|
|
|
Wow that is real unlucky... Sorry mate :/
|
That really sucks. Why did Blizzard think it was stalemate anyhow?
|
OMFG the hatch had 2 hp left. I feel for u.
|
wow.... thats brutal >.< better luck next time I guess
|
The stalemate detection activates when it sense no one mining for a certain amount of time if I remember right. There might be other conditions, but that is at least one of them.
I have a similar story from beta (before stalemate existed) where I was on that shitty lava map they used to have playing a PvT we get into an elimination race he kills my nexus, I hide pylons and have a much larger army, I saw him rebuilding CC in my main and needed to go kill it, but he was running around wiping out all my pylons so I had to hold my ground, killed his entire army, but by the time I got to his CC because I had to wait he floated it away. I killed all his army and had map control, but no workers or money, he had a command center but couldn't do shit because I was camping every expo. We sat there for 5 minutes and talked, and I ended up just leaving.
They have a lot of stupidly implemented things in sc2. The stalemate detection should take a LOT longer to kick in, or have better criterion. The revealing players with no nexcus/cc/hatch is just stupid. It's goal is to prevent pylon hiding homosexuality in games, but it actually just ruins elimination races and is just really annoying.
|
I thought one of the conditions for breaking a stalemate was doing damage to an enemy unit or structure... what the heck :|
|
Dont you get a 5 minute warning?
You couldnt kill any of his buildings in 5 minutes?
|
On August 23 2011 02:20 Backpack wrote: Dont you get a 5 minute warning?
You couldnt kill any of his buildings in 5 minutes? He only had one zergling...it's gonna take a while to kill everything lol
|
When they announced the stalemate detector it was quite obviously flawed. So flawed it shocked me they would set it up this way.
|
Seems silly that it doesn't realize if damage is still being inflicted = not a stalemate.
:/
|
|
On August 23 2011 02:54 krndandaman wrote: they should make it so that they have to first fulfill the requirement of having no attacking units before announcing stalemate for not mining for a while. that wouldn't work because if player 1 only has ground units and no mining ability and player 2 floats a building to the corner, it's still a stalemate. I like the idea of no damage being inflicted as an additional requirement to stalemate.
|
You rage over such boring game ?That is some serious I-have-to-win issue And at any rate,you won,so you rage just over some number in ladder?
|
|
Calgary25951 Posts
Shouldn't one of the criteria be nothing is taking damage?
|
On August 23 2011 04:06 Chill wrote: Shouldn't one of the criteria be nothing is taking damage? Yes! If a building it under attack there obviously isn't a stalemate. Dunno why Blizzard implemented it this way. Sorry OP..that's brutal :/
|
Sadly it's not taking damage, its building destroyed. I think it's to prevent someone from infinitely stalling a game (i.e. zealot versus 1-ling, the ling constant hits a building to stall the game forever), but even then its a bit silly.
Stale Mate (From Liquipedia) Generate income, Produce a unit, Construct a building, Research an upgrade, or Destroy an enemy building.
|
Calgary25951 Posts
Ah I guess that makes sense. I never thought about one Muta flying around and dealing one shot worth of damage to stall a game forever.
|
|
|
|