EPT[GCPL] Dignitas vs EG - Page 8
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
DeMusliM
United Kingdom401 Posts
| ||
|
RandomAccount#49059
United States2140 Posts
| ||
|
Sorkoas
549 Posts
On February 28 2011 04:51 nihlon wrote: He's implying that bischu chose the wrong strat for that map. Most people would agree. Well I can't argue that since I don't play protoss and he did after all lose. However the way he put it was really in the manner of saying that Bischu is bad because he used a build that wouldn't work on this level. Which is implying that he hasn't practiced it. And that's a pretty silly assumption when it's a player of Dignitas we are talking about. Thanks for making me aware of that. I will try to express myself in a different way from now on. | ||
|
Azarkon
United States21060 Posts
 | ||
|
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
| ||
|
Jotoco
Brazil1342 Posts
Really, I think EG is the only team who is not showing good Terran players, but Strife, Axlav and Machine keep surprising me. They are very good. I wanted to see more of Demuslim (obviously need to wait) and LzGamer, but I will take whatever they give me. | ||
|
bobhund
Sweden364 Posts
| ||
|
Velocity`
United Kingdom343 Posts
Thanks for making me aware of that. I will try to express myself in a different way from now on.[/QUOTE] Good to know. Also, rooting for Axslav in this one. | ||
NonY
8751 Posts
On February 28 2011 04:48 Sorkoas wrote: I don't think anyone denied that it counters an eco build. However I thought a definition of an all in was that if you fail with your attack you have pretty much lost. Seems like that is usually the case if you cut worker production to rush the guy who is fast expanding. Am I wrong? The defending player can stop the attack but lose enough harvesters to be behind. As soon as the attacker sees that he's killing a lot of harvesters, he has the option to take the econ advantage and move on to the next stage of the game. | ||
|
Synche
United States1345 Posts
| ||
|
Sorkoas
549 Posts
On February 28 2011 05:04 Liquid`Tyler wrote: The defending player can stop the attack but lose enough harvesters to be behind. As soon as the attacker sees that he's killing a lot of harvesters, he has the option to take the econ advantage and move on to the next stage of the game. Well, I get that. But if we are going to use the phrase all in, can't we say that he is betting all he has on doing enough damage that he can either win or at least punish the opponent but if he does fail he has lost the game? It sounds like we are trying to deny the existence of all in strategies completely because we can keep finding arguments like this since we can end up with all kind of crazy scenarios, while the fact is that the attacking player still has to do significant damage to not end up losing the game because of that specific attack he has invested so much in. | ||
|
emperorchampion
Canada9496 Posts
| ||
|
Xeris
Iran17695 Posts
great job EG <3 | ||
|
Fyzar
Netherlands8010 Posts
| ||
|
emperorchampion
Canada9496 Posts
| ||
|
.Enigma.
Sweden1461 Posts
| ||
|
mordk
Chile8385 Posts
| ||
|
Smurphy
United States374 Posts
| ||
|
hifriend
China7935 Posts
 | ||
|
arioch
England403 Posts
| ||
| ||
