Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums - RDF feed
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
I'm just wondering what is in your avatar?I can't quite make it out.
was wondering too, but figured it's from starcraft , looks like a panda o.O
LiL KiLLa wrote on Sun, 07 June 2009 17:21 Mind if I use that as my avatar?
ErroR wrote on Sun, 07 June 2009 14:06 was wondering too, but figured it's from starcraft , looks like a panda o.O what the hell kind of pandas have you seen, that sounds like a nightmare
liquidv2 wrote on Sun, 07 June 2009 15:40 ErroR wrote on Sun, 07 June 2009 14:06 was wondering too, but figured it's from starcraft , looks like a panda o.O what the hell kind of pandas have you seen, that sounds like a nightmare Nightmare panda's look like this:
CarrierII wrote on Sun, 07 June 2009 15:18 LiL KiLLa wrote on Sun, 07 June 2009 17:21 Mind if I use that as my avatar? You should! Tassadar in the pic is actually looking at a monitor logged onto Renforums and deleting trolls.
nikki6ixx wrote on Sun, 07 June 2009 16:04 liquidv2 wrote on Sun, 07 June 2009 15:40 ErroR wrote on Sun, 07 June 2009 14:06 was wondering too, but figured it's from starcraft , looks like a panda o.O what the hell kind of pandas have you seen, that sounds like a nightmare Nightmare panda's look like this: I lol'd
CarrierII wrote on Sun, 07 June 2009 11:19 Tassadar from StarCraft, you fool!
Everyone knows Battlecruisers > Carriers.
Carrier rush.
CarrierII wrote on Mon, 08 June 2009 01:48 Carrier rush. Assuming equal (Or at least similar) numbers, BattleCruisers put carriers to shame. Intercepters deal poor damage to high-armor targets like BattleCruisers, and as if that wasn't enough, Yamato Cannon decides the battle before it begins. Take the example of 12 carriers vs 12 BCs; Two BattleCruisers Yamatoing a carrier is enough to destroy it, which means 12 v 12 instantly becomes 12 v 6.
You've got 12 BC when I've got 6 carriers at ~15ish minutes into the game? (Well, I can't play that fast, but my elder brother could demonstrate the principle)
CarrierII wrote on Mon, 08 June 2009 03:50 You've got 12 BC when I've got 6 carriers at ~15ish minutes into the game? (Well, I can't play that fast, but my elder brother could demonstrate the principle) In order to get 6 carriers out in 15 minutes, you will have to have teched straight to it and build absolutely no other forces. If that's your strategy, you won't get very far past your Stargate. Note that faggoty $$$FASTEST$MONEY$MAPS$$$ don't count. That's not StarCraft, that's AIDS impersonating StarCraft.
True, we can get it to function against the AI quite well, but human vs human games are a whole different ballgame.
CarrierII wrote on Mon, 08 June 2009 05:11 True, we can get it to function against the AI quite well, but human vs human games are a whole different ballgame. The AI is silly. You can take on seven terran comps alone with Protoss because they let you pump out Dark Templar before they can build any detectors. It's a strange combination of sad and funny to watch 7 bases be destroyed by one unit each.
Just to prove my point, here's what happens when a Protoss player tries to tech straight for carriers against a competent Terran player. http://www.gomtv.net/classics3/vod/750 Note that this strategy is actually (Somewhat) viable here, because of the size of the map and because of the strategy employed by the players (Flash is known to turtle quite a bit. Fast carriers when executed correctly are something of an "anti-turtle" build). Even with how delayed the comsat was already, the carriers still get discovered before they're ready to act, giving Flash (The Terran player) ample time to counter. If you're wondering why Reach (The Protoss player) went for this somewhat odd build, here's the replay/commentary from the game immediately preceeding, where Flash turtles very well stopping any shuttle/reaver action cold, and very effectively blocking any intel gathering with observers: http://www.gomtv.net/classics3/vod/749 Needless to say, there was no game 3.
Did you ever switch to that other avatar. Cuz if you did, it doesn't look like it on my computer.
Muad Dib15 wrote on Mon, 29 June 2009 02:44 Did you ever switch to that other avatar. Cuz if you did, it doesn't look like it on my computer.
my guess is he didn't
ErroR wrote on Mon, 29 June 2009 14:58 my guess is he didn't I know Just wondering why he didnt yet
Toggle Spoiler Dover wrote on Mon, 29 June 2009 01:38 Just to prove my point, here's what happens when a Protoss player tries to tech straight for carriers against a competent Terran player. http://www.gomtv.net/classics3/vod/750 Note that this strategy is actually (Somewhat) viable here, because of the size of the map and because of the strategy employed by the players (Flash is known to turtle quite a bit. Fast carriers when executed correctly are something of an "anti-turtle" build). Even with how delayed the comsat was already, the carriers still get discovered before they're ready to act, giving Flash (The Terran player) ample time to counter. If you're wondering why Reach (The Protoss player) went for this somewhat odd build, here's the replay/commentary from the game immediately preceeding, where Flash turtles very well stopping any shuttle/reaver action cold, and very effectively blocking any intel gathering with observers: http://www.gomtv.net/classics3/vod/749 Needless to say, there was no game 3. I dislike professional Starcraft because unless both players can unit spam (IE click) equally fast, strategy is all but irrelevant. As for the avatar, I never received any word of Lil KiLLa saying he didn't mind me using it.
I still wait...till I see the moving tassadar head in your avatar
No I can't, the file is too big.
ErroR wrote on Mon, 29 June 2009 20:34 har har har Sorry for dubble post (below) Forum gave submit error but did submitted it anyway :S
CarrierII wrote on Mon, 29 June 2009 10:37 Toggle Spoiler Dover wrote on Mon, 29 June 2009 01:38 Just to prove my point, here's what happens when a Protoss player tries to tech straight for carriers against a competent Terran player. http://www.gomtv.net/classics3/vod/750 Note that this strategy is actually (Somewhat) viable here, because of the size of the map and because of the strategy employed by the players (Flash is known to turtle quite a bit. Fast carriers when executed correctly are something of an "anti-turtle" build). Even with how delayed the comsat was already, the carriers still get discovered before they're ready to act, giving Flash (The Terran player) ample time to counter. If you're wondering why Reach (The Protoss player) went for this somewhat odd build, here's the replay/commentary from the game immediately preceeding, where Flash turtles very well stopping any shuttle/reaver action cold, and very effectively blocking any intel gathering with observers: http://www.gomtv.net/classics3/vod/749 Needless to say, there was no game 3. I dislike professional Starcraft because unless both players can unit spam (IE click) equally fast, strategy is all but irrelevant. Untrue. In fact, these two players have about equal Macro Strategy is far from irrelevant, especially in the games I posted here. Watch the first video (Game 2). Reach (Protoss) knows Flash (Terran) will turtle and come out with a huge army once he maxes out his supply (A strategy). In response, Reach (Protoss) goes for fast carriers, to counter Flash's (Terran's) turtling (A counter-strategy, largely unused otherwise). Flash (Terran) is wise to his shit thanks to a Comsat scan, to after a brief period of pumping turrets to buy time, he produces a huge amount of Goliaths and a small amount of tanks, rather than small amount of Goliaths and large amount of tanks typical to Terran VS Protoss builds (Counter-counter-strategy). Good strategy/counter-strategy is what won him the game. How well you can micro/macro, or what you call "click-spamming" is important, but only to the extent that you can control what's going on in the game. You can click as fast as you want but it won't save you if you make all the wrong decisions. That is what buries Reach (Protoss) in Game 1 (The second video). He spends too much time trying to Reaver-drop, arbiter-drop and gather intel against a basically impeneitrable set of turrets. What he should have done instead is either find a weak point in Flash's (Terran's) defenses, try to out-macro Flash (Terran) by getting more expansions sooner, or out-micro him by winning a big fight and pressing his advantage. What lost him the game was bad strategy that was poorly executed, not clicking any slower. I really hope you (And others like you) would start to shed the image of professional StarCraft as a clickfest. Certainly that's a part of it, but to say that all you need to do to win in StarCraft is click faster is to say that all you need to do in professional basketball is rebound better, or dribble faster. It's a small part is a large, complex game.
I demand a response, CarrierII. Have you watched the videos yet?
Yeah yeah triple post blah blah. Here's more evidence to prove my point. The same Terran player (Flash) facing a much more competent Protoss opponent (Stork, who at the time of the match was ranked 6 spots higher than Flash) in the GOMTV Star Invitationals finals. Game 1 on a map that heavily favors carrier harassment against Terran. Flash, again, making excellent use of comsat to detect the early stargates quickly (Even though they are placed in unconventional spots), and good use of goliaths to bring them down, much to the chagrin of Stork fans in the audience who can be heard crying out loudly above the commentators every time a carrier gets downed. Inb4 clickspam complaining. These are two top-rated StarCraft players who both consistently pull equally-high APM (Actions Per Minute) above 300. This is all strategy, no clickspam. Seriously, watch the damn matches. You have to be very harderned not to crack a smile to see Flash crapping all over Stork's Carriers like this, especially on a map that so heavily favors Protoss using Carriers. Edit: And here, Flash (Terran) pulls it off again on game 4 on the same Carrier-heavy map (Katrina), with the same end result. Lesson: Fast carriers fail against competent Terran players, and of course garbage against Zerg. Fast Tech is a gimmick for when facing bad players or the AI.
For fast tech: CarrierII wrote on Mon, 08 June 2009 13:11 True, we can get it to function against the AI quite well, but human vs human games are a whole different ballgame. As for the click fest, the strategies chosen only have meaning if both players have roughly equal APM, else the strategy chosen is irrelevant, the player with the lower APM would be overrun, even if his strategy was better.
CarrierII wrote on Thu, 02 July 2009 10:11 As for the click fest, the strategies chosen only have meaning if both players have roughly equal APM, else the strategy chosen is irrelevant, the player with the lower APM would be overrun, even if his strategy was better. Untrue. And even if it was, you say it as if it's a bad thing. Part of the appeal in watching Flash is the absolute precision with which he controls the battlefield. Not one unit out of place, not one factor or SCV sitting idle. It's like driving really fast in a race. Sure, it helps, but you also need to be driving in the right direction (Or in the case of StarCraft, making the right decisions and "clicking" on the right things in the right places). You'll notice in all the videos I've posted, Flash doesn't win by attrition and out-macroing his opponent--These aren't hour-and-a-half games, where it truely comes down to who can produce more units faster and fund them all.
CarrierII needs a tassadar gif img... that can be used