| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Luddite
United States2315 Posts
On September 09 2009 11:57 Duckvillelol wrote: Nerf David Kim! Nice post though, good info to think about. I wish David Kim would post his thoughts about the game, ideally here but at least on the bnet forums. It sounds like his understanding of the game is head and shoulders above that of anyone else in the world, at this point. | ||
|
Joneagle_X
United States26 Posts
| ||
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On September 11 2009 19:28 Joneagle_X wrote: Great post. I'm glad to see someone was able to see what I was talking about. Thanks for posting your thoughts. :D What the hell are you talking about. It doesn't address the main issue. And if you think that this post addresses the issues, you have no concept of strategy and timings in SC. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On September 11 2009 21:25 TanGeng wrote: What the hell are you talking about. It doesn't address the main issue. And if you think that this post addresses the issues, you have no concept of strategy and timings in SC. Theres that TL welcome  Seriously, attack the arguement not the person. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7328 Posts
On September 10 2009 13:07 dcttr66 wrote: you're talking nonsense. zerg had the problem of needing far more larva than they were getting. protoss could always build probes, zealots, and pylons simultaneously...if you max out mineral gathering rates at your bases you'll be getting your troops faster as a protoss player. as a zerg player you have to rely on your battle wits to win out. usually this means using mutalisks and/or lurkers with great skill. and sometimes it means rushing with zerglings with great skill...if you can't outright win the games by these methods then you usually jump to take the map and overrun the protoss with whatever...usually hydralisks or ultralisks. without the larva acceleration, it's very hard to get enough larva for drones, zerglings, sunken colonies, overlords...all the while finding the cash to expand and tech up without falling behind on anything. you see protoss can build only what he needs to defend, and tech up and/or rush whatever he needs to do as he sees with his scouting probe. part of the problem is the ramps. protoss are very strong on ramps. you take away the ramps, and suddenly zerg has a huge edge! but guess what? all the latest maps in sc2 are going to be ramp maps!! that means protoss will have that awesome ramp edge. so what does zerg have to compensate? the larva production. oh...well regardless this whole thing was very short notice i think... :D anyway i was already at bumbershoot saturday...and doing something else on sunday... :/ but yeah if i'd known ahead of time i totally would've gone friday...i think the event was held on that day looking at the website...i'll just have to keep my eyes a bit more peeled i guess from now on. zerg never needed more larvae than they were getting. In fact the game was patched way back when because larvae re spawned TOO fast and people could 1 hatch hydra and shit | ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On September 11 2009 22:06 Archerofaiur wrote: Theres that TL welcome Seriously, attack the arguement not the person. Did you read posts about the flaws of this supposed "answer?" Just answering about how to defend against 1-hatch-queen + lings or 1-hatch-queen + hydra and accepting that as a good answer shows a serious lack of understanding of strategic concepts. It's not even worth arguing with someone like that. It's like a professor arguing with a little child. A person that actually read through Hot Bid's article would understand that it's far more nuanced than defending against an early bunch of hydras. It's naive to think that a P or T could prepare defenses specifically to counter hydras and lings and the Z would graciously walk into that trap. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
| ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On September 11 2009 22:34 TanGeng wrote: Did you read posts about the flaws of this supposed "answer?" Just answering about how to defend against 1-hatch-queen + lings or 1-hatch-queen + hydra and accepting that as a good answer shows a serious lack of understanding of strategic concepts. It's not even worth arguing with someone like that. It's like a professor arguing with a little child. A person that actually read through Hot Bid's article would understand that it's far more nuanced than defending against an early bunch of hydras. It's naive to think that a P or T could prepare defenses specifically to counter hydras and lings and the Z would graciously walk into that trap. I didnt say anything about the "answer". Were talking about your attack of the person and not the arguement. | ||
|
CowGoMoo
United States428 Posts
On September 08 2009 04:27 dcttr66 wrote: as it is...in warcraft 3 people will pick particular heroes because they know that they will always get the worker kill. an example is a mountain king...he can storm bolt so kill a worker for 75 mana. but, that does incur a cost. a better example is an agility hero. like the blademaster or a demon hunter. if your opponent went one of those heroes, you can bet there's no way your worker is getting away. lol thats not why u pick those heroes, its just a result of picking them. | ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On September 11 2009 23:16 FrozenArbiter wrote: Regardless, don't you think you'll get more people to see your point if you coat it in a bit of diplomacy, instead of hitting them over the head with it? Hmm, I was thinking about being more diplomatic, but at this point, it boils down to "read the arguments" - both Hot Bid's and the reply, compare, contrast, and analyze. That's sort of hitting them over the head - only a littler light blow. I'm not sure it's completely warranted, but I didn't want to mince any words. Sorry. | ||
|
Joneagle_X
United States26 Posts
But in response to my "having no concept of timing or strategy in SC" or arguing "like a child." I'd like to point to the fact that this player had just as much hands-on time with the build as Hot_Bid and was "focused" on the same issue, that is a 1-Hatch ling and/or Hydra build. Simple build order that focuses on reacting to an obvious 10-pool. I've said it 20 times and now Karune's even stated it. 1-Hatch is a good option but is not OP. Of course you can sit here all day and theory craft a way around it but... wait--nevermind, you can't. | ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
A. Going to turtle, tech, and defend B. Hope the Zerg chooses the worst possible strategy against a turtling teching defender. That's a very comprehensive strategy! Good luck with that. On September 13 2009 06:02 Joneagle_X wrote: Of course you can sit here all day and theory craft a way around it but... wait--nevermind, you can't. It's been done. Hot Bid even posted a little about his experiences play testing it. It's not our fault you don't read. | ||
|
Joneagle_X
United States26 Posts
| ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On September 13 2009 06:52 Joneagle_X wrote: I just stated that this player had as much play time with the game as Hot_Bid at BlizzCon. Not my fault you don't read. Not all players are created equal. 10 hours of some people's time is worth a 1000 of other people's. How fast people can concoct a competent strategy depends on their strategic sense. When you have none, it takes you a hell of a long time. Hell, there's a possibility that you never come up with a decent strategy. | ||
zatic
Zurich15366 Posts
What is this focus on how many hours someone played the game anyway? I have played probably more SC2 than anyone here, does that make me "more right" than someone else who posts a compelling argument? No. | ||
|
EchOne
United States2906 Posts
| ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On September 13 2009 07:40 EchOne wrote: I'd like to clearly delineate right now that the averment that a person with a superior quantity of experience will always issue more accurate, enlightened, or predictive statements than a person with an inferior quantity of experience is a mere assumption. It is a very intuitive assumption that might not bother people to take as fact, but the truth is it is not a fact. It is not even a theory. Please do not rely on it unless you have evidence supporting its applicability to the relevant situation. Expert, expert use of complicated vocabulary to tell us that we should hedge our bets. Yet, it still begs the question, how do we hedge our bets? Who should we believe more at this juncture? I mean once the truth comes out, there is no need for "experts" to give us second-hand information. | ||
Manifesto7
Osaka27174 Posts
On September 11 2009 23:16 FrozenArbiter wrote: Regardless, don't you think you'll get more people to see your point if you coat it in a bit of diplomacy, instead of hitting them over the head with it? This could go for a lot of people in this thread. A couple things to keep in mind please. Don't be a martyr, you will get banned. Don't turn threads into skill bashes about a game that nobody has been able to play for any significant amount of time. You will get banned. If you are new on TL, read before you post. Thanks. | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Weekly
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
