvP seem suicidal, even in a slightly less chaotic meta game. Still, it varies drastically on whether or not taking a Nexus is an auto lose when the other player hits at the right time.
CecilSunkure
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States2829 Posts
October 24 2011 00:04 GMT
#33
On October 24 2011 09:01 Tyrant0 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 23 2011 10:42 Selendis wrote:
Yeah I don't agree with this chart. It's very pretty and has the potential to be very useful but in my experience fast expands in pvp are a quick way to lose.

In fact I win pretty much all of my pvps by waiting for my opponent to expand then killing him with my 400mineral stronger army.


I agree that FE's in PvP seem suicidal, even in a slightly less chaotic meta game. Still, it varies drastically on whether or not taking a Nexus is an auto lose when the other player hits at the right time.

I fast expand in PvP pretty often, and I do just fine. I actually win every time I've done it this past couple weeks, because I know when and how to.
rd
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States2586 Posts
October 24 2011 00:09 GMT
#34
On October 24 2011 09:04 CecilSunkure wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 24 2011 09:01 Tyrant0 wrote:
On October 23 2011 10:42 Selendis wrote:
Yeah I don't agree with this chart. It's very pretty and has the potential to be very useful but in my experience fast expands in pvp are a quick way to lose.

In fact I win pretty much all of my pvps by waiting for my opponent to expand then killing him with my 400mineral stronger army.


I agree that FE's in PvP seem suicidal, even in a slightly less chaotic meta game. Still, it varies drastically on whether or not taking a Nexus is an auto lose when the other player hits at the right time.

I fast expand in PvP pretty often, and I do just fine. I actually win every time I've done it this past couple weeks, because I know when and how to.


It still varies on both player's openings and the map. Also, define 'fast.'
Darclite
Profile Joined January 2011
United States1021 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-10-24 00:14:40
October 24 2011 00:13 GMT
#35
On October 24 2011 08:50 Xujhan wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 23 2011 21:31 NrGmonk wrote:
On October 23 2011 21:21 Markwerf wrote:
On October 23 2011 20:20 NrGmonk wrote:
On October 23 2011 20:10 Markwerf wrote:
This seems like such an oversimplification that the information isn't useful anymore. Like anihc and others said there are too many variations for the builds which vastly change how each build is working. Also many things are too map dependent. Capturing this information in a scheme like this as it will either get way too complex by adding all variables or it will say nothing which is pretty much the case now.
Also immortal expand > colo push on any map. Colo's on one base are a huge investment and non-range colo's don't do well against range 6 immortals.. Colo's aren't too good in low number fights either as the oppurtunities for surrounds etc are much bigger. Their slow movement also makes it terrible to pus early with as by the time you arrive at your opponents expo they'll have 1 more robo unit extra already.
Edit:
excluding 3 or 4 gates is also a odd choice, as they are still reasonably popular and impact the choices by quite a bit.


Immortal expands can't hold equally greedy colossi allins. Excluding 3 or 4 gates is because every build except fast expand can be played either safely to hold 4 gates or greedily to not hold 4 gates that there's not much of a point including those into the chart.


kcdc explained it pretty well, colossi allins are too costly to have a chance against immortal expand. If you don't get range your expensive colossi are just victim to immortals, if you do get range the economy of the expo will have paid off and they can simply swarm you with units. Expansion has always been quite popular in robo vs robo scenario's because of this and is now even safer since robo -> blink builds are slower and immortals got buffed (helping both against robo-blink and fast colossi)..
With the same argument your excluding 3 or 4 gates you could exclude DT builds as well as any build can be adapted to stop that and almost any build can lose against it given no detection..


You won't be able to target the colossi with immortals versus a player who controls well. The expansion also will not pay for itself by the time a 2 colossi push comes.


Is there any chance we could get replays from some of your test games to see the builds and timings for ourselves? Otherwise this is just going to be an endless repetition of "No, I'm right!"


Yeah this is actually really important. I've been hoping for someone to make a guide exactly like this (a grid of what beats/has an edge over what), but now I can't really tell how I'm supposed to use this. For example, I would consider what my PvP is as an "immortal expand" but the time I get my expansion varies greatly depending on what I see, so I'd like to see both how you do it (because you're better than me), what beats it and what I need to watch for as a result. Also, when to be where, when to push, how to engage, etc. are useful to know. So if you could add a replay for each matchup or at least just one example of what each build is (so we know what is being compared to what), it would help.
They're fools. You should eat them.
CecilSunkure
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States2829 Posts
October 24 2011 00:18 GMT
#36
On October 24 2011 09:09 Tyrant0 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 24 2011 09:04 CecilSunkure wrote:
On October 24 2011 09:01 Tyrant0 wrote:
On October 23 2011 10:42 Selendis wrote:
Yeah I don't agree with this chart. It's very pretty and has the potential to be very useful but in my experience fast expands in pvp are a quick way to lose.

In fact I win pretty much all of my pvps by waiting for my opponent to expand then killing him with my 400mineral stronger army.


I agree that FE's in PvP seem suicidal, even in a slightly less chaotic meta game. Still, it varies drastically on whether or not taking a Nexus is an auto lose when the other player hits at the right time.

I fast expand in PvP pretty often, and I do just fine. I actually win every time I've done it this past couple weeks, because I know when and how to.


It still varies on both player's openings and the map. Also, define 'fast.'

Of course it varies. If you do it at the wrong time, you are at a disadvantage, and at the right time, an advantage.

I'd say fast is something like a 1 Gate FE after the first Stalker is out.
FairForever
Profile Joined February 2011
Canada2392 Posts
October 24 2011 00:19 GMT
#37
On October 24 2011 09:04 CecilSunkure wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 24 2011 09:01 Tyrant0 wrote:
On October 23 2011 10:42 Selendis wrote:
Yeah I don't agree with this chart. It's very pretty and has the potential to be very useful but in my experience fast expands in pvp are a quick way to lose.

In fact I win pretty much all of my pvps by waiting for my opponent to expand then killing him with my 400mineral stronger army.


I agree that FE's in PvP seem suicidal, even in a slightly less chaotic meta game. Still, it varies drastically on whether or not taking a Nexus is an auto lose when the other player hits at the right time.

I fast expand in PvP pretty often, and I do just fine. I actually win every time I've done it this past couple weeks, because I know when and how to.


I'm a zerg player, but when I offrace as P and I play a PvP I typically always 1gate FE which is super greedy (unless it's TDA), even at midmasters level this works (although I'm sure once you get to higher levels they get better and scouting and rescouting and figuring out what you're doing based on your units). Obviously it's disguised as an agressive 4gate (with the original 20probe cut until I force scouting probe out).
chaopow
Profile Joined March 2011
United States556 Posts
October 24 2011 00:23 GMT
#38
Really great chart organizing all the builds in PvP! Unfortunately this kinda proves that PvP can be somewhat of a coin flip if the players are on equal skill levels. A lot of these are build order wins for the most part.
Soowoo AD.
rd
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States2586 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-10-24 00:29:38
October 24 2011 00:25 GMT
#39
On October 24 2011 09:18 CecilSunkure wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 24 2011 09:09 Tyrant0 wrote:
On October 24 2011 09:04 CecilSunkure wrote:
On October 24 2011 09:01 Tyrant0 wrote:
On October 23 2011 10:42 Selendis wrote:
Yeah I don't agree with this chart. It's very pretty and has the potential to be very useful but in my experience fast expands in pvp are a quick way to lose.

In fact I win pretty much all of my pvps by waiting for my opponent to expand then killing him with my 400mineral stronger army.


I agree that FE's in PvP seem suicidal, even in a slightly less chaotic meta game. Still, it varies drastically on whether or not taking a Nexus is an auto lose when the other player hits at the right time.

I fast expand in PvP pretty often, and I do just fine. I actually win every time I've done it this past couple weeks, because I know when and how to.


It still varies on both player's openings and the map. Also, define 'fast.'

Of course it varies. If you do it at the wrong time, you are at a disadvantage, and at the right time, an advantage.

I'd say fast is something like a 1 Gate FE after the first Stalker is out.


In other words, a coin flip.

I feel like we're discussing two entirely different circumstances.
epeezy
Profile Joined October 2011
United States3 Posts
October 24 2011 00:27 GMT
#40
Tried searching and failed. Are there any good links to guides to latest patch builds PvP for FE and Immortal Expand? Links to replays also appreciated.

Thanks!
Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 2h 44m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
mouzHeroMarine 489
ViBE70
CosmosSc2 24
StarCraft: Brood War
NaDa 18
Dota 2
monkeys_forever276
League of Legends
Doublelift3349
Counter-Strike
shoxiejesuss994
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu386
Other Games
gofns3843
Grubby2672
FrodaN2251
fl0m814
Beastyqt673
C9.Mang0226
XaKoH 157
ToD122
ZombieGrub95
Trikslyr58
Nathanias15
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• davetesta5
• intothetv
• mYiSmile10
• Migwel
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• IndyKCrew
• Kozan
StarCraft: Brood War
• blackmanpl 54
• HerbMon 24
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota21934
• WagamamaTV715
League of Legends
• TFBlade1016
Other Games
• imaqtpie1452
• Shiphtur152
Upcoming Events
Replay Cast
2h 44m
The PondCast
12h 44m
KCM Race Survival
12h 44m
OSC
1d 1h
Escore
1d 12h
IntoTheTV X SOOP
1d 13h
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
3 days
Spirit vs Mixu
Clem vs TBD
RSL Revival
3 days
Serral vs Rogue
[ Show More ]
BlizzCon
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Afreeca Starleague
4 days
WardiTV Weekly
4 days
Afreeca Starleague
5 days
GSL
5 days
PiGosaur Cup
6 days
The PondCast
6 days
Kung Fu Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2026-09-08
PiG Sty Festival 8.0
Big Dog Cup 2026 Div 1

Ongoing

KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 3
K-JUNGMAN
ASL Season 22
Super Anchor Qualifying S3
CSL 2026 AUTUMN (S22)
Acropolis #5
Acropolis #5 - TRS
RSL Revival: Season 6
Calamity Invitational
FISSURE Playground #3
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer Qual
Stake Ranked Episode 3
XSE Pro League 2026

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S3: King of Kings
Acropolis #5 - GSA
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
Acropolis #5 - GSB
Acropolis #5 - GSC
SC4ALL II: Brood War
HSC XXX
Stellar Fest 2: Lunar Cup
SC4ALL II: StarCraft II
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
RSL Offline Finals
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 6
BLAST Rivals Fall 2026
IEM Beijing 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 5
PGL Masters Bucharest 2026
1win Private Club #2
Thunderpick World Champ. '26
ESL Pro League Season 24
Stake Ranked Episode 4
1win Private Club #1
Logitech G Play Connect 2026
SL StarSeries Fall 2026
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 © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.