On February 06 2011 11:57 Spectorials wrote: Wow Idra played AMAZINGLY well, very few errors that I saw from Artosis' cast.
On the other hand, MVP didn't play too well. Not as well as we have seen him play in the GSL last season.
What surprises me is that Idra played SO WELL for that whole game yet it still took him 35 minutes to win...
Sometimes it's better to just say "Terran is OP", since you're obviously not so gifted at covering up your balance whine.
I play random. Do you think if MVP had played as well as Idra did the game would have lasted 35 mins?
So what, Artosis "plays" Protoss, he still thinks Zerg is underpowered.
I'm just surprised that you can judge MVP's play as bad whilst claiming IdrA played brilliantly, whereas any lesser of a Terran would've died to the 1,5 control group of mutalisk IdrA was running around. It's just interesting that you can make such claims without caring to explain what it was that maked IdrA's play AMAZING, and MVP's not too well.
For the record, I think both players played a good and entertaining game, but you're stating this IdrA played better than MVP thing like there was a "good player" bar in the replay Artosis casted. I must've missed it, can you give me the time at which he brings it up?
On February 07 2011 01:17 zakk wrote: This game perfectly shows how screwed Terran is in late game vs. zerg. Godly play by MVP and it wasn't enough, Terran was never close to winning the game except the first marauder/marine push when he decided not to attack.
Incredible micro - that marine spread at ~27 minutes game time, it was God, not MVP that did that mindblowing split, viking micro against broodlords (and general amazing broodlord defense), MMM micro, drops, saving Thors with medivacs etc... Superb macro. Amazing multitasking - drops in 3 places at once, microing his army, keeping up with macro.
And he was never close to winning the game after 10 minute mark. ))) I don't get why people on TL still argue about the truth that is "terran against Z/P has to win under 15m, otherwise they're screwed". Best TL argument is "terrans have to learn to macro, that's all!" - yeah, MVP and other korean pros clearly have to learn how to macro. ))
This game shows you don't need creep to crush Terran armies, even if you send your banelings like 20 seconds after lings and mutas (that first big engagement lol - no flank, banes way too late but still taking out 3/4 of the terrans defensively camped army hehe). I liked how Idra had 1k minerals and was supply blocked at 110/110 or when he had 2k+ gas and still was ahead all game long. I don't think I have to mention about 2 fungals killing like 30 marines, let alone immobilizing them so they can't run from banelings. I like that balanced spell. I think everyone's used to mutas one-shotting tanks by now, so won't cover that.
So - can't wait for the larger maps to go live, aight bros? Zerg whine seems to be working.
User was warned for this post
OMG, TERRAN COULDN'T END 2 BASE VS 4 BASE!! ZERG OP!!!!
To the players saying it wasn't exciting because it seemed one sided, you obviously didn't watch the same game.
More than once MVP brought the worker count to even despite being behind on bases. And while he lost his army on his first push, idra lost his army twice in his first two pushes. While Idra's mutalisks killed off scvs, tanks and medivacs--mvp's drops killed drones and hatcheries. While MVP managed to secure his half of the map with turrets, tanks and thors, Idra's creep spread protected the south while his mutalisks protected the north.
These are all very exciting plays no matter who won in the end. It's NOT about the final outcome. That is irrelevant. It's about all those things that happened in between. That what made this game great.
I thought it was very fun to watch, especially since I saw the video of IdrA playing this live on his stream before I saw this video.
I think Mvp lost the game early on when he lost so many tanks to IdrA's mutalisks during his slow push through the middle. It took IdrA so long to close out the game, because Mvp still managed to hurt IdrA's economy alot with his drop harassing. I think IdrA decided to make sure he didn't needlessly overcommit to an attack and risk his lead. He just made sure he stayed ahead the entire time and wore Mvp down. That makes total sense to me, because Mvp is such a good player that he'll punish you for any mistakes you make. IdrA probably realised that and didn't wanna give him that chance to get back into the game. Mvp was trying hard to accomplish that with all his harassing and trying to make IdrA slip. Which he didn't! That's why I think it was such a fun game to watch.
Maybe I am wrong, but in what way was this game so epic? Great play ofc by both players, but it was never ever even close that MVP would win the match. It was just a 30+ min long Zerg stroy at shakuras?.
IdrA simply has one of the strongest if not the strongest overall zerg play. His macro, amazing unit control, harassment, never stops.
As a Terran player (who is in favor of bigger/better maps) I really think this shows how well Zergs can control of the map starting with the 10 minute~ Muta harass. I was really impressed with how well IdrA was finding every single opening and attacking MVP with it.
The last thing I am saying is imbalance. I think Terrans are going to have to play differently, and have different unit compositions. I don't think saying "Terran's need to learn how to Macro" is an effective statement either.
I just think that with the new bigger maps coming that 2x rack Marine might not be as popular. Right now the smaller maps favor Terran in most situations. Early game the Marine is so strong so its easier to abuse that. However you can clearly see from late game in that replay that Broodlords, infesters, making the Marines split up around the map then picking them off with 25 muta....Really makes Marines terrible option late game. I really only saw them effective for harassment drops.
I'm really surprised why some pros havent looked into going more of Thor + Hellions in the army mix. Hellions are really cost effective, and it seemed like MVP never wanted to get more than 1-2 Thor with his army at any time.
Shak Plat is a decent map, I hope we see more maps like it in the future.
On February 07 2011 01:17 zakk wrote: This game perfectly shows how screwed Terran is in late game vs. zerg. Godly play by MVP and it wasn't enough, Terran was never close to winning the game except the first marauder/marine push when he decided not to attack.
Incredible micro - that marine spread at ~27 minutes game time, it was God, not MVP that did that mindblowing split, viking micro against broodlords (and general amazing broodlord defense), MMM micro, drops, saving Thors with medivacs etc... Superb macro. Amazing multitasking - drops in 3 places at once, microing his army, keeping up with macro.
And he was never close to winning the game after 10 minute mark. ))) I don't get why people on TL still argue about the truth that is "terran against Z/P has to win under 15m, otherwise they're screwed". Best TL argument is "terrans have to learn to macro, that's all!" - yeah, MVP and other korean pros clearly have to learn how to macro. ))
This game shows you don't need creep to crush Terran armies, even if you send your banelings like 20 seconds after lings and mutas (that first big engagement lol - no flank, banes way too late but still taking out 3/4 of the terrans defensively camped army hehe). I liked how Idra had 1k minerals and was supply blocked at 110/110 or when he had 2k+ gas and still was ahead all game long. I don't think I have to mention about 2 fungals killing like 30 marines, let alone immobilizing them so they can't run from banelings. I like that balanced spell. I think everyone's used to mutas one-shotting tanks by now, so won't cover that.
So - can't wait for the larger maps to go live, aight bros? Zerg whine seems to be working.
User was warned for this post
OMG, TERRAN COULDN'T END 2 BASE VS 4 BASE!! ZERG OP!!!!
On February 07 2011 02:56 Sturehof wrote: Maybe I am wrong, but in what way was this game so epic? Great play ofc by both players, but it was never ever even close that MVP would win the match. It was just a 30+ min long Zerg stroy at shakuras?.
As a Terran player I agree. Once I saw IdrA's sick play with the Muta harass I knew MVP would be running around in circles. I think it was really fun for me still is because he's American as I, and playing one of the top players in the world. But as in terms of ZVT I didn't see anything to amazing that really blew me away from either side. It's just the players names in general.
On February 07 2011 03:04 Grimjim wrote: Apparently MVP was behind from the very start, yet it took 35 minutes for IdrA to actually close the game?
That's either saying a lot about MVP, or a lot about ZvT. You decide which.
You have an interesting point but I remember IdrA saying that Zergs never want to attack until they are almost 100% sure they can take a fight. He wore MVP down with some great MUTA harass into some muta/brood lord harass.
At the pro level with BETTER/BIGGER maps in the future I think we will see a lot more games like this, were players have to continually beat they're opponent all game then finally finish them. 10-minute all-in games for the majority of the games isn't fun to me.
Whats the average game time in GSL like 10-13 minutes or something like that? I hope that goes way up with bigger maps.
On February 07 2011 03:04 Grimjim wrote: Apparently MVP was behind from the very start, yet it took 35 minutes for IdrA to actually close the game?
That's either saying a lot about MVP, or a lot about ZvT. You decide which.
You have an interesting point but I remember IdrA saying that Zergs never want to attack until they are almost 100% sure they can take a fight. He wore MVP down with some great MUTA harass into some muta/brood lord harass.
At the pro level with BETTER/BIGGER maps in the future I think we will see a lot more games like this, were players have to continually beat they're opponent all game then finally finish them. 10-minute all-in games for the majority of the games isn't fun to me.
Whats the average game time in GSL like 10-13 minutes or something like that? I hope that goes way up with bigger maps.
We will definitely see a lot more zergs going for mutas. That is for sure.
After watching Artosis's cast, I can definitely say that watch idra play the game live was a lot more exciting. Not saying Artosis's didn't do a good job, but being in first person view really let's you see how intense the micro/macro management was and how many different fronts he attacked while expanding and all that. That's why the game may not be as "epic" for those that were watching it from Artosis's POV.
On February 07 2011 03:04 Grimjim wrote: Apparently MVP was behind from the very start, yet it took 35 minutes for IdrA to actually close the game?
That's either saying a lot about MVP, or a lot about ZvT. You decide which.
You have an interesting point but I remember IdrA saying that Zergs never want to attack until they are almost 100% sure they can take a fight. He wore MVP down with some great MUTA harass into some muta/brood lord harass.
At the pro level with BETTER/BIGGER maps in the future I think we will see a lot more games like this, were players have to continually beat they're opponent all game then finally finish them. 10-minute all-in games for the majority of the games isn't fun to me.
Whats the average game time in GSL like 10-13 minutes or something like that? I hope that goes way up with bigger maps.
While that would be indeed awesome for all matchups, you must admit, when a Zerg loses their army to a push, it's incredibly difficult to recover without significant loss to infrastructure. Even losing your natural to a 1 base 3 Rax push is enough to put you incredibly far behind your opponent, no matter how many SCVs he cut.
I feel like Zerg just don't have the units to facilitate a push early OR mid-game that can actually do enough damage to harm an opponent, and are therefore shunted into harassment, unit exchanges and skirmishes until they severely outnumber the enemy on bases, like BW.
But unlike BW, the increased power and longevity of 2 base plays and the increased weakness of 200/200 Zerg armies makes Terran and Protoss wins last about 12 minutes average, and Zerg wins go upwards to 20+ minutes, this game being the crazy exaggeration.
My point being this: If IdrA was playing behind from the start, he would have lost within 12 minutes. MVP was behind, yet it took 35 minutes to lose. To me, that just doesn't seem right. All factions should have the same power early, mid, and late-game.
On February 07 2011 02:56 Sturehof wrote: Maybe I am wrong, but in what way was this game so epic? Great play ofc by both players, but it was never ever even close that MVP would win the match. It was just a 30+ min long Zerg stroy at shakuras?.
I agree with you. I think a lot of the hype comes from a foreigner beating a top Korean in a long macro game. I highly doubt it would've gotten much attention if the result of the game was the other way around. Really nicely played by Idra though. He seems to be making a steady progress toward the top since the end of Beta.
Guys, you don't have to justify everything and rank everything and say "who's the best" all the time. Just enjoy it! Also I now have plenty of Skrillex in my iTunes!
On February 07 2011 03:04 Grimjim wrote: Apparently MVP was behind from the very start, yet it took 35 minutes for IdrA to actually close the game?
That's either saying a lot about MVP, or a lot about ZvT. You decide which.
You have an interesting point but I remember IdrA saying that Zergs never want to attack until they are almost 100% sure they can take a fight. He wore MVP down with some great MUTA harass into some muta/brood lord harass.
At the pro level with BETTER/BIGGER maps in the future I think we will see a lot more games like this, were players have to continually beat they're opponent all game then finally finish them. 10-minute all-in games for the majority of the games isn't fun to me.
Whats the average game time in GSL like 10-13 minutes or something like that? I hope that goes way up with bigger maps.
My point being this: If IdrA was playing behind from the start, he would have lost within 12 minutes. MVP was behind, yet it took 35 minutes to lose. To me, that just doesn't seem right. All factions should have the same power early, mid, and late-game.
you wanna cry imbalance just cry it out loud, don't go sneaky and far from discretely implying it.
it took 35 minutes to lose as playstyle for each race is different.
EPT
