DarkBlizz

this will be just as easy to spot as regular maphacks when watching replays, especially since replays contain a players first person view.  Staring at areas where you shouldn't (or in this case actually don't) have vision?  Get reported, get banned.  Buy game again.  Win for Blizzard.  Assuming Blizzard decides to care of course

sTo0z, jesus.  Obviously it's execrable if they are lying and going for attention, but get some perspective.  It affects you exactly as much as you let it.  "I'm feeling PLAYED by these guys" why?  How?  It sounds like you never believed them.  Sounds like they never fooled you.  If it turns out they are faking, you were right.  How does that make you feel played?  When the time comes you should either feel happy you are wrong (and get to play multiplayer), or vindicated.  If you don't want to get played, remain skeptical.  Don't get emotionally invested.  Just wait and see.  Do that and these histrionics, these feelings of hostility should go away.

codec on the original appears to be tscc as used by camtasia.  download here http://www.techsmith.com/codecs.asp

Or try MadSheeps reencoded version (previous page)

Quote from: MadSheep on March 13, 2010, 11:52:20 AM

Code Select Expand

http://www.multiupload.com/QWGRA9S4OP
re-encoded and re-uploaded to xvid

no way I would ever go for that.  The original account holder can call up Blizzard and moan that his account was stolen.  He can answer all those secret questions (that you can't change) and they will give it back.  Not guaranteed that he would do that, but he could

Quote from: krutoistudent on March 12, 2010, 04:45:06 AM
seriously, why dont you guys make stronger ai? ?
there is no improvement since version 5, just big talk but nothing is changing in difficulty

I'm sure they are keeping it the same just to piss you off.  If I was working on it that's what I'd be doing.  
There are changes from 5.0.  Maybe not as noticeable if you never let it live past 5 minutes, but changes are there and obvious and I can't take you seriously if you are going to pretend they don't exist.  Said changes lay a framework for making it more challenging and varied going forward.  
Given what they had to start with, progress in two weeks is great, and it isn't going to go any faster because some jerk on a forum says it should.  I mean what, you think they are just dicking around but now that *you* have come to tell them it should be harder they finally realize they need to do it right, or they finally have the motivation to do it right, and because *you* told them to suddenly they can snap their fingers and do it?  What an egoist.
Actually I take that back.  I have a stupendous idea!  Seriously, why don't *you* make stronger ai?  You seem to know exactly how easy it is.  They are holding back!  Show us th way! Hell, it's so easy I'll go do it.  I'll race you!

drop mules directly on a mineral patch and they just start mining without any intervention necessary


loved the close up of the first nuke hit  Those poor marines

Quote from: iounas on March 07, 2010, 02:48:30 PM
Apm is irrelevant.. Its something for nerds to talk about..
You can watch your replay and see it there..
I hate watching first person play because of apm spammers.. Seriously some guys click 10 times for a fricking move and just select random stuff for no reason..And worker selection at the start is annoying

you knew what this threead was about before you even clicked on it thanks to the title.  What the hell are you doing in here?  OP had a request, you coming in here to shit on things helps no one.

Quote from: Isurwars on March 08, 2010, 04:24:31 PM
-The zerg AI never EVER upgrade his armor, it should build 2 (not 1,2!!!) evolution chambers, and start evolving armor->ranged->meele.(Roaches and hydras use ranged attacks).

I played a ZvZ where zerg ranged units were 2/2 by the end.  They do upgrade, but when they do might need to be tweaked for all I know

Quote from: farishawk88 on March 08, 2010, 12:37:45 AM
most of the army followed around this lone medivac i had left behind even tho it had no air attacking units. main issues i see are:

IMPORTANT-make it so groundattack only/airattack only units leave units they cant attack alone instead of follow them around pointlessly.

Good point.  In ZvZ my scouting overlord was shadowed by a bunch of AI lings (until a queen chased it off).  Ground attack only units shouldn't be paying that much attention to air.

ZvZ almost got pwned when I didn't army up fast enough.  Had to defend with drones then scramble to catch back up in econ.  Then mutas came  Got some spore walkers out while the hydras morphed and the roaches charged his nat.  Counterattack to his third worked OK (he had 4 queens there haha).  Bout then he took an island, and ferried troops back and forth with ovies.  Was a little confused, sometimes he took troops back.  Keeping all bases defended I guess.  Steamrolled his main and doom dropped the island, GG.  
Was ahead of me in econ for a long time after that initial ling attack took out some drones.  Good army mix.  More statics than I would have made (except in a panic to hold of mutas).  Don't listen too much to people saying to make more static.  Army > static since, well, it can move.  Some is nice.  More depending on race and matchup of course and where you are in relation to the unit cap.  Seemed pretty good for now though.


Anyway, I'd spread the queens out some.  Other than that no real critiques from that game!

Getting so much better


Played one ZvT, no cheese.  I've seen people complain about no AA.  T did build a lot of turrets in my game.  It was in response to nothing, I never had air.  Also, if I had gone air, the turrets would have been too late.  At some (late) point, the AI just decided to start making some.  
Kept pressure on me, and expanded.  Never defended its expansions.  Also seemed a little low on production buildings.  
I got to see ultralisks vs thors though, that was fun

Quote from: Gamewiz on March 03, 2010, 02:02:35 PM

Quote from: Artanis186 on March 03, 2010, 01:55:32 PM

Quote from: r3ddrag0nx on March 03, 2010, 01:15:05 PMthey dont saturate mineral fields (builds 15 scvs and stops for a good while - saturation is at 24)

24 is saturation? I only go with 16 and I fare pretty well. I don't see a need for 24, that's just overkill. It'd only be good if the extra 8 were going for expansion, and if they don't, that's a waste of 400 minerals.

I agree. At the closest mineral (because they do stagger slightly in distance), 2 SCVs is fully saturated. So technically it's more like 2-2.5 SCVs per mineral for saturation, but to me that's not fully necessary. So 16 SCVs per standard mineral batch (12 for the high yield) is a nearly full saturation. 24 is definitely overkill.

24 is certainly not overkill.  That's the number of probes that gives you the fastest income.  Besides, you are going to be expanding at some point.  When the new nexus goes up, you're going to want to move some of your probes from your main to your expansion (maynarding) so it is up and running as fast as possible without having to build as many new probes from the new nexus.  Keeping that in mind I will often oversaturate, then when a new expansion comes up it is mining at a fast rate right away

Quote from: ooni on March 01, 2010, 06:33:27 AM
 It does not consume a lot of resources early game making the overall game stronger 

Consuming fewer resources is never a good thing.