The usual: Don't flame casters or players. Don't discuss balance in this or any LR thread. Don't call your fellow posters idiots. Be excited, happy and entertained.
On March 18 2013 10:35 Wombat_NI wrote: So basically people think it's a GOOD thing that widowmines can hit a huge clump of stuff and pretty much do nothing?
Widowmines should be potent, but counterable by baiting them with lings. That's 100% really cool I loved Life's continual use of that kind of micro trick. Widowmines randomly wiping out whole armies, or doing nothing is terrible and gimmicky, an artificial way to create 'tension'
It hit huge clump last game? I didn't see it..
I'm saying this distinct from those games. People have been claiming some sort of 'randomness' with mines would improve the game by adding volatility.
but it really forces zerg to use their zergling micro heavily. We all have seen Life's ridiculuos mine baiting micro.
Yeah but, that's zergling baiting, which is fine and I said that was cool. People were mentioning mines should be more like Reaver scarabs from BW which would sometimes fizzle out and do nothing at seemingly random intervals.
In essence. 1. Mitigating the splash with baiting and micro = awesome 2. Randomness = bad.
I was wondering if there would be some way to hold mines fire via some APM intensive thing, as a Terran counter to Zergs baiting tactics that could come in. Might be ridiculous though, but I'd rather see those kind of solutions pursued than straight tweaks to damage and whatnot
hold widow mines lolol
Come on
Nice, who was the T ? Would be funny if it was justin, darkelf or hwasin
On March 18 2013 10:28 IMHope wrote: All the randomness that widow mines bring is great for the game. Stuff like that is what made BW a great spectator game because you never knew what would happen and it added suspense to games rather than knowing how fights would turn out before they even happened.
Perhaps that's how you feel personally. For me I despise the 'random' things in Starcraft, takes away from it as a legitimate competitive activity to a degree, for me anyway.
The guy posting about lucky/unlucky scarabs hits the nail on the head.
That's nonsense every competitive sport in the world has some luck/randomness involved. The weather, wind, bounce of a ball, the referees decision. It makes it more exciting and entertaining for the spectator. Mines and scarabs in BW were awesome. Too much randomness is obviously bad and at the moment the widow mine might need tweaking a bit but its not far off
It would be like deliberately making poor refereeing decisions in football just to spice things up a bit.
Acceptable randomness is things like pulling your overlord back just inches from that proxy pylon, or things on that basis, but that's just me.
Man can't control the weather (yet? maybe? someday? who knows). Man, however, can control proper programming in a computer game. Why accept randomness when you can fix it?
On March 18 2013 10:35 Wombat_NI wrote: So basically people think it's a GOOD thing that widowmines can hit a huge clump of stuff and pretty much do nothing?
Widowmines should be potent, but counterable by baiting them with lings. That's 100% really cool I loved Life's continual use of that kind of micro trick. Widowmines randomly wiping out whole armies, or doing nothing is terrible and gimmicky, an artificial way to create 'tension'
It hit huge clump last game? I didn't see it..
I'm saying this distinct from those games. People have been claiming some sort of 'randomness' with mines would improve the game by adding volatility.
but it really forces zerg to use their zergling micro heavily. We all have seen Life's ridiculuos mine baiting micro.
Yeah but, that's zergling baiting, which is fine and I said that was cool. People were mentioning mines should be more like Reaver scarabs from BW which would sometimes fizzle out and do nothing at seemingly random intervals.
In essence. 1. Mitigating the splash with baiting and micro = awesome 2. Randomness = bad.
I was wondering if there would be some way to hold mines fire via some APM intensive thing, as a Terran counter to Zergs baiting tactics that could come in. Might be ridiculous though, but I'd rather see those kind of solutions pursued than straight tweaks to damage and whatnot
If something awsome like this were to happend in sc2 people would immediately cry imba and blizzard would nerf it within a week to never be seen again.
you mean like they nerfed baneling mines? oh wait ...
On March 18 2013 10:57 Levistus wrote: I wanna see Innovation vs Life. I'm curious on what Innovation would have done. Is Innovation and Life in GSL Code S?
yup. I'm also curious as to how that series would go. Innovation's playstyle is really different from Flash's.
On March 18 2013 10:57 Levistus wrote: I wanna see Innovation vs Life. I'm curious on what Innovation would have done. Is Innovation and Life in GSL Code S?
yup. I'm also curious as to how that series would go. Innovation's playstyle is really different from Flash's.
ya I believe Innovation and Life are both in Code S
On March 18 2013 10:16 ShivaN wrote: wow he calls zerg weak, after just winning the 1st major Hots tournament? Are you fucking kidding me? lol
Well if you don't count Life game, zerg are 3-21 in ZvT in this tournament. And Life barely win against Polt and Last, even if both are really good player, Life has been since the last 6 month of MLG hand down the best player in the world and I think it's fair to say he is a way better player. Furthermore, yes he did win at the end, but a lot of his win was due to the fact that he cleverly exploited the HoTS metagames with his baneling bust timing, it's not going to work as much now it has been shown. It's not lying to say that zerg is a little bit underpowered against terran, I'm not sure if there is real problems in the PvZ match up to be honest, but there is style a lot of room to improve bio mine in terms of timing and the micro/positionning of the widow mine but I really don't see how you can play better that Life did.
Foreigners vs Koreans stats are invalid becuase of huge skill gap.
I hate this idea of saying that a guy is obviously better because he is Korean, there is absolutely no logic behind it. Stephano has been considered (by Korean too) as one of the top Zerg in the world, he's not the best obviously but he is really good and has won a lot even at a time where Zerg were weaker, i don't know how you would not count that. He has been demolished 3-0. Leenock as well, does that not count to you? The fact that DRG, Soulkey, Curious have also been eliminated by terran does not count? A lot pros agrees on this, even terran Zerg is indeed a little bit weaker right now, even though Life has won the tournament. Fruitdealer also won first GSL, it doesn't mean terran wasn't the stronger race at the time.
Really? Stephano was only 1 of 8 foreigner zergs in this tournament and you included them all in your stats. I hate this idea of choosing 1 of the 3 races and making it the designated foreigner race. It cheapens the competition.
On March 18 2013 10:35 Wombat_NI wrote: So basically people think it's a GOOD thing that widowmines can hit a huge clump of stuff and pretty much do nothing?
Widowmines should be potent, but counterable by baiting them with lings. That's 100% really cool I loved Life's continual use of that kind of micro trick. Widowmines randomly wiping out whole armies, or doing nothing is terrible and gimmicky, an artificial way to create 'tension'
It hit huge clump last game? I didn't see it..
I'm saying this distinct from those games. People have been claiming some sort of 'randomness' with mines would improve the game by adding volatility.
but it really forces zerg to use their zergling micro heavily. We all have seen Life's ridiculuos mine baiting micro.
Yeah but, that's zergling baiting, which is fine and I said that was cool. People were mentioning mines should be more like Reaver scarabs from BW which would sometimes fizzle out and do nothing at seemingly random intervals.
In essence. 1. Mitigating the splash with baiting and micro = awesome 2. Randomness = bad.
I was wondering if there would be some way to hold mines fire via some APM intensive thing, as a Terran counter to Zergs baiting tactics that could come in. Might be ridiculous though, but I'd rather see those kind of solutions pursued than straight tweaks to damage and whatnot
I am actually baffled at how people are complaining about ZvT.
There is literally NO evidence that suggests that T is too strong in tvz.
This tournament had 2 korean zergs. One lost 1 zvt series, the other won 3. Hyun beat Polt in IPL FC. At IEM, ret beat kas + sting, and nerchio and slivko beat lucifron, while Violet advanced out of his group 5-0, beating Sting.
Foreign Zergs got dominated by Koreans, but so did every other foreigner. The fact that foreigners are no competition to Koreans now means HOTS was a success. IT raised the skill cap, and rewards the players that are faster, more hardworking, and more talented.
On March 18 2013 10:28 IMHope wrote: All the randomness that widow mines bring is great for the game. Stuff like that is what made BW a great spectator game because you never knew what would happen and it added suspense to games rather than knowing how fights would turn out before they even happened.
Perhaps that's how you feel personally. For me I despise the 'random' things in Starcraft, takes away from it as a legitimate competitive activity to a degree, for me anyway.
The guy posting about lucky/unlucky scarabs hits the nail on the head.
That's nonsense every competitive sport in the world has some luck/randomness involved. The weather, wind, bounce of a ball, the referees decision. It makes it more exciting and entertaining for the spectator. Mines and scarabs in BW were awesome. Too much randomness is obviously bad and at the moment the widow mine might need tweaking a bit but its not far off
It would be like deliberately making poor refereeing decisions in football just to spice things up a bit.
Acceptable randomness is things like pulling your overlord back just inches from that proxy pylon, or things on that basis, but that's just me.
Man can't control the weather (yet? maybe? someday? who knows). Man, however, can control proper programming in a computer game. Why accept randomness when you can fix it?
Simply because it's more entertaining. Crucially it adds tension, which is the key to all popular sports. There's a reason nobody watches chess (and i say this as a former chess player) which is probably the least random game there is.
EPT
TheStC
