Blizzard Interviews Day[9]

On May 05 2011 01:28 TheRabidDeer wrote:
Good read
Did anybody else read it in day9's voice?

There are always a bunch of replays the viewers never see that influence the discussion of the replay or content in any given daily. You'll always hear me say things like "he's heading to do X, Y, or Z, but he COULD do A or B," and that is always a consideration for any daily. The studies of the replays not shown are what gives me A and B.

When I sit down and start analyzing a game for a daily, I'm actually utilizing the same techniques that I use for improving my own play privately. The only difference is I'm talking while doing so.

On May 05 2011 08:44 eviltomahawk wrote:
Hmmmm...

Day9 is about to finish his master's degree in Interactive Media, which is basically fancy talk for video game design.

On May 05 2011 01:55 Drazzyo wrote:
this interview reminds me of when he was going buck wild in his balance/imbalance argument with idrA. my heart said day9 was right but idrA made a good point about nscouting being so difficult

On May 05 2011 08:43 Qzy wrote:
Who cares tho - I don't see him as a community person rather than a person not able to discuss balance or have a good view on the game.

Hopefully average Joe starts worshiping good players, in stead of commentators, such that SC2 can move into a new phase2.

It really shined through last sotg where IdrA slaughtered Day9 in his inexperience.

On May 05 2011 01:32 AlBundy wrote:
Wow thanks for the link, I love Day9.

Some interesting info there:



I know some people are doubting Day9's legitimacy, and not aknowledging his views about the game. That is quite deplorable imho Even if he doesn't play in tournaments, he has a better understanding of the game than a lot of top players, thats undeniable.

On May 05 2011 01:28 TheRabidDeer wrote:
Good read
Did anybody else read it in day9's voice?

On May 05 2011 23:38 loveeholicce wrote:


How is it undeniable? He doesn't play anymore, I dont see how you could think he knows the game better than pro players who make a living from the game. Day9 is awesome but some people get carried away

On May 05 2011 01:32 AlBundy wrote:
Wow thanks for the link, I love Day9.

Some interesting info there:



I know some people are doubting Day9's legitimacy, and not aknowledging his views about the game. That is quite deplorable imho Even if he doesn't play in tournaments, he has a better understanding of the game than a lot of top players, thats undeniable.

On May 06 2011 00:10 novabossa wrote:


As much as I love Day9 and how much he contributes to e-sports...it's flat out wrong to say that he has as good of an understanding of the game as the current progamers do. You think that he has a better understanding of the game than a lot of top players? That's just silly. So much of the game can only be learned through playing, and the finest details can only be learned through playing at the top level. It's not really Day9's fault, he simply doesn't have time to play the game as much as the progamers do. Sorry, but I have an issue with people putting commentators on a pedestal above progamers : /

On May 06 2011 00:28 AlBundy wrote:


Well, I may have exaggerated a bit, but "progamer" is a very loose term in NA an Europe, that's why I used "top players". A lot of them are amateurs. So I believe that it's YOU who are putting the "progamers" on a pedestal. I watch the IPL IGN and the NASL, and so far, I've been totally disappointed by both scenes. I don't want to derail this thread, so I'll just say this: Let's get supply blocked! I bet Day9 got better macro. Please notice that I'm not even talking about strategy, because I know that Day9 is a better strategist than a lot of these so-called "progamers".

edit, I'm not saying Day9 is BETTER at the game than top players

On May 06 2011 00:31 ZealotKiller wrote:


The thing is, Day9 has been a progamer for 12 years. For sure, he won't know the current state of the game as much as the progamers, but his experience is far good enough to be able to comprehend that strategies will emerge to make things happen. Take Spanishiwa's build that might not be totally refined yet, and that may be the future of ZvT, where you don't even need that much scouting. Thnking Day9 knows less about the game isn't completely wrong, since he can't follow the trends as much, but he knows his stuff and knows more than certain progamers for being one for 12 years. His experience in progaming transpires from BW to SC2. We cannot put commentators on a pedestral over progamers, but Day9 isn't only a commentator : He is Day9, the man who studies the game and plays as much as he can, and is much better than almost any commentators.

On May 06 2011 00:31 ZealotKiller wrote:


The thing is, Day9 has been a progamer for 12 years. For sure, he won't know the current state of the game as much as the progamers, but his experience is far good enough to be able to comprehend that strategies will emerge to make things happen. Take Spanishiwa's build that might not be totally refined yet, and that may be the future of ZvT, where you don't even need that much scouting. Thnking Day9 knows less about the game isn't completely wrong, since he can't follow the trends as much, but he knows his stuff and knows more than certain progamers for being one for 12 years. His experience in progaming transpires from BW to SC2. We cannot put commentators on a pedestral over progamers, but Day9 isn't only a commentator : He is Day9, the man who studies the game and plays as much as he can, and is much better than almost any commentators.

On May 06 2011 00:32 PiQLiQ wrote:
Great Guy, good interview.

On May 06 2011 02:00 artanis2 wrote:
The only thing a player can possibly have over a commentator is mechanics. The player doesn't know why they lost until after the game and they can watch the replay. The commentator doesn't have to waste that time playing as well and will learn just as much as the player from a replay.

On May 06 2011 02:05 Leavzou wrote:


This is not true at all.

When you hear analysis from Idra or HuK, it's just freaking obvious that Day9 for example has absolutly noe clue about starcraft 2 in high level.

I Loved the 3 videos of day9, when he said it was hardcore analysis, and he just conclued after 2 hours that less than 6 units / minut from a protoss player mean colossi on the way... It was just hilarious...

He just ALWAYS give examples of BW, and he think it gives him credibility.

He just don't anderstand that it's not the same game, and he lives in the past.

On May 06 2011 02:33 VorcePA wrote:


Yeah, and this is why progamers ask him to analyze his replays and why he's friends with a massive amounts of them. Oh, wait.

Day[9] has an understanding of the game very similar to that of a progamer, because all strategy games, and most things in life have the same core concepts. Figuring out weaknesses to play, where to improve, tweaking redundancy out of your game -- all of these are applicable to SC1, BW, SC2, Age of Empires, Warhammer, Axis and Allies, and Chess.

On May 06 2011 00:31 ZealotKiller wrote:


The thing is, Day9 has been a progamer for 12 years. For sure, he won't know the current state of the game as much as the progamers, but his experience is far good enough to be able to comprehend that strategies will emerge to make things happen. Take Spanishiwa's build that might not be totally refined yet, and that may be the future of ZvT, where you don't even need that much scouting. Thnking Day9 knows less about the game isn't completely wrong, since he can't follow the trends as much, but he knows his stuff and knows more than certain progamers for being one for 12 years. His experience in progaming transpires from BW to SC2. We cannot put commentators on a pedestral over progamers, but Day9 isn't only a commentator : He is Day9, the man who studies the game and plays as much as he can, and is much better than almost any commentators.

On May 06 2011 02:42 Leavzou wrote:


The pros are actually at a level of knowledge that day9 can't keep with. It might be true a few mouths ago, but now he is just outclassed

On May 06 2011 02:05 Leavzou wrote:


When you hear analysis from Idra or HuK, it's just freaking obvious that Day9 for example has absolutly noe clue about starcraft 2 in high level.

I Loved the 3 videos of day9, when he said it was hardcore analysis, and he just conclued after 2 hours that less than 6 units / minut from a protoss player mean colossi on the way... It was just hilarious...

On May 06 2011 01:06 Bobster wrote:
Watched the Mana vs Naama game 3 because of the interview.

So good.

On May 05 2011 01:55 Drazzyo wrote:
this interview reminds me of when he was going buck wild in his balance/imbalance argument with idrA. my heart said day9 was right but idrA made a good point about nscouting being so difficult

On May 06 2011 03:52 artanis2 wrote:


All you've proven here is that you don't know the metagame?

On May 06 2011 06:44 Shiladie wrote:


since that argument I've lost some faith in day9, he failed to bring up any valid argument points, or lacking being able to do so admit to current observations.
I enjoy him as a caster and as an entertainer, but from this and other recent observations, I'm beginning to see what other pros have said about him having lost his edge in top end game analysis.

It's not a fault of his beyond that he doesn't play at the pro level anymore, if he were to get back into playing, I think he'd be able to bring more to the table in relation to this.

On May 06 2011 16:03 asteroid1 wrote:
day9 is extremely narcissistic

I don't think anyone understands that he has a niche following and doesn't really appeal to the mainstream. He basically just fits this role of super pumped nerd that loves to hear his own voice and ideas.

As long as day9 is a main caster only nerds will watch. Tastosis has a lot more mainstream appeal than day9 / anyone. I can't stand day 9 at all, when he first started doing shows (sc:bw) and had maybe 100 viewers it was okay but the ego is really affecting him and he honestly thinks he is better than the pros in these tournaments. He's like secretly super insecure too and at every point must mention how much better he is than X.

On May 06 2011 16:07 Obaten wrote:


Wow because I haven't read that on 4chan before >_> http://archive.no-ip.org/v/thread/91855635

Thanks for playing dude.

On May 06 2011 16:09 asteroid1 wrote:


Just cause it isn't original, doesn't make it false.

On May 06 2011 10:43 Zeke50100 wrote:
Day[9] disagreeing that Zerg cannot scout is indicative of his lack of top-level knowledge? What? The argument on SOTG wasn't rocket science; it involved incredibly basic knowledge that any person with any amount of logic could come up with arguments for. What's even more hilarious is that tons of non-top level Zergs flock to go against him just because IdrA said it, when they hardly hold any of the "credibility" they hold so dear in the first place. Playing at a top level is not synonymous with understanding the game, nor are they dependent on each other. Why bring it up in a topic purely dedicated to an interview of him?

I really love how Blizzard has been appreciating pretty much everybody who works for SC2. It shows that they aren't completely heartless jerks, even if the end goal of the corporation is money

On May 06 2011 16:26 GunSec wrote:
I am just wondering if Day[9] has a college degree and what would he do if he wouldn't shoutcast? Maths maybe ?

On May 06 2011 16:37 shindigs wrote:
Whether or not Day[9] is right about the state of balance, I don't see how having his attitude of "disregard balance, acquire fund and understanding" is detrimental to the game at all. He has an amazing attitude and personality that at the very least, keeps me entertained every night at 7pm PST. Community is a bunch of hipsters imo if they care about what casters other people listen to.

On May 05 2011 01:27 Callanish wrote:
I'ts so awesome of Blizzard to actively promote eSports and supporting one of our dearest community members,so big props to them :D Amazing interview, and it really made me appreciate how much work goes into the dailies.

On May 06 2011 17:14 brum wrote:

They aren't supporting esports. They are supporting sc2.

On May 06 2011 17:08 Day[9] wrote:
<3 u all ^__^

On May 05 2011 01:32 AlBundy wrote:
Wow thanks for the link, I love Day9.

Some interesting info there:



I know some people are doubting Day9's legitimacy, and not aknowledging his views about the game. That is quite deplorable imho Even if he doesn't play in tournaments, he has a better understanding of the game than a lot of top players, thats undeniable.

On May 05 2011 08:43 Qzy wrote:It really shined through last sotg where IdrA slaughtered Day9 in his inexperience.

On May 05 2011 23:38 loveeholicce wrote:


How is it undeniable? He doesn't play anymore, I dont see how you could think he knows the game better than pro players who make a living from the game. Day9 is awesome but some people get carried away

On May 05 2011 01:55 Drazzyo wrote:
this interview reminds me of when he was going buck wild in his balance/imbalance argument with idrA. my heart said day9 was right but idrA made a good point about nscouting being so difficult

On May 05 2011 01:32 AlBundy wrote:
Wow thanks for the link, I love Day9.

Some interesting info there:



I know some people are doubting Day9's legitimacy, and not aknowledging his views about the game. That is quite deplorable imho Even if he doesn't play in tournaments, he has a better understanding of the game than a lot of top players, thats undeniable.

On May 06 2011 23:45 Ifrit wrote:

Incontrol: Idra, what was the weakest race in BW?
Idra: Terran
Incontrol: And what race did you play in BW?
Idra: Terran


People wondering should let TLO and Day9 host the "Imbalanced"-Show. If you're eager to receive somewhat unbiased results in a balance-oriented discussion, random players are the most qualified to do so. But in the end, it's just the dev-team at Blizzard who's actually able to do this, because they can base their decisions on myriads of facts and decide scientifically instead of based on emotions, which is exactly what Idra did/does.

On May 06 2011 23:52 eiger wrote:


Your game knowledge is not measured by your competition results.

If it was, then the game knowledge of Roger Federer's coach would be zero.

Stop making this fundamental mistake.

Sorry for bolding out, but the point needs to be hammered home with some people.

On May 07 2011 00:48 ati wrote:

Yeah but they were both right.
Idra said: everything I tried, and everything I can imagine, did (wouldn't) work.
Day9 response was basically: is everything that you can imagine really everything that exists?

On May 07 2011 01:32 War Horse wrote:

How can Idra seriously believe Terran was the weakest race? Idra confuses weakness with difficulty to play. Terran was the most demanding mechanical and strategic race in BW, but many would argue that played optimally, it was the best. So many of the best players of the game played Terran - Flash, Nada, Oov, Boxer, etc

There is no doubt in BW that Protoss was the easiest race to play and Terran was the hardest, but no one argued that P was overpowered and T underpowered. In fact, at the top levels, its often Protoss that has the weakest showings.

On May 07 2011 02:02 mikyaJ wrote:

No IdrA was right. Day9 might also be right.



At the peak of competition, Terran essentially had the highest skill ceiling, and therefore the absolute best players in the worlds were Terrans a lot of the time, because the players were rewarded the most for playing the best i.e. most of the time, the best Terran player was better than the best Zerg player was better than the best Protoss player. However the foreign scene that IdrA was home to was no where near this level of play, and therefore, Protoss, considered the easiest race, did very well. If you're not at the peak level of play, he believed (and there was merit to this) that if there were equally skilled Protoss, Terran, and Zerg players, the Terran would lose out of all of them.

On May 05 2011 23:44 eviltomahawk wrote:
However, I suspect that he has taken quite a few higher-level math courses at USC.

On May 06 2011 10:43 Zeke50100 wrote:
Day[9] disagreeing that Zerg cannot scout is indicative of his lack of top-level knowledge? What? The argument on SOTG wasn't rocket science; it involved incredibly basic knowledge that any person with any amount of logic could come up with arguments for. What's even more hilarious is that tons of non-top level Zergs flock to go against him just because IdrA said it, when they hardly hold any of the "credibility" they hold so dear in the first place. Playing at a top level is not synonymous with understanding the game, nor are they dependent on each other. Why bring it up in a topic purely dedicated to an interview of him?

I really love how Blizzard has been appreciating pretty much everybody who works for SC2. It shows that they aren't completely heartless jerks, even if the end goal of the corporation is money

On May 06 2011 06:44 Shiladie wrote:
since that argument I've lost some faith in day9, he failed to bring up any valid argument points, or lacking being able to do so admit to current observations.
I enjoy him as a caster and as an entertainer, but from this and other recent observations, I'm beginning to see what other pros have said about him having lost his edge in top end game analysis.

It's not a fault of his beyond that he doesn't play at the pro level anymore, if he were to get back into playing, I think he'd be able to bring more to the table in relation to this.

On May 07 2011 00:48 ati wrote:

Yeah but they were both right.
Idra said: everything I tried, and everything I can imagine, did (wouldn't) work.
Day9 response was basically: is everything that you can imagine really everything that exists?

On May 07 2011 04:24 Lysenko wrote:


My feeling about that discussion was that he was trying to make a distinction between imbalance and other types of design issues that was so subtle that everyone, including IdrA, missed it. His argument was: having to make a coin-flip decision at the start of the game doesn't mean playing Zerg puts you at a long-term disadvantage in terms of likelihood of winning, it just takes the control out of your hands to some extent for any given game. IdrA hates this because he wants to be in control of the game from start to end. Day9's view is "What you want is not the game they designed, and you might be able to find a way around it given enough time and creativity, so what's the problem?"

It's the same kind of thing as his "no such thing as a counter" argument, which everyone misinterprets -- his point is simply that you can win the game with a suboptimal unit composition, not that there isn't an optimal composition available.

In each case, Day9's position is that it's useful to think of the game his way because it leaves you more free to explore possibilities that you might have ruled out prematurely, and I think that's at the core of how he analyzes the game.



He tweeted yesterday that he'll be free to play a LOT more starting June 1, and it will be interesting to see whether and how this affects his view of the game.

On May 07 2011 02:00 loveeholicce wrote:


Yes it does, and this is nothing like Tennis, although Roger Federers coach was probably a tennis player, whether amateur or professional, so he does know about Tennis.

Sorry, but game knowledge IS based on how much you play. It's not based on results directly, but results themselves are based on how good you are and how much you play. Correlation / causation kind of thing. Thing with starcraft is it can be deceptively simple. You can look at all the pro games you want but unless you're actually actively playing the game you won't have the same extent of understanding, not even close. Day9 is a good player, way better than the average person but to think his knowledge is better than a pro players knowledge is absolutely ridiculous. You need to play the game at a high level to understand it at that level. The overarching RTS concepts that day9 brings are excellent, and it makes sense because he was once himself a amateur / pro player, but about starcraft 2 specifically he doesnt have the knowledge the professionals have because he doesn't play it as much as they do, which leads to him saying things that are often wrong like telling Idra to get 20 infestors in a lategame ZvP while every other state of the game pro agreed they should be supplement units used in small numbers

On May 07 2011 02:02 mikyaJ wrote:

No IdrA was right. Day9 might also be right.



At the peak of competition, Terran essentially had the highest skill ceiling, and therefore the absolute best players in the worlds were Terrans a lot of the time, because the players were rewarded the most for playing the best i.e. most of the time, the best Terran player was better than the best Zerg player was better than the best Protoss player. However the foreign scene that IdrA was home to was no where near this level of play, and therefore, Protoss, considered the easiest race, did very well. If you're not at the peak level of play, he believed (and there was merit to this) that if there were equally skilled Protoss, Terran, and Zerg players, the Terran would lose out of all of them.

On May 07 2011 05:51 War Horse wrote:

You should tell that to all the BW coaches and managers that they know nothing about the game because they don't play at a super high level anymore.

On May 07 2011 06:09 Ballistixz wrote:
day 9s inexperience in SC2 really showed during that state of the game debate he had with idra about balance.

On May 07 2011 06:09 Ballistixz wrote:
i know idra is a pretty fucking stuck up person, but he makes good points. anyone that has played a zerg knows that it really is a guessing game. anyone that has played zerg knows that they have to play defensively the entire game and react to whatever the opponent is doing. 99% of the time it is usually terran or protoss that are extremely aggressive and zerg needs to react to that. and like idra mentioned one of zergs main defenses, the spine crawler, simply takes to long to build.

it also takes eons for a zerg to get to lair tech and make 2nd tier units where as a terran or toss can get to tier 2 in nearly half the time on just 1 base.

On May 07 2011 05:53 War Horse wrote:

So Terran was the weakest because all the players sucked?

Its like saying "Terran is the weakest at Gold". Who cares, balance doesn't even matter at that level., and the game isn't balanced towards that level.

Terran was never, ever the weakest race, and for Idra to think so is laughable.

I starting watching you analisis show before i ever really got into competitive play. After watching EVERY single one of your vids in 3 months, i started played and ranks straight to silver in 3v3 up to rank 21, after my second match (in 3v3) I think that having played a total of only like 20 matches i have done very well. (please note that i drilled while watching the daylies, so i have a good amount of timing.)

On May 07 2011 05:53 War Horse wrote:

So Terran was the weakest because all the players sucked?

Its like saying "Terran is the weakest at Gold". Who cares, balance doesn't even matter at that level., and the game isn't balanced towards that level.

Terran was never, ever the weakest race, and for Idra to think so is laughable.

On May 05 2011 08:43 Qzy wrote:
Who cares tho - I don't see him as a community person rather than a person not able to discuss balance or have a good view on the game.

Hopefully average Joe starts worshiping good players, in stead of commentators, such that SC2 can move into a new phase2.

It really shined through last sotg where IdrA slaughtered Day9 in his inexperience.

User was temp banned for this post.

On May 07 2011 18:07 FIRETRUCK wrote:


Wow... Can't believe you're getting banned for that.

As soon as anyone expresses anti mainstream opinions they're silenced. Lol.

On May 07 2011 18:07 FIRETRUCK wrote:
As soon as anyone expresses anti mainstream opinions they're silenced. Lol.

On May 07 2011 06:09 Ballistixz wrote:
day 9s inexperience in SC2 really showed during that state of the game debate he had with idra about balance.

idra was 100% correct on all points he made. day 9 was right on some points to, but his inexperience just showed drastically. he barely had anything to say most of the time.

On May 08 2011 02:55 Vul wrote:


You guys are taking a conversation with no replays and hence no context and trying to extrapolate all sorts of personal judgments about both Idra and Day9. Scouting is game specific. I don't even play at a high level, and I can tell you that nobody scouts exactly the same way in each match up, regardless of what they see initially. The only way for us to really evaluate their claims is if Idra presented a replay in which he found scouting literally impossible, and then they analyzed it together. Anything other than that is just speculation based on our biases.

I'm more inclined to buy Day9 over Idra because I have a lot of respect for Day9's skill as a player and analyst. Idra kind of makes it his thing to complain about balance, seemingly no matter what, so I have to take that with a grain of salt.

On May 08 2011 02:55 Vul wrote:


You guys are taking a conversation with no replays and hence no context and trying to extrapolate all sorts of personal judgments about both Idra and Day9. Scouting is game specific. I don't even play at a high level, and I can tell you that nobody scouts exactly the same way in each match up, regardless of what they see initially. The only way for us to really evaluate their claims is if Idra presented a replay in which he found scouting literally impossible, and then they analyzed it together. Anything other than that is just speculation based on our biases.

I'm more inclined to buy Day9 over Idra because I have a lot of respect for Day9's skill as a player and analyst. Idra kind of makes it his thing to complain about balance, seemingly no matter what, so I have to take that with a grain of salt.

And by the way, I think Incontrol really nailed this when he asked Idra which race was underpowered in BW.

On May 08 2011 04:07 awesomoecalypse wrote:
Day9 isn't biased towards any one race. That alone makes his opinions more valuable than IdrA's, who has a massive conflict of interest. NO Zerg pro can be trusted when it comes to their opinions of race balance as it relates to Zerg, for the same reason we ignore MVP when he complains that Terran is UP.

On May 08 2011 04:07 awesomoecalypse wrote:
Day9 isn't biased towards any one race. That alone makes his opinions more valuable than IdrA's, who has a massive conflict of interest. NO Zerg pro can be trusted when it comes to their opinions of race balance as it relates to Zerg, for the same reason we ignore MVP when he complains that Terran is UP.

On May 07 2011 07:25 mikyaJ wrote:
in the beginning Terran was definitely the weakest race until BoxeR showed that you can be creative, and used units that were "useless", so your conclusion is just wrong. And guess what some people are saying about Zerg now? They just have to be creative -_-

On May 07 2011 15:27 infinity2k9 wrote:

Uhh Mellamojay, the devs don't think like this. And they do patch and change things in the short term. So what Day9 says about it is basically irrelevant. The game isn't going to be left to balance itself for better or for worse.

In regards to Day[9] not wanting to talk balance, this is also false. He stated that he did not want to talk balance in an emotionally driven, short conversation. Day[9] realizes that, just like the devs, balance discussions require an immense amount of time and FACTS in order to be productive, otherwise they are just unproductive QQ.

On May 09 2011 22:00 womanman wrote:
juts wondering but am i the only person who finds day 9 rather obnoxious in casts. i mean his knowledge being top notch not only for casters but also players in general is undisputable but his fake laughs and pretentious hm well "personality"? or what u wanan call it just get me so angry. well littl ebit off topic but just wnated to know whether im weird or any1 else also feels this way

On May 09 2011 22:00 womanman wrote:
juts wondering but am i the only person who finds day 9 rather obnoxious in casts. i mean his knowledge being top notch not only for casters but also players in general is undisputable but his fake laughs and pretentious hm well "personality"? or what u wanan call it just get me so angry. well littl ebit off topic but just wnated to know whether im weird or any1 else also feels this way

On May 08 2011 04:10 awesomoecalypse wrote:


this. IdrA's history of balance whining, even in the most balanced RTS ever designed, speaks for itself

On May 08 2011 03:07 Ballistixz wrote:



what? you dont need replays for that. day 9 has been and always will be a in depth and deep person, so the way he learns things is by deep analysis. its just the way he is. but the fact of the matter is you DO NOT have to go that deep.

going into the scouting example again lets look at other races. a toss can just walk a probe in a zergs base and scout everything he is doing. a scv can walk into a zergs base and scout everything he is doing. now a zerg drone? try walking a drone into a terrans base. if it cant magically walk thru walls then a drone will never just up and walk into a terrans base.

same for toss. they can just wall and a drone will never get inside there base. now lets go further into the game. terran gets scan. he can scout ur entire base with the click of a fucking button. zerg has to move a insanely slow unit that costs SUPPLY into the terrans base. 3 marines will be able to snipe it off before it gets to see anything majorly important. and guess what? u loose some supply in the proccess.

for a overlord to be effective it needs speed upgrade which costs minerals AND gas. or u would have to morph it into a overseer which requires lair, then u have to morph it after lair is done which costs 100 minerals and 100 gas.

now lets look at tosses scouting. they got observers. a very good scouting unit that is also cloaked.

zergs scouting abilities is not nearly as good as the other 2 races.


also how are u able to buy more into day 9s based on his skill when idras skill is billions of times better then day 9s? that makes no sense. to say idra doesnt know as much as day 9 is also stupid. the guy plays every single day for hours a day, he knows the game like the back of his hand. he isnt less knowledgeable then day 9 is.

no one is denying that idra is pretty much a whiner and a zerg tear shedder, but the guy has reasons and good points to make with it. he isnt some random smoe that cries imbalanced for no reason and no evidence to back it up.

On May 11 2011 03:50 Belphegor13 wrote:


Hold your horses.

From the time zerg gets zerglings and until protoss gets observers, protoss has no way to scout zerg directly. Also, observers cost gas and robotics build time, they're not exactly free. Zerg always has overlords.

Scans delays your income, as you must know, and zergs can actually hide their tech and units to make terrans waste more scans. If you place every tech building beside your main hatchery, well of course he's going to scout it. That's like placing your 4 warp gates by your ramp...

And zerg actually has ridiculously good map knowledge in the later stages of the game, via overlords and creep spread.

It's not as simple as you seem to believe.

On May 26 2011 12:35 Eleaven wrote:




It's much simpler than you seem to believe though.

How many abusive things can protoss do, now how many of these each require their own unique response from the zerg? (protip: basically everything)

Now flip this around, how many different things can the zerg do, that cant be solved with sentry, stalker zealot?

See why zerg needs scouting, and protoss isn't as reliant on it? your basic units provide all the protection you need as toss. As Z, you need to know whats coming to prepare a specific response.

On May 06 2011 17:19 Sandro wrote:

Its quite honestly the same thing to be honest.