|
On May 04 2011 17:18 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 17:13 Executor1 wrote:
Idra is such a child, by his reasoning, if a protoss player wins its because protoss is OP if a zerg player wins it is because he is a vastly superior player to the protoss. Idra should look at the statistics for recent tournament results, im sure hed have some backwards explanation for it, for the past 2 months in all major non korean tournaments zergs have been beating protoss almost 10% more than protoss have been beating zergs in the zvp matchup in February it was in protoss's favor but it isnt february anymore and the meta game has shifted it was only a 2 month period were protoss had an advantage over zerg in tournaments and now zerg has had that same advantage for a 2 month period yet you dont hear every protoss screaming imbalance like zergs do.
Idra acts like such a child and he just spews words out of his ass when it comes to balance. Like for instance the fact that overlords cant scout, thats pretty bs do terran and protoss's set up units at every angle of their base there is no way a well placed overlord shouldnt make it into the base and see what is going on especially later on in the game when players dont keep their units in their base and overseer speed is up. But even in the early game there are so few units out that it takes a while to kill an overlord and it should see most of what is in the base. that + poking the ramp should give you a pretty good idea of whats going on.
Hes just so stubborn and ignorant when it comes to talks about balance and every zerg listens to every word he says like its gospel. zergs look at tournament results in the past 2 months if the results were still in protoss's favor it would give zergs even more of a reason to qq but they arent in fact it is quite the opposite, do you hear any protoss qq'ing about the matchup though? no you dont because we dont listen to a small group of players who instead of trying to figure out new strategies just complain complain complain even if they win against protoss it was just a coin flip or luck it has nothing to do with balance, but if they lose well its just because protoss is OP
I find that train of thought to be complete and utter shit. I think you are the child for not listening to his argument and then trashtalking him this way. He never said that when the zerg win he is always vastly superior to his protoss opponent, he is saying that if both are using standard builds, then the zerg is a better player. On the other hand, if the zerg want to have a good chance of winning against a decent protoss, he must use coinflip build : thus winning or loosing will never have anything to do with who is the better player, but more like who is the luckiest player.
Clearly your a zerg player ^^ keep worshiping idra and pretending your race is underpowered it will do you alot of good.
I listened to every word he said and although i may have exaggerated a bit thats pretty much how he acts he would be a far superior player if he had a better mentality possibly the best in the world ^^
btw have you seen the statistics for zvp in the past 2 months? for international tournaments? check it out:http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=218558
oh and its not 10% i was looking at the korean one, but it is still in zergs favor that is aggregated from quite a few tournaments and there doesnt seem to be any signs of imbalance in recent tournaments. but i guess from idras point of view that just means protoss players are shit and zerg players are just super gosu's because they can overcome the imbalance. =/
if they were playing standard that is
I think every race has to use certain coinflip builds or play safe there are 2 options, if i go 3 gate sentry expand and play safe its not like im automatically ahead or anything thats not how it works its a intricate dance based on who makes the better decisions i rarely see a standard game where i think wow that zerg player completely outplayed the protoss in every way but still lost if you see that then you have a skewed view on the game, sure it can happen but its very rare.
|
On May 04 2011 17:16 Goibon wrote:
If i had to choose between waiting for Day9's Nash equilibrium to arrive, or Idra's 'being proactive and analysing potential imbalance and then fixing it' i'd lean toward the latter.
I really like Day's train of thought, but this is meant to be a professional e sport with big dollars on the line etc. There's a lot more at stake here to just wait for a balanced meta game arrive. That could take for fucking ever.
I'd like to see some legit debate between Idra and someone else at some point on Zerg imbalance. So far whenever Idra is on, it always ends up as him vs Day9, and Day just doesn't entertain the former's viewpoint at all. It's such a waste of time. Likewise the protoss buddies are pretty useless when it comes to the same topic so all we get is Idra 'venting' and its just not constructive.
No one has the balls to actually debate with him.
In that sense i feel kinda robbed. Like instead of a legit debate between Idra and someone about early zerg scouting / defense / pressure etc we get a philisophical cockblock. And with the Tyler Geoff shitfest we got almost no discussion on the actual pertinent issue, which should be lag in online tournaments.
We got some good Jerry Springer action though, if that's what you like.
I prefer Tyler's 15 minute monologues over that though. They're enlightening. It's a shame the chat doesn't agree. No idea why they dislike Tyler's wisdom so much. Dude is easily smartest on the panel. Too much protoss hate? Wouldn't surprise me.
My main problem with Idra and other players that keep throwing the word imbalanced out there is that the word iself implies it's a flaw in the game and not really something that can be fixed as you put it. I find the mindset of "there is no imbalance" better for improving as a player. Saying there is no imbalance doesn't mean that everything is solved, but you assume it can be. If zergs have a general problem in the game -> keep trying to find the "the solution" until you either find it or Blizzard fix it with a patch. Obviously for a player like Idra that have played the game at the highest level, having tried most that there is to try (certain things at least, scouting and so on) will feel he have an good understanding of what can or can't be done and he is probably right about most of it but I still think it's counter productive in a general sence to simply accept things as imbalanced as easy as many seem to have.
|
lol no problem , it was actually a problem i was having specifically that night and i was extremely frusterated.
Hey if you want to judge someone solely off of one post they made in frusteration thats cool, im sure i could dig through your posts and find some stupid shit as well ^^ would i judge you off of it no because im not a ignorant douchebag 
|
On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
You dont need fast overlord speed to scout early game no player is going to have that many units out and usually before the 4 gates go up say your doing 4 gate you have about 1 stalker out, are you telling me you cant get into the base and see whats going on before 1 stalker kills your overlord, whoever thinks that must have terrible overlord control or something.
Sure there is a chance you wont see it i guess, but there are other ways of telling including poking at the ramp to see army composition if you see lots of sentries your most likely safe if you see lots of stalkers and zealots get up some damn spines.
Honestly its almost like saying " protoss never has a chance to scout terran because they can put turret parameters around their base" thats pretty much what idra was saying but he was replacing it with units, your not going to have units at every angle to your base, find an unlikely angle and send in your OV your gonna probably see pretty much everything as more than likely if you scout at the right time they will have 1 stalker up, usually you get 1 stalker 1 zealot then put up 4 gates say your going for 4 gate.
What you just suggested is incredibly map dependent and totally reliant upon your opponent being incompetent. Plus you missed Idra's point completely, which is that Zerg has no "safe" builds or way to quickly respond to a suddenly unscouted threat. Zerg needs to be able to know what their opponent is capable of assaulting them with so they can produce the right units for defense. They don't have a "catch all" unit like the stalker or marine or ways to delay an attack with wall-ins or forcefields, if you're caught with your pants down as Zerg, you just die, period. There's an aspect of this with all races, but it is by far the least forgiving for Zerg. Zerg units are too one dimensional to be microed enough in-combat to make up for a bad or unprepared unit composition. It's simply not possible to have all the resources, tech, and larva already available to respond to a threat on short notice.
|
That link is hilarious and depressing at the same time.
My god.
|
On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
You dont need fast overlord speed to scout early game no player is going to have that many units out and usually before the 4 gates go up say your doing 4 gate you have about 1 stalker out, are you telling me you cant get into the base and see whats going on before 1 stalker kills your overlord, whoever thinks that must have terrible overlord control or something.
Sure there is a chance you wont see it i guess, but there are other ways of telling including poking at the ramp to see army composition if you see lots of sentries your most likely safe if you see lots of stalkers and zealots get up some damn spines.
It appears you have the entire matchup figured out. It's a shame people who play for a living haven't yet. Do you even watch pros play?
On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
Honestly its almost like saying " protoss never has a chance to scout terran because they can put turret parameters around their base" thats pretty much what idra was saying but he was replacing it with units
Horrible argument. Don't make comparative statements that don't even hold.
|
Great episode, but the first zerg I played on ladder afterwards did a completely fail roach timing and started some misconstrued Idra rant about how walls are impossible to be aggressive against protoss.
I guess what I'm saying here is that I just want to build a nexus is all, and the line up for the show was very well rounded for the different perspectives.
|
On May 04 2011 17:37 reprise wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
You dont need fast overlord speed to scout early game no player is going to have that many units out and usually before the 4 gates go up say your doing 4 gate you have about 1 stalker out, are you telling me you cant get into the base and see whats going on before 1 stalker kills your overlord, whoever thinks that must have terrible overlord control or something.
Sure there is a chance you wont see it i guess, but there are other ways of telling including poking at the ramp to see army composition if you see lots of sentries your most likely safe if you see lots of stalkers and zealots get up some damn spines.
It appears you have the entire matchup figured out. It's a shame people who play for a living haven't yet. Do you even watch pros play? Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
Honestly its almost like saying " protoss never has a chance to scout terran because they can put turret parameters around their base" thats pretty much what idra was saying but he was replacing it with units Horrible argument. Don't make comparative statements that don't even hold.
Don't even try and argue with him, he's already shown he replies to people countering his point with "Lol you must be a Zerg and worship IdrA!" or calling you an "Ignorant douchebag"
|
On May 04 2011 17:36 Lochat wrote:That link is hilarious and depressing at the same time. My god.
it was depressing =(
3 hours sleep and 3 or 4 games lost in a row not my finest hour.
Im not the greatest player either though im only low-mid diamond -_-
|
Honestly... what went through your head when he said "they chose not to attend"? You know what that doesn't even matter honestly. So basically you are saying your argument is "this is all Colbi's fault (all the arguing that occurred and all that) for not saying "because of an irreconcilable difference" even though a TL member could have said something on their behalf (and in fact did) and simply end it in a perfectly normal fashion?
No im not saying its colbis fault for it all. I think tyler over reacted and which is why players should shut their mouth when its a issue concerning their team. because the get emotional about it, and dont think rationally.
And i think TL did say something on their behalf which was the right response(not tylers), however TL shouldnt have never had to clarify anything. If there is a question about a team. That team should answer the questions...not a second party.
So what is your point? That Colbi maybe should have been a bit more careful because apparently things MIGHT go wrong? Keep in mind, there have been MANY players and teams declining from MANY events in the past, and often we are greeted with the standard "they declined" and get nothing more from it until it is clarified by the player... and it has never been an issue? Why? Because the player them self chose to not make it a big deal.
I feel like we are getting further away from the root of the problem here... but honestly if you think the only problem here is Colbi's wording... then that is a bit ridiculous. He clearly told his side, and the end result.
Many players and many teams decline. And when asked why, the player/team says why...the event never says anything. such as i didnt get invited..i didnt want to do..not enough time etc etc. Events leave it up to the players because usually events dont know and dont care.
Team Liquid did in fact choose not to play... so why do you put such a focus on the word chose?
Lets see. Would it be better if he simply said "Team liquid was invited" to the point where he would STRICTLY be speaking solely on behalf of himself and his organization? Surely that would be alright... right? He wouldn't be impeding on Team Liquids situation (because if he did then that could be seen as rude... which people could flame him for) right? So then what would you think in THAT situation? Hmm... TL was invited... TL is not in the league... Hmm... they must have chosen not to play in this league.
Like ive said before, he simply shouldnt have said anything, not his place to answer questions for a team. Give me all these examples of leagues saying oh this person was invited but not going to show up. I gave you a example of a highly successful league(ufc) dealing with the exact same situation. He didnt speak on behalf the player until he had to. in which he gave a complete neutral response.
If he did feel the need to respond since having the biggest na team not in ur na league is a big thing. He shoulda said something completely neutral. Now your arguing that what he said is and i dont think it is. I think making a statement that leaves room for people to question is bad. Because the questions that were razed and the comments that were, were negative.(by forum goers im not talking about tyler). Which put a bad light on team liquid, until they had to clear it up. And anyone who saw the statement. wondered...why arent they showing up. And with this community leaving questions open like that is bad becasue it normally goes into flaming the team for not going until they respond
Look at that, we would reach all the same conclusions. The point I am making here is that he didn't personally speak on behalf of another organization. He is not in a place to do so... if you think otherwise then you don't know business. Another point I am making is that if you are arguing that using the word "chose" is the root of the problem, you are wrong because all he did was state the obvious after stating that TL was invited.
He did speak on behalf of another organization. As soon as he said what someone else did or didn't do thats speaking for them. And he stated the obvious sure, but by doing so he made the issue 1 dimensional. When it really wasnt. Alot of teams dont attend events becaue they dont want to and thats fine. But by making that statement it seemed like thats what TL did, they just didnt want to attend that event, when that wasnt the case.
Finally... and the most important point that you did not address (interesting...) was that it was a single fucking sentence. Now I humored you and responded to all the little intricacies... but please tell me why he should be scrutinized for a single sentence while Tyler had an equally (and arguably more rude/aggressive response) ambiguous response that did not clarify both sides? Feel free to respond to those major points.
Interestingly i did address this. But i did do a multi reply so ill assume you didnt see it. Like i said up top tyler was wrong and ive said multiple times players need to shut their mouths when it comes to their teams. If they want to comment on anything else thats fine people will take that as their opinion. But as soon as they talk about issues regarding their team, it becomes the teams tance.
Heres what i think in short. what colbi said was wrong. what tyler said was even more wrong.
How it should have happened and normally does. people ask why x team isnt in the event. Team says were arent in the event because of y issue or just becasue we dont want to be. Case closed no drama.
Say colbi does say what he does. It would be wrong to do. But the response should have been TL makes a post addressing the issue without emotion and just lay out their side without any jabs or remarks back at colbi. Even tho coming from their side it seems like colbi purposefully left out crucial info in their minds.
And coming from someone who has followed eg since the day it was created. I think colbi did make the statement with the intent of peoples reaction of wtf why arent tl in the league thats dumb. You may disagree and thats fine. But from past experiences i wouldnt put it past them.(now i dont know colbi personally, but i do know the organization he works for...and they will use any trick they can) But i dont see us ever coming to a agreement about the issue, if you dont see any fault in colbis statement. When i see fault on all sides.
|
On May 04 2011 17:09 Jiddra wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 17:08 SmoKim wrote:EG Master league discussion starting As ready as i can be  let's see what's the hype is all about Two bags of popcorn required
well that wasn't so bad sure abit heated but nothing serious
but then again concidering how the smallest comments, serious or not got blown out WAY out of proportions, this thread might end up completely nuclear disaster soon 
|
Day9/Idra Argument
Apart from Idra being quite crass about the abilities of opponents he faces, the issues he brings up with Zerg early game are valid. Early game a Zerg has absolutely no way of knowing what a Terran is up to if the terran wants to hide it. This creates a situation in where a Zerg has to guess and maybe come out even or just straight up lose the game. This is one of the biggest factors that needs to be addressed in my opinion. Obviously I'm a Zerg player so i am biased but I'm sure anyone with an objective look at the game cant argue that a Zerg early game is extremely limited and does rely on some modicum of luck.
Tyler/Incontrol Argument
Both of them raise certain points but i believe they were both blinded in their discussion by their need to defend themselves. Tyler's main and only concern i believe he was trying to get across was the principle of telling the whole truth. He was concerned that Colbi was being deceptive by omission, in the fact he wasn't explaining the circumstances behind what caused TL to decline their invitation. Incontrol was understandably upset about the attack on Colbi which wasn't really necessary by Tyler. The response by Colbi was indeed standard PR and I am sure he had no malice or forethought of construed malice from his post. Tyler would just of preferred a more complete picture be presented and was a little upset that it wasn't.
|
On May 04 2011 17:37 reprise wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
You dont need fast overlord speed to scout early game no player is going to have that many units out and usually before the 4 gates go up say your doing 4 gate you have about 1 stalker out, are you telling me you cant get into the base and see whats going on before 1 stalker kills your overlord, whoever thinks that must have terrible overlord control or something.
Sure there is a chance you wont see it i guess, but there are other ways of telling including poking at the ramp to see army composition if you see lots of sentries your most likely safe if you see lots of stalkers and zealots get up some damn spines.
It appears you have the entire matchup figured out. It's a shame people who play for a living haven't yet. Do you even watch pros play? Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
Honestly its almost like saying " protoss never has a chance to scout terran because they can put turret parameters around their base" thats pretty much what idra was saying but he was replacing it with units Horrible argument. Don't make comparative statements that don't even hold.
yes suggesting ways to scout with an overlord surely means i have the entire matchup figured out.
Your a smart cookie aren't you
User was warned for this and other posts
|
On May 04 2011 17:41 Executor1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 17:37 reprise wrote:On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
You dont need fast overlord speed to scout early game no player is going to have that many units out and usually before the 4 gates go up say your doing 4 gate you have about 1 stalker out, are you telling me you cant get into the base and see whats going on before 1 stalker kills your overlord, whoever thinks that must have terrible overlord control or something.
Sure there is a chance you wont see it i guess, but there are other ways of telling including poking at the ramp to see army composition if you see lots of sentries your most likely safe if you see lots of stalkers and zealots get up some damn spines.
It appears you have the entire matchup figured out. It's a shame people who play for a living haven't yet. Do you even watch pros play? On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
Honestly its almost like saying " protoss never has a chance to scout terran because they can put turret parameters around their base" thats pretty much what idra was saying but he was replacing it with units Horrible argument. Don't make comparative statements that don't even hold. yes suggesting ways to scout with an overlord surely means i have the entire matchup figured out. Your a smart cookie aren't you
your suggestion is mute as a terran or protoss can easily deny scouting with 1 stalker or a few marines, a slow overlord is useless if your playing a decent opponent.
|
|
|
On May 04 2011 17:44 Mojar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 17:41 Executor1 wrote:On May 04 2011 17:37 reprise wrote:On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
You dont need fast overlord speed to scout early game no player is going to have that many units out and usually before the 4 gates go up say your doing 4 gate you have about 1 stalker out, are you telling me you cant get into the base and see whats going on before 1 stalker kills your overlord, whoever thinks that must have terrible overlord control or something.
Sure there is a chance you wont see it i guess, but there are other ways of telling including poking at the ramp to see army composition if you see lots of sentries your most likely safe if you see lots of stalkers and zealots get up some damn spines.
It appears you have the entire matchup figured out. It's a shame people who play for a living haven't yet. Do you even watch pros play? On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
Honestly its almost like saying " protoss never has a chance to scout terran because they can put turret parameters around their base" thats pretty much what idra was saying but he was replacing it with units Horrible argument. Don't make comparative statements that don't even hold. yes suggesting ways to scout with an overlord surely means i have the entire matchup figured out. Your a smart cookie aren't you your suggestion is mute as a terran or protoss can easily deny scouting with 1 stalker or a few marines, a slow overlord is useless if your playing a decent opponent.
Okay im going to stop with the snarkiness but lets be reasonable here does anyone know exactly how long it takes for a stalker to kill an overlord or 2 marines to kill an overlord?
|
On May 04 2011 17:48 Executor1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 17:44 Mojar wrote:On May 04 2011 17:41 Executor1 wrote:On May 04 2011 17:37 reprise wrote:On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
You dont need fast overlord speed to scout early game no player is going to have that many units out and usually before the 4 gates go up say your doing 4 gate you have about 1 stalker out, are you telling me you cant get into the base and see whats going on before 1 stalker kills your overlord, whoever thinks that must have terrible overlord control or something.
Sure there is a chance you wont see it i guess, but there are other ways of telling including poking at the ramp to see army composition if you see lots of sentries your most likely safe if you see lots of stalkers and zealots get up some damn spines.
It appears you have the entire matchup figured out. It's a shame people who play for a living haven't yet. Do you even watch pros play? On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
Honestly its almost like saying " protoss never has a chance to scout terran because they can put turret parameters around their base" thats pretty much what idra was saying but he was replacing it with units Horrible argument. Don't make comparative statements that don't even hold. yes suggesting ways to scout with an overlord surely means i have the entire matchup figured out. Your a smart cookie aren't you your suggestion is mute as a terran or protoss can easily deny scouting with 1 stalker or a few marines, a slow overlord is useless if your playing a decent opponent. Okay im going to stop with the snarkiness but lets be reasonable here does anyone know exactly how long it takes for a stalker to kill an overlord or 2 marines to kill an overlord?
Without delving too deeply into the many variables involved in such a question, such as angles of movement and attack I'll just say from experience:
A single stalker takes a little while to kill an overlord.
Two marines don't take long at all.
Currently downloading this episode, hopefully it's not as doom and gloom as the recent posts imply
|
If you see a lot of sentries your mostly safe except if the protoss he's doing a fake FE into 5 gate. Once you see the cancel you're practically screwed unless you made a huge commitment to army units. That's one of the problem, even if you scout you're not safe.
|
+ Show Spoiler +[QUOTE]On May 04 2011 17:50 maJes wrote:
[QUOTE]On May 04 2011 17:48 Executor1 wrote:
[QUOTE]On May 04 2011 17:44 Mojar wrote:
[QUOTE]On May 04 2011 17:41 Executor1 wrote:
[QUOTE]On May 04 2011 17:37 reprise wrote:
[QUOTE]On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
You dont need fast overlord speed to scout early game no player is going to have that many units out and usually before the 4 gates go up say your doing 4 gate you have about 1 stalker out, are you telling me you cant get into the base and see whats going on before 1 stalker kills your overlord, whoever thinks that must have terrible overlord control or something.
Sure there is a chance you wont see it i guess, but there are other ways of telling including poking at the ramp to see army composition if you see lots of sentries your most likely safe if you see lots of stalkers and zealots get up some damn spines.
[/QUOTE]
It appears you have the entire matchup figured out. It's a shame people who play for a living haven't yet. Do you even watch pros play?
[QUOTE]On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
Honestly its almost like saying " protoss never has a chance to scout terran because they can put turret parameters around their base" thats pretty much what idra was saying but he was replacing it with units[/QUOTE]
Horrible argument. Don't make comparative statements that don't even hold.
[/QUOTE]
yes suggesting ways to scout with an overlord surely means i have the entire matchup figured out.
Your a smart cookie aren't you [/QUOTE]
your suggestion is mute as a terran or protoss can easily deny scouting with 1 stalker or a few marines, a slow overlord is useless if your playing a decent opponent.
[/QUOTE]
Okay im going to stop with the snarkiness but lets be reasonable here does anyone know exactly how long it takes for a stalker to kill an overlord or 2 marines to kill an overlord?[/QUOTE]
Without delving too deeply into the many variables involved in such a question, such as angles of movement and attack I'll just say from experience:
A single stalker takes a little while to kill an overlord.
Two marines don't take long at all.
+ Show Spoiler +Currently downloading this episode, hopefully it's not as doom and gloom as the recent posts imply
Nah it's a good episode in of itself, but only part I didn't like myself was tyler vs geoff. Otherwise the episode was interesting and had some fun parts as usual.
|
On May 04 2011 17:48 Executor1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 17:44 Mojar wrote:On May 04 2011 17:41 Executor1 wrote:On May 04 2011 17:37 reprise wrote:On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
You dont need fast overlord speed to scout early game no player is going to have that many units out and usually before the 4 gates go up say your doing 4 gate you have about 1 stalker out, are you telling me you cant get into the base and see whats going on before 1 stalker kills your overlord, whoever thinks that must have terrible overlord control or something.
Sure there is a chance you wont see it i guess, but there are other ways of telling including poking at the ramp to see army composition if you see lots of sentries your most likely safe if you see lots of stalkers and zealots get up some damn spines.
It appears you have the entire matchup figured out. It's a shame people who play for a living haven't yet. Do you even watch pros play? On May 04 2011 17:21 Executor1 wrote:
Honestly its almost like saying " protoss never has a chance to scout terran because they can put turret parameters around their base" thats pretty much what idra was saying but he was replacing it with units Horrible argument. Don't make comparative statements that don't even hold. yes suggesting ways to scout with an overlord surely means i have the entire matchup figured out. Your a smart cookie aren't you your suggestion is mute as a terran or protoss can easily deny scouting with 1 stalker or a few marines, a slow overlord is useless if your playing a decent opponent. Okay im going to stop with the snarkiness but lets be reasonable here does anyone know exactly how long it takes for a stalker to kill an overlord or 2 marines to kill an overlord?
Er, yeah i do know exactly how long it takes 1 stalker to kill an OL. The idea that the first slow ovi can be in anyway considered a RELIABLE scout is ludicrous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
