Please stop the tournament comparison discussion. Especially regarding players their runs (Stephano seems to be the current topic). Stay on topic and stick to the games. Consequences will be met out to further derailment.
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
It's because Destiny is often extremely vocal about it on his stream. People believe him over watching players like Stephano winning tournaments by using Ultras to great effect.
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
because ultras are not comeback units but tank units, they are made to tank dmg not exatctly to deal demage quite opposite to broodlords and people mix up their role
Haypro's bust-out vs MVP with ultras says otherwise - imo ultras are really undervalued, same as infestors were several months ago
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
and even vs ghosts someone did maths a while ago to show that the amount of snipes needed to kill ultras makes even mass-ghosts not really a "hard" counter
Thanks god people can do the math to explain us what seems to be wrong if you consider all the games. I wonder what math did he do, seriously, such troll is funny. 10 Ghost kill 5 ultra in an instant - an instant. That's a hard counter.
and 10 mutas kill 5 marines in an instant; your logic is flawless, your understanding of the game groundbreaking; please tell me more about how the game works
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Not entirely correct : ). Roaches with banes can be really good against clumped up thors because of the burst damage and low "microbility" of thors as shown by Nestea in a GSL game. Of course this is only true if Terran stays on pure thor-hellion without tanks or is caught unsieged.
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
because ultras are not comeback units but tank units, they are made to tank dmg not exatctly to deal demage quite opposite to broodlords and people mix up their role
They tank really good due to their armor and hp, but their damage shouldn't be overlooked. With 17.4 dps and their splash damage it hits pretty hard. Really its the combination of staying alive while dealing adequate dmg is what makes them so good. Against thors i would normally use broodlords but with the creep spread Ret has.. Ultra's are much much faster to get around. Ret likes to stay mobile
precisecly... ultras are just that the zergling can live and kill terran, because the biggest flaw of a zergling is that it dies before it has a chance to deal dmg, ultras take care of the most of a splash if they are targeted and even if not they are good dps y
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
because ultras are not comeback units but tank units, they are made to tank dmg not exatctly to deal demage quite opposite to broodlords and people mix up their role
Haypro's bust-out vs MVP with ultras says otherwise - imo ultras are really undervalued, same as infestors were several months ago
On November 25 2011 23:49 WhiteDog wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:46 sleepingdog wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:45 Itsmedudeman wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:43 bgx wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:42 SafeAsCheese wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:41 sleepingdog wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
and even vs ghosts someone did maths a while ago to show that the amount of snipes needed to kill ultras makes even mass-ghosts not really a "hard" counter
Thanks god people can do the math to explain us what seems to be wrong if you consider all the games. I wonder what math did he do, seriously, such troll is funny. 10 Ghost kill 5 ultra in an instant - an instant. That's a hard counter.
and 10 mutas kill 5 marines in an instant; your logic is flawless, your understanding of the game groundbreaking; please tell me more about how the game works
10 mutas = 1000/1000, 5 marines = 500/0
10 ghosts = 2000/1000, 5 ultras = 1500/1000
And the time it takes to get those ghosts to full energy? Ghosts being a suitable unit against ultras have much more to do with positioning and the map itself than unit vs. unit.
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
It's because Destiny is often extremely vocal about it on his stream. People believe him over watching players like Stephano winning tournaments by using Ultras to great effect.
Basically. Stephano, DRG, Dimaga, and Curious all prefer ultras in the late game.
hehe if he will see the replay he will poke himself. Could have killed the sentrys and ... then the obs was basically over the marines, just one click. Without the sentrys he could have just retreated with his groundforce and kill the immortals. then move back in and take the win.
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
because ultras are not comeback units but tank units, they are made to tank dmg not exatctly to deal demage quite opposite to broodlords and people mix up their role
Haypro's bust-out vs MVP with ultras says otherwise - imo ultras are really undervalued, same as infestors were several months ago
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
and even vs ghosts someone did maths a while ago to show that the amount of snipes needed to kill ultras makes even mass-ghosts not really a "hard" counter
Thanks god people can do the math to explain us what seems to be wrong if you consider all the games. I wonder what math did he do, seriously, such troll is funny. 10 Ghost kill 5 ultra in an instant - an instant. That's a hard counter.
and 10 mutas kill 5 marines in an instant; your logic is flawless, your understanding of the game groundbreaking; please tell me more about how the game works
The problem with Ultras has always been their size. 5 Ultras and 15 Ultras are about as similarly effective, unless you pull off a massive flank. Even in the final battle between Thorzain & Ret, the Lings actually did more damage than the Ultras, to the seige tanks. They allowed the flank to work. Ultras only work in combination is the big problem.
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
because ultras are not comeback units but tank units, they are made to tank dmg not exatctly to deal demage quite opposite to broodlords and people mix up their role
Haypro's bust-out vs MVP with ultras says otherwise - imo ultras are really undervalued, same as infestors were several months ago
On November 25 2011 23:49 WhiteDog wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:46 sleepingdog wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:45 Itsmedudeman wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:43 bgx wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:42 SafeAsCheese wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:41 sleepingdog wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
and even vs ghosts someone did maths a while ago to show that the amount of snipes needed to kill ultras makes even mass-ghosts not really a "hard" counter
Thanks god people can do the math to explain us what seems to be wrong if you consider all the games. I wonder what math did he do, seriously, such troll is funny. 10 Ghost kill 5 ultra in an instant - an instant. That's a hard counter.
and 10 mutas kill 5 marines in an instant; your logic is flawless, your understanding of the game groundbreaking; please tell me more about how the game works
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
because ultras are not comeback units but tank units, they are made to tank dmg not exatctly to deal demage quite opposite to broodlords and people mix up their role
Haypro's bust-out vs MVP with ultras says otherwise - imo ultras are really undervalued, same as infestors were several months ago
On November 25 2011 23:49 WhiteDog wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:46 sleepingdog wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:45 Itsmedudeman wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:43 bgx wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:42 SafeAsCheese wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:41 sleepingdog wrote:
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
and even vs ghosts someone did maths a while ago to show that the amount of snipes needed to kill ultras makes even mass-ghosts not really a "hard" counter
Thanks god people can do the math to explain us what seems to be wrong if you consider all the games. I wonder what math did he do, seriously, such troll is funny. 10 Ghost kill 5 ultra in an instant - an instant. That's a hard counter.
and 10 mutas kill 5 marines in an instant; your logic is flawless, your understanding of the game groundbreaking; please tell me more about how the game works
10 mutas = 1000/1000, 5 marines = 500/0
10 ghosts = 2000/1000, 5 ultras = 1500/1000
And the time it takes to get those ghosts to full energy? Ghosts being a suitable unit against ultras have much more to do with positioning and the map itself than unit vs. unit.
On November 25 2011 23:40 Killcani wrote: ultra? why......
that's why - they are kinda good vs thors
Banes are good against thors when you have 200 of them vs 10 thors, doesn't make it smart
If thorzain had 30 more supply, rets army would have melted.
not entirely correct ultras are v good vs middle sized mech army, and they are cost efficient while banelings are not cost efficient vs mech almost ever
Everyone always tries to argue that ultras are awful and you should never get them when several top pros end up using them quite often. Ultras are only really bad against marauders and like 15 ghosts.
It's because Destiny is often extremely vocal about it on his stream. People believe him over watching players like Stephano winning tournaments by using Ultras to great effect.
Basically. Stephano, DRG, Dimaga, and Curious all prefer ultras in the late game.
Check minute 29:20 - to see the power over ghosts vs broodlords. And yes i know nestea overproduced broods, was under constant attack by nukes etc. But just view this as an example of pure snipe dps.
EPT
