Humanity expanding their territories with colonies in space, only to be met by a technologically superior super-intelligent species of aliens, with threatened extinction by an insect-like hive-mind controlling a swarm of genetically mutated monsters?
No one gives a fuck about originality, it's about who does it better in the end. It's like saying Motorola invented the first real cellphone so Motorola beats Sony Ericsson, Nokia, etc. no matter what. You guys are idiots. Starcraft > WH40k.
@DeeStylistic Your definition, if I may call it a definition, of who "does it better" is quite narrow. Starcraft and Starcraft 2 are far superior than Warhammers game counterparts, theres no question. However Warhammer's universe, lore, faction development, literary works, overall atmosphere and depiction are far superior to starcrafts. In the end you can't compare the two because one is primarily a PC series whereas the other is a hobby/tabletop game. They are both good in their own respects.
Why the fuck the mine at 0:07 has such a big delay and moves just as the goon is issued to move away from it? It makes totally no sence! Maybe some old bug/setting in an older version of SC?!
Pft, half the stuff in this video is just Boxer abusing Terran imba like the cheap bastard he is. All glory to the Emperor and all that, credit where credit is due for his role in popularizing SC, but honestly, most of Boxer's skill lies in figuring out the cheapest possible ways in which to use units and then practicing those uses to death. Entertaining? Only if you like watching cheapness.
And the proof of that is that he's not particularly good at SC2, since it's a much more balanced game
@Zidana123 just from what i hear from pro-gamers, seeing that starcraft didnt have a balance patch after 2009 which btw had very minor balance changes, win/loss ratios were very close to 50%
SC2 on the other hand has had patches that drastically affected balance,unit functioning (removing abilities, changing tech paths of abilities, even removing units from the game entirely), win/loss ratios have been all over the place, what pro-gamers say
I've played sc1 since around 1997. I've personally seen these so-called balance patches. You're right. They had very minor balance changes. The game was imba at release and it was imba in 2009. There's massive bugs and inconsistancies that had never been addressed. Lemmie just bring up one issue. Terran and Zerg get notifications for building completion. Protoss do not. How then is such a game more balanced than a game with less bugs?
@Zidana123 thats a very minor issue and really would not affect gameplay, especially at higher levels since timings are so downpact. and yes i did play before 2009. in fact ive played since the release which was in 1998, so idk how you played from 1997...anyways let me put it in other words...It wasn't balanced based on 'a beats b which beats c', but rather that with proper control a variety of units could defeat a variety of other units. what league do you play in for sc2? be honest
@hithur Brood War was released in 1998. StarCraft was out in 97.
And balance doesn't mean either a beats b which beats c, or that with proper control a variety of untis could defeat a variety of other units. The balance -type- is irrelevant. All it means is that given two players of equal skill, game mechanics lead them to a 50/50 win/loss ratio.
It's not a minor issue, because it brings up a flaw in your argument about patches. You're saying that SC1 is more balanced simply -cont
@hithur cont because it has less patches? That doesn't mean the game is more balanced and thus required less patching. All it means is that Blizzard didn't care as much about the game. There's major bugs that exist in SC1 that were not fixed after over 10 years of being in release version. Things like units with 2 independant sprites getting stuck on ramps, Protoss not getting building complete notifications. Patrol loop causing units to travel at 300% speed, etc.
@Zidana123 you should do a little research, starcraft was released on march 31st, 1998, beta doesnt count since its..well...beta. once again you are just giving me examples of problems that have no effect on balance. i dont see how your argument is even valid since you have never played SC2.
@hithur My argument is perfectly valid because it has internal consistancy and logic, which I arrived at using my analytical skills. Whether or not I've played is irrelevant to the validity of my argument.
Let me give you an example. Person 1 has never played say, Command and Conquer. They have, however, done extensive research and watched dozens of hours of replays. Person 2 has played one game of C&C and done no other research. Are you saying That person 2 is more knowledable?
@hithur As to the date I was playing SC1 from, okay, I don't remember exactly what date I got it on. I remember playing it quite a while before BW came out though, and apparently I was off by a few months.
@hithur And incidentally I don't play SC2. Still waiting for the price to come down. I also don't see why the league I theoretically play in matters to the balance. If a game is well-balanced then it should tend towards 50% win/loss at all levels of play.
@Zidana123 the league you play in most definitely matters since someone in bronze league would not know how to use units to their full capacity, which is the only time balance comes into effect. thats why when people masters level or lower complain about inbalance, its bullshit since it was most likely their own mechanics that were at fault. once again i dont see how you can argue about this when you dont play the game.
@hithur "thats why when people masters level or lower complain about inbalance, its bullshit since it was most likely their own mechanics that were at fault."
And what % of total players are masters level or lower? That group -does- consititute the vast majority of all StarCraft players, do they not? Are you saying that their input is totally irrelevant simply because they're not the best of the best? Shouldn't the game be balanced for ALL players instead of a very small group?
@Zidana123 im saying there is no possible way to compare balance at all levels since there are too many variables involved. when looking at high level players, you remove all other variables from the equation that could skew how a win was acheived. if a game is balanced for the highest level of play, it will be balanced for all levels of play. im saying sc1 is more balanced than sc2.
@Zidana123 i was reffering to why a bronze league player loses as opposed to someone masters league or higher. your taking my statements out of context. i would say all high level players have similar understanding of the game and how to use units. wins and loses are determined by strategy, skill, or balance. there is a difference between that and mechanics.
@hithur "wins and loses are determined by strategy, skill, or balance. there is a difference between that and mechanics."
That statement is completely meaningless. A game IS the sum total of a series of mechanics. It's the way players use mechanics in the right time and place that determine STRATEGY. It's the ability of the player to use those mechanics effectivly that make up SKILL. And BALANCE is nothing more than the advantage that one races' mechanics have against another race.
@Zidana123 btw mechanics do not determine strategy. mechanics just means how efficiently you can implement your strategy. someone in bronze can have amazing strategic mindset but can have shitty mehcanics holding him back. its a combination of good mechanics and good strategy that make up a skilled player. i suggest you go to teamliquid and lurk around the forums there, you will probably get better answers there.
@hithur I'm talking about mechanics as in GAME mechanics. Unit health, attack speed, costs, movement rate, effective targets, bonus damage, that sort of thing. The mechanics are set for all players at all levels of play by the game engine itself and is immutable except through patches.
I'm not talking about what you're referring to as (PLAYER) mechanics, which is how well a player issues orders to their units/buildings to implement their will/strategy upon the game.
@hithur cont: What you've just said there is something like "there's a difference between oxygen, nitrogen, and the atmosphere." Sure, it's valid, but it's completely meaningless.
@Zidana123 "cont: What you've just said there is something like "there's a difference between oxygen, nitrogen, and the atmosphere." Sure, it's valid, but it's completely meaningless."
yes it would be meaningless if im saying all of them are elements, it doesnt matter what element they are. my statement is still true. you are just taking what i say out of context. once again.
@hithur "i would say all high level players have similar understanding of the game and how to use units."
I would say that's not the case. Let's take a look at say, Bisu. As we both know, Bisu basically is the father of Forge FE and the the corsair overlord snipe. Before Bisu, zerg early aggression was a nightmare for protoss, but no progamer could counter it as well as what Bisu did. Therefore, Bisu must have had a GREATER understanding of protoss and zerg units than other progamers.
@Zidana123 i did provide an example with the infestor buff and nerf. ZvP was 70/30 across all leagues post buff and now its 40/60 post nerf. i provided an explaination to but for some reason the comment never came through. the example of Bisu is not better understanding of the game, its just discoviefng a new startegy. Forge FE is pretty easily countered now that the metagame has evolved.
@hithur "i did provide an example with the infestor buff and nerf. ZvP was 70/30 across all leagues post buff and now its 40/60 post nerf."
Interesting now that you're claiming that ONE change to ONE unit is causing such a drastic change in win/loss ratio across all leagues, when previously you claimed that "im saying there is no possible way to compare balance at all levels since there are too many variables involved."
Which argument is it? You can't have it both ways.
@Zidana123 you said provide an example, i provided one. that doesnt mean there arent other balance issues out there. and yes this one change to the infestor had DRASTIC changes for the win/loss for that matchup. that is how imbalanced the infestor was just till a while ago. all zergs did was mass infestor and fungal and mindcontrol to win
@hithur Okay, let's say for the sake of argument that you're right. Up until a little while ago, all zerg had to do was mass infestor v protoss to win.
How do you know that this is a result of imbalance and not as a result of players not understanding the game enough to counter it? Your argument rests on the assumption that all progamers automatically have a 100% understanding of all game mechanics. We both know that they don't.
@Zidana123 because the metagame had enough time to evolve to the strategy but there was nothing that could be done. templars couldnt get close enough to feedback, since they would just be fungalled out of range, colossi couldnt get a shot off before they were mindcontrolled. you would know this if you played the game.
@hithur "because the metagame had enough time to evolve to the strategy but there was nothing that could be done."
But you're not a progamer. By your own argument that "thats why when people masters level or lower complain about inbalance, its bullshit since it was most likely their own mechanics that were at fault." you in fact do not understand the game enough to tell if the metagame has or hasn't had enough time to evolve.
@Zidana123 another example would be the 1/1/1 terran opening against protoss. at high levels of play it used to be a 70/30 favoring terran. even after the immortal range buff the build is extremely imbalance. the metagame has had sufficient time to evolve to the strategy but it is still imbalanced.
@Zidana123 i have played through 4 season of SC2 now and am playing at a high masters level. a third party would value my opinion over yours since you have no experience playing the game. you dont see many sports analyst that just went to school for broadcasting. most of them actually played the sport, which is why they have legitimate analyses. i can go up to any schmuck and ask him what he thinks of a baseball game but it wont be as reliable.
@hithur "a third party would value my opinion over yours since you have no experience playing the game."
Yes, your barely-supported opinion which has changed between about 4 different arguments now, first grouping master league players with bronze players and then grouping them with progamers, and first saying there's too many variables to determine balance as a result of one changed variable and then saying that one infestor change causes massive win/loss ratio changes. Right.
@Zidana123 i dont see how you are calling my arguments weak and saying im repeating what other people say when you acutally dont have any opinions for yourself. you have never actually played the game so all your basing your opinions on are what you read, what you hear commentators say and what you see on replays which isnt much since you cant possibly looking at all aspects of the match.
@hithur I'm calling your arguments weak because they're not internally consistant. You keep contradicting yourself in your claims. If you actually understood your own claims, then they should be internally consistant and not contradictory.
As for my opinions, they are my own. Unlike you I don't take the words of commentators, other players, or progamers as gospel. I look at the game mechanics and derive my opinions from what I see there.
@Zidana123 your lack of understanding /= contradiction on my part. but see you dont have opinions of your own. you never played the game. your basing your opinions on what other people have said. how can you look at game mechanics when YOU DONT PLAY? there is no way you can have an understanding of the game by watching replays and commentators. im providng examples of what i have seen in the actual game. i have just backed up my game experience with what progamers say.
@hithur "your lack of understanding /= contradiction on my part."
No, the contradictions in your own statements are self-evident. The flaws in logic and self-defeating arguments exist separate from the topic being discussed. Either there are too many variables to calculate the effect that one variable has on overall balance for all levels of play, as you claimed earlier, OR one variable like infestors can be clearly responsible for massive win/loss ratio changes, as you claim now.
@Zidana123 i said at lower levels there are too many variables to compare balance which is why balance can only be analzyed at higher levels since things like lack of mechanics and lack of unit knowledge play less of a part in wins/losses. christ, learn to comprehend what you read.
@hithur "christ, learn to comprehend what you read."
You're calling me out on my reading comprehension when you yourself couldn't comprehend that my argument wasn't to say that SC2 was perfectly balanced? That's a joke, right?
Let's run with your latest definition. It once again contradicts your earlier statements in that you cited a win/loss ratio at ALL LEVELS OF PLAY for your Infestor example, and not a win/loss ratio at the HIGHEST LEVELS OF PLAY.
@Zidana123 i also said before that if it is balanced at highest level of play it will be balanced it all levels of play. that works for imbalance as well. my argument is sound.
@hithur Now lemmie explain to you why things like, say, the building complete notice ISN'T a minor issue and in fact does point to Blizzard not caring whether SC1 is imba or not. First, let's get some precepts out of the way.
Any player, progamer included, has a limited number of things on which they can focus their attention on within the game at any given time. No one human can respond to and manage an infinite number of things simultaneously. Are we in agreement on this precept?
@Zidana123 building complete notice is irrelevent since if you are a good enough player, you should have enough game sense to know when a building you built is complete without beind reminded by a notice. i never look at building/unit complete notices because i always have a good idea when my buildings are complete. but yes no one can manage an infinite number of things. that is irrelelvent since there arent an infinite number of things in starcraft to manage.
@hithur "but yes no one can manage an infinite number of things. that is irrelelvent since there arent an infinite number of things in starcraft to manage."
Glad to see that we agree that all humans have limits when it comes to how many things they can focus on. Did I say or imply that there were an infinite number of things in StarCraft to manage? No. Once again you're emptily attempting to refute a point I did not make.
@hithur "building complete notice is irrelevent since if you are a good enough player, you should have enough game sense to know when a building you built is complete without beind reminded by a notice. i never look at building/unit complete notices because i always have a good idea when my buildings are complete."
In an ideal situation, yes. But are you going to go so far as to tell me you've never fucked up a build order? Go ahead and tell me you haven't, and you'll be lying.
@Zidana123 i have fucked up a build order. i dont get why building notice affects build orders. build orders go by supply and not by when buildings finish constructing. your analysis of game mechanics is not complete. you have never played the game therefore you would never have full understanding of the game mechanics.
@hithur "i have fucked up a build order. i dont get why building notice affects build orders."
So for the first time you've admitted that you don't understand something. The curious thing is that despite your claiming to understand the game more deeply than me, I understand this thing which you do not.
"your analysis of game mechanics is not complete."
Actually, it's quite complete. Moreso than yours if you don't understand a basic idea like how building notices affect build orders.
@hithur "you have never played the game therefore you would never have full understanding of the game mechanics."
If I've never played StarCraft 1, how would I know about things like Protoss not getting building completion announcements? Or that two-sprite units having broken pathfinding? Do you even understand that I'm talking about StarCraft 1 here, and not StarCraft 2?
You DO realize they're two separate games, right? >_>
@hithur Now then, if I may get back to my explanation?
Given the previous two precepts which you acknowledged as being true, we've also both seen progamers in situations where the outcome of games are determined by fucking up build orders, or by not noticing critical events. Sometimes these events that determine win/loss can be measured in spans of mere SECONDS. Just a few seconds too late on a critical unit being built. A key tech finishing. Are we in agreement on that point as well?
@hithur So the fact is, given that all these three precepts are true, yes, there are not an infinite number of things to keep track of in SC. You're right, it -is- finite. But to date, no human player, pro or otherwise, has been able to keep track of 100% of even those limited number of things in a game. At some point EVERYONE is going to bump up against the upper limit of their own ability to focus. Not saying that it happens in EVERY game played, but it happens in SOME. Are we in agreement?
@hithur And if you will permit me a small tangent, talking about progamers here, yes, I know they spend thousands of hours practicing the minutia of the game. They've got build orders and things like scanning between bases, keeping their production buildings from idling, scouting, etc, down to an art on a level that you or I probably don't comprehend. That's their job.
@hithur But the rub is that progamers are also under a helluva lot of stress. You've seen it. The sweating, the straining expressions, the way that sometimes after a game they just kind of sag for a few moments. You and me, we play for fun. Maybe you play for small pots in tourneys, I dunno. But there's a TON riding on a progamer's shoulders when they play. And as a result of this kind of stress, alot of times they don't play AS WELL AS THEY COULD. Are we in agreement on this point as well?
@Zidana123 play the game, get to masters, tell me the game is more balanced than SC1. if you cant do that then your argument is invalid. i provided examples from my experience playing the game. where are you basing your opinions off of?
@hithur "where are you basing your opinions off of?"
My independant analysis of the game mechanics, as I'm in the process of explaining. If I may continue?
Having agreed that there's limits to how many things a human can focus on, we've both had situations where we fucked up our own build orders or failed to pay attention to a critical event and so lost a game. We've also won games and noted from replays that our opponents fucked up build orders or didn't see a critical event. Agreed?
@Zidana123 just gonna say this again in case you missed it "just the fact that the lead balance designer of the game himself has said the game is imbalanced makes your arguement invalid." :)
@hithur "just the fact that the lead balance designer of the game himself has said the game is imbalanced makes your arguement invalid."
Actually, it doesn't. If my argument were 'StarCraft 2 is perfectly balanced,' it would make my argument invalid.
But that's not my argument. My argument is 'StarCraft 1 is LESS BALANCED than StarCraft 2.' That does not imply that either SC1 OR SC2 is perfectly balanced. Everything regarding balance is all relative, in the end.
@Zidana123 i never grouped masters with bronzes. i said if the game is balanced for highest level of play, it will trickle down and be balance for all levels of play. and i also said that to have a legitimate opinion on balance you need to be masters or higher.
"thats why when people masters level or lower complain about inbalance, its bullshit since it was most likely their own mechanics that were at fault."
Do you actually not see what you've done? You're created two groups here:
(master level and below players) and (players above master level)
@Zidana123 theres no need for name-calling either...parrot? really? come on now. anyways i feel that i have provided enough evidence for my standpoint. and all you have given me are just examples that would have no real effect on balance. i probably wont reply to you again. not admiting defeat, i just dont see this argument going anwhere. good day sir. i hope you have a great time playing once you get the game. maybe ill see you on ladder!
@hithur "theres no need for name-calling either...parrot? really?"
I'm just calling it as I see it. Your argument is inconsistant and you keep changing your stance. That's indicative of someone who doesn't actually understand what they are talking about and is only parroting the words of others without independant thought or analysis.
@hithur "im saying sc1 is more balanced than sc2."
Once again, what do you have to back that up with? I've provided numerous examples of actual problems with SC1 that don't exist in SC2. All you've done is cited vaguely nebulous trends and comments from pro-gamers. Do you actually understand the differences in mechanics between SC1 and SC2 and how they affect balance? Or do you just parrot the words of your heros?
@hithur Further, your argument is ultimately self-defeating. You are saying that if a player is not a progamer they can't possibly understand 100% of the game mechanics and thus they have no valid input into whether or not the game is balanced.
By your own logic, because you yourself are not a pro gamer, you cannot possibly arrive at the conclusion that SC1 is or is not more or less relatively balanced than SC2, because you don't understand 100% of the mechanics of either game.
@Zidana123 i never said pro-gamer, i said masters level or higher. i said pro-gamers have also said the game is not as balanced as sc1. masters is not that hard to get once you have a solid understanding of the game and its mechanics. i have also watched countless of hours of replays and analyses by players of similar level or higher, forums, teamliquid etc. by my logic and yours i would have a solid if not better understanding of balance than you.
@hithur "by my logic and yours i would have a solid if not better understanding of balance than you."
And yet, it's interesting to note that although you claim to have a better understanding of balance than me, you can't come up with a single example of an in-game mechanic where sc1 is more balanced than sc2. All you can do is repeat "pro-gamers have also said the game is not as balanced as sc1."
@Zidana123 anyways i say we should agree to disagree since it is highly unlikely that we will convince each other. but i still say you should actually play the game before arguing about balance.
@hithur "anyways i say we should agree to disagree since it is highly unlikely that we will convince each other."
Why would I agree to disagree with you when you have absolutely no evidence to back up your claims? Do you have even one shred of evidence to back up your claims past repeating what others have said? Any shred of independant analysis or understanding?
See, I know you don't, because we both know that your position is indefensible. We both know that sc1 is NOT more balanced.
@Zidana123 not saying sc2 is terrible, i love it but the game is far from balanced, especially since there are still two more expansions coming out. if you think sc2 is more balanced than sc1, you probably do not play high enough on the ladder.
Its funny, watching SC after so many years of playing. I moved on played so many other RTS and now SC2, it make me remember SC how great a game it is.
@qrogueuk yeah dude, SC2 its nice... but you know, SC its soooo old and yet so perfect that i dont think there will be another RTS that can match it. Its just wow.
@Qwerty48121 im pretty sure protectivevalle is referring to the races, units and concept art of the warhammer universe, not the PC game version of warhammer.
cos SC is way better than the warhammer PC games, but the tabletop game and lore is amazing for warhammer
I wonder what would happen if BoxeR has access to those gaming keyboards/mices like the ones progamers use now.... haha he would be BEYOND GODLIKE!! haha
@susugeki You do realize that warhammer has been around since 1983 right? and that there's entire store dedicated to selling their products. It's been rebalanced more times that starcraft and the technology has had over 30 years to be explained.
Oh and did I forget to mention that Starcraft has warhammer roots.
@PilotOfTime Vultures do not trigger spidermines, so he needed to move in his single marines to trigger the enemy mines in the area. Once the marine trigger the mine and they pop up, he killed them immediately from a safe distance, taking no damage.
lol, ms is pretty damn good but after playing it 3 years, im getting sick of it, whether or not its one of the finest mmorpgs ive? ever had the pleasure to play ^-^
@protectivevalle people always say o this is alot like this or this is a lot like this.. wbell avatar is a lot like the story of the native americans, sure and medal of honor is a lot like cod, starcraft is a lot like warhammer but starcraft is better u know why? cause of its great patches and the unseen world of super intense micro when they made it.. most game u can move and shoot but one major thing of starcraft is... gotta stop to shoot and a lot more... so don't make that comparison
@protectivevalle starcraft is the most successful balanced esport of all time, you fucking faggots need to shut the fuck up about your dumb warhammer bullshit which no one in the world gives a fuck about
The games are not like at all... but the lore is. Races, units, etc. WH40k's games weren't out when SC:BW was... but the tabletop was. Starcraft took from WH40k as a whole... not from the newer games.
I just finished watching twilight eclipse guys and girls this was freaking awesome 95minutes of my life xD You can see it at web site OnlineEclipseNow(.)info #OMG
does anyone know the name of the song used through the majority of the video? otherwise this is as classic as the game can be!
apc6254 2 months ago
You guys know that starcraft was meant to be a warhammer 40k game from the beginning right? The company didnt think that it was good enough though.
Southdwnc 2 months ago
@Southdwnc They were right, it didn't. 40K is more in-dept than SC
bondjoethree 1 month ago
@bondjoethree Instead they allowed warhammer 40k dawn of war to be released? I must say that SC, and SC2 to me appear way better.
Southdwnc 1 month ago
why silent hill's depressing music at the end?
WhoIamisIamwhois 2 months ago
Comment removed
leftovercrunch 3 months ago
4:54 i love this game
paulkroll88 3 months ago
Ok lets make this simple.... sc > wh 40k
CARPELOVERXX 5 months ago 13
@CARPELOVERXX Let make this obvious......SC for Noobs, Warhammer n 40k series are for men.
bondjoethree 1 month ago
@bondjoethree awww fanboys are so cute when they get worked up over video games....whos a lil fanboy, whos a lil fan boyyyyyyy awwwwwwwww
hithur 1 month ago
Humanity expanding their territories with colonies in space, only to be met by a technologically superior super-intelligent species of aliens, with threatened extinction by an insect-like hive-mind controlling a swarm of genetically mutated monsters?
No one gives a fuck about originality, it's about who does it better in the end. It's like saying Motorola invented the first real cellphone so Motorola beats Sony Ericsson, Nokia, etc. no matter what. You guys are idiots. Starcraft > WH40k.
DeeStylistic 6 months ago 5
@DeeStylistic Your definition, if I may call it a definition, of who "does it better" is quite narrow. Starcraft and Starcraft 2 are far superior than Warhammers game counterparts, theres no question. However Warhammer's universe, lore, faction development, literary works, overall atmosphere and depiction are far superior to starcrafts. In the end you can't compare the two because one is primarily a PC series whereas the other is a hobby/tabletop game. They are both good in their own respects.
Tripyourift2 2 months ago
worse music ever
5Happysmoke 7 months ago
What's a CC Crush?
PhazonOmega 7 months ago
Currently you can crush interceptors with the command center?
catarsico 7 months ago
@catarsico No... They patched it because BoxeR invented it and it's sorta unbalanced.
GaleStream 7 months ago
It was Jim Raynor driving this vulture at 1:23.
PeonLfg 8 months ago 17
love the sh music at the end.
memokk 8 months ago
???? wao seguro que todo el dia esta jugando starcraft, yo deje de jugar por los diferentes hack map que habian, saludos a Cygnus!!
ITzJimROb 10 months ago
one of the most unbelievable was his wrath dance
BoxeR is the Michael Jordan of starcraft, or even better!
RappersAreGay 11 months ago
lmao @ his move where he couldnt scan the lurker so he moved a rine over it and attacked it with his almost dead siege tank
scubasteve42009 11 months ago
i didnt get the "Boxer's cc crush interceptors" thing at 0:15
SiriusPP 11 months ago
@SiriusPP the CC crush interceptors was when you could land "on top" of the interceptors and destroy them.
whdudgh2145 11 months ago
@SiriusPP I didn't pay attention to it until I saw your question. It is just what it says, BoxeR was crushing the enemy interceptors beneath his CC
rashalfarid 10 months ago
omg that marine taking the hit from the siege tank to kill the lurker was nais
MrRuufs 1 year ago
no one gives a fuck about starcraft lore, its the game that matters
jakoson7 1 year ago
Why the fuck the mine at 0:07 has such a big delay and moves just as the goon is issued to move away from it? It makes totally no sence! Maybe some old bug/setting in an older version of SC?!
LucaTurilli89 1 year ago
@LucaTurilli89
its his "allied mine". basically he'll set the mine, run away, ally his opp. wait until a bunch of units get close to it. unally. and BOOM. epic
rickiex 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Pft, half the stuff in this video is just Boxer abusing Terran imba like the cheap bastard he is. All glory to the Emperor and all that, credit where credit is due for his role in popularizing SC, but honestly, most of Boxer's skill lies in figuring out the cheapest possible ways in which to use units and then practicing those uses to death. Entertaining? Only if you like watching cheapness.
And the proof of that is that he's not particularly good at SC2, since it's a much more balanced game
Zidana123 1 year ago
@Zidana123 sc2 more balanced than sc1? wth are you smoking?!?!?
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur Can you defend that? In what ways is sc1 more balanced than sc2?
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 just from what i hear from pro-gamers, seeing that starcraft didnt have a balance patch after 2009 which btw had very minor balance changes, win/loss ratios were very close to 50%
SC2 on the other hand has had patches that drastically affected balance,unit functioning (removing abilities, changing tech paths of abilities, even removing units from the game entirely), win/loss ratios have been all over the place, what pro-gamers say
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur Did you actually play sc1 before 2009?
I've played sc1 since around 1997. I've personally seen these so-called balance patches. You're right. They had very minor balance changes. The game was imba at release and it was imba in 2009. There's massive bugs and inconsistancies that had never been addressed. Lemmie just bring up one issue. Terran and Zerg get notifications for building completion. Protoss do not. How then is such a game more balanced than a game with less bugs?
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 thats a very minor issue and really would not affect gameplay, especially at higher levels since timings are so downpact. and yes i did play before 2009. in fact ive played since the release which was in 1998, so idk how you played from 1997...anyways let me put it in other words...It wasn't balanced based on 'a beats b which beats c', but rather that with proper control a variety of units could defeat a variety of other units. what league do you play in for sc2? be honest
hithur 1 month ago
Comment removed
Zidana123 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hithur Brood War was released in 1998. StarCraft was out in 97.
And balance doesn't mean either a beats b which beats c, or that with proper control a variety of untis could defeat a variety of other units. The balance -type- is irrelevant. All it means is that given two players of equal skill, game mechanics lead them to a 50/50 win/loss ratio.
It's not a minor issue, because it brings up a flaw in your argument about patches. You're saying that SC1 is more balanced simply -cont
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur cont because it has less patches? That doesn't mean the game is more balanced and thus required less patching. All it means is that Blizzard didn't care as much about the game. There's major bugs that exist in SC1 that were not fixed after over 10 years of being in release version. Things like units with 2 independant sprites getting stuck on ramps, Protoss not getting building complete notifications. Patrol loop causing units to travel at 300% speed, etc.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 you should do a little research, starcraft was released on march 31st, 1998, beta doesnt count since its..well...beta. once again you are just giving me examples of problems that have no effect on balance. i dont see how your argument is even valid since you have never played SC2.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur My argument is perfectly valid because it has internal consistancy and logic, which I arrived at using my analytical skills. Whether or not I've played is irrelevant to the validity of my argument.
Let me give you an example. Person 1 has never played say, Command and Conquer. They have, however, done extensive research and watched dozens of hours of replays. Person 2 has played one game of C&C and done no other research. Are you saying That person 2 is more knowledable?
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur As to the date I was playing SC1 from, okay, I don't remember exactly what date I got it on. I remember playing it quite a while before BW came out though, and apparently I was off by a few months.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur And incidentally I don't play SC2. Still waiting for the price to come down. I also don't see why the league I theoretically play in matters to the balance. If a game is well-balanced then it should tend towards 50% win/loss at all levels of play.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 the league you play in most definitely matters since someone in bronze league would not know how to use units to their full capacity, which is the only time balance comes into effect. thats why when people masters level or lower complain about inbalance, its bullshit since it was most likely their own mechanics that were at fault. once again i dont see how you can argue about this when you dont play the game.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "thats why when people masters level or lower complain about inbalance, its bullshit since it was most likely their own mechanics that were at fault."
And what % of total players are masters level or lower? That group -does- consititute the vast majority of all StarCraft players, do they not? Are you saying that their input is totally irrelevant simply because they're not the best of the best? Shouldn't the game be balanced for ALL players instead of a very small group?
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 im saying there is no possible way to compare balance at all levels since there are too many variables involved. when looking at high level players, you remove all other variables from the equation that could skew how a win was acheived. if a game is balanced for the highest level of play, it will be balanced for all levels of play. im saying sc1 is more balanced than sc2.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "if a game is balanced for the highest level of play, it will be balanced for all levels of play."
Thereby directly contradicting what you said earlier in
"someone in bronze league would not know how to use units to their full capacity, which is the only time balance comes into effect."
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 i was reffering to why a bronze league player loses as opposed to someone masters league or higher. your taking my statements out of context. i would say all high level players have similar understanding of the game and how to use units. wins and loses are determined by strategy, skill, or balance. there is a difference between that and mechanics.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "wins and loses are determined by strategy, skill, or balance. there is a difference between that and mechanics."
That statement is completely meaningless. A game IS the sum total of a series of mechanics. It's the way players use mechanics in the right time and place that determine STRATEGY. It's the ability of the player to use those mechanics effectivly that make up SKILL. And BALANCE is nothing more than the advantage that one races' mechanics have against another race.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 btw mechanics do not determine strategy. mechanics just means how efficiently you can implement your strategy. someone in bronze can have amazing strategic mindset but can have shitty mehcanics holding him back. its a combination of good mechanics and good strategy that make up a skilled player. i suggest you go to teamliquid and lurk around the forums there, you will probably get better answers there.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur I'm talking about mechanics as in GAME mechanics. Unit health, attack speed, costs, movement rate, effective targets, bonus damage, that sort of thing. The mechanics are set for all players at all levels of play by the game engine itself and is immutable except through patches.
I'm not talking about what you're referring to as (PLAYER) mechanics, which is how well a player issues orders to their units/buildings to implement their will/strategy upon the game.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur cont: What you've just said there is something like "there's a difference between oxygen, nitrogen, and the atmosphere." Sure, it's valid, but it's completely meaningless.
Zidana123 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Zidana123 "cont: What you've just said there is something like "there's a difference between oxygen, nitrogen, and the atmosphere." Sure, it's valid, but it's completely meaningless."
yes it would be meaningless if im saying all of them are elements, it doesnt matter what element they are. my statement is still true. you are just taking what i say out of context. once again.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "i would say all high level players have similar understanding of the game and how to use units."
I would say that's not the case. Let's take a look at say, Bisu. As we both know, Bisu basically is the father of Forge FE and the the corsair overlord snipe. Before Bisu, zerg early aggression was a nightmare for protoss, but no progamer could counter it as well as what Bisu did. Therefore, Bisu must have had a GREATER understanding of protoss and zerg units than other progamers.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 i did provide an example with the infestor buff and nerf. ZvP was 70/30 across all leagues post buff and now its 40/60 post nerf. i provided an explaination to but for some reason the comment never came through. the example of Bisu is not better understanding of the game, its just discoviefng a new startegy. Forge FE is pretty easily countered now that the metagame has evolved.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "i did provide an example with the infestor buff and nerf. ZvP was 70/30 across all leagues post buff and now its 40/60 post nerf."
Interesting now that you're claiming that ONE change to ONE unit is causing such a drastic change in win/loss ratio across all leagues, when previously you claimed that "im saying there is no possible way to compare balance at all levels since there are too many variables involved."
Which argument is it? You can't have it both ways.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 you said provide an example, i provided one. that doesnt mean there arent other balance issues out there. and yes this one change to the infestor had DRASTIC changes for the win/loss for that matchup. that is how imbalanced the infestor was just till a while ago. all zergs did was mass infestor and fungal and mindcontrol to win
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur Okay, let's say for the sake of argument that you're right. Up until a little while ago, all zerg had to do was mass infestor v protoss to win.
How do you know that this is a result of imbalance and not as a result of players not understanding the game enough to counter it? Your argument rests on the assumption that all progamers automatically have a 100% understanding of all game mechanics. We both know that they don't.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 because the metagame had enough time to evolve to the strategy but there was nothing that could be done. templars couldnt get close enough to feedback, since they would just be fungalled out of range, colossi couldnt get a shot off before they were mindcontrolled. you would know this if you played the game.
hithur 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hithur "because the metagame had enough time to evolve to the strategy but there was nothing that could be done."
But you're not a progamer. By your own argument that "thats why when people masters level or lower complain about inbalance, its bullshit since it was most likely their own mechanics that were at fault." you in fact do not understand the game enough to tell if the metagame has or hasn't had enough time to evolve.
Not saying infestors -were- balanced, btw.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 another example would be the 1/1/1 terran opening against protoss. at high levels of play it used to be a 70/30 favoring terran. even after the immortal range buff the build is extremely imbalance. the metagame has had sufficient time to evolve to the strategy but it is still imbalanced.
hithur 1 month ago
@Zidana123 i have played through 4 season of SC2 now and am playing at a high masters level. a third party would value my opinion over yours since you have no experience playing the game. you dont see many sports analyst that just went to school for broadcasting. most of them actually played the sport, which is why they have legitimate analyses. i can go up to any schmuck and ask him what he thinks of a baseball game but it wont be as reliable.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "a third party would value my opinion over yours since you have no experience playing the game."
Yes, your barely-supported opinion which has changed between about 4 different arguments now, first grouping master league players with bronze players and then grouping them with progamers, and first saying there's too many variables to determine balance as a result of one changed variable and then saying that one infestor change causes massive win/loss ratio changes. Right.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 i dont see how you are calling my arguments weak and saying im repeating what other people say when you acutally dont have any opinions for yourself. you have never actually played the game so all your basing your opinions on are what you read, what you hear commentators say and what you see on replays which isnt much since you cant possibly looking at all aspects of the match.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur I'm calling your arguments weak because they're not internally consistant. You keep contradicting yourself in your claims. If you actually understood your own claims, then they should be internally consistant and not contradictory.
As for my opinions, they are my own. Unlike you I don't take the words of commentators, other players, or progamers as gospel. I look at the game mechanics and derive my opinions from what I see there.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 your lack of understanding /= contradiction on my part. but see you dont have opinions of your own. you never played the game. your basing your opinions on what other people have said. how can you look at game mechanics when YOU DONT PLAY? there is no way you can have an understanding of the game by watching replays and commentators. im providng examples of what i have seen in the actual game. i have just backed up my game experience with what progamers say.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "your lack of understanding /= contradiction on my part."
No, the contradictions in your own statements are self-evident. The flaws in logic and self-defeating arguments exist separate from the topic being discussed. Either there are too many variables to calculate the effect that one variable has on overall balance for all levels of play, as you claimed earlier, OR one variable like infestors can be clearly responsible for massive win/loss ratio changes, as you claim now.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 i said at lower levels there are too many variables to compare balance which is why balance can only be analzyed at higher levels since things like lack of mechanics and lack of unit knowledge play less of a part in wins/losses. christ, learn to comprehend what you read.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "christ, learn to comprehend what you read."
You're calling me out on my reading comprehension when you yourself couldn't comprehend that my argument wasn't to say that SC2 was perfectly balanced? That's a joke, right?
Let's run with your latest definition. It once again contradicts your earlier statements in that you cited a win/loss ratio at ALL LEVELS OF PLAY for your Infestor example, and not a win/loss ratio at the HIGHEST LEVELS OF PLAY.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 i also said before that if it is balanced at highest level of play it will be balanced it all levels of play. that works for imbalance as well. my argument is sound.
hithur 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hithur "my argument is sound."
Repeating an untrue statement doesn't make it true, sorry.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur Now lemmie explain to you why things like, say, the building complete notice ISN'T a minor issue and in fact does point to Blizzard not caring whether SC1 is imba or not. First, let's get some precepts out of the way.
Any player, progamer included, has a limited number of things on which they can focus their attention on within the game at any given time. No one human can respond to and manage an infinite number of things simultaneously. Are we in agreement on this precept?
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 building complete notice is irrelevent since if you are a good enough player, you should have enough game sense to know when a building you built is complete without beind reminded by a notice. i never look at building/unit complete notices because i always have a good idea when my buildings are complete. but yes no one can manage an infinite number of things. that is irrelelvent since there arent an infinite number of things in starcraft to manage.
hithur 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hithur "but yes no one can manage an infinite number of things. that is irrelelvent since there arent an infinite number of things in starcraft to manage."
Glad to see that we agree that all humans have limits when it comes to how many things they can focus on. Did I say or imply that there were an infinite number of things in StarCraft to manage? No. Once again you're emptily attempting to refute a point I did not make.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur "building complete notice is irrelevent since if you are a good enough player, you should have enough game sense to know when a building you built is complete without beind reminded by a notice. i never look at building/unit complete notices because i always have a good idea when my buildings are complete."
In an ideal situation, yes. But are you going to go so far as to tell me you've never fucked up a build order? Go ahead and tell me you haven't, and you'll be lying.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 i have fucked up a build order. i dont get why building notice affects build orders. build orders go by supply and not by when buildings finish constructing. your analysis of game mechanics is not complete. you have never played the game therefore you would never have full understanding of the game mechanics.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "i have fucked up a build order. i dont get why building notice affects build orders."
So for the first time you've admitted that you don't understand something. The curious thing is that despite your claiming to understand the game more deeply than me, I understand this thing which you do not.
"your analysis of game mechanics is not complete."
Actually, it's quite complete. Moreso than yours if you don't understand a basic idea like how building notices affect build orders.
Zidana123 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hithur "you have never played the game therefore you would never have full understanding of the game mechanics."
If I've never played StarCraft 1, how would I know about things like Protoss not getting building completion announcements? Or that two-sprite units having broken pathfinding? Do you even understand that I'm talking about StarCraft 1 here, and not StarCraft 2?
You DO realize they're two separate games, right? >_>
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur Now then, if I may get back to my explanation?
Given the previous two precepts which you acknowledged as being true, we've also both seen progamers in situations where the outcome of games are determined by fucking up build orders, or by not noticing critical events. Sometimes these events that determine win/loss can be measured in spans of mere SECONDS. Just a few seconds too late on a critical unit being built. A key tech finishing. Are we in agreement on that point as well?
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 sure
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur So the fact is, given that all these three precepts are true, yes, there are not an infinite number of things to keep track of in SC. You're right, it -is- finite. But to date, no human player, pro or otherwise, has been able to keep track of 100% of even those limited number of things in a game. At some point EVERYONE is going to bump up against the upper limit of their own ability to focus. Not saying that it happens in EVERY game played, but it happens in SOME. Are we in agreement?
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur And if you will permit me a small tangent, talking about progamers here, yes, I know they spend thousands of hours practicing the minutia of the game. They've got build orders and things like scanning between bases, keeping their production buildings from idling, scouting, etc, down to an art on a level that you or I probably don't comprehend. That's their job.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur But the rub is that progamers are also under a helluva lot of stress. You've seen it. The sweating, the straining expressions, the way that sometimes after a game they just kind of sag for a few moments. You and me, we play for fun. Maybe you play for small pots in tourneys, I dunno. But there's a TON riding on a progamer's shoulders when they play. And as a result of this kind of stress, alot of times they don't play AS WELL AS THEY COULD. Are we in agreement on this point as well?
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 play the game, get to masters, tell me the game is more balanced than SC1. if you cant do that then your argument is invalid. i provided examples from my experience playing the game. where are you basing your opinions off of?
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "where are you basing your opinions off of?"
My independant analysis of the game mechanics, as I'm in the process of explaining. If I may continue?
Having agreed that there's limits to how many things a human can focus on, we've both had situations where we fucked up our own build orders or failed to pay attention to a critical event and so lost a game. We've also won games and noted from replays that our opponents fucked up build orders or didn't see a critical event. Agreed?
Zidana123 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Zidana123 just gonna say this again in case you missed it "just the fact that the lead balance designer of the game himself has said the game is imbalanced makes your arguement invalid." :)
hithur 1 month ago
@Zidana123 just the fact that the lead balance designer of the game himself has said the game is imbalanced makes your arguement invalid.
hithur 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hithur "just the fact that the lead balance designer of the game himself has said the game is imbalanced makes your arguement invalid."
Actually, it doesn't. If my argument were 'StarCraft 2 is perfectly balanced,' it would make my argument invalid.
But that's not my argument. My argument is 'StarCraft 1 is LESS BALANCED than StarCraft 2.' That does not imply that either SC1 OR SC2 is perfectly balanced. Everything regarding balance is all relative, in the end.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 i never grouped masters with bronzes. i said if the game is balanced for highest level of play, it will trickle down and be balance for all levels of play. and i also said that to have a legitimate opinion on balance you need to be masters or higher.
hithur 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hithur "i never grouped masters with bronzes."
Do I really have to quote it again?
"thats why when people masters level or lower complain about inbalance, its bullshit since it was most likely their own mechanics that were at fault."
Do you actually not see what you've done? You're created two groups here:
(master level and below players) and (players above master level)
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 theres no need for name-calling either...parrot? really? come on now. anyways i feel that i have provided enough evidence for my standpoint. and all you have given me are just examples that would have no real effect on balance. i probably wont reply to you again. not admiting defeat, i just dont see this argument going anwhere. good day sir. i hope you have a great time playing once you get the game. maybe ill see you on ladder!
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "theres no need for name-calling either...parrot? really?"
I'm just calling it as I see it. Your argument is inconsistant and you keep changing your stance. That's indicative of someone who doesn't actually understand what they are talking about and is only parroting the words of others without independant thought or analysis.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur "when looking at high level players, you remove all other variables from the equation that could skew how a win was acheived."
You're making the assumption there that all high level players are at the same level of skill. We both know that's not true.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur "im saying sc1 is more balanced than sc2."
Once again, what do you have to back that up with? I've provided numerous examples of actual problems with SC1 that don't exist in SC2. All you've done is cited vaguely nebulous trends and comments from pro-gamers. Do you actually understand the differences in mechanics between SC1 and SC2 and how they affect balance? Or do you just parrot the words of your heros?
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur Further, your argument is ultimately self-defeating. You are saying that if a player is not a progamer they can't possibly understand 100% of the game mechanics and thus they have no valid input into whether or not the game is balanced.
By your own logic, because you yourself are not a pro gamer, you cannot possibly arrive at the conclusion that SC1 is or is not more or less relatively balanced than SC2, because you don't understand 100% of the mechanics of either game.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 i never said pro-gamer, i said masters level or higher. i said pro-gamers have also said the game is not as balanced as sc1. masters is not that hard to get once you have a solid understanding of the game and its mechanics. i have also watched countless of hours of replays and analyses by players of similar level or higher, forums, teamliquid etc. by my logic and yours i would have a solid if not better understanding of balance than you.
hithur 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@hithur "i never said pro-gamer, i said masters level or higher."
Actually, you didn't. You said
"thats why when people masters level or lower complain about inbalance, its bullshit since it was most likely their own mechanics that were at fault."
You've lumped master level players in with bronze level players there.
Come on, get your own quotes straight, man!
Zidana123 1 month ago
@hithur "by my logic and yours i would have a solid if not better understanding of balance than you."
And yet, it's interesting to note that although you claim to have a better understanding of balance than me, you can't come up with a single example of an in-game mechanic where sc1 is more balanced than sc2. All you can do is repeat "pro-gamers have also said the game is not as balanced as sc1."
Just like a parrot.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 anyways i say we should agree to disagree since it is highly unlikely that we will convince each other. but i still say you should actually play the game before arguing about balance.
hithur 1 month ago
@hithur "anyways i say we should agree to disagree since it is highly unlikely that we will convince each other."
Why would I agree to disagree with you when you have absolutely no evidence to back up your claims? Do you have even one shred of evidence to back up your claims past repeating what others have said? Any shred of independant analysis or understanding?
See, I know you don't, because we both know that your position is indefensible. We both know that sc1 is NOT more balanced.
Zidana123 1 month ago
@Zidana123 not saying sc2 is terrible, i love it but the game is far from balanced, especially since there are still two more expansions coming out. if you think sc2 is more balanced than sc1, you probably do not play high enough on the ladder.
hithur 1 month ago
can somebody explain me the CC trick? i didnt get it , thanks
dalvarox27 1 year ago
@dalvarox27 i think he just lifted off to a different base (natural behind main?) so when zerg scouted, he saw nothing there.
SoulTrii 1 year ago
lol played so much sc2 i forgot lurkers exist
TheMazurka 1 year ago 2
@TheMazurka
Its funny, watching SC after so many years of playing. I moved on played so many other RTS and now SC2, it make me remember SC how great a game it is.
qrogueuk 1 year ago 2
@qrogueuk yeah dude, SC2 its nice... but you know, SC its soooo old and yet so perfect that i dont think there will be another RTS that can match it. Its just wow.
danortiz 9 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
no life !
axelnjoy 1 year ago
@Qwerty48121 im pretty sure protectivevalle is referring to the races, units and concept art of the warhammer universe, not the PC game version of warhammer.
cos SC is way better than the warhammer PC games, but the tabletop game and lore is amazing for warhammer
dk6918 1 year ago
sc2 made the microing wayy to easy.
YoonaLoveable 1 year ago
@YoonaLoveable especially the smart casting and the speed of zerg on creep
mwaned 1 year ago
Target firing the marine on top of the lurker?! What the FUCK?
CptnObvious21 1 year ago 2
All hail the Emperor
DelothVyrr 1 year ago
I wonder what would happen if BoxeR has access to those gaming keyboards/mices like the ones progamers use now.... haha he would be BEYOND GODLIKE!! haha
taligreen 1 year ago
medic wall was genius.
gosciu555 1 year ago 2
The army should take all pro starcraft players to be generals and they will buttrape each other to oblivion
TobbzSC 1 year ago
@TobbzSC jesus are you serious?
kubekzpiciem 1 year ago
@kubekzpiciem well, yes, they are pretty skilled ruling armies
TobbzSC 1 year ago
@protectivevalle whatever you say, Sc and SC2 is more popular than Warhammer series. It's only game that dedicated TV channel!
susugeki 1 year ago
@susugeki You do realize that warhammer has been around since 1983 right? and that there's entire store dedicated to selling their products. It's been rebalanced more times that starcraft and the technology has had over 30 years to be explained.
Oh and did I forget to mention that Starcraft has warhammer roots.
Marines = Space marines.
Zerg= Tyranids
toss are a combo of eldar and tau.
terran has imperial guard roots as well.
SupComRaiden2 1 year ago
@SupComRaiden2
Actually, the Zerg in StarCraft were inspired by the Alien franchise. The Protoss, for curiosity, was inspired by the Predator franchise.
In fact, the person who designed the mutalisk was the same person who designed the Aliens, unless I am much mistaken.
apanapane 1 year ago
@apanapane No you're right, starcraft was based off those series.
But if you look closely you can see some similarities between warhammer as well.
SupComRaiden2 1 year ago
@SupComRaiden2 starcraft was pretty much based on almost every Sci fi series prior to it
Starship troopers HEAVILY
40K Moderately
Aliens heavily
Predators mildly
star wars mildly
shadowtygo 1 year ago
@shadowtygo Aliens VS Predators
TOTALLY but, StarCraft came out before AVP I think
batmann12111 1 year ago
@batmann12111 the movie yeah but the AVP games cae out in the 80's or early 90's starcraft was in 98 while broodwar was 99 and SC64 in 2000
shadowtygo 1 year ago
@shadowtygo LOL tell someone who cares
4lifeSNSD 1 year ago
@4lifeSNSD well I suppose my comment was directed towards you since you commented so.... you care.. (AWWWW you're a failtroll)
shadowtygo 1 year ago
@apanapane
So the movie Alien vs Predator was related to Starcraft somewhat, right?
I assumed that at first
But in the movie there was just 1 Toss most likely a Zealot unusually using a plasmatic gun of some sort
In the end a Nuke was poured down on the city to relinquish the "Zerg"
sukarestu 1 year ago
LOL!!! He is such a baller! Only he could use SCVs succesfully in a push!
45step54 1 year ago
i dont understand the combat sapper can anyone please explain? haha
PilotOfTime 1 year ago
@PilotOfTime He used his marine to coax out vulture mines so his vultures could kill them off. Allowed him to safely clear out minefields.
darkchiron 1 year ago
@PilotOfTime Vultures do not trigger spidermines, so he needed to move in his single marines to trigger the enemy mines in the area. Once the marine trigger the mine and they pop up, he killed them immediately from a safe distance, taking no damage.
chateae 1 year ago
2:28 simple trick but used very nicely
ShindyK2 1 year ago
he has higher apm than the pros who play Gunz : The Duel
h3l1lo0 1 year ago
@h3l1lo0 That would be crazy cuz Ive played GunZ at competitive level and it was pretty insane
ShindyK2 1 year ago
@ShindyK2 if this guy played gunz i think he would master tbf in like a day o_o
h3l1lo0 1 year ago
@h3l1lo0 LOL a day? One hour. He'll be the best k styler ever. xD
NikorasuLee 1 year ago
Boxer would make a great war general - he be microin' them soldiers like crazy :D
ActualGaming 1 year ago
this i am going to get today and? it looks so beastly i hope the protoss are just as good as in the first yupi Me got key at
FreeStarcraftRetailKeys[dot]tk
Go for it
MyrtleSpence1768 1 year ago
if i am correct she had? a love afair with raynor right?
MaryTucker9830 1 year ago
lol, ms is pretty damn good but after playing it 3 years, im getting sick of it, whether or not its one of the finest mmorpgs ive? ever had the pleasure to play ^-^
MargaretMcvey1322 1 year ago
wow, the last part will last for about a month? to finish, nice
TheresaPate0739 1 year ago
this is the reason i? love protoss =D mighty units ^^
periodicagnosti 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
how much is this like warhammer 40k? answer:? alot much
protectivevalle 1 year ago 23
@protectivevalle people always say o this is alot like this or this is a lot like this.. wbell avatar is a lot like the story of the native americans, sure and medal of honor is a lot like cod, starcraft is a lot like warhammer but starcraft is better u know why? cause of its great patches and the unseen world of super intense micro when they made it.. most game u can move and shoot but one major thing of starcraft is... gotta stop to shoot and a lot more... so don't make that comparison
Qwerty48121 1 year ago
@protectivevalle not at all...
aznfury456 1 year ago
@protectivevalle except for the part where starcraft is better.
shadowtygo 1 year ago
@protectivevalle starcraft is the most successful balanced esport of all time, you fucking faggots need to shut the fuck up about your dumb warhammer bullshit which no one in the world gives a fuck about
gradeschoolin9 1 year ago
@protectivevalle This Isnt Anything Like Warhammer 40k You Idiot
ZergSc2 11 months ago
@ZergSc2
Actually it is. Starcraft hugely ripped off Warhammer 40k... this is well known and is not an opinion.
PaCo12349 6 months ago
@PaCo12349 I Dont See How Starcraft Is Anything Like Warhammer.... There Two Completly Diffrent Games...
ZergSc2 6 months ago
@ZergSc2
Oh, you're misunderstand.
The games are not like at all... but the lore is. Races, units, etc. WH40k's games weren't out when SC:BW was... but the tabletop was. Starcraft took from WH40k as a whole... not from the newer games.
PaCo12349 6 months ago
@PaCo12349 Well Starcraft May Have Took From Warhammer.. But Starcraft Is A Much Better Game...
ZergSc2 6 months ago
@PaCo12349 Guess what, i dont see any law suits or anyone giving a fuck that starcraft ripped off WH40K.
anime223 6 months ago
@anime223
Lawsuits? No shit, dumbass. You can't sue for copying something and changing it ever so slightly.
Giving a fuck? You have noooo idea how many people give much more than a fuck.
PaCo12349 6 months ago
@PaCo12349 YEA U CANT SUE, SO I DONT SEE WHAT THE FUSS IS ABOUT SON LOLLOLOLOL umad that this game is more popular than ur shittty game AKAKAKAKAK
anime223 6 months ago
@anime223
He mad.
PaCo12349 6 months ago
hly sht the graphs so fukin good omg it just made me? want to buy it now!!!!!!!!!
perfectquibble8 1 year ago
That vult at 1:23 is out of control!!!
JKT84 1 year ago
Comment removed
JKT84 1 year ago
can someone explain to me the cc trick? i dont get it >_<
PilotOfTime 1 year ago
@PilotOfTime the trick was that he moved to another expansion to avoid getting scouted I think.. very risky move.
HCNguyen86 1 year ago
excelent video
rayman2704 1 year ago
What is the song called. reminds me of the ana-matrix/
Persian5life 1 year ago
i dont get boxers cc trick
FierCeSC 1 year ago
@FierCeSC The drone went to scout Boxer's position and scouted his nat first to find a CC there to make him guess tht boxer went for like a 14cc
T2Dtruegamer 1 year ago
@FierCeSC Lands cc as soon as the SCV's finished mining so they run to the closer CC and not to some other random CC that's not close by.
kennyc002 1 year ago
Is he gonna play in SC2? does anybody know?
eltiogamboin 1 year ago
ROFL, Boxer ripped off his WINDOWS keys on his keyboard ahhahahaha
Can't afforded to be fucked over by hitting those by accident during a money match I guess.
Sapreme 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
I just finished watching twilight eclipse guys and girls this was freaking awesome 95minutes of my life xD You can see it at web site OnlineEclipseNow(.)info #OMG
doctorPlastic76 1 year ago
r.i.p
evalldas 1 year ago
Hes smart. =)
neofintch2 1 year ago
lololol that medic wall was epic
frickish 1 year ago
Does The CC Interceptor crushing thing work in the original SC ?
UlzzangChaser 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam