|
Poll: Recommend Winners' Match Game 3?★★★★★- One of the best games this season (0) 0% ★★★★- Highly recommended game (0) 0% ★★★- Good game (7) 88% ★★- Not recommended unless you have nothing better to do (0) 0% ★- Do not see this game no matter what (1) 13% 8 total votes Your vote: Recommend Winners' Match Game 3? (Vote): ★★★★★- One of the best games this season
(Vote): ★★★★- Highly recommended game
(Vote): ★★★- Good game
(Vote): ★★- Not recommended unless you have nothing better to do
(Vote): ★- Do not see this game no matter what
|
Solid display from Dark. Hoping Bbyong can get out in second place.
|
|
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 30 2014 20:20 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:19 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:18 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:17 deacon.frost wrote:
OMG! I am too paranoid, but it looks like I was right! I am scared now... What are you talking about? On September 30 2014 20:00 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 19:54 Shellshock wrote:On September 30 2014 19:52 graNite wrote:On September 30 2014 19:51 Shellshock wrote:
it's because would've and would of are phonetically similar ok, but would of never occurs in the english language I'm not disagreeing. I'm just saying why a lot of people probably use it. They hear would've and it sounds like would of so it doesn't seem wrong to them even though it is Germany -> rules are there to follow, not to break them  Hmm, If Dark manages to advance, I can think about a premade scenario that Parting is more comfortable in PvT so Dark will advance 1st sniping one T and then P advances by sniping 2 T... damn, am I too paranoid? oO So basically some nonsensical matchfixing talk without any evidence?
What an ugly word, it is called team strategy I think. But it depends on how good BigBoy will be...
|
On September 30 2014 20:20 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:19 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:18 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:17 deacon.frost wrote:
OMG! I am too paranoid, but it looks like I was right! I am scared now... What are you talking about? On September 30 2014 20:00 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 19:54 Shellshock wrote:On September 30 2014 19:52 graNite wrote:On September 30 2014 19:51 Shellshock wrote:
it's because would've and would of are phonetically similar ok, but would of never occurs in the english language I'm not disagreeing. I'm just saying why a lot of people probably use it. They hear would've and it sounds like would of so it doesn't seem wrong to them even though it is Germany -> rules are there to follow, not to break them Hmm, If Dark manages to advance, I can think about a premade scenario that Parting is more comfortable in PvT so Dark will advance 1st sniping one T and then P advances by sniping 2 T... damn, am I too paranoid? oO So basically some nonsensical matchfixing talk without any evidence?
You didn't hear SKT1 is fixing the GSL finals as well so both Soo and Innovation can go to Blizzcon?
Dude, keep up!
|
On September 30 2014 20:22 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:20 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:19 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:18 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:17 deacon.frost wrote:
OMG! I am too paranoid, but it looks like I was right! I am scared now... What are you talking about? On September 30 2014 20:00 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 19:54 Shellshock wrote:On September 30 2014 19:52 graNite wrote:On September 30 2014 19:51 Shellshock wrote:
it's because would've and would of are phonetically similar ok, but would of never occurs in the english language I'm not disagreeing. I'm just saying why a lot of people probably use it. They hear would've and it sounds like would of so it doesn't seem wrong to them even though it is Germany -> rules are there to follow, not to break them Hmm, If Dark manages to advance, I can think about a premade scenario that Parting is more comfortable in PvT so Dark will advance 1st sniping one T and then P advances by sniping 2 T... damn, am I too paranoid? oO So basically some nonsensical matchfixing talk without any evidence? What an ugly word, it is called team strategy I think. But it depends on how good BigBoy will be...
Wait, on second thought, Parting left SKT -,-
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 30 2014 20:22 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:20 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:19 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:18 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:17 deacon.frost wrote:
OMG! I am too paranoid, but it looks like I was right! I am scared now... What are you talking about? On September 30 2014 20:00 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 19:54 Shellshock wrote:On September 30 2014 19:52 graNite wrote:On September 30 2014 19:51 Shellshock wrote:
it's because would've and would of are phonetically similar ok, but would of never occurs in the english language I'm not disagreeing. I'm just saying why a lot of people probably use it. They hear would've and it sounds like would of so it doesn't seem wrong to them even though it is Germany -> rules are there to follow, not to break them Hmm, If Dark manages to advance, I can think about a premade scenario that Parting is more comfortable in PvT so Dark will advance 1st sniping one T and then P advances by sniping 2 T... damn, am I too paranoid? oO So basically some nonsensical matchfixing talk without any evidence? You didn't hear SKT1 is fixing the GSL finals as well so both Soo and Innovation can go to Blizzcon? Dude, keep up!
Well, that's soO in the finals, Innovation got this, just give him the points and trophy already...
|
United Kingdom31935 Posts
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 30 2014 20:23 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:22 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:20 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:19 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:18 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:17 deacon.frost wrote:
OMG! I am too paranoid, but it looks like I was right! I am scared now... What are you talking about? On September 30 2014 20:00 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 19:54 Shellshock wrote:On September 30 2014 19:52 graNite wrote:On September 30 2014 19:51 Shellshock wrote:
it's because would've and would of are phonetically similar ok, but would of never occurs in the english language I'm not disagreeing. I'm just saying why a lot of people probably use it. They hear would've and it sounds like would of so it doesn't seem wrong to them even though it is Germany -> rules are there to follow, not to break them Hmm, If Dark manages to advance, I can think about a premade scenario that Parting is more comfortable in PvT so Dark will advance 1st sniping one T and then P advances by sniping 2 T... damn, am I too paranoid? oO So basically some nonsensical matchfixing talk without any evidence? What an ugly word, it is called team strategy I think. But it depends on how good BigBoy will be... Wait, on second thought, Parting left SKT -,-
It's his last day, still on team.
|
352 Posts
On September 30 2014 20:06 Ramiz1989 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:03 Shellshock wrote:
Do corruptors make a difference? I think using mutas like normal would of been fine Point is he is making a lot less Corruptors than Mutas. He is using like ~10 Corruptors at best, while without ~20 Mutas you can't really do much. That means he can get a lot faster upgrades/hive and a lot more Banelings and those just crush Terran army with proper control and without dying to the mines. He is losing harass potential with Mutas, but he constantly doing run-by with Lings and Banes. Can't say which style is better, but it seems that this one works.
Couldn't it also be that the corruptors snipe the medivacs automatically while marines don't shoot at the corruptors during the fight? Mutas shoot at marines if you don't take care, am I right?
So Dark has more apm for microing the rest of his army and becomes so much more effective with banelings. Also it shows how medivacs are important and how they should be sniped preferentially in general.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 30 2014 20:28 10bulgares wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:06 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 30 2014 20:03 Shellshock wrote:
Do corruptors make a difference? I think using mutas like normal would of been fine Point is he is making a lot less Corruptors than Mutas. He is using like ~10 Corruptors at best, while without ~20 Mutas you can't really do much. That means he can get a lot faster upgrades/hive and a lot more Banelings and those just crush Terran army with proper control and without dying to the mines. He is losing harass potential with Mutas, but he constantly doing run-by with Lings and Banes. Can't say which style is better, but it seems that this one works. Couldn't it also be that the corruptors snipe the medivacs automatically while marines don't shoot at the corruptors during the fight? Mutas shoot at marines if you don't take care, am I right? So Dark has more apm for microing the rest of his army and becomes so much more effective with banelings. Also it shows how medivacs are important and how they should be sniped preferentially in general.
Also Corruptor has base armor 2, mutalisk 0. Corruptor may live longer than Mutas with regen?
(I hope these numbers are correct, my memory isn't very good at numbers)
|
By the way, do we know if Soulkey plays his group or forfeits?
|
On September 30 2014 20:33 TheDwf wrote:
By the way, do we know if Soulkey plays his group or forfeits?
on the official site he's still in and they seem to keep it up to date so I guess he plays?
http://www.wecg.com/knf/sc.php
|
On September 30 2014 20:35 Yello wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:33 TheDwf wrote:
By the way, do we know if Soulkey plays his group or forfeits? on the official site he's still in and they seem to keep it up to date so I guess he plays? http://www.wecg.com/knf/sc.php
Hopefully!
I don't understand at all PartinG's transition. /:
|
On September 30 2014 20:26 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:23 SC2Toastie wrote:On September 30 2014 20:22 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:20 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:19 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:18 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:17 deacon.frost wrote:
OMG! I am too paranoid, but it looks like I was right! I am scared now... What are you talking about? On September 30 2014 20:00 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 19:54 Shellshock wrote:On September 30 2014 19:52 graNite wrote:On September 30 2014 19:51 Shellshock wrote:
it's because would've and would of are phonetically similar ok, but would of never occurs in the english language I'm not disagreeing. I'm just saying why a lot of people probably use it. They hear would've and it sounds like would of so it doesn't seem wrong to them even though it is Germany -> rules are there to follow, not to break them Hmm, If Dark manages to advance, I can think about a premade scenario that Parting is more comfortable in PvT so Dark will advance 1st sniping one T and then P advances by sniping 2 T... damn, am I too paranoid? oO So basically some nonsensical matchfixing talk without any evidence? What an ugly word, it is called team strategy I think. But it depends on how good BigBoy will be... Wait, on second thought, Parting left SKT -,- It's his last day, still on team.
They don't care, tomorrow he won't be so there is no gain for SKT going for a risk in matchfixing over that 
On September 30 2014 20:28 10bulgares wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:06 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 30 2014 20:03 Shellshock wrote:
Do corruptors make a difference? I think using mutas like normal would of been fine Point is he is making a lot less Corruptors than Mutas. He is using like ~10 Corruptors at best, while without ~20 Mutas you can't really do much. That means he can get a lot faster upgrades/hive and a lot more Banelings and those just crush Terran army with proper control and without dying to the mines. He is losing harass potential with Mutas, but he constantly doing run-by with Lings and Banes. Can't say which style is better, but it seems that this one works. Couldn't it also be that the corruptors snipe the medivacs automatically while marines don't shoot at the corruptors during the fight? Mutas shoot at marines if you don't take care, am I right? So Dark has more apm for microing the rest of his army and becomes so much more effective with banelings. Also it shows how medivacs are important and how they should be sniped preferentially in general.
Firstly, Corruptors auto-target Medivacs, leaving APM for the Lings.
Secondly, Corruptors are more resilient (2 base armor and 200 HP over 0 base armor and 125 HP, IIRC).
Thirdly, Corruptors don't die to Mine shots.
Fourthly, Corruptors can handle Thors.
Fifthly, Corruptors seem more effective vs Medivacs as they have more range. This keeps the skies clean, actually allowing a decent Broodlord Transition as Terran will be air-less.
Sixtly, You invest way less into corruptors, leaving extra gas for the banelings.
This is what I could come up with.
|
On September 30 2014 20:24 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:22 SC2Toastie wrote:On September 30 2014 20:20 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:19 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:18 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:17 deacon.frost wrote:
OMG! I am too paranoid, but it looks like I was right! I am scared now... What are you talking about? On September 30 2014 20:00 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 19:54 Shellshock wrote:On September 30 2014 19:52 graNite wrote:On September 30 2014 19:51 Shellshock wrote:
it's because would've and would of are phonetically similar ok, but would of never occurs in the english language I'm not disagreeing. I'm just saying why a lot of people probably use it. They hear would've and it sounds like would of so it doesn't seem wrong to them even though it is Germany -> rules are there to follow, not to break them Hmm, If Dark manages to advance, I can think about a premade scenario that Parting is more comfortable in PvT so Dark will advance 1st sniping one T and then P advances by sniping 2 T... damn, am I too paranoid? oO So basically some nonsensical matchfixing talk without any evidence? You didn't hear SKT1 is fixing the GSL finals as well so both Soo and Innovation can go to Blizzcon? Dude, keep up! Well, that's soO in the finals, Innovation got this, just give him the points and trophy already...
You don't understand bro. They've carefully been building Soo's final throwing image. They were planning ahead for this situation.
|
|
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
PartinG getting choo choo'd is hilarious :3
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 30 2014 20:39 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:26 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:23 SC2Toastie wrote:On September 30 2014 20:22 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:20 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:19 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 20:18 TheDwf wrote:On September 30 2014 20:17 deacon.frost wrote:
OMG! I am too paranoid, but it looks like I was right! I am scared now... What are you talking about? On September 30 2014 20:00 deacon.frost wrote:On September 30 2014 19:54 Shellshock wrote:On September 30 2014 19:52 graNite wrote:On September 30 2014 19:51 Shellshock wrote:
it's because would've and would of are phonetically similar ok, but would of never occurs in the english language I'm not disagreeing. I'm just saying why a lot of people probably use it. They hear would've and it sounds like would of so it doesn't seem wrong to them even though it is Germany -> rules are there to follow, not to break them Hmm, If Dark manages to advance, I can think about a premade scenario that Parting is more comfortable in PvT so Dark will advance 1st sniping one T and then P advances by sniping 2 T... damn, am I too paranoid? oO So basically some nonsensical matchfixing talk without any evidence? What an ugly word, it is called team strategy I think. But it depends on how good BigBoy will be... Wait, on second thought, Parting left SKT -,- It's his last day, still on team. They don't care, tomorrow he won't be so there is no gain for SKT going for a risk in matchfixing over that Show nested quote +On September 30 2014 20:28 10bulgares wrote:On September 30 2014 20:06 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 30 2014 20:03 Shellshock wrote:
Do corruptors make a difference? I think using mutas like normal would of been fine Point is he is making a lot less Corruptors than Mutas. He is using like ~10 Corruptors at best, while without ~20 Mutas you can't really do much. That means he can get a lot faster upgrades/hive and a lot more Banelings and those just crush Terran army with proper control and without dying to the mines. He is losing harass potential with Mutas, but he constantly doing run-by with Lings and Banes. Can't say which style is better, but it seems that this one works. Couldn't it also be that the corruptors snipe the medivacs automatically while marines don't shoot at the corruptors during the fight? Mutas shoot at marines if you don't take care, am I right? So Dark has more apm for microing the rest of his army and becomes so much more effective with banelings. Also it shows how medivacs are important and how they should be sniped preferentially in general. Firstly, Corruptors auto-target Medivacs, leaving APM for the Lings. Secondly, Corruptors are more resilient (2 base armor and 200 HP over 0 base armor and 125 HP, IIRC). Thirdly, Corruptors don't die to Mine shots. Fourthly, Corruptors can handle Thors. Fifthly, Corruptors seem more effective vs Medivacs as they have more range. This keeps the skies clean, actually allowing a decent Broodlord Transition as Terran will be air-less. Sixtly, You invest way less into corruptors, leaving extra gas for the banelings. This is what I could come up with.
Pff, with Parting's PvT I would lose as he to Dark and hope he could snipe BB and advance. I still don't understand the MGR nexus first against Dark... It doesn't have to be a "team strategy" per se
|
Poll: Recommend Losers' Match Game 1?★★★★★- One of the best games this season (0) 0% ★★★★- Highly recommended game (2) 33% ★★★- Good game (2) 33% ★★- Not recommended unless you have nothing better to do (1) 17% ★- Do not see this game no matter what (1) 17% 6 total votes Your vote: Recommend Losers' Match Game 1? (Vote): ★★★★★- One of the best games this season
(Vote): ★★★★- Highly recommended game
(Vote): ★★★- Good game
(Vote): ★★- Not recommended unless you have nothing better to do
(Vote): ★- Do not see this game no matter what
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
