|
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
Basically just be respectful. Aside from that, enjoy the games, make sure you bring an umbrella and have some delicious waffles! (#) |
On August 28 2011 11:11 Novalisk wrote:
How are the ties in pools A and C gonna work? Pool C has HerO, Slush, and Trickster with 2-3, and HerO has the least amount of wins but has beaten Slush and lost to Trickster.
In case of 3 way tie then they go by overall record for games. Slush and Trickster are tied in this respect (5-6), but Slush beat Trickster so it's Slush 3rd trickster 4th
|
On August 28 2011 11:04 garlicface wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:01 Femari wrote:
Puma just lost any respect I had for him. lol. I don't think he's worried about winning your respect when his goal is to win the tournament.
Ofc he thinks about the sc2 communits opinion about him. Shiish
|
On August 28 2011 11:09 CEPEHDREI wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:08 Inflicted_ wrote:On August 28 2011 11:07 Scisyhp wrote:
If Puma thought the 1-1-1 would win him the game, then don't blame him for using it. Only an idiot would avoid doing something because it was (allegedly) OP. I definitely will not blame someone for trying to win, I'd much rather a player try to win than try to lose. IMMVP doesn't condone the usage of 1-1-1 all-in because he sees it as OP too. Is he an idiot? he did it against MC in Code S.
It's Bomber who did that, not MVP ?
|
Are there any more games being played today? Puma's 1-1-1 vs Kiwikaki would be a sour note for the day to end on.
|
You know... my biggest problem isn't even the build itself.
It is this one build destroying an entire matchup, it's supereasy for Terran too execute and has a insanely high winrate, so yeh sure I would use it too.
But it completely sucks the fun out of watching, so yeh i'm gonna say it, the current state of PvT is hurting E-sports.
There shouldn't be such insanely strong all-ins in an competetive RTS game, not from any race.
|
On August 28 2011 11:11 Alpino wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:10 dwillow wrote:On August 28 2011 11:06 Otori wrote:On August 28 2011 11:04 Netsky wrote:
Imagine a world where...
...Protoss players stopped crying...
...and learned to play Starcraft 2. quoted for truth protoss diamond players in the thread needs to stop crying because it's getting really old. it is not unbalanced one bit. Kiwi did not counter that build and he wasnt even expecting it since he put up a nexus that he later cancelled. :-D :-D :-D :-D I am Masters terran and I still think its a little bit too strong...have someone even ever held it, if he didn't know its coming, like 3 gate exp doesnt work, 3 gate robo neither, 4gate + robo + stargate may... we can easily get back the 5 raxx reaper vs. Z and terran it all the way!! But than it wud be all TvT's and blue flames :-D... A player that dont know the 1-1-1 is coming deserves to lose. The force of the 1-1-1 lies in it being "scoutable" and not easily countered even still.
Everyone knows the 1-1-1 is coming.. The fans know it, casters know it, the players know it, God knows it, Blizzard knows it.... EveryONE knows its coming lol.
|
On August 28 2011 11:08 Inflicted_ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:07 Scisyhp wrote:
If Puma thought the 1-1-1 would win him the game, then don't blame him for using it. Only an idiot would avoid doing something because it was (allegedly) OP. I definitely will not blame someone for trying to win, I'd much rather a player try to win than try to lose. IMMVP doesn't condone the usage of 1-1-1 all-in because he sees it as OP too. Is he an idiot?
I don't get why people keep saying this, if MVP thought 1-1-1 had 100% win-rate in TvP then he would do it every time until it got nerfed. Just because MVP made a light-hearted comment about 1-1-1 being OP, it doesn't mean that he won't do the build...
|
On August 28 2011 11:07 iyoume wrote:
Lol, PuMa was Flash's practice partner and some other pros as well in BW.
It's not because he uses 1-1-1 that he's suddenly a piece of crap. PuMa is much more skilled RTS-wise than everybody else in this tournament.
Sorry man, but that's a load of crap. People can keep saying how he practiced with Flash all you want, but to call him the most skilled is absolutely asinine and discrediting a lot of the guys who are actually there including the very man who has the most accolades there. -_-
|
|
|
On August 28 2011 11:09 Flonomenalz wrote:
Man you guys are dumb.
Kiwi chose a build that's.... strange, but could have worked.
He was going for zealot/immortal/phoenix, but then got nervous at the increasing marine count and chose to engage awfully. He needed to adopt a sort of Zerg player mentality when he engaged...
- Immortals target tanks
- Zealots a-move
- Phoenixes flank around back and PICK UP TANKS
Seriously, people are qqing about marines but tanks do SO much damage, once the tanks die you can warp in stalkers to kite everything else. Kiwi knows he should've won that.
Immortals will never get to vs the tanks against a Terran that spreads them out (Puma) and can keep them safe behind a marine/SCV ball. Immortal range just isn't long enough.
|
On August 28 2011 11:11 ak1knight wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:08 jyLee wrote:On August 28 2011 11:03 Condor Hero wrote:On August 28 2011 11:01 benjammin wrote:
serious question: with the expo having so much surface area, why wouldn't kiwi keep delaying until puma has to push through the cavern? why engage earlier if your advantage increases over time? im so tired of seeing this shit. tell me, HOW does his advantage increase over time? bottom line: 1) mass marines only dealt with aoe 2) marine ball constantly growing 3) kiwi had no chance of getting aoe since both templar and colossus require time and resources he didnt have would you rather he waited until puma slow pushed to the chokes of his natural? Let me lay it out for you since you clearly dont know how the game works. The longer he stalls the bigger the economic advantage he has because puma pulled half his scvs. Hopefully you can understand the math behind it now or you have no hope. 1. MULES 2. He can't just delay until he has a couple collos to kill marines, the longer he delays the more marines the T has that the P can't deal with efficiently with tank support until collos.
can you please stop posting when you dont have any idea how the game works.
|
On August 28 2011 11:11 Dommk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:10 hysterial wrote:On August 28 2011 11:04 VTPerfect wrote:On August 28 2011 11:00 WindCalibur wrote:
I really do not understand why protoss do not go 1 gate expand. It is so easy for 1 gate expand to hold a 1/1/1 yet i never see a protoss do it. I really do not understand. because after the 20 second warpgate nerf 2 rax is guarunteed to force a cancel on the nexus or kill it and then its basically free win for terran, search for why Koreans think the 1/1/1 is imbalanced thread. I'm pretty sure 1 gate FE into 3 gates can hold any 2 rax. Do you even play Protoss? If 1gate FE could hold off a 2rax then I would do it every game
You cut probes and chrono warp gate, good 20/22 nexus expand man.
|
In other news- Naniwa vs Rain rematch incoming tomorrow. I hope Naniwa crushes his face this time!
|
On August 28 2011 11:07 Valikyr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:04 Netsky wrote:
Imagine a world where...
...Protoss players stopped crying...
...and learned to play Starcraft 2. Imagine a world in which ppl didn't generalize so much
no. imagine a world where people wouldnt get so butthurt over something that is balanced.
|
It's great to see that despite all the evidence that this shit is unstoppable, there are always the dudes who put the blame on the P player. Every time someone does a 1-1-1 the T player wins, the P player tries yet another strategy that fails, and the people in the LR threads say stuff like "he should have made a fast colossus" like they know what they're talking about.
|
On August 28 2011 11:10 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:09 Serpico wrote:On August 28 2011 11:07 Femari wrote:On August 28 2011 11:04 Otori wrote:On August 28 2011 11:02 mordk wrote:On August 28 2011 11:02 Yaki wrote:On August 28 2011 11:01 Femari wrote:
Puma just lost any respect I had for him. Stop you can't blame him for using a strong build You can, MVP has self respect so he refuses to use 1-1-1, there's a real player  self respect refusing to use a specific build? that's just retarded, thats like saying its self respect to not 6pool someone dont think MVP can pull off 1-1-1 builds as perfectly as puma does. MVP would more than likely pull it off better than Puma. I dislike the 1/1/1. It's broken. I don't abuse it when I play. I play straight up. I could use it and do extremely well but what's the point? It's like cheating to get infinite items in a game. It's boring. It's stupid. And it's broken. Lol you complain too much, Kiwi needed to stall for time and he didnt do that. Stalling is not the answer, because as you stall, terran gains an eco lead and makes more marines, which makes immortals and phoenixes ineffective
lol wat, how does terran get an eco lead? u have guardian shield + mass zeal immortal, ur immortals tank the 1st few tank shots while ur zealots get close to the marines, ur phoenix is are taking the banshees out and once theres no banshee threat u lift the tanks leaving the marines exposed, the more kiwi stalled the more time he would have had to get more immortals + phoenixs out cus of chrono boost while pumping 4 zeals at a time.. its extremely defendable if u execute everything perfectly
|
Anyone who thinks kiwi shouldn't delay is wrong. Puma pulled 12 SCVs and didn't make a single one after that. Mules are good but kiwi had higher income. The longer he delayed meant the better he could defend. There was simply no reason to attack when he did. The tanks weren't even unsieged when he did. I'm not blaming him but don't use 1-1-1 as an excuse when it could have went quite a bit better.
edit: double negatives, how do they work?
|
On August 28 2011 11:09 Flonomenalz wrote:
Man you guys are dumb.
Kiwi chose a build that's.... strange, but could have worked.
He was going for zealot/immortal/phoenix, but then got nervous at the increasing marine count and chose to engage awfully. He needed to adopt a sort of Zerg player mentality when he engaged...
- Immortals target tanks
- Zealots a-move
- Phoenixes flank around back and PICK UP TANKS
Seriously, people are qqing about marines but tanks do SO much damage, once the tanks die you can warp in stalkers to kite everything else. Kiwi knows he should've won that.
what about the banshees, kiwi had pheonixes focusing those down, which is pretty good since his AA was fairly low
|
On August 28 2011 11:09 CEPEHDREI wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 11:08 Inflicted_ wrote:On August 28 2011 11:07 Scisyhp wrote:
If Puma thought the 1-1-1 would win him the game, then don't blame him for using it. Only an idiot would avoid doing something because it was (allegedly) OP. I definitely will not blame someone for trying to win, I'd much rather a player try to win than try to lose. IMMVP doesn't condone the usage of 1-1-1 all-in because he sees it as OP too. Is he an idiot? he did it against MC in Code S.
ok dont bring IMMvp to this discussion and mvp did 1 rax expo vs MC and followed it with whatever he wanted , do u know what 1-1-1 is ? its making a barracks factory and starport ....
|
they are all 2. ! says nothing to me
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
