EPT178 Asia vs EU Starleague - Page 48
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
Garnet
Vietnam9049 Posts
| ||
|
koshka
Germany181 Posts
On May 23 2010 01:00 travis wrote: tlo has higher upgrades, bigger army, more workers harvesting jap TLO was ahead pretty obviously | ||
|
Puremiss
United States232 Posts
| ||
|
Brad
2754 Posts
| ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
| ||
|
PROJECTILE
United States226 Posts
less mining bases though. If TLO could take one more base and turtle a little he could just mech overrun sen though. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On May 23 2010 01:01 Puosu wrote: He had only one active mineral field that from what I saw was quickly going to run out, he had one huge attack he would've been able to unleash though but I believe Sen could have survived it with some good micro. I thought Sen had the overall bigger chance at winning tho The worker count has zero effect on the game too when he only needs 24~ scvs at that point for perfect saturation. On May 23 2010 01:01 G.s)NarutO wrote: TLO only had 1 base mining, SEn was ahead in that aspect, but he was lacking units. So, I'm not sure, TLO needed to push that second, that freezing is really annoying. ok i'll concede the game was close hehe very close whhhhy did it have to crash! | ||
|
xephon
Canada38 Posts
On May 23 2010 01:00 travis wrote: tlo has higher upgrades, bigger army, more workers harvesting more workers but only 1 base harvestering | ||
|
Count9
China10928 Posts
| ||
|
PlutoNZ
New Zealand410 Posts
| ||
BroOd
Austin10833 Posts
On May 23 2010 01:00 StorkHwaiting wrote: Sen seemed to have solid advantage... 3 base to 1... and mech army would not win when it moved out. It only stayed alive because of positional advantage... And that's after the first game where Sen would easily have countered the banshee harass -_- viking game was the first game, then the banshee game. also, sen had lost a bunch of drones, and that entire army he dropped. tlo almost had 3-2 upgrades vs 1-0, his next push would've been really powerful. I'm not saying it would've definitively won, but I don't think sen had any solid advantage. | ||
|
koshka
Germany181 Posts
| ||
|
ironchef
Canada1350 Posts
| ||
|
Inkblood
United States463 Posts
| ||
|
Kirb
Germany900 Posts
On May 23 2010 01:02 Stratos_speAr wrote: Yet another reason why removing LAN was a completely ridiculous decision. Relying on B.net for tournaments like this is a complete joke. Yes.. cause asian vs europe would have been played on lan. o.O -not- | ||
|
Puosu
7034 Posts
 I wonder if its realistic at all to expect Blizz to fix bnet 2.0 before the weekend is over... I'd love to be able to play some and watch tournaments. | ||
|
HolydaKing
21254 Posts
(meaning we shouldn't be too surprised that there are some days/patches were battle.net sucks) | ||
|
psyote
Germany15 Posts
On May 23 2010 01:06 Kirb wrote: Yes.. cause asian vs europe would have been played on lan. o.O -not- vpn? | ||
|
PROJECTILE
United States226 Posts
On May 23 2010 01:06 Kirb wrote: Yes.. cause asian vs europe would have been played on lan. o.O -not- ... seriously? | ||
|
Shizuru~
Malaysia1676 Posts
for 3 times in a row! | ||
| ||
