Johannicus wrote:


they had shite micro, and weren't kiting them around. They should of taken out alot of drones tbh.

Gazza wrote:

thats absolutely not true. For one ur definition "COULD" be only true in perfect balance, and admit it now, its not perfect.

And second some tactics are by definition "easier" than other which require for example more micro but would be more efficient.
PS: even in sc1, the winners werent ppl with highest APM (after a certain amount it stops being influential)

protip:
TvP = ghosts

marines + emp > void rays

lol vp anyone who plays terran knows to get ghosts vs protos just silly inot too, but ive never tried them on voids :S

liger wrote:


Im sorry, but if you play agianst someone who knows what they are doing and scouting how they react is much more important than there original gameplan. That is RTS common sense. Also Micro is what wins fights, once you get past the stage or running all your units in and firing what you can. Even microing your economy when in combat is important. It seperates the pros and the noobs and im a noob btw. Its the reason why we can copy the pros strategys/tactics yet were not pro?

let me explain what i ment. Yes every tactic has its counter and u should scout to adjust ur army to counter the opponent. However, what i ment is that u can follow a tactic which even though u get the theoretical counter, its not at all "easy" to defend. Why? Because to counter u would require a lot more micro for example.
To counter a well mixed terran army with zerg u require a whole lot more skill to win while terran can pretty much do a-move
havent seen many replays yet, so only this comes to mind
www.gosugamers.net/starcraft2/replays/35080" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;