|
Its time to enjoy the matches, keep the whining out of this thread. GL HF!
Also, don't reply to the whining and ignore it: have faith in the mods, we read every post and act swiftly. You're making it worse. Enjoy! |
On April 18 2011 06:22 mordk wrote:Well, time for some predictions  MC 3-1  ThorZaINAdelscott 0-3 KasBoxeR 3-2 HasuObsNaNiwa 3-0 CrunCherMC will probably lose one game being caught a little off guard by thorzain's style. But he'll catch up. Training with Jinro is going to serve him well. Kas is going to roll adelscott. He'll play well in game one but lose anyway and then tilt and make horrible mistakes and lose terribly. Happens all the time. BoxeR vs Hasuobs is probably the most interesting Ro8 matchup. Hard to predict. I think hasuobs' PvT ain't too good, while BoxeR's TvP is so patient and solid. I think lag might screw BoxeR up a bit, 3-2 is the correct prediction imo. Naniwa is going to crush cruncher so hard it will make him look bronze league. He's on a whole different level of play. I give cruncher absolutely 0% chances he'll win.
Agree with all your predictions. However I will be rooting hard for Thorzain to upset MC even though I don't think he stands much of a chance vs Kas in TvT
|
On April 18 2011 06:06 delayed reflex wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:00 Sabu113 wrote:On April 18 2011 05:57 slimshady wrote:
Very good manners by Mondragon, and it sucks he lost.
Although I'm a protoss, I gotta ask: what could Mondragon do better in the last game? It seems to me that he played very well. He never quite responded to Cruncher's composition. When he went for the big muta base snipe he should have killed the tech off. He could have killed the archives and possibly the cyber core and that would have bought a lot more time for him. Also fungal seems like it should be super effective against these stalker clumps. Sure there's templar there,but each feedback is a storm lost. Probably needed Hydras or the infestors to just be cost effective against those big clumps. Maybe baneling drops would have been a nice edge to add in in the mid late game. Idk tbf Cruncher's air opening is superstrong. It really prevents that 3rd from going up. I think in theory ultralisks would be the way to go vs stalker+HT, and I think he might have been able to get them out in time after that massive hold at the 4th if he started it after his hive instead of the greater spire (which never saw any use). I gotta say I was impressed at how nicely Cruncher responded in unit comp to Mondi's muta play - mass mutas would do great against void+colossus but Cruncher showed he is more than just a 1-trick pony. I still feel bad for zergs  You can't go ultras vs blink stalker+HT, as he can morph into 2-3 archons, warp in a round of zealots, and crush any amount of ultras you have.
Plus, hydras aren't cost effective vs blink stalkers either, as the blink stalkers will choose where and when to engage, and can win a straight up fight off creep easily.On April 18 2011 06:07 Kyouya wrote:
1 supply roach. Maybe as a tier 3 upgrade, but roaches are still very good early-mid, even at 2 supplies.
|
Were the matches pretty fast today? I wasn't home and I missed everything. When will the vids be up?
|
On April 18 2011 06:34 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:32 Sky Net wrote:On April 18 2011 06:22 mordk wrote:Well, time for some predictions MC 3-1 ThorZaINAdelscott 0-3 KasBoxeR 3-2 HasuObsNaNiwa 3-0 CrunCherMC will probably lose one game being caught a little off guard by thorzain's style. But he'll catch up. Training with Jinro is going to serve him well. Kas is going to roll adelscott. He'll play well in game one but lose anyway and then tilt and make horrible mistakes and lose terribly. Happens all the time. BoxeR vs Hasuobs is probably the most interesting Ro8 matchup. Hard to predict. I think hasuobs' PvT ain't too good, while BoxeR's TvP is so patient and solid. I think lag might screw BoxeR up a bit, 3-2 is the correct prediction imo. Naniwa is going to crush cruncher so hard it will make him look bronze league. He's on a whole different level of play. I give cruncher absolutely 0% chances he'll win. Some of Cruncher's PvP results: 2-0 vs Kiwikaki, 2-0 vs oGsInca. I consider Naniwa the favorite as well, but to say Cruncher has absolutely no chance to win is simply ignorant. I didn't ever say Cruncher's PvP was bad. I don't know where you read that. I'm pretty confident in naniwa's ability in PvP, he's a level above cruncher.
"0% chance he'll win" & "will make him look bronze league" don't imply his PvP is bad?? Kiwi certainly didn't look bronze league against Naniwa in the MLG finals (he took 2 games off him) and as I pointed out Cruncher has beaten Kiwi in addition to other elite protosses. Your post came off as biased by the Cruncher hate in the thread, but I could be wrong.
|
Pretty sure Boxer is going to shit on Hasu if he plays like he played morrow
|
The way people assume the Zerg player is better in every.single.case. is pathetic. Spending all your money on roaches so you have a higher supply doesn't mean you're winning or skilled you know. Anyone can do it.
Mondragon did hatch first which is dumb. He then responded to the inevitable cannons TERRIBLY.
He built mutas and basically didn't harass to them. Again, terrible play.
Maybe Mondragon - cool or not - simply isn't very good.
|
The backbone of the Protoss late-game vs. Zerg is basically mass blink stalkers. Retaining stalker count is everything. The high-tech units are there to support. How many colossi you mass really isn't as important as how many stalkers you mass as it's those crucial units that give Protoss the versatility to handle Zerg tech switches.
Every Protoss unit but the stalker is basically specialized. For this reason the main variation in Protoss composition comes from what you add to your stalker army. If Zerg goes muta ling or baneling, you add HTs. If Zerg goes roaches or ultras, you add immortals. If Zerg goes hydras, you add colossi. If Zerg goes broodlord you might consider adding some void rays.
The point of getting Infestors is to cut down on that stalker count. Stalkers are relatively expensive, and they are armored, so they take extra damage from FG, and when held in place by FG they will fall cost efficiently to roaches. The issue with going Infestors however is that Blink Stalkers can snipe your Infestors if the Protoss has fast reaction time, and Colossi in the back can do the same. Having the level of control necessary to land FGs and keep down the number of stalkers is going to be critical to doing well.
|
On April 18 2011 06:14 Kennigit wrote:King of Manner Show nested quote +Kennigit says (4:57 PM): you did well ^^ . Everyone on twitter was cheering for you Mondragon says (4:58 PM): nah after the games vs cruncher i found out how to play XD Kennigit says (4:58 PM): hahah Mondragon says (4:58 PM): wouldnt have lost now! ^^ roaches + infestors only are the key to everything Mondragon says (4:58 PM): found out too late taht infestors are the key ! Kennigit says (4:59 PM): protoss death ball is -_- Mondragon says (5:00 PM): yes protoss deathball isnt tough anymore if you make 10 infestors ^^ either infestors + roaches only Kennigit says (5:00 PM): haha Mondragon says (5:00 PM): or just broodlords only + infestors only both are fine but i found out 3 days too late Kennigit says (5:00 PM): ahh ;;; oh well, next time ^^ Mondragon says (5:00 PM): yep yep  ----- Take your zerg tears elsewhere
This means nothing you can't just assume that cruncher didn't have a response to infestors.
|
On April 18 2011 06:39 fadestep wrote:
Waah. Zerg is underpowered. When Zergs get horribly outplayed they lose. Waah.
I lol'd
Look Mondi had some really good play, but he also made some pretty big mistakes. He over committed in game 2 to the drop play. Also he could have sniped the nexus in his first drop, but he had units attack the out of position cannons instead of focusing the nexus. He wouldnt have needed to drop again had he done that and would have been in a great spot. Game 3 he had terrible crisis management and Cruncher executed the cannon rush pretty damn well. Game 4, Mondi was too passive with the mutas early. By the time he was aggressive, Cruncher had better defenses up. And he just never teched far enough. You aren't going to win with roach muta against blink stalker/high templar with some immortals in the mix. You shouldn't either.
|
On April 18 2011 06:43 Yaotzin wrote:
The way people assume the Zerg player is better in every.single.case. is pathetic. Spending all your money on roaches so you have a higher supply doesn't mean you're winning or skilled you know. Anyone can do it.
Mondragon did hatch first which is dumb. He then responded to the inevitable cannons TERRIBLY.
He built mutas and basically didn't harass to them. Again, terrible play.
Maybe Mondragon - cool or not - simply isn't very good.
trolls <3
|
On April 18 2011 06:38 Tegin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:36 DonaldLee wrote:On April 18 2011 06:35 Serpico wrote:On April 18 2011 06:35 DonaldLee wrote:On April 18 2011 06:33 Serpico wrote:On April 18 2011 06:30 DonaldLee wrote:On April 18 2011 06:24 entropius wrote:On April 18 2011 06:21 Tegin wrote:On April 18 2011 06:14 Tracedragon wrote:On April 18 2011 06:07 Tegin wrote:
Pretty sure the better player won today, and that better player was CrunCher. That's why they played a best of 5. Anyone complaining because of the outcome need to realize CrunCher outplayed Mondragon, especially in the final game. It's sad to see no zergs left..maybe they need to pick their games up a bit to contend? So are you implying that all Zerg players are bad? :/ No. I'm saying they need to pick their game up. Kinda like what a pitcher would need to get a final out in the 9th inning, or a basketball player to hit a game winning shot. There are tons of great zerg players, but none of them are "finishing" in TSL3. So here's a baseball analogy. Suppose in baseball all players had to bat from the same side of the plate, and then suppose there is a season of baseball where left-handed batters have a league-wide batting average of .210, while right-handed batters have a league-wide batting average of .275, over all teams in the Major Leagues, over the whole ~150 game season. Should you say "Those lefties really need to step up their game"? What a terrible analogy, which I'm hoping was the point, but I'll run with it regardless. If lefties were indeed forced to bat right handed, then yes, they need to adapt to the situation they're given because fair or not, results are what matter, not circumstances. No....you'd ruin the game and force every left handed hitter out of the league and left handed pitchers would dominate. It would be beyond stupid. That wasn't remotely what anyone was saying at all, good job. The point is you cant just change things and always tell people to deal with it. Sometimes you have to be responsible for actually making good changes and making sure things are fair. You get get it? And I'm saying you can't count on changes happening to make things fair. So how are things unfair? I believe they played a BO5 on maps that were on the tournament pool with CrunCher winning 3-1 without using any hacks/cheats.
They didn't play the same race. Symmetry makes something fair by definition (as in chess, where players alternate black/white), but there is no symmetry in non-mirror matches.
If you want things to be guaranteed fair, then play 9 games, where each player plays each race against each other race.
But that's not what players/fans want; we want players to be able to specialize. The trick is making asymmetric matchups fair.
|
On April 18 2011 06:39 TYJ.Aoy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:32 SkelA wrote:On April 18 2011 06:18 OrangeSoda wrote:On April 18 2011 06:12 SkelA wrote:
Seriosly Im so pissed because I feel like all top zerg player are stupid nobrainers like their race.... HELLO infestor counter blink stalkers, mass phoenix voidrays and are awesome against everything toss have(ok not against HT). Why noone makes em !?!?!
game 1 = Cruncher played terrible , Mondi played awesome.
game 2 = Cruncher played good wining because of imba map and invincible combo, Mondi played awesome but its just not enough.
game 3 = Cruncher wins with cheese thats easy to defend, Mondi reacts in the worst possible way.
game 4 = Both playing awesome but Cruncher was so cost effective that wins even with Mondi massive eco advantage. Overall Cruncher is the superior player today ( or superior race?? )
Cruncher played decent today if we dont count game 1. Clearly deserved this win. GG's !! because all the people that happen to play zerg are nobrainers Yep preety much. Do you see any zerg wining any big tournaments or going even deep into tournaments lately? Well I havent. Obviosly they are doing something wrong or zvp is imbalanced. I dont think zvp is imbalanced so they are playing zvp the wrong way but I havent played even played SC2 so I might be wrong. Zergs need to pick up their game and start experimenting with other styles that doesnt revolve just on mass roach hydra corruptors. The one zerg I was impressed is Spanishwa. That guy is awesome. I see now the general type of players that think everything is going totally fine.
B on iccup
Don't jump to conclusions
|
On April 18 2011 06:44 Facehead wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:14 Kennigit wrote:King of Manner Kennigit says (4:57 PM): you did well ^^ . Everyone on twitter was cheering for you Mondragon says (4:58 PM): nah after the games vs cruncher i found out how to play XD Kennigit says (4:58 PM): hahah Mondragon says (4:58 PM): wouldnt have lost now! ^^ roaches + infestors only are the key to everything Mondragon says (4:58 PM): found out too late taht infestors are the key ! Kennigit says (4:59 PM): protoss death ball is -_- Mondragon says (5:00 PM): yes protoss deathball isnt tough anymore if you make 10 infestors ^^ either infestors + roaches only Kennigit says (5:00 PM): haha Mondragon says (5:00 PM): or just broodlords only + infestors only both are fine but i found out 3 days too late Kennigit says (5:00 PM): ahh ;;; oh well, next time ^^ Mondragon says (5:00 PM): yep yep ----- Take your zerg tears elsewhere This means nothing you can't just assume that cruncher didn't have a response to infestors.
You completely miss the point. If the Zerg that lost - Mondragon - isn't crying and saying how impossible things are, what are lowly forum posters doing crying?
|
On April 18 2011 06:45 butchji wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:43 Yaotzin wrote:
The way people assume the Zerg player is better in every.single.case. is pathetic. Spending all your money on roaches so you have a higher supply doesn't mean you're winning or skilled you know. Anyone can do it.
Mondragon did hatch first which is dumb. He then responded to the inevitable cannons TERRIBLY.
He built mutas and basically didn't harass to them. Again, terrible play.
Maybe Mondragon - cool or not - simply isn't very good. trolls <3
Not trolling just sick to death of all the Zerg whining when the Zerg player isn't even good. What the fuck has Mondragon ever done in SC2? Beat Zeerax? Wow.
|
hts are the answer to infestors
|
On April 18 2011 06:44 Azarkon wrote:
The backbone of the Protoss late-game vs. Zerg is basically mass blink stalkers. Retaining stalker count is everything. The high-tech units are there to support. How many colossi you mass really isn't as important as how many stalkers you mass as it's those crucial units that give Protoss the versatility to handle Zerg tech switches.
Every Protoss unit but the stalker is basically specialized. For this reason the main variation in Protoss composition comes from what you add to your stalker army. If Zerg goes muta ling or baneling, you add HTs. If Zerg goes roaches or ultras, you add immortals. If Zerg goes hydras, you add colossi. If Zerg goes broodlord you might consider adding some void rays.
The point of getting Infestors is to cut down on that stalker count. Stalkers are relatively expensive, and they are armored, so they take extra damage from FG, and when held in place by FG they will fall cost efficiently to roaches. The issue with going Infestors however is that Blink Stalkers can snipe your Infestors if the Protoss has fast reaction time, and Colossi in the back can do the same. Having the level of control necessary to land FGs and keep down the number of stalkers is going to be critical to doing well.
Can't believe I'm reading such an argumented opinion here. (seriously)
|
On April 18 2011 06:22 mordk wrote:Well, time for some predictions MC 3-1 ThorZaINAdelscott 0-3 KasBoxeR 3-2 HasuObsNaNiwa 3-0 CrunCherMC will probably lose one game being caught a little off guard by thorzain's style. But he'll catch up. Training with Jinro is going to serve him well. Kas is going to roll adelscott. He'll play well in game one but lose anyway and then tilt and make horrible mistakes and lose terribly. Happens all the time. BoxeR vs Hasuobs is probably the most interesting Ro8 matchup. Hard to predict. I think hasuobs' PvT ain't too good, while BoxeR's TvP is so patient and solid. I think lag might screw BoxeR up a bit, 3-2 is the correct prediction imo. Naniwa is going to crush cruncher so hard it will make him look bronze league. He's on a whole different level of play. I give cruncher absolutely 0% chances he'll win.
I agree with all the results. I don't think Kas will have much trouble with Adelescott's PvT, but I think maybe Adelescott will take one game off him.
|
On April 18 2011 06:39 freetgy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:32 entropius wrote:
Do you really want it to get to the point where going into a tournament you already know the odds will always be 3-2 in favor of Z in PvZ, 3-1 in TvP?
I want it to get to the point where the odds are even. the odds should be tried to get even without Blizzard touching the game first. There are so many possible strategies, that could work and needs to be tested. Though it might a little bit harder to create stable builds for Zerg since their Mechanics are much more versatile that the other races, those Strategies do exist. Someone just has to find and refine them. Blizzard should be only the last angle to take action if nothing else works. The last patch is quite fresh and still isn't fully fleshed out. But since then alot of Infestors build have popped out that are quite strong against Protoss. perfection of builds needs time.
Unfortunately, that's not how people think. It's funny, too, because if Blizzard keeps tweaking things as new strategies get developed (like most people seem to want), it'll actually end up being nearly impossible to balance. I'm not saying it's balanced now, but if it is, any changes they make disrupt it, and if something changes in the metagame, it becomes perceptively imbalanced again. It's a tough spot to be in, since SC2 is an active competitive game with a lot of eyes watching it. Any changes you make are either the right call, or just band-aids to problems outside of their control.
Vultures are a classic example. How many people, when they first picked up the game thought "Man, these things are terrible, they don't do any damage to anything!" And they turn out to be a staple unit for BW Terran with zero changes ever.
|
On April 18 2011 06:42 Sky Net wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 06:34 mordk wrote:On April 18 2011 06:32 Sky Net wrote:On April 18 2011 06:22 mordk wrote:Well, time for some predictions MC 3-1 ThorZaINAdelscott 0-3 KasBoxeR 3-2 HasuObsNaNiwa 3-0 CrunCherMC will probably lose one game being caught a little off guard by thorzain's style. But he'll catch up. Training with Jinro is going to serve him well. Kas is going to roll adelscott. He'll play well in game one but lose anyway and then tilt and make horrible mistakes and lose terribly. Happens all the time. BoxeR vs Hasuobs is probably the most interesting Ro8 matchup. Hard to predict. I think hasuobs' PvT ain't too good, while BoxeR's TvP is so patient and solid. I think lag might screw BoxeR up a bit, 3-2 is the correct prediction imo. Naniwa is going to crush cruncher so hard it will make him look bronze league. He's on a whole different level of play. I give cruncher absolutely 0% chances he'll win. Some of Cruncher's PvP results: 2-0 vs Kiwikaki, 2-0 vs oGsInca. I consider Naniwa the favorite as well, but to say Cruncher has absolutely no chance to win is simply ignorant. I didn't ever say Cruncher's PvP was bad. I don't know where you read that. I'm pretty confident in naniwa's ability in PvP, he's a level above cruncher. "0% chance he'll win" & "will make him look bronze league" don't imply his PvP is bad?? Kiwi certainly didn't look bronze league against Naniwa in the MLG finals (he took 2 games off him) and as I pointed out Cruncher has beaten Kiwi in addition to other elite protosses. Your post came off as biased by the Cruncher hate in the thread, but I could be wrong.
Both quoted statements account for my confidence on naniwa's strenght in the matchup... see how it says "HE will MAKE him LOOK bronze league", never stated he isn't good. While it's true I dislike Cruncher that's got no relation with my prediction. I just think naniwa is too strong atm, only white-ra and MC can beat him in a PvP imo, even considering how volatile PvP is. I also think he's a strong contender to take TSL3, very strong actually. I don't see him losing a finals to anyone but MC, maybe Kas.
|
On April 18 2011 06:44 Azarkon wrote:
The backbone of the Protoss late-game vs. Zerg is basically mass blink stalkers. Retaining stalker count is everything. The high-tech units are there to support. How many colossi you have really isn't as important as how many stalkers you have as it's those crucial units that give Protoss the versatility to handle Zerg tech switches.
Every Protoss unit but the stalker is basically specialized. For this reason the main variation in Protoss composition comes from what you add to your stalker army. If Zerg goes muta ling or baneling, you add HTs. If Zerg goes roaches or ultras, you add immortals. If Zerg goes hydras, you add colossi. If Zerg goes broodlord you might consider adding some void rays.
The point of getting Infestors is to cut down on that stalker count. Stalkers are relatively expensive, and they are armored, so they take extra damage from FG, and when held in place by FG they will fall cost efficiently to roaches. The issue with going Infestors however is that Blink Stalkers can snipe your Infestors if the Protoss has fast reaction time, and Colossi in the back can do the same. Having the level of control necessary to land FGs and keep down the number of stalkers is going to be critical to doing well.
Well said. Though you don't necessarily need quick reaction times. Various smart things like leading your push with 1-3 stalkers out in front (or better yet an observer) or blinking stalkers from the back when some of your ball is fungaled. I'm looking forward to seeing more infestor based strategies, but I'm not that hopeful. The thing to me about infestors ZvP is they REALLY aren't efficient off just 1 fungal cost wise. In ZvZ/ZvT this is also true, but seems to be less extreme as even if you throw away your infestors off 1 good fungal it can tilt the battle enough in your favor to still be alright. I just don't see that happening in ZvP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
