|
Let's have a nice clean LR thread folks! Beware that moderation will probably be stricter than usual, balance whine, player bashing and trolling will not be tolerated! |
On January 11 2012 21:12 cyclone25 wrote:
Everyone calling Lucky terrible and being outclassed when he lost to a 4 minute bunker rush.
What now? This game showed the real skill of the players and not that bunker rush.
That's just the people with half a brain. Anyone with some intelligence can understand that a bunker rush will never be indicative of a players actual skill. The purpose of a bunker rush is to pidgeonhole a zerg into reacting in a way that isn't optimal. Clearly Lucky was taken aback by the rush and didn't react as best as he could've.
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On January 11 2012 21:15 Drazerk wrote:Game Two on Antiga shipyard In the top left is  Lucky In the bottom right is  MVP
4:00
Factory and reactor from MVP
Queesn for lucky
|
Gogogo, another game of mvp vs lucky 
|
United States4720 Posts
Did he just praise TheBest?
|
On January 11 2012 21:14 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 21:12 bittman wrote:On January 11 2012 21:11 Poopi wrote:
I can't believe how bad mech is.
Mvp won't be able to win another GSL if he can't play bio in TvZ :/ You mean marine tank medivac right? Only bio just as bad as only mech vs Zerg. Belshir was also an odd map for mech imo. I think that only "bio" is fine since you can't play pure bio in TvZ so bio is ofcourse biomech. You say biomech in TvT because there is pure bio (against mech) that can work too
No wonder I get confused so easily when bio doesn't always mean bio =P
|
Everybody keeps forgetting that MVP was actually dead that game when he lost those 20 SCV's...
|
On January 11 2012 21:14 Salteador Neo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 21:12 Napoleon53 wrote:On January 11 2012 21:10 forsooth wrote:
I knew vikings were bad against corrupters, but I didn't know they were that bad. I think there are some factors to consider. 1) Fungal growth.. Sometimes 1-2 on all during the battles. 2) upgrades. I think Zerg was ahead in the air upgrades. 3) 4 queens also did some damage. Normally I think Vikings is pretty cost-effective against corruptors. There's nothing to "think". Vikings counter corruptors and are very good against them. IMO forsooth was either trolling or QQing.
Or neither. Vikings are actually pretty bad straight up against corrupters. Fungals are just icing on the cake.
|
On January 11 2012 21:14 Salteador Neo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 21:12 Napoleon53 wrote:On January 11 2012 21:10 forsooth wrote:
I knew vikings were bad against corrupters, but I didn't know they were that bad. I think there are some factors to consider. 1) Fungal growth.. Sometimes 1-2 on all during the battles. 2) upgrades. I think Zerg was ahead in the air upgrades. 3) 4 queens also did some damage. Normally I think Vikings is pretty cost-effective against corruptors. There's nothing to "think". Vikings counter corruptors and are very good against them. IMO forsooth was either trolling or QQing.
Vikings can somewhat kite corrupters, but if you can fungel the vikings then the corrupters will do just fine.
|
On January 11 2012 21:15 Seeker wrote:
BARRACKS IN THE BASE?!!?!
THIS IS MADNESS!!!
hahahahah
|
You simply don't take zergs into the lategame on maps like belshir.
|
United Kingdom38257 Posts
On January 11 2012 21:16 Bastilol wrote:
Everybody keeps forgetting that MVP was actually dead that game when he lost those 20 SCV's...
Erm no, not at all.
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On January 11 2012 21:15 Drazerk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 21:15 Drazerk wrote:Game Two on Antiga shipyard In the top left is Lucky In the bottom right is MVP
4:00Factory and reactor from MVP Queesn for lucky
5:10
Ling speed for Lucky
Expansion for MVP
|
On January 11 2012 21:14 Salteador Neo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 21:12 Napoleon53 wrote:On January 11 2012 21:10 forsooth wrote:
I knew vikings were bad against corrupters, but I didn't know they were that bad. I think there are some factors to consider. 1) Fungal growth.. Sometimes 1-2 on all during the battles. 2) upgrades. I think Zerg was ahead in the air upgrades. 3) 4 queens also did some damage. Normally I think Vikings is pretty cost-effective against corruptors. There's nothing to "think". Vikings counter corruptors and are very good against them. IMO forsooth was either trolling or QQing.
No. Just because they have a damage bonus against Armored units does not make them a “counter”.
|
Broodlords get exponentially more powerful in large clouds like that. Inf broodlord corruptor is the strongest unit comp because the corruptors take care of air anti air and broodlords take care of ground anti air. The infestors take out everything.
Maybe ravens with hunter seeker couldve done something, a few less tanks and hunterseeker with a few ravens maybe. Ravens can also be used for harrass with auto turrets/
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37076 Posts
MVP DO IT SON!!! DO IT!!!!
|
On January 11 2012 21:15 Roe wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 21:12 ChaosTerran wrote:
and this is why terran needs ghosts to beat broodlords, corrupters just dont die to vikings, its an uneven battle even if you have superior numbers as terran. ghosts won't do anything since he had mass overseers. you would waste so much energy sniping them you wouldnt have anything left for broods, let alone infestors. then you have cloak constantly draining energy as well. the only answer is mass viking+mass raven.
No, the only answer is mass ghosts, because they outrange infestors and broodlords. viking/raven just gets fungaled to death and theres not much you can do.
|
On January 11 2012 21:11 SuperFanBoy wrote:
if he went ghosts would of been an easy win against that composition.
He probably didn't have that much gas to spare, since I think he was never really on 4 bases ?
edit : + you don't have THAT much raxxes when you're meching no ?
|
On January 11 2012 21:16 Koshi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 21:14 Salteador Neo wrote:On January 11 2012 21:12 Napoleon53 wrote:On January 11 2012 21:10 forsooth wrote:
I knew vikings were bad against corrupters, but I didn't know they were that bad. I think there are some factors to consider. 1) Fungal growth.. Sometimes 1-2 on all during the battles. 2) upgrades. I think Zerg was ahead in the air upgrades. 3) 4 queens also did some damage. Normally I think Vikings is pretty cost-effective against corruptors. There's nothing to "think". Vikings counter corruptors and are very good against them. IMO forsooth was either trolling or QQing. Vikings can somewhat kite corrupters
No. Vikings have 2,75 movespeed, Corruptors 2,95.
|
United Kingdom31255 Posts
On January 11 2012 21:15 Drazerk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 21:15 Drazerk wrote:Game Two on Antiga shipyard In the top left is Lucky In the bottom right is MVP
4:00Factory and reactor from MVP Queesn for lucky
5:10Ling speed for Lucky Expansion for MVP
6:20
Stim and multiple barracks for MVP
|
lol at MVP map winrate on antiga, 100%? really ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
