On November 19 2012 19:12 Deckkie wrote: Did Taeja use HSM, and on what?
Corruptors.
They all evaporated.
For all the "Taeja still almost lost" whine, well yeah, if you choose to play a game like that, where you want to starve Zerg after he already has BL/Infestor, you're choosing to allow the premier spell caster in the game to reach max energy. Imagine playing a TvZ in BW if you chose to just never attack and let defilers sit there and reach full energy. They would fuck you up when you finally engaged.
If you're going to allow 25+ infestors to chill around for 20 minutes, you have to expect that kind of engagement... and there's so many ways to limit the Zergs gas. Drops force banelings/infestor support. Little groups of marine/marauder flanks can force wasted fungals, etc...
Or you can sit and build a Sky Terran army and aim to win the one big mega engagement against 30 full energy Infestors.
On November 19 2012 19:14 lannisport wrote: That game was a perfect illustration of QXC's point that SC2 can be boring because of poorly designed units. In BW you had units that were incredibly strong but had interesting tradeoffs. Lurkers were fast above ground but could only attack while burrowed, reavers were ultra powerful but super slow with buggy scarabs, their weakness was mitigated with a masterful control of a shuttle. In SC2 the weaknesses of the strongest units are just that they're... really slow. No one wants to watch that shit. No one wants to see players sit back and max out in 30 minutes. Even improving the slowness itself would be a huge improvement, ultra based zvt is exciting whereas BL based zvt is boring as Hell.
You know, I see your point, but there are a lot of games where there's exciting stuff going on because of players abusing the immobility of slow units to wage constant wars of attrition. Some of the more interesting Grubby and HasuObs PvZs have been much like that But Dark just sat back and let Taeja get huge spellcaster armies that take so long to build up. And in BW there were slow units too ; )
On November 19 2012 19:12 Deckkie wrote: Did Taeja use HSM, and on what?
Corruptors.
They all evaporated.
For all the "Taeja still almost lost" whine, well yeah, if you choose to play a game like that, where you want to starve Zerg after he already has BL/Infestor, you're choosing to allow the premier spell caster in the game to reach max energy. Imagine playing a TvZ in BW if you chose to just never attack and let defilers sit there and reach full energy. They would fuck you up when you finally engaged.
If you're going to allow 25+ infestors to chill around for 20 minutes, you have to expect that kind of engagement... and there's so many ways to limit the Zergs gas. Drops force banelings/infestor support. Little groups of marine/marauder flanks can force wasted fungals, etc...
Or you can sit and build a Sky Terran army and aim to win the one big mega engagement against 30 full energy Infestors.
Which Taeja did.
I'm not here to talk balance or whine but holy shit that line was hilarious
On November 19 2012 19:12 Deckkie wrote: Did Taeja use HSM, and on what?
Corruptors.
They all evaporated.
For all the "Taeja still almost lost" whine, well yeah, if you choose to play a game like that, where you want to starve Zerg after he already has BL/Infestor, you're choosing to allow the premier spell caster in the game to reach max energy. Imagine playing a TvZ in BW if you chose to just never attack and let defilers sit there and reach full energy. They would fuck you up when you finally engaged.
If you're going to allow 25+ infestors to chill around for 20 minutes, you have to expect that kind of engagement... and there's so many ways to limit the Zergs gas. Drops force banelings/infestor support. Little groups of marine/marauder flanks can force wasted fungals, etc...
Or you can sit and build a Sky Terran army and aim to win the one big mega engagement against 30 full energy Infestors.
Which Taeja did.
best post I've even read. in fact, be was not so different from wol. its just the players who are not enough good yet ! in some years we will have awesome games for sure
On November 19 2012 19:06 AlternativeEgo wrote: Why vote no?
1. ending was anticlimatic 2. Terran almost lost this if infested terrans were casted earlier or some neurals have gone up. Which shouldn't be the case after dominating 45 mins and having the theorycraft hardcounter units to the zerg units
1) Was a long game where very little happened 2) Zerg did nothing 3) Taeja's most exciting move was building every unit in the book 4) thennnn the ending was anticlimatic 5) Balance actually a moot point.
Didn't enjoy it because it wasn't enjoyable. 200/200 armies smashing into each other with poor control isn't fun to watch. If some shit got neuraled and missiles went off and yamatos were clutch and a nuke was going off else where and a zergling run by happened etc then I'd definitely recommend in spite of the nothing game before the battle.
yeah I agree. Before I played mi absolutely first Starcraft Game I thought of games to be epic when there are 2 huge armies battling it out. But since I played a few years now, I think different and I like to see some skill overall ;-)
On November 19 2012 19:12 Deckkie wrote: Did Taeja use HSM, and on what?
Corruptors.
They all evaporated.
For all the "Taeja still almost lost" whine, well yeah, if you choose to play a game like that, where you want to starve Zerg after he already has BL/Infestor, you're choosing to allow the premier spell caster in the game to reach max energy. Imagine playing a TvZ in BW if you chose to just never attack and let defilers sit there and reach full energy. They would fuck you up when you finally engaged.
If you're going to allow 25+ infestors to chill around for 20 minutes, you have to expect that kind of engagement... and there's so many ways to limit the Zergs gas. Drops force banelings/infestor support. Little groups of marine/marauder flanks can force wasted fungals, etc...
Or you can sit and build a Sky Terran army and aim to win the one big mega engagement against 30 full energy Infestors.
On November 19 2012 19:12 Deckkie wrote: Did Taeja use HSM, and on what?
Corruptors.
They all evaporated.
For all the "Taeja still almost lost" whine, well yeah, if you choose to play a game like that, where you want to starve Zerg after he already has BL/Infestor, you're choosing to allow the premier spell caster in the game to reach max energy. Imagine playing a TvZ in BW if you chose to just never attack and let defilers sit there and reach full energy. They would fuck you up when you finally engaged.
If you're going to allow 25+ infestors to chill around for 20 minutes, you have to expect that kind of engagement... and there's so many ways to limit the Zergs gas. Drops force banelings/infestor support. Little groups of marine/marauder flanks can force wasted fungals, etc...
Or you can sit and build a Sky Terran army and aim to win the one big mega engagement against 30 full energy Infestors.
Which Taeja did.
I'm not here to talk balance or whine but holy shit that line was hilarious
On November 19 2012 19:06 AlternativeEgo wrote: Why vote no?
1. ending was anticlimatic 2. Terran almost lost this if infested terrans were casted earlier or some neurals have gone up. Which shouldn't be the case after dominating 45 mins and having the theorycraft hardcounter units to the zerg units
1) Was a long game where very little happened 2) Zerg did nothing 3) Taeja's most exciting move was building every unit in the book 4) thennnn the ending was anticlimatic 5) Balance actually a moot point.
Didn't enjoy it because it wasn't enjoyable. 200/200 armies smashing into each other with poor control isn't fun to watch. If some shit got neuraled and missiles went off and yamatos were clutch and a nuke was going off else where and a zergling run by happened etc then I'd definitely recommend in spite of the nothing game before the battle.
yeah I agree. Before I played mi absolutely first Starcraft Game I thought of games to be epic when there are 2 huge armies battling it out. But since I played a few years now, I think different and I like to see some skill overall ;-)
Well each person has their "perfect game" concept. Mine would start out scrappy and somehow through constant battles and harassment over 20+ minutes still make lategame where main armies battle it out yet some backstabs and mini battles happened elsewhere.
EPT
