|
Obligatory public note for all large tournament threads:
The following is a list of behaviors that will get immediate bans:
1. Whining about stream
2. Bashing other games
3. Flaming other users
4. Bashing players
5. Complaining about imbalance.
It is in no way complete. Keep in mind that there's a difference between pointing out that the SC2 and CoD streams were switched and whining about it (same thing on pointing out/asking about stream lag and whining about it, etc.). Also, just because you post something and aren't immediately banned for it doesn't mean you won't get caught. We'll be going through this thread very carefully.
That being said, enjoy today's games!
Time stamp: page 12, 6:54. |
On August 27 2011 14:18 poorcloud wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 13:48 dcsoda wrote:On August 27 2011 13:41 IMBAkorean wrote:
WOOO NANI! huk going downhill since going to eg The guy who is in the Ro8 of Code S and just beat NaDa not two or three days ago is going downhill? That means his uphill would have to be winning back to back tournaments or something... Did you watch the Huk vs Nada games? Looked way worse than some of the Code A games i seen. Nada has stagnated since like a few months ago.
Yeah I did watch. I think the games were fine. What does it matter if some Code A games were better played?
|
On August 27 2011 14:30 doffe wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 13:48 FighterHayabusa wrote:On August 27 2011 13:40 doffe wrote:On August 27 2011 13:29 FighterHayabusa wrote:On August 27 2011 13:20 doffe wrote:On August 27 2011 13:16 FighterHayabusa wrote:On August 27 2011 13:10 Slakter wrote:On August 27 2011 13:08 FighterHayabusa wrote:
Mutas are really terrible, and they shouldn't be that bad for their cost. To those saying that he engaged badly...he didn't have anything left, and he had plenty of banes, but about 15 of them died at once to one siege tank shot. Marines just do way too much DPS for the cost. First of all you´re talking imba in a LR-thread which is against the rules. Secondly, you´re wrong. You cant judge how good mutas are by looking at straight up fights just like you cant judge reapers based on straight fights. No, I'm talking about utility for cost, and it isn't there with any zerg unit except the Infestor and Brood lord. Everything else is basically a glass cannon or worse. Some do decent damage, but have pitiful health. The best unit in this game is the marine as far as utility for the investment. With stim they are absurd, and eclipse every unit in the game. Ive seen you discuss this in other threads aswell and you are still as misguided I see. Had zerg been a costeffective race it would be ridicolously OP. And besides, mutalisks cost is well worth it considering what they bring to the table. I must ask, at what level do you play the game? Simple curiousity to where your opinions come from (no BM intended). I myself is far from a pro but can stand my ground against master Ts and probably win half. I'm decent, but my level of play means just as little as yours. It is an argument from authority. Lets try to stay away from logical fallacies in a discussion. Now, I agree that Zerg isn't cost efficient. So you must always be ahead in economy. The problem lies in the fact that zerg is also supply inefficient, and you cannot satisfy both of conditions for the whole game. You can't because you can't have both more drones and more units when you are both at 200 food. The argument is that as zerg you shouldn't allow them to get to 200 food, but this relies more on someone else making a mistake than on your skill. Zerg is hardly supply inefficient. Roaches are, but zerg in general cant really be consider such. And letting a terran getting to 200 is not and issue really, its about how fas you can reinforce and where you engage the terran. Once you as a zerg is maxed you can trade very costinefficient and still get the better end of the deal, thats pretty unique for zergs. And yes, what level you play at does matter, If your on a lower level your point of view in these situations are extremly misguided due to most likely neither macroing nor microing properly. Id say Id take a GMs opinion over a plat every day of the week due to this. It seems like your watching SC2 from a purely mathetmatical point of view. This is not a working way of doing it unless you can find working variables for micro / macro / Maps / where you engage / scouting etc etc. Its about SO much more then simple dps/cost or hp/cost. Marines have the potential to be cost effective against banes but banes also has the potential to be extremly cost effecive against marines, no match can prova a balance here, only actual gameplay will show where the balance lies and as of now ZvT seems to be a pretty damn even MU. I'm looking at it purely mathematically, because I'm a mathematician(actuary to be specific). Gameplay is a terrible way to judge balance because you cannot account for player skill in it. That is why the best way will always be mathematically. I think it is more of a design issue with Zerg as opposed to an issue with individual units. Obviously they cannot really fix the former, but they can make adjustments to the latter. Thats an absolutely horrid argument. You cant disregard actual resluts in favor of mathematics simply cause the results doesnt account for the skillvl of the players. Id say it does just that alot better then math does since math does so not at all. To account for gameplay we though need to do some asumptions, most of all we must asume that the top tier of each race has close to the same skillpotential. I dont think this is far fetched at all. Its pretty damn likely to be the fact considering most players actually tried out all races before deciding. Math leaves a TON of things out that are 100% necessery to bring to the table in these discussions. Id say that math is the absolute worst way of all to use to look into SC2 balance. Sure, what you adjust to balance the game are pure numbers but how you actually come to the conclusion that these things are unbalance are purely based on how they actually play out. I will leave this now and you should take further complaints to the real balance threads and not in the LR threads. and if you do so please actually back your claims up with the magical numbers you claim to have. I have yet to seen an actual fact from you. And I to urge you to play terran against a mutalisking zerg to see how incredibly hard it can be to defend against it while not being utterly outmacroed. Sure, my Z is better then my T but I definitly think harassing with mutas is way easier then defending against the same.
This is where you are wrong and even admit it: Assuming that each race has the same skill potential has not been proven, and there can definitely be arguments made both for and against that statement.
|
On August 27 2011 14:52 FighterHayabusa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 14:30 doffe wrote:On August 27 2011 13:48 FighterHayabusa wrote:On August 27 2011 13:40 doffe wrote:On August 27 2011 13:29 FighterHayabusa wrote:On August 27 2011 13:20 doffe wrote:On August 27 2011 13:16 FighterHayabusa wrote:On August 27 2011 13:10 Slakter wrote:On August 27 2011 13:08 FighterHayabusa wrote:
Mutas are really terrible, and they shouldn't be that bad for their cost. To those saying that he engaged badly...he didn't have anything left, and he had plenty of banes, but about 15 of them died at once to one siege tank shot. Marines just do way too much DPS for the cost. First of all you´re talking imba in a LR-thread which is against the rules. Secondly, you´re wrong. You cant judge how good mutas are by looking at straight up fights just like you cant judge reapers based on straight fights. No, I'm talking about utility for cost, and it isn't there with any zerg unit except the Infestor and Brood lord. Everything else is basically a glass cannon or worse. Some do decent damage, but have pitiful health. The best unit in this game is the marine as far as utility for the investment. With stim they are absurd, and eclipse every unit in the game. Ive seen you discuss this in other threads aswell and you are still as misguided I see. Had zerg been a costeffective race it would be ridicolously OP. And besides, mutalisks cost is well worth it considering what they bring to the table. I must ask, at what level do you play the game? Simple curiousity to where your opinions come from (no BM intended). I myself is far from a pro but can stand my ground against master Ts and probably win half. I'm decent, but my level of play means just as little as yours. It is an argument from authority. Lets try to stay away from logical fallacies in a discussion. Now, I agree that Zerg isn't cost efficient. So you must always be ahead in economy. The problem lies in the fact that zerg is also supply inefficient, and you cannot satisfy both of conditions for the whole game. You can't because you can't have both more drones and more units when you are both at 200 food. The argument is that as zerg you shouldn't allow them to get to 200 food, but this relies more on someone else making a mistake than on your skill. Zerg is hardly supply inefficient. Roaches are, but zerg in general cant really be consider such. And letting a terran getting to 200 is not and issue really, its about how fas you can reinforce and where you engage the terran. Once you as a zerg is maxed you can trade very costinefficient and still get the better end of the deal, thats pretty unique for zergs. And yes, what level you play at does matter, If your on a lower level your point of view in these situations are extremly misguided due to most likely neither macroing nor microing properly. Id say Id take a GMs opinion over a plat every day of the week due to this. It seems like your watching SC2 from a purely mathetmatical point of view. This is not a working way of doing it unless you can find working variables for micro / macro / Maps / where you engage / scouting etc etc. Its about SO much more then simple dps/cost or hp/cost. Marines have the potential to be cost effective against banes but banes also has the potential to be extremly cost effecive against marines, no match can prova a balance here, only actual gameplay will show where the balance lies and as of now ZvT seems to be a pretty damn even MU. I'm looking at it purely mathematically, because I'm a mathematician(actuary to be specific). Gameplay is a terrible way to judge balance because you cannot account for player skill in it. That is why the best way will always be mathematically. I think it is more of a design issue with Zerg as opposed to an issue with individual units. Obviously they cannot really fix the former, but they can make adjustments to the latter. Thats an absolutely horrid argument. You cant disregard actual resluts in favor of mathematics simply cause the results doesnt account for the skillvl of the players. Id say it does just that alot better then math does since math does so not at all. To account for gameplay we though need to do some asumptions, most of all we must asume that the top tier of each race has close to the same skillpotential. I dont think this is far fetched at all. Its pretty damn likely to be the fact considering most players actually tried out all races before deciding. Math leaves a TON of things out that are 100% necessery to bring to the table in these discussions. Id say that math is the absolute worst way of all to use to look into SC2 balance. Sure, what you adjust to balance the game are pure numbers but how you actually come to the conclusion that these things are unbalance are purely based on how they actually play out. I will leave this now and you should take further complaints to the real balance threads and not in the LR threads. and if you do so please actually back your claims up with the magical numbers you claim to have. I have yet to seen an actual fact from you. And I to urge you to play terran against a mutalisking zerg to see how incredibly hard it can be to defend against it while not being utterly outmacroed. Sure, my Z is better then my T but I definitly think harassing with mutas is way easier then defending against the same. This is where you are wrong and even admit it: Assuming that each race has the same skill potential has not been proven, and there can definitely be arguments made both for and against that statement.
Yeah, it hasn't been proven that each race has the same skill potential, but that doesn't mean shit because once again... it hasn't been proven that each race has the same skill potential or different skill potential. You're not making any real argument, you've just been saying random shit and saying you have math and statistics to back you up but I guess they're super top secret statistics.
Your approach to the game is your problem, units aren't always directly comparable which is why approaching it from a gameplay and situational perspective, with numbers thrown in here and there makes more sense, and this is what Blizzard does, and this is why I sit here and enjoy what appears to be a fair game. Now, if you think it's unfair, go to the designated balance discussion thread and explain why instead of pretending you have some masterful insight that you're sitting on.
|
Did I miss SOTG or is it on soon?
|
Just wanted to say I love the K[9] duo! In terms of hype during a match, I think they actually do it better >.>
|
On August 27 2011 15:14 EnderCraft wrote:
Just wanted to say I love the K[9] duo! In terms of hype during a match, I think they actually do it better >.>
haha, dog days on the blue stream ^^
on topic i'm sad that nada didn't do so good... i wish he could go into koreandomination mode ;<
I liquibet him over huk but noooo D:
Anyone know how qxc is doing in bracket?
|
On August 27 2011 15:17 Active.815 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 15:14 EnderCraft wrote:
Just wanted to say I love the K[9] duo! In terms of hype during a match, I think they actually do it better >.> haha, dog days on the blue stream ^^ on topic i'm sad that nada didn't do so good... i wish he could go into koreandomination mode ;< I liquibet him over huk but noooo D: Anyone know how qxc is doing in bracket?
He got 2-0'd by Noblesse in ro4
|
Is there any way of knowing which stream a specific bracket match will be on, or what time? I know they start at 11 (10 my time) and am hoping to catch the KawaiiRice match. Anyone know which stream its going to be on, or is it yet to be determined. Thanks.
GLHF
|
3030 Posts
On August 27 2011 15:45 adcannon wrote:
Is there any way of knowing which stream a specific bracket match will be on, or what time? I know they start at 11 (10 my time) and am hoping to catch the KawaiiRice match. Anyone know which stream its going to be on, or is it yet to be determined. Thanks.
GLHF I think they will be announced impromptu at the start of the day. That's what they did in the past MLGs so I assume it will be the same.
|
Yah thats what I figured. Just hoping to catch it before I go to sleep tomorow, as I have to work tomorow night  . Ive just started following competitive SC2 and MLG over the past 6 months and it seems I have to work every single MLG weekend, T.T
Thanks blahz0r
|
^^ Hurt times man, just catch it inbetween work hours
|
Question may have been asked already :/ But is there a chance to see Idra <-> Sjow again right now? Its was to late here when it took place (6am).
edit: found it :p
|
On August 27 2011 16:20 Troopi wrote:
Question may have been asked already :/ But is there a chance to see Idra <-> Sjow again right now? Its was to late here when it took place (6am).
Yep. The re-broadcast is up, just click on the stream link in the OP, and on the player, click/move the time to about 3/4 way through (sorry don't know the exact hour/minute).
edit: around 06:38:21
|
On August 27 2011 13:11 Obscenity wrote:
Anyone who thinks 50 mineral units should do that much damage is delusional. Idra played those games masterfully from start to finish, dominated the map, and lost to some scumbag who could build barracks and hit A.
At first I was like "yeaaaah trollin' them up".
Then I lol'd.
But then I also remembered the absurd stubborness of idra fanbois and I was sad for you.
|
not sure what happened with Idra, but I'm glad hes going back to korea. Either everyone else in the foreign scene is catching up fast or hes been a major title lately, I really didn't understand the sjow games and just the way hes been playing. He needs Boxers determination and TLO's creativity and he would be set! lol I can dream right!?
On a positive note, KIWI is destroying out there.. 3-0?
|
Hey, I seem to have a problem with my stream.
It stops after a bit of time and shows me an MLG icon.
It's on all qualities (although it seems to stop faster on a higher quality).
It cant be my internet, just made a speedtest and got 87 mbit on DL and 9 mbit on UL, so its fine and should be able to watch ultra w/o problems.
|
Any recommended matches for a VOD-watcher? (from both red and blue)
|
Are vods out yet?
If so, where? Do I need a MLG subscription?
Also what happened to free HD?
|
why there are no recommended games? I would like to watch some vods now.. Dont have time to watch all /:. Any recommendation? Any sick games?
|
On August 27 2011 21:45 xHassassin wrote:
Are vods out yet?
If so, where? Do I need a MLG subscription?
Also what happened to free HD?
If you have a subscription (I think you need one), you can go to mlgpro.com and skip forwards or backwards in the time bar. When todays broadcast starts, you will have to wait until after the tournament to get the VODs for yesterday.
How to get a free silver subscription: http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/jrkt4/hot_pockets_is_giving_away_free_one_month_silver/
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
