On April 30 2012 04:07 Ylrahc wrote: No, you play cheesy (or greedy which is a form of economical cheese) so you can end the match faster. You play safe when there is a lot on the line and you don't want to get "cheesed" or time-attacked.
well, if it's not an important game, sure. otherwise you'll generally want to play in a way that'll reduce variance, obviously chucking in occasional cheese to be less exploitable
Question is, he was leading 2 - 0 against a (in his opinion) weaker opponent in a cup for "only" (he could win more or less the same amount if he was streaming instead of participating, w/o actually having to win) 1000€. Was it, for Stephano, an important game ? I don't think so. Game 4 seemed to prove me right, he made a safer build and totally outplayed Lucifron in late game.
On April 30 2012 04:07 Ylrahc wrote: No, you play cheesy (or greedy which is a form of economical cheese) so you can end the match faster. You play safe when there is a lot on the line and you don't want to get "cheesed" or time-attacked.
well, if it's not an important game, sure. otherwise you'll generally want to play in a way that'll reduce variance, obviously chucking in occasional cheese to be less exploitable
Question is, he was leading 2 - 0 against a (in his opinion) weaker opponent in a cup for "only" (he could win more or less the same amount if he was streaming instead of participating, w/o actually having to win) 1000€. Was is, for Stephano, an important game ? I don't think so. Game 4 seemed to prove me right, he made a safer build and totally outplayed Lucifron in late game.
well, it wasn't really, esp given that he'd have the map choice in set 4 (and 5 if needed), i'm just talking in general
On April 30 2012 04:07 Ylrahc wrote: No, you play cheesy (or greedy which is a form of economical cheese) so you can end the match faster. You play safe when there is a lot on the line and you don't want to get "cheesed" or time-attacked.
well, if it's not an important game, sure. otherwise you'll generally want to play in a way that'll reduce variance, obviously chucking in occasional cheese to be less exploitable
Question is, he was leading 2 - 0 against a (in his opinion) weaker opponent in a cup for "only" (he could win more or less the same amount if he was streaming instead of participating, w/o actually having to win) 1000€. Was it, for Stephano, an important game ? I don't think so. Game 4 seemed to prove me right, he made a safer build and totally outplayed Lucifron in late game.
He lost a game, deal with it. 1000$ is a lot of money, I don't think that he does this in 3 hours streaming.
It still irks me how little Zerg utilizes their race. They'll get a lead and then just build 10 ultras and a move them into a meat grinder.
I don't ever think I've seen a terran a move 10 thors into 100 zerglings and complain they suck.
If Stephano would have just instantly maxed on roach/ling/bane the game would have ended way sooner. Zergs still don't drop at all. How devastating would it have been to drop 30 lings into Lucifron's main?
If creep can be spread every 15 seconds why wasn't the entire map covered by the game's end?
How much easier would Stephano have won if he made a nydus network right outside of lucifrons 3rd and streamed units into it indefinitely?
Nydus would be about ten times more effective if it would STFU when emerging. You'd think the Zerg would evolve one that was silent instead of screaming.
On April 30 2012 04:07 Ylrahc wrote: No, you play cheesy (or greedy which is a form of economical cheese) so you can end the match faster. You play safe when there is a lot on the line and you don't want to get "cheesed" or time-attacked.
well, if it's not an important game, sure. otherwise you'll generally want to play in a way that'll reduce variance, obviously chucking in occasional cheese to be less exploitable
Question is, he was leading 2 - 0 against a (in his opinion) weaker opponent in a cup for "only" (he could win more or less the same amount if he was streaming instead of participating, w/o actually having to win) 1000€. Was is, for Stephano, an important game ? I don't think so. Game 4 seemed to prove me right, he made a safer build and totally outplayed Lucifron in late game.
well, it wasn't really, esp given that he'd have the map choice in set 4 (and 5 if needed), i'm just talking in general
Okay, my misunderstanding.
He lost a game, deal with it. 1000$ is a lot of money, I don't think that he does this in 3 hours streaming
You'd be suprised...when he talks he gets 10k+, sometimes 15k+ viewers on his stream, spams advertising, imho he gets more than that...
On April 30 2012 04:39 Nerchio wrote: Titan could have taken that easily but he did too much forward blinks so he lost like 5 stalkers where he could lose none.
What's your prediction for the finals? How would you rate Titan's PvZ against Stephano's ZvP?
On April 30 2012 04:39 Nerchio wrote: Titan could have taken that easily but he did too much forward blinks so he lost like 5 stalkers where he could lose none.
Are you still studying at School, Nerchio? Or are you full-time pro?
I've the feeling I've seen this match a million times on Daybreak with Stephano as the 3 bases zerg holding a protoss 2 bases all in and win Either there is something wrong with Daybreak, or protoss should start to search for another opening...
On April 30 2012 04:42 Ylrahc wrote: I've the feeling I've seen this match a million times on Daybreak with Stephano as the 3 bases zerg holding a protoss 2 bases all in and win Either there is something wrong with Daybreak, or protoss should start to search for another opening...
No, Titan had the win. His build hit at a timing when Stephano was very vulnerable - he was at 90 supply vs. 110 with BLINK STALKERS. That's an auto-win in the hands of a top Korean Protoss but Titan's micro failed.
EPT
Either there is something wrong with Daybreak, or protoss should start to search for another opening...
