• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 10:35
CEST 16:35
KST 23:35
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL22] Finals Preview: Sweet Victory!9[ASL22] Ro4 Preview: Mirror Mirror6[ASL22] Ro8 Preview: Within Reach5[ASL22] Ro8 Preview: In A Tizzy11[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Holy Diver5
Community News
Evil Geniuses - shutting down10ISSL (IntoTheTV x SOOP SC2 League): Premier5Weekly Cups (October 12-18): 5.0.17 era begins1[$1250] International ShieldBattery League53Weekly Cups (October 5-11): Farewell to 5.0.166
StarCraft 2
General
REPORT: StarCraft 2: Remastered In Development Weekly Cups (October 5-11): Farewell to 5.0.16 No more SC2 streamers on team liquid? Evil Geniuses - shutting down How do you feel about the mass reverts in the 5.0.17 PTR?
Tourneys
RSL goes to London! 2026 Offline Finals Nov 21-22 ISSL (IntoTheTV x SOOP SC2 League): Premier Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament ScienceCraft (October 24-25) - Live Event WORTEX Challenger Series — Open SC2 LAN in Budapes
Strategy
[H] ZvP Mid-Late Game: Stalkers Collossi HT
Custom Maps
[G] How to playtest arcade maps [A] Nemrods 1/4 players [M] (2) Sweltering Sands [M] (2) Frigid Storage
External Content
Mutation # 548 Shining Bright The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 547 Temple Of Terror Mutation # 546 Catch the Train
Brood War
General
Do we even care about balance? [Megathread] Daily Funny Videos Rollback Netcode in Brood War BW General Discussion Young Players Tournament Announced by SOOP
Tourneys
[BSL23] RO24 Group Stage KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 4 [ASL22] Grand Finals [$1250] International ShieldBattery League
Strategy
Cliff Jump Revisited (1 in a 1000 strategy) Simple Questions, Simple Answers Replay Review Process - What do you do?
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread General RTS Discussion Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Armies of Exigo - YesYes? Dawn of War IV
Dota 2
Dota 2 Champions League Season 3 Begins April 25!
League of Legends
[TL LoL EUW IHs] Teemo shall perish
Heroes of the Storm
Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Artificial Intelligence Thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI The Chess Thread
Fan Clubs
Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion!
Sports
Football (Soccer) Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Recent Gifted Posts
Blogs
How Much Genes Contribute to…
TrAiDoS
ShieldBattery on Mac
Kraekkling
[ASL22] Ro4 Day1 Ticket Giv…
bITt.mAN
38 yo Retired SWE loo…
PurE)Rabbit-SF
Can Bots Beat Pros?? Starcr…
namkraft
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 9866 users

Ultras vs Repaired PF - Page 22

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Prev 1 20 21 22 23 24 55 Next
exezelot
Profile Joined May 2010
United States26 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-09-22 02:26:29
September 22 2010 02:24 GMT
#421
Interesting. So the Splash is calculated from the building it hits and not the unit? Does anyone else have anything that says otherwise?

EDIT
Sigh, i should actually read topics before posting. The page numbers scare me
omnigol
Profile Joined April 2008
United States166 Posts
September 22 2010 02:37 GMT
#422
On September 22 2010 10:59 VanGarde wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 22 2010 10:55 omnigol wrote:
On September 22 2010 10:27 VanGarde wrote:
On September 22 2010 10:14 Devlin wrote:
On September 22 2010 09:49 VanGarde wrote:
On September 22 2010 09:44 tacrats wrote:
On September 22 2010 09:39 VanGarde wrote:
Here are some numbers I'd like everyone to remember before you make statements about Planetary Fortress cost efficiency.

The PF costs 550 minerals and 150 gas AND 270 minerals every 87 seconds.

If you had turned your PF into an OC instead you would if you used every 50 energy on MULE had a MULE every 1 minute and 27 seconds. Lets say one and a half minute for simplicity.

So after just 3 minutes of play the PF has actually costed you 1090/150.
After 6 minutes 1630/150
After 12 minutes 2710/150

Terran player realize this added virtual cost and it is why it is a tough decision every time you decide between an OC and a PF. But reading threads like this makes me think that most zerg players might not quite grasp this.

This is why the PF HAS to be repairable. Because otherwise it is just not worth it cost for cost.


If i didnt turn my 14 drone into a pool, he could have made me 2k minerals over the course of the game!

Protip: people wouldnt get a PF if there wasnt a reason to, regardless of how expensive it is.


Yes, that is also true. The drone used to make a zerg building is lost income. Ofcourse both of you who are using this is an example are just missing the point. When you make a building from a drone you are not at a fork in the road where you choose between two options that can be weighed against each other. You HAVE to make a pool obviously and thus that logic does not apply to this example.

A correct example would be the decision between making a spine crawler and not, you loose income over time by making a spine crawler, thus it is a loss to make one, a loss that should be avoided unless absolutely necessary.

Ofcourse it is still not a very related example because the difference in scale is so far off. The income we are talking about when choosing between OC and PF are in scales way way above the cost of a spine crawler.

Protip: Good terran players will avoid getting a PF. It is a defeat in itself to have to build a PF at an expansion.


The math logic in your previous post just doesn't work. You build a Planetary Fortress. You don't build an Orbital Command. OCs don't "give" you minerals, they accelerate the income rate, therefore you don't "lose" minerals by going PF over OC.

Semantics, the MULE is a worker. SCV's, probles and drones do not "give" you minerals either. As I said before you don't "lose" minerals by having all your workers killed by a hellion drop either. But you loose income over time. Having a planetary fortress is financially as if you had and oc but never called down MULE's.

Seriously is this concept really so hard for people to grasp?

You're just using growth over time numbers to justify the ridiculousness of PF with repairing SCVs. Use common sense. PFs can replace entire ground armies in certain defensive situations, yes they're still a viable choice, even when jackasses like you play with income-over-time numbers.


Growth over time is the entire foundation of Starcraft 2. It is the backbone of the game.

Also I am not justifying anything I started off by calmly pointing out to people why the PF does in fact cost you more resources than just what it takes to build it on the spot, and thus further explained why it need to be repairable. I did not say how repairable or anything regarding balance, just that it has to actually be possible to repair it in combat or else it stops being worth the cost.

Ofcourse oneeyed people who rage their way into these threads with red eyes seeing only talk of nerfs and balance will read what they want into posts. All I have said is that getting a PF has a larger impact than just being a one time cost and apparently it has been useful because half the people in here don't even understand how starcraft economy works.


You're saying the PF should be repairable. In the context of this thread that means ultra splashing all the SCVs makes the PF too costly. That's a normative stance on the "balance" of the game. You're attitude that people can't handle your objectivity is a joke. It's your blatantly obtuse approach (stating "the PF does *not* cost 550/150"), while accusing no one of understanding that RTS games have an economic aspect is just insulting.
Fa1nT
Profile Joined September 2010
United States3423 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-09-22 02:37:48
September 22 2010 02:37 GMT
#423
The last thing I can comment on this is...

Blizzard, you are assholes.

I mean, you just stated on battlenet that this is a bug and will be patched.

HOW could you NOT test this at least ONCE before release? You have been working on this FOR A MONTH.

You got thousands of zergs hopes up, thinking we finally got one unit that is OP. I mean, terran get marauders 3 minutes into the game, but OP ultras at T3 was just too much?

Really... spend 15 minutes testing your patches before you release them please.

Q.Q
Techno
Profile Joined June 2010
1900 Posts
September 22 2010 02:39 GMT
#424
I do not approve. I think thats a bug, actually.
Hell, its awesome to LOSE to nukes!
TedJustice
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
Canada1324 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-09-22 02:42:33
September 22 2010 02:42 GMT
#425
The ultralisk's blow causes a shockwave in the command center that hits the SCVs. There's the rationale.
Ndugu
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States1078 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-09-22 02:44:10
September 22 2010 02:42 GMT
#426
On September 22 2010 11:37 Fa1nT wrote:
The last thing I can comment on this is...

Blizzard, you are assholes.

I mean, you just stated on battlenet that this is a bug and will be patched.

HOW could you NOT test this at least ONCE before release? You have been working on this FOR A MONTH.

You got thousands of zergs hopes up, thinking we finally got one unit that is OP. I mean, terran get marauders 3 minutes into the game, but OP ultras at T3 was just too much?

Really... spend 15 minutes testing your patches before you release them please.

Q.Q


I defend Blizzard non-stop.

But... give any non Blizzard person version 1.1 for a day and they'd have figured this out. Honestly mind-numbing that this didn't get figured out beforehand.

The sad thing is this is pretty much balanced XD

Should be like this but only within in a reasonable range, like a quarter of the building per ultralisk gets splashed.

Just curious, but if fully 100% surrounded by SCVS, can ultralisks target the buidling? Or does it have to be true melee?
Garamor
Profile Joined September 2010
Canada22 Posts
September 22 2010 02:44 GMT
#427
Hmm, what about zerg larva, I guess they'd be affected by splash as well.

Any idea how long it would take for an ultra to gimp 3 + larva sitting next to the hatch?
Less is more
Raz0r
Profile Joined September 2008
United States287 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-09-22 02:45:18
September 22 2010 02:44 GMT
#428
why did blizzard even add the planetary fortress in the first place, seems ridiculous, when scvs could simply repair it to defend against smaller scale attacks. although the splash buff from ultras seem to counteract this, i really think this could affect other parts of the game, and blizzard really should consider removing planetary all together.
Fruscainte
Profile Blog Joined December 2009
4596 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-09-22 02:45:31
September 22 2010 02:44 GMT
#429
On September 22 2010 11:39 Techno wrote:
I do not approve. I think thats a bug, actually.


Blizzard intentionally put splash on the attack....so now that it's doing splash...it's a bug? I don't get your logic.

People need to calm the fuck down. Thors were OP and game breaking at one point. Look at them now, they're considered balance after only a few weeks of the whining and there are effective ways to deal with them. Same with this, boo hoo, you can't insta win by putting 20 SCV's onto a planetary fortress and take out a 100 supply army. I'm sure it's powerful, but stop blowing it out of proportion until you have given it time to develop. The patch just came out today.

I'm glad T are getting a taste of their own medicine though.
Carnivorous Sheep
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
Baa?21248 Posts
September 22 2010 02:45 GMT
#430
God forbid 2 300/200 units actually kill a 150/100 thing while losing one. Oh how imba that'd be.
TranslatorBaa!
Techno
Profile Joined June 2010
1900 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-09-22 02:48:58
September 22 2010 02:45 GMT
#431
On September 22 2010 11:37 omnigol wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 22 2010 10:59 VanGarde wrote:
On September 22 2010 10:55 omnigol wrote:
On September 22 2010 10:27 VanGarde wrote:
On September 22 2010 10:14 Devlin wrote:
On September 22 2010 09:49 VanGarde wrote:
On September 22 2010 09:44 tacrats wrote:
On September 22 2010 09:39 VanGarde wrote:
Here are some numbers I'd like everyone to remember before you make statements about Planetary Fortress cost efficiency.

The PF costs 550 minerals and 150 gas AND 270 minerals every 87 seconds.

If you had turned your PF into an OC instead you would if you used every 50 energy on MULE had a MULE every 1 minute and 27 seconds. Lets say one and a half minute for simplicity.

So after just 3 minutes of play the PF has actually costed you 1090/150.
After 6 minutes 1630/150
After 12 minutes 2710/150

Terran player realize this added virtual cost and it is why it is a tough decision every time you decide between an OC and a PF. But reading threads like this makes me think that most zerg players might not quite grasp this.

This is why the PF HAS to be repairable. Because otherwise it is just not worth it cost for cost.


If i didnt turn my 14 drone into a pool, he could have made me 2k minerals over the course of the game!

Protip: people wouldnt get a PF if there wasnt a reason to, regardless of how expensive it is.


Yes, that is also true. The drone used to make a zerg building is lost income. Ofcourse both of you who are using this is an example are just missing the point. When you make a building from a drone you are not at a fork in the road where you choose between two options that can be weighed against each other. You HAVE to make a pool obviously and thus that logic does not apply to this example.

A correct example would be the decision between making a spine crawler and not, you loose income over time by making a spine crawler, thus it is a loss to make one, a loss that should be avoided unless absolutely necessary.

Ofcourse it is still not a very related example because the difference in scale is so far off. The income we are talking about when choosing between OC and PF are in scales way way above the cost of a spine crawler.

Protip: Good terran players will avoid getting a PF. It is a defeat in itself to have to build a PF at an expansion.


The math logic in your previous post just doesn't work. You build a Planetary Fortress. You don't build an Orbital Command. OCs don't "give" you minerals, they accelerate the income rate, therefore you don't "lose" minerals by going PF over OC.

Semantics, the MULE is a worker. SCV's, probles and drones do not "give" you minerals either. As I said before you don't "lose" minerals by having all your workers killed by a hellion drop either. But you loose income over time. Having a planetary fortress is financially as if you had and oc but never called down MULE's.

Seriously is this concept really so hard for people to grasp?

You're just using growth over time numbers to justify the ridiculousness of PF with repairing SCVs. Use common sense. PFs can replace entire ground armies in certain defensive situations, yes they're still a viable choice, even when jackasses like you play with income-over-time numbers.


Growth over time is the entire foundation of Starcraft 2. It is the backbone of the game.

Also I am not justifying anything I started off by calmly pointing out to people why the PF does in fact cost you more resources than just what it takes to build it on the spot, and thus further explained why it need to be repairable. I did not say how repairable or anything regarding balance, just that it has to actually be possible to repair it in combat or else it stops being worth the cost.

Ofcourse oneeyed people who rage their way into these threads with red eyes seeing only talk of nerfs and balance will read what they want into posts. All I have said is that getting a PF has a larger impact than just being a one time cost and apparently it has been useful because half the people in here don't even understand how starcraft economy works.


You're saying the PF should be repairable. In the context of this thread that means ultra splashing all the SCVs makes the PF too costly. That's a normative stance on the "balance" of the game. You're attitude that people can't handle your objectivity is a joke. It's your blatantly obtuse approach (stating "the PF does *not* cost 550/150"), while accusing no one of understanding that RTS games have an economic aspect is just insulting.


Vangard has made excellent points and responded to his responses without flames. He is also being quite objective. Many of his opposers lower they're credibility by flaming.
Especially omnigol, for some reason he is clearly angered by Vangard and his rage is clouding his ability to make objective points. Quite unfortunate.

I am wondering whether this splash damage is a bug or not. I mean, it kills SCVs not even close to the blades. It's very odd to look at. However I do agree that Ultralisks should be what you should use against a PF.

I'm glad Zergs have something that they have to defend as balanced now.
Hell, its awesome to LOSE to nukes!
Fruscainte
Profile Blog Joined December 2009
4596 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-09-22 02:47:43
September 22 2010 02:46 GMT
#432
On September 22 2010 11:45 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
God forbid 2 300/200 units actually kill a 150/100 thing while losing one. Oh how imba that'd be.


YEAH BUT HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO WIN IF I CAN'T NEVER LOSE MY CC'S WITHOUT HAVING TO ACTUALLY MICRO MY FORCES AT ALL?!?!

I don't even know what I just said, or if it made coherent sense. But honestly people, the patch has been out for less than 24 hours. Give. It. Time. I'm sure it's not that big of a freaking deal, yeah, 5 ultra's can beat 20 SCV's and a 150/100 structure. You want a fucking medal for figuring that out?
MisterPuppy
Profile Joined August 2010
161 Posts
September 22 2010 02:47 GMT
#433
Terrans use TEARS on Blizzard Balance Team.

TEARS are super effective!
ohN
Profile Blog Joined November 2009
United States1075 Posts
September 22 2010 02:47 GMT
#434
I like how blizzard gets all zerg's hopes up that they have a scary lategame unit and then crushes them so blatantly. But if this isn't getting fixed until a future patch, this will still be in the game for ~2 months. hmmm *thinks of ways to abuse this on ladder*
Fa1nT
Profile Joined September 2010
United States3423 Posts
September 22 2010 02:48 GMT
#435
The ONE thing that I am happy about for all this -

Cleave is RANGED slightly

This means ultras can STILL attack the fortress even if there is a wall of SCV repairing. This means if the AoE is placed in front of the ultra, SCV will still die, just not all of them.

Before, with Ram, the ultras would run in circles trying to find an opening to attack while getting blasted.
DooMDash
Profile Joined May 2010
United States1015 Posts
September 22 2010 02:49 GMT
#436
I love the Zerg players defending this problem. I mean I understand they are bitter, but I know they don't believe this is fair. I don't believe anyone does.
S1 3500+ Master T. S2 1600+ Master T.
Fruscainte
Profile Blog Joined December 2009
4596 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-09-22 02:51:26
September 22 2010 02:49 GMT
#437
On September 22 2010 11:48 Fa1nT wrote:
The ONE thing that I am happy about for all this -

Cleave is RANGED slightly

This means ultras can STILL attack the fortress even if there is a wall of SCV repairing. This means if the AoE is placed in front of the ultra, SCV will still die, just not all of them.

Before, with Ram, the ultras would run in circles trying to find an opening to attack while getting blasted.


This I like a lot. So many Ultra's with retardation trying to figure out how they should gently side step the SCV's to hit the PF.

EDIT: DoomDash, I do not think this is fair or unfair. IT JUST CAME OUT TODAY. Jesus tit fucking Christ, how can you base your entire opinion on one video and less than a day of real game testing? There was a video a while back of like 5 thors taking on 35 1a'd mutalisks and everyone was having a huge hissy fit that Thors were OP. Now look at them, 35 muta's could probably take on 8-10 thors easily. It's the same shit with this, I am not throwing out the possibility that this is OP but Terran's crying imba at the first sight of something that might be great against them is just hilarious.
Raz0r
Profile Joined September 2008
United States287 Posts
September 22 2010 02:51 GMT
#438
On September 22 2010 11:44 Fruscainte wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 22 2010 11:39 Techno wrote:
I do not approve. I think thats a bug, actually.


Blizzard intentionally put splash on the attack....so now that it's doing splash...it's a bug? I don't get your logic.

People need to calm the fuck down. Thors were OP and game breaking at one point. Look at them now, they're considered balance after only a few weeks of the whining and there are effective ways to deal with them. Same with this, boo hoo, you can't insta win by putting 20 SCV's onto a planetary fortress and take out a 100 supply army. I'm sure it's powerful, but stop blowing it out of proportion until you have given it time to develop. The patch just came out today.

I'm glad T are getting a taste of their own medicine though.


the whole concept of planetary fortress makes the game more one dimensional, as you do not have to worry about small scale atks or harassments as much, because you have your main building defending for you. that means the opponent has to commit more forces to take it down, making it less of a strategic move. its to the point now when he has to have enough forces to take it down or his small harassments won't do much. high level bw has brought us many multiareas of atks and harassments like bisu's multitasking harassment style, and etc.. with these kinds of concepts in the game, i guess you could say its a different game, but imo its a worse game. if you only have big armies roaming around the map, sounds like wc3?
Fruscainte
Profile Blog Joined December 2009
4596 Posts
September 22 2010 02:52 GMT
#439
On September 22 2010 11:51 Raz0r wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 22 2010 11:44 Fruscainte wrote:
On September 22 2010 11:39 Techno wrote:
I do not approve. I think thats a bug, actually.


Blizzard intentionally put splash on the attack....so now that it's doing splash...it's a bug? I don't get your logic.

People need to calm the fuck down. Thors were OP and game breaking at one point. Look at them now, they're considered balance after only a few weeks of the whining and there are effective ways to deal with them. Same with this, boo hoo, you can't insta win by putting 20 SCV's onto a planetary fortress and take out a 100 supply army. I'm sure it's powerful, but stop blowing it out of proportion until you have given it time to develop. The patch just came out today.

I'm glad T are getting a taste of their own medicine though.


the whole concept of planetary fortress makes the game more one dimensional, as you do not have to worry about small scale atks or harassments as much,


I stopped right there. 5 ultralisks is what, 1500/1000 and upwards of 30 supply? That's not "small harassment"
Almin
Profile Joined August 2010
United States583 Posts
September 22 2010 02:54 GMT
#440
I love this update.

You guys do realize..nothing in SC2 is built to scale, so don't cry how it "Magically hits" scv's in the back. Battleships, motherships, carriers, etc, are built extremely small and can be shot down by mass marines. Nothing is built to scale.

One buff that was given to Zerg and every Terran goes crazy that they can MAYBE lose their expansion. I don't really see the Protoss complaining, just the Terrans.

Try being Zerg and sending mass roaches against PF, even without repair, the PF can 5 shot 5 roaches with it's splash, and still have 75% of it's HP.

Don't worry Terrans, you still have your orbital commands to throw down mass mules wherever you expand to.

If Zerg reaches tier 3 + Ultralisk Cavern + Plating, before you guys get your thors out, you deserve to lose your expansion.
Prev 1 20 21 22 23 24 55 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 8h 25m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Lowko443
Hui .243
LamboSC2 180
Classic 60
Codebar 23
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 48569
Calm 7233
Bisu 1866
EffOrt 1219
Shuttle 786
firebathero 581
Light 547
Soma 376
Stork 375
Rush 295
[ Show more ]
Snow 272
Leta 223
ZerO 213
Soulkey 159
Dewaltoss 104
hero 91
Hyun 72
Hyuk 65
Barracks 58
PianO 51
Sharp 49
910 44
Killer 42
Movie 42
Mong 39
Pusan 36
ggaemo 35
Shinee 27
HiyA 26
sorry 25
Trap 23
Bishop 22
Sacsri 21
soO 16
Hm[arnc] 15
Terrorterran 15
Noble 11
Free 9
Dota 2
Gorgc9943
qojqva1965
XaKoH 436
syndereN361
Fuzer 85
League of Legends
Reynor47
Counter-Strike
byalli538
Heroes of the Storm
crisheroes472
Trikslyr45
Other Games
singsing2208
B2W.Neo1028
hiko886
DeMusliM350
Liquid`VortiX129
mouzStarbuck75
ZerO(Twitch)15
fpsfer 3
Organizations
StarCraft 2
IntoTheiNu 852
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• StrangeGG 62
• CranKy Ducklings SOOP6
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• iopq 19
• FirePhoenix5
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 2355
League of Legends
• Nemesis1965
• Jankos1447
• TFBlade414
Other Games
• WagamamaTV236
Upcoming Events
OSC
8h 25m
WardiTV Summer Champion…
20h 25m
Harstem vs Zoun
Harstem vs GgMaChine
GgMaChine vs Lambo
Harstem vs Lambo
GgMaChine vs Zoun
Lambo vs Zoun
OSC
23h 25m
FEL
1d 18h
Patches Events
1d 22h
AI Arena Tournament
2 days
FEL
2 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
Replay Cast
3 days
WardiTV Weekly
3 days
[ Show More ]
IntoTheTV X SOOP
4 days
ByuN vs Lambo
MaxPax vs Bunny
PiGosaur Cup
5 days
The PondCast
5 days
Kung Fu Cup
5 days
IntoTheTV X SOOP
6 days
SHIN vs GuMiho
Clem vs Classic
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2026-10-20
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
HCC Season 3

Ongoing

Acropolis #5
IPSL Winter 2026-27
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 4
Acropolis #5 - GSC
1win Private Club #2
Thunderpick World Champ. '26
ESL Pro League Season 24
Stake Ranked Episode 4
1win Private Club #1
Logitech G Play Connect 2026
SL StarSeries Fall 2026
FISSURE Playground #3
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026

Upcoming

BSL Season 23
SC4ALL II: Brood War
BSL 23: Non-Korean Championship
HSC XXX
Stellar Fest 2: Lunar Cup
SC4ALL II: StarCraft II
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
RSL Offline Finals
eXTREMESLAND 2026
PGL Major Singapore 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 6
BLAST Rivals Fall 2026
IEM Beijing 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 5
PGL Masters Bucharest 2026
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.