|
On November 12 2012 14:46 FlyingTurtle wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 14:43 SlixSC wrote:On November 12 2012 14:40 FlyingTurtle wrote:
If you're whining about balance, refute me or GTFO. Here's the crux: so Fungal is OP? A "skill-less" skill? What about lurkers in BW? Move your marines into a few of them, get shredded...and the Zerg didn't even have to click "F". Lockdown prevents micro? DEFINITELY OP. Plague = guaranteed damage? OP. You might as well say that the entire game of SC BW was just whoever could get the most OP units on the field. There's something called MICRO, idiots. Bomber clumped his marines and lost the game, simple as that. The difference you are looking for is that in Broodwar Zerg didn't win almost every single tournament. Is that good enough for you? No wait, Zergs are just better than Terrans and Protoss players righ? Right... LOL this is one of the most ridiculous arguments I've seen on TL. For certain periods of time, a race DID dominate the scene in BW. Remember the Six Dragons era, when Terran was considered the weakest race by far? Remember how Boxer led the Terrans to learn new ways to deal with the Protoss endgame composition without begging Blizzard for a Terran buff? No, of course you don't. This is just a period when Zerg is rising. Deal with it.
Now, I wasn't part of the BW scene like you and many other TLers. However, I'm pretty sure that when a race dominated in BW, it was because of something innovating a certain player has made for their race. Boxer, of course, leading the way of Terran dominance out of their darkest times. Along with Nada and iloveoov. Bisu also ended the Zerg reign over Protoss with the FFE.
I'm not so sure on this one, but I believe the most important thing to note is that Balance Patches were non-existent, or at least less often than in SC2. Every change in the meta and balance all had to do with the players themselves, whereas meta changes in SC2 depended on the Balance Patches.
All in all, Blizzard can balance the Infestor/Collosus/etc. all they want. It's still poorly designed.
|
On November 12 2012 14:55 FlyingTurtle wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 14:49 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:44 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:37 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:33 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:30 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:24 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:21 Gator wrote:On November 12 2012 14:18 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:16 Thomanson wrote:
[quote]
I'd buy that argument, if Terran had Tier 3 that was any use against....well anything. Go watch some of Gumiho's games or any games where the Terran makes anything out of his Starports other than Vikings and Meds. Bomber lost because he went pure marine tank versus a hive composition instead of throwing in Ravens, BCs, Thors, etc. WTF how do build that army on Ohana lol, that game lasted what 20 minutes? Bomber couldn't even take a 4th base I'll tell you how. You don't go for the maxed-out marine-tank push on 3 bases. You don't fall behind on tech and econ due to a fake roach bust. You don't make the mistakes Bomber made while Stephano rushed up to hive tech. don'ts: 1. play safe vs all ins 2. do a standard prehive timing push 3. let your opponent rush to hive while you make mistakes am i getting everything? so the margin of error is about, 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers, an unnecessary stim and reading the committal of unit production from a zerg player perfectly all game Obviously you've never heard of present value vs future value. 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers? He paid 100 upfront for each bunker. If he spent that money on, say, another CC or more upgrades, etc, he would have been paid back more than just 100 minerals for the investment. Bomber didn't just lose those 75 minerals, he invested 400 minerals that would have paid exponential dividends as the game went on. Learn your stuff before you post any of this nonsense. do you mean opportunity cost? dont talk to me like i'm retarded. If stephano has 8 roaches out there, breaks the rocks and then floods in with banes like he did on cloud kingdom, bombers loses that game in a minute. even with 2 bunkers. he chose to play safe and it lost him the game, stop calling it a "mistake" when in reality zergs make midgame zerglings all the time just to be "safe" and it doens't make them as critically far behind as youre claiming it made bomber.. Opportunity cost refers to any trade-off. In your specific case, you're making the mistake of thinking that 75 minerals at the 6 minute mark is worth 75 minerals at the 8 minute mark and so forth. If you want me to explain to you why dismissing it as "75 minerals" is stupid, I'll be glad to point it out. yes, it delays the ebays and i understand why it's critical, i'm just questioning the validity of you being critical in this situation. bomber did the ace match "thing" and played safe and it cost him the game. i dont really consider it a "mistake" and i think it's funny that no one points out the 4 roaches he made + warren as well as the 40 or so lings he made randomly at like 10 or 11 minutes. did that opportunity cost impact stephano as greatly? If he had saved a scan and just used it on the natural, he would have instantly known it was a fake. Playing it "safe" was a misread; stop trying to claim otherwise.
There are 2 ways to play in save. Using a scan to check or a bunker.
Scan is maybe the most stupid option. Because if it is a fake, you have wasted a scan(which almost costs as much as the bunker). If it is an all-in, you STILL have to build the bunker.
Just building the bunkers was the correct play at the time.
|
On November 12 2012 14:40 FlyingTurtle wrote:
If you're whining about balance, refute me or GTFO. Here's the crux: so Fungal is OP? A "skill-less" skill? What about lurkers in BW? Move your marines into a few of them, get shredded...and the Zerg didn't even have to click "F". Lockdown prevents micro? DEFINITELY OP. Plague = guaranteed damage? OP. You might as well say that the entire game of SC BW was just whoever could get the most OP units on the field. There's something called MICRO, idiots. Bomber clumped his marines and lost the game, simple as that.
Lurkers in BW took an insane amount of skill to use. Clearly you didn't play Zerg. They were fucking insane to use. I can't even tell if you're just spouting nonsense for the sake of spouting nonsense. The entire premise of attacking MM in BW with lurker ling was setting up a 2pronged flank (almost ALWAYS had to do a flank, extremely inefficient otherwise), surrounding the units with the lings and getting perfect burrow placement on the lurkers in different areas, since lurkers had an animation when burrowing (think the same thing as a siege tank entering siege mode). If you did it too far away, they didn't splash the marines. If they did it too close, then all the lurkers would die to stim.
Plague required 150 energy, not 75, was hive tech, and needed to be researched, often after consume. Defilers were notably slower, could not move while burrowed. Plague did not kill NOR root the enemy units.
Lockdown was not a viable spell and was almost never used.
You have fucking awful arguments.
|
On November 12 2012 15:12 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 14:55 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:49 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:44 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:37 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:33 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:30 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:24 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:21 Gator wrote:On November 12 2012 14:18 FlyingTurtle wrote:
[quote]
Go watch some of Gumiho's games or any games where the Terran makes anything out of his Starports other than Vikings and Meds. Bomber lost because he went pure marine tank versus a hive composition instead of throwing in Ravens, BCs, Thors, etc. WTF how do build that army on Ohana lol, that game lasted what 20 minutes? Bomber couldn't even take a 4th base I'll tell you how. You don't go for the maxed-out marine-tank push on 3 bases. You don't fall behind on tech and econ due to a fake roach bust. You don't make the mistakes Bomber made while Stephano rushed up to hive tech. don'ts: 1. play safe vs all ins 2. do a standard prehive timing push 3. let your opponent rush to hive while you make mistakes am i getting everything? so the margin of error is about, 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers, an unnecessary stim and reading the committal of unit production from a zerg player perfectly all game Obviously you've never heard of present value vs future value. 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers? He paid 100 upfront for each bunker. If he spent that money on, say, another CC or more upgrades, etc, he would have been paid back more than just 100 minerals for the investment. Bomber didn't just lose those 75 minerals, he invested 400 minerals that would have paid exponential dividends as the game went on. Learn your stuff before you post any of this nonsense. do you mean opportunity cost? dont talk to me like i'm retarded. If stephano has 8 roaches out there, breaks the rocks and then floods in with banes like he did on cloud kingdom, bombers loses that game in a minute. even with 2 bunkers. he chose to play safe and it lost him the game, stop calling it a "mistake" when in reality zergs make midgame zerglings all the time just to be "safe" and it doens't make them as critically far behind as youre claiming it made bomber.. Opportunity cost refers to any trade-off. In your specific case, you're making the mistake of thinking that 75 minerals at the 6 minute mark is worth 75 minerals at the 8 minute mark and so forth. If you want me to explain to you why dismissing it as "75 minerals" is stupid, I'll be glad to point it out. yes, it delays the ebays and i understand why it's critical, i'm just questioning the validity of you being critical in this situation. bomber did the ace match "thing" and played safe and it cost him the game. i dont really consider it a "mistake" and i think it's funny that no one points out the 4 roaches he made + warren as well as the 40 or so lings he made randomly at like 10 or 11 minutes. did that opportunity cost impact stephano as greatly? If he had saved a scan and just used it on the natural, he would have instantly known it was a fake. Playing it "safe" was a misread; stop trying to claim otherwise. There are 2 ways to play in save. Using a scan to check or a bunker. Scan is maybe the most stupid option. Because if it is a fake, you have wasted a scan(which almost costs as much as the bunker). If it is an all-in, you STILL have to build the bunker. Just building the bunkers was the correct play at the time.
Did you not read any of my other posts? A scan is much less costly than 4 bunkers even with salvage.
|
On November 12 2012 15:09 NAPoleonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 14:46 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:43 SlixSC wrote:On November 12 2012 14:40 FlyingTurtle wrote:
If you're whining about balance, refute me or GTFO. Here's the crux: so Fungal is OP? A "skill-less" skill? What about lurkers in BW? Move your marines into a few of them, get shredded...and the Zerg didn't even have to click "F". Lockdown prevents micro? DEFINITELY OP. Plague = guaranteed damage? OP. You might as well say that the entire game of SC BW was just whoever could get the most OP units on the field. There's something called MICRO, idiots. Bomber clumped his marines and lost the game, simple as that. The difference you are looking for is that in Broodwar Zerg didn't win almost every single tournament. Is that good enough for you? No wait, Zergs are just better than Terrans and Protoss players righ? Right... LOL this is one of the most ridiculous arguments I've seen on TL. For certain periods of time, a race DID dominate the scene in BW. Remember the Six Dragons era, when Terran was considered the weakest race by far? Remember how Boxer led the Terrans to learn new ways to deal with the Protoss endgame composition without begging Blizzard for a Terran buff? No, of course you don't. This is just a period when Zerg is rising. Deal with it. Now, I wasn't part of the BW scene like you and many other TLers. However, I'm pretty sure that when a race dominated in BW, it was because of something innovating a certain player has made for their race. Boxer, of course, leading the way of Terran dominance out of their darkest times. Along with Nada and iloveoov. Bisu also ended the Zerg reign over Protoss with the FFE. I'm not so sure on this one, but I believe the most important thing to note is that Balance Patches were non-existent, or at least less often than in SC2. Every change in the meta and balance all had to do with the players themselves, whereas meta changes in SC2 depended on the Balance Patches. All in all, Blizzard can balance the Infestor/Collosus/etc. all they want. It's still poorly designed.
Actually, some meta changes were brought on by maps in BW. That is why you see a lot of mirrors in PL, some maps just favor certain races. In SC2, terrain (and thus maps) doesn't make as much difference. Also, a lot of the maps we have now are pretty similiar (relatively easy thirds and a pretty accessible fourth). That is why zergs find Antiga so difficult, the 4th is either exposed (center) or really far to defend by ground (edge expos).
|
On November 12 2012 15:14 FlyingTurtle wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 15:12 vthree wrote:On November 12 2012 14:55 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:49 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:44 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:37 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:33 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:30 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:24 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:21 Gator wrote:
[quote]
WTF how do build that army on Ohana lol, that game lasted what 20 minutes? Bomber couldn't even take a 4th base I'll tell you how. You don't go for the maxed-out marine-tank push on 3 bases. You don't fall behind on tech and econ due to a fake roach bust. You don't make the mistakes Bomber made while Stephano rushed up to hive tech. don'ts: 1. play safe vs all ins 2. do a standard prehive timing push 3. let your opponent rush to hive while you make mistakes am i getting everything? so the margin of error is about, 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers, an unnecessary stim and reading the committal of unit production from a zerg player perfectly all game Obviously you've never heard of present value vs future value. 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers? He paid 100 upfront for each bunker. If he spent that money on, say, another CC or more upgrades, etc, he would have been paid back more than just 100 minerals for the investment. Bomber didn't just lose those 75 minerals, he invested 400 minerals that would have paid exponential dividends as the game went on. Learn your stuff before you post any of this nonsense. do you mean opportunity cost? dont talk to me like i'm retarded. If stephano has 8 roaches out there, breaks the rocks and then floods in with banes like he did on cloud kingdom, bombers loses that game in a minute. even with 2 bunkers. he chose to play safe and it lost him the game, stop calling it a "mistake" when in reality zergs make midgame zerglings all the time just to be "safe" and it doens't make them as critically far behind as youre claiming it made bomber.. Opportunity cost refers to any trade-off. In your specific case, you're making the mistake of thinking that 75 minerals at the 6 minute mark is worth 75 minerals at the 8 minute mark and so forth. If you want me to explain to you why dismissing it as "75 minerals" is stupid, I'll be glad to point it out. yes, it delays the ebays and i understand why it's critical, i'm just questioning the validity of you being critical in this situation. bomber did the ace match "thing" and played safe and it cost him the game. i dont really consider it a "mistake" and i think it's funny that no one points out the 4 roaches he made + warren as well as the 40 or so lings he made randomly at like 10 or 11 minutes. did that opportunity cost impact stephano as greatly? If he had saved a scan and just used it on the natural, he would have instantly known it was a fake. Playing it "safe" was a misread; stop trying to claim otherwise. There are 2 ways to play in save. Using a scan to check or a bunker. Scan is maybe the most stupid option. Because if it is a fake, you have wasted a scan(which almost costs as much as the bunker). If it is an all-in, you STILL have to build the bunker. Just building the bunkers was the correct play at the time. Did you not read any of my other posts? A scan is much less costly than 4 bunkers even with salvage.
Did you read mine? If it is not a fake, you are down a scan AND bunkers...
|
On November 12 2012 15:13 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 14:40 FlyingTurtle wrote:
If you're whining about balance, refute me or GTFO. Here's the crux: so Fungal is OP? A "skill-less" skill? What about lurkers in BW? Move your marines into a few of them, get shredded...and the Zerg didn't even have to click "F". Lockdown prevents micro? DEFINITELY OP. Plague = guaranteed damage? OP. You might as well say that the entire game of SC BW was just whoever could get the most OP units on the field. There's something called MICRO, idiots. Bomber clumped his marines and lost the game, simple as that. Lurkers in BW took an insane amount of skill to use. Clearly you didn't play Zerg. They were fucking insane to use. I can't even tell if you're just spouting nonsense for the sake of spouting nonsense. The entire premise of attacking MM in BW with lurker ling was setting up a 2pronged flank (almost ALWAYS had to do a flank, extremely inefficient otherwise), surrounding the units with the lings and getting perfect burrow placement on the lurkers in different areas, since lurkers had an animation when burrowing (think the same thing as a siege tank entering siege mode). If you did it too far away, they didn't splash the marines. If they did it too close, then all the lurkers would die to stim. Plague required 150 energy, not 75, was hive tech, and needed to be researched, often after consume. Defilers were notably slower, could not move while burrowed. Plague did not kill NOR root the enemy units. Lockdown was not a viable spell and was almost never used. You have fucking awful arguments.
LOL so stupid. Let me explain to you something. I didn't say Infestors are on par with Lurkers in difficulty. In fact, I believe Infestors are easier to use. But the entire thread was basically "OMG INFESTOR NO SKILL QQ". Attacking marine-tank with infestor-ling in SC2 is basically the same concept as lurker-ling in BW. You have to time your infestor movement just right; too early and the tanks will focus you, too late and the marines will have already kited your lings to death while avoiding the fungals. Yes, it's a step down from BW, but not the night-and-day difference that TLers are whining about.
Does fungal do 300 damage? No? STFU.
Lockdown not viable? Go watch some of Boxer's lockdown vs Carriers. STFU.
You're an idiot. Please delete your account.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Random notes:
There were 7 mirrors this tournament. 5 TvT, 1PvP, 1 ZvZ
Every foreigner who went out to a Korean did so 0-2, it was always 1-2 if they lost to another foreigner
Of the 4 teams with multiple players in the tournament only EG managed to get anyone into the money
|
On November 12 2012 15:16 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 15:14 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 15:12 vthree wrote:On November 12 2012 14:55 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:49 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:44 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:37 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:33 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:30 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:24 FlyingTurtle wrote:
[quote]
I'll tell you how. You don't go for the maxed-out marine-tank push on 3 bases. You don't fall behind on tech and econ due to a fake roach bust. You don't make the mistakes Bomber made while Stephano rushed up to hive tech. don'ts: 1. play safe vs all ins 2. do a standard prehive timing push 3. let your opponent rush to hive while you make mistakes am i getting everything? so the margin of error is about, 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers, an unnecessary stim and reading the committal of unit production from a zerg player perfectly all game Obviously you've never heard of present value vs future value. 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers? He paid 100 upfront for each bunker. If he spent that money on, say, another CC or more upgrades, etc, he would have been paid back more than just 100 minerals for the investment. Bomber didn't just lose those 75 minerals, he invested 400 minerals that would have paid exponential dividends as the game went on. Learn your stuff before you post any of this nonsense. do you mean opportunity cost? dont talk to me like i'm retarded. If stephano has 8 roaches out there, breaks the rocks and then floods in with banes like he did on cloud kingdom, bombers loses that game in a minute. even with 2 bunkers. he chose to play safe and it lost him the game, stop calling it a "mistake" when in reality zergs make midgame zerglings all the time just to be "safe" and it doens't make them as critically far behind as youre claiming it made bomber.. Opportunity cost refers to any trade-off. In your specific case, you're making the mistake of thinking that 75 minerals at the 6 minute mark is worth 75 minerals at the 8 minute mark and so forth. If you want me to explain to you why dismissing it as "75 minerals" is stupid, I'll be glad to point it out. yes, it delays the ebays and i understand why it's critical, i'm just questioning the validity of you being critical in this situation. bomber did the ace match "thing" and played safe and it cost him the game. i dont really consider it a "mistake" and i think it's funny that no one points out the 4 roaches he made + warren as well as the 40 or so lings he made randomly at like 10 or 11 minutes. did that opportunity cost impact stephano as greatly? If he had saved a scan and just used it on the natural, he would have instantly known it was a fake. Playing it "safe" was a misread; stop trying to claim otherwise. There are 2 ways to play in save. Using a scan to check or a bunker. Scan is maybe the most stupid option. Because if it is a fake, you have wasted a scan(which almost costs as much as the bunker). If it is an all-in, you STILL have to build the bunker. Just building the bunkers was the correct play at the time. Did you not read any of my other posts? A scan is much less costly than 4 bunkers even with salvage. Did you read mine? If it is not a fake, you are down a scan AND bunkers...
If it isn't a fake, you win either way. How much you win by makes no difference.
If it IS a fake, you pay 400 minerals up front instead of 270 minerals over 3 minutes. If you want to say that you'll get the money back by salvage later, read my other posts.
|
On November 12 2012 15:16 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 15:14 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 15:12 vthree wrote:On November 12 2012 14:55 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:49 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:44 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:37 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:33 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:30 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:24 FlyingTurtle wrote:
[quote]
I'll tell you how. You don't go for the maxed-out marine-tank push on 3 bases. You don't fall behind on tech and econ due to a fake roach bust. You don't make the mistakes Bomber made while Stephano rushed up to hive tech. don'ts: 1. play safe vs all ins 2. do a standard prehive timing push 3. let your opponent rush to hive while you make mistakes am i getting everything? so the margin of error is about, 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers, an unnecessary stim and reading the committal of unit production from a zerg player perfectly all game Obviously you've never heard of present value vs future value. 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers? He paid 100 upfront for each bunker. If he spent that money on, say, another CC or more upgrades, etc, he would have been paid back more than just 100 minerals for the investment. Bomber didn't just lose those 75 minerals, he invested 400 minerals that would have paid exponential dividends as the game went on. Learn your stuff before you post any of this nonsense. do you mean opportunity cost? dont talk to me like i'm retarded. If stephano has 8 roaches out there, breaks the rocks and then floods in with banes like he did on cloud kingdom, bombers loses that game in a minute. even with 2 bunkers. he chose to play safe and it lost him the game, stop calling it a "mistake" when in reality zergs make midgame zerglings all the time just to be "safe" and it doens't make them as critically far behind as youre claiming it made bomber.. Opportunity cost refers to any trade-off. In your specific case, you're making the mistake of thinking that 75 minerals at the 6 minute mark is worth 75 minerals at the 8 minute mark and so forth. If you want me to explain to you why dismissing it as "75 minerals" is stupid, I'll be glad to point it out. yes, it delays the ebays and i understand why it's critical, i'm just questioning the validity of you being critical in this situation. bomber did the ace match "thing" and played safe and it cost him the game. i dont really consider it a "mistake" and i think it's funny that no one points out the 4 roaches he made + warren as well as the 40 or so lings he made randomly at like 10 or 11 minutes. did that opportunity cost impact stephano as greatly? If he had saved a scan and just used it on the natural, he would have instantly known it was a fake. Playing it "safe" was a misread; stop trying to claim otherwise. There are 2 ways to play in save. Using a scan to check or a bunker. Scan is maybe the most stupid option. Because if it is a fake, you have wasted a scan(which almost costs as much as the bunker). If it is an all-in, you STILL have to build the bunker. Just building the bunkers was the correct play at the time. Did you not read any of my other posts? A scan is much less costly than 4 bunkers even with salvage. Did you read mine? If it is not a fake, you are down a scan AND bunkers...
But if you scan it's a fake, that's information that makes the scan all worth it, right? Wouldn't need to make those bunkers.
|
On November 12 2012 15:13 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 14:40 FlyingTurtle wrote:
If you're whining about balance, refute me or GTFO. Here's the crux: so Fungal is OP? A "skill-less" skill? What about lurkers in BW? Move your marines into a few of them, get shredded...and the Zerg didn't even have to click "F". Lockdown prevents micro? DEFINITELY OP. Plague = guaranteed damage? OP. You might as well say that the entire game of SC BW was just whoever could get the most OP units on the field. There's something called MICRO, idiots. Bomber clumped his marines and lost the game, simple as that. Lurkers in BW took an insane amount of skill to use. Clearly you didn't play Zerg. They were fucking insane to use. I can't even tell if you're just spouting nonsense for the sake of spouting nonsense. The entire premise of attacking MM in BW with lurker ling was setting up a 2pronged flank (almost ALWAYS had to do a flank, extremely inefficient otherwise), surrounding the units with the lings and getting perfect burrow placement on the lurkers in different areas, since lurkers had an animation when burrowing (think the same thing as a siege tank entering siege mode). If you did it too far away, they didn't splash the marines. If they did it too close, then all the lurkers would die to stim. Plague required 150 energy, not 75, was hive tech, and needed to be researched, often after consume. Defilers were notably slower, could not move while burrowed. Plague did not kill NOR root the enemy units. Lockdown was not a viable spell and was almost never used. You have fucking awful arguments.
Plague seems incredibly horrible compared to fungal when you put it like that. My god...
|
Hi. I don't play sc2 much any more, but I watch a lot. I enjoy fungal as a spell. Not sure why so many people are suddenly going berserk over it. Rather silly, honestly.
Did you know, that the infestor hasn't been changed since patch 1.4.0, which was in September of 2011. In fact, over a year ago. I'm wondering, in fact, why the community is such in a rage all of a sudden when, in fact, the infestor hasn't changed in a year. Hmm.
|
On November 12 2012 15:22 NAPoleonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 15:16 vthree wrote:On November 12 2012 15:14 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 15:12 vthree wrote:On November 12 2012 14:55 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:49 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:44 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:37 c0sm0naut wrote:On November 12 2012 14:33 FlyingTurtle wrote:On November 12 2012 14:30 c0sm0naut wrote:
[quote]
don'ts:
1. play safe vs all ins
2. do a standard prehive timing push
3. let your opponent rush to hive while you make mistakes
am i getting everything? so the margin of error is about, 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers, an unnecessary stim and reading the committal of unit production from a zerg player perfectly all game Obviously you've never heard of present value vs future value. 75 minerals in salvaged bunkers? He paid 100 upfront for each bunker. If he spent that money on, say, another CC or more upgrades, etc, he would have been paid back more than just 100 minerals for the investment. Bomber didn't just lose those 75 minerals, he invested 400 minerals that would have paid exponential dividends as the game went on. Learn your stuff before you post any of this nonsense. do you mean opportunity cost? dont talk to me like i'm retarded. If stephano has 8 roaches out there, breaks the rocks and then floods in with banes like he did on cloud kingdom, bombers loses that game in a minute. even with 2 bunkers. he chose to play safe and it lost him the game, stop calling it a "mistake" when in reality zergs make midgame zerglings all the time just to be "safe" and it doens't make them as critically far behind as youre claiming it made bomber.. Opportunity cost refers to any trade-off. In your specific case, you're making the mistake of thinking that 75 minerals at the 6 minute mark is worth 75 minerals at the 8 minute mark and so forth. If you want me to explain to you why dismissing it as "75 minerals" is stupid, I'll be glad to point it out. yes, it delays the ebays and i understand why it's critical, i'm just questioning the validity of you being critical in this situation. bomber did the ace match "thing" and played safe and it cost him the game. i dont really consider it a "mistake" and i think it's funny that no one points out the 4 roaches he made + warren as well as the 40 or so lings he made randomly at like 10 or 11 minutes. did that opportunity cost impact stephano as greatly? If he had saved a scan and just used it on the natural, he would have instantly known it was a fake. Playing it "safe" was a misread; stop trying to claim otherwise. There are 2 ways to play in save. Using a scan to check or a bunker. Scan is maybe the most stupid option. Because if it is a fake, you have wasted a scan(which almost costs as much as the bunker). If it is an all-in, you STILL have to build the bunker. Just building the bunkers was the correct play at the time. Did you not read any of my other posts? A scan is much less costly than 4 bunkers even with salvage. Did you read mine? If it is not a fake, you are down a scan AND bunkers... But if you scan it's a fake, that's information that makes the scan all worth it, right? Wouldn't need to make those bunkers.
Yes, but you don't know until you scan. There is still a good chance you will need both.
And once you scan, the zerg can always just re-drone back to macro while you still have to build the bunkers. It is like scanning cloak in TvT. You still have to prepare for it but your opponent can always cancel.
|
On November 12 2012 15:28 WhatsInAName wrote:
Hi. I don't play sc2 much any more, but I watch a lot. I enjoy fungal as a spell. Not sure why so many people are suddenly going berserk over it. Rather silly, honestly.
Did you know, that the infestor hasn't been changed since patch 1.4.0, which was in September of 2011. In fact, over a year ago. I'm wondering, in fact, why the community is such in a rage all of a sudden when, in fact, the infestor hasn't changed in a year. Hmm.
Metagame changes, other units changed affecting the matchup. It's not as simple as you think
|
On November 12 2012 15:28 WhatsInAName wrote:
Hi. I don't play sc2 much any more, but I watch a lot. I enjoy fungal as a spell. Not sure why so many people are suddenly going berserk over it. Rather silly, honestly.
Did you know, that the infestor hasn't been changed since patch 1.4.0, which was in September of 2011. In fact, over a year ago. I'm wondering, in fact, why the community is such in a rage all of a sudden when, in fact, the infestor hasn't changed in a year. Hmm.
Because it is 2-3x easier to go straight from ling to infestors now that you have the 4-6 queen builds and overlord speed? It is like if they buff mules to give 540 minerals over its life time. You will just see mass marine builds be OP eventhough the marine itself has not been change. Changes in the meta game can make certain units OP. Ghost snipe were also not nerfed until pretty late because that meta had not be uncovered.
|
On November 12 2012 15:29 zefreak wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 15:28 WhatsInAName wrote:
Hi. I don't play sc2 much any more, but I watch a lot. I enjoy fungal as a spell. Not sure why so many people are suddenly going berserk over it. Rather silly, honestly.
Did you know, that the infestor hasn't been changed since patch 1.4.0, which was in September of 2011. In fact, over a year ago. I'm wondering, in fact, why the community is such in a rage all of a sudden when, in fact, the infestor hasn't changed in a year. Hmm. Metagame changes, other units changed affecting the matchup. It's not as simple as you think
Metagame changes ----> Not infestor's fault. Just implies that people haven't re-figured out how to combat intelligently.
Other units changed affecting the matchup -----> Please, continue.
|
On November 12 2012 15:35 WhatsInAName wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 15:29 zefreak wrote:On November 12 2012 15:28 WhatsInAName wrote:
Hi. I don't play sc2 much any more, but I watch a lot. I enjoy fungal as a spell. Not sure why so many people are suddenly going berserk over it. Rather silly, honestly.
Did you know, that the infestor hasn't been changed since patch 1.4.0, which was in September of 2011. In fact, over a year ago. I'm wondering, in fact, why the community is such in a rage all of a sudden when, in fact, the infestor hasn't changed in a year. Hmm. Metagame changes, other units changed affecting the matchup. It's not as simple as you think Metagame changes ----> Not infestor's fault. Just implies that people haven't re-figured out how to combat intelligently. Other units changed affecting the matchup -----> Please, continue.
The metagame has evolved in such a way that infestors are being abused far more than ever before. Any possible imbalances caused by the infestor weren't readily apparent before. They are now.
|
On November 12 2012 15:34 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 15:28 WhatsInAName wrote:
Hi. I don't play sc2 much any more, but I watch a lot. I enjoy fungal as a spell. Not sure why so many people are suddenly going berserk over it. Rather silly, honestly.
Did you know, that the infestor hasn't been changed since patch 1.4.0, which was in September of 2011. In fact, over a year ago. I'm wondering, in fact, why the community is such in a rage all of a sudden when, in fact, the infestor hasn't changed in a year. Hmm. Because it is 2-3x easier to go straight from ling to infestors now that you have the 4-6 queen builds and overlord speed? It is like if they buff mules to give 540 minerals over its life time. You will just see mass marine builds be OP eventhough the marine itself has not been change. Changes in the meta game can make certain units OP. Ghost snipe were also not nerfed until pretty late because that meta had not be uncovered.
2-3x easier ------------> hmmm. Rethink cause and effect. Are you implying that previously, terran had to do damange in the very early game to hault the ease of going to ling infestor? Also, the queen change was made very long time ago. Explain why just now, people are begging for a nerf.
|
On November 12 2012 15:38 WhatsInAName wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 15:34 vthree wrote:On November 12 2012 15:28 WhatsInAName wrote:
Hi. I don't play sc2 much any more, but I watch a lot. I enjoy fungal as a spell. Not sure why so many people are suddenly going berserk over it. Rather silly, honestly.
Did you know, that the infestor hasn't been changed since patch 1.4.0, which was in September of 2011. In fact, over a year ago. I'm wondering, in fact, why the community is such in a rage all of a sudden when, in fact, the infestor hasn't changed in a year. Hmm. Because it is 2-3x easier to go straight from ling to infestors now that you have the 4-6 queen builds and overlord speed? It is like if they buff mules to give 540 minerals over its life time. You will just see mass marine builds be OP eventhough the marine itself has not been change. Changes in the meta game can make certain units OP. Ghost snipe were also not nerfed until pretty late because that meta had not be uncovered. 2-3x easier ------------> hmmm. Rethink cause and effect. Are you implying that previously, terran had to do damange in the very early game to hault the ease of going to ling infestor? Also, the queen change was made very long time ago. Explain why just now, people are begging for a nerf.
Complaining about Zerg has been going on constantly since the Queen patch, although the complaints have recently shifted from the queen range and overlord speed to the Infestor instead.
Check out this thread from June, about one month after the patch dropped: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=346544
|
On November 12 2012 15:37 zefreak wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2012 15:35 WhatsInAName wrote:On November 12 2012 15:29 zefreak wrote:On November 12 2012 15:28 WhatsInAName wrote:
Hi. I don't play sc2 much any more, but I watch a lot. I enjoy fungal as a spell. Not sure why so many people are suddenly going berserk over it. Rather silly, honestly.
Did you know, that the infestor hasn't been changed since patch 1.4.0, which was in September of 2011. In fact, over a year ago. I'm wondering, in fact, why the community is such in a rage all of a sudden when, in fact, the infestor hasn't changed in a year. Hmm. Metagame changes, other units changed affecting the matchup. It's not as simple as you think Metagame changes ----> Not infestor's fault. Just implies that people haven't re-figured out how to combat intelligently. Other units changed affecting the matchup -----> Please, continue. The metagame has evolved in such a way that infestors are being abused far more than ever before. Any possible imbalances caused by the infestor weren't readily apparent before. They are now.
Great. Please explain ------> how Stephano's apparent "infestor abuse" in this tournament is relevant to the discussion of the infestor being to strong. Because in my opinion, Stephano did not abuse the infestor. He barely made them in fact (less than usual). The final 2-3 fungals at the end of the last game (when stephano was already ahead after his surprise bl transition) were clearly taking advantage of the fact Bomber mis-used his inexorability high number of marines by clumping them.
Could it be possible that the metagame just has to shift in favor of another race. Should metagame shifts be instigated by Blizzard or by innovative players?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
