|
First, I should present myself, I'm a low Diamond Protoss, that has been playing since january. SC2 is my first foray into competitive RTS, I played a lot of C&C and Warcraft 2/3 but never online and only a handful lan matches. For season 4 I've started to use SC2Gears to run stats on my games, beside informing me that I suck at PvZ, I found an interesting piece of information.
If a game is 15 min or shorter I lose 2/3s of games.
But if a game is 15 min or longer I win 2/3s of games.
Now I believe there could be 3 reasons for this.
1: I try to stay away from cheese or all-ins. Not that I dislike these tactics, I just feel I learn more from trying to go into longer games. For instance, for a while I used a blink stalker rush against Zerg that took an early hatch. This is why I believe I have the aforementioned problems in the matchup. And this is a problem I would've run into, even if blizzard hadn't increased the blink research time. I also dislike the feeling of, "if this doesn't work, I've lost the game".
2: There are a lot of people that doesn't agree with me on 1, and I need to get better at holding cheese and all-ins. For instance I still really haven't stopped a Cannon rush. I don't blame people, what ever works. I also have a tendency to panic and feel rushed (no punned intended) when I see the all-in coming, many a pylon has been forgotten this way.
3: "When ahead, get more ahead." The last one here is Tastosis fault. I'm very weary of over-committing, and while this is mostly a good tactic. I do loose a game or two where I could've just killed my opponent earlier. Of course this will come about, because of mistakes I make later in the game, so the rule still stands, it just leads to longer games.
So what about you, any difference for you. Even if you don't have stats, what is you feeling? Longer or shorter games?
- DanaKaZ
|
I prefer longer games on certain matchups and shorter games on the others, for example:
PvP: I really don't like this matchup, so I tend to cannon rush or 4gate it just to end it quicker, however, occasionally the colossi race is necessary.
PvZ: Long games are the way to go here, because I really want to outmacro the race that's considered as the macro race of this game, maybe it's just mean, but beating a zerg in a long, steady macro game just gives me a warm, good feeling.
PvT: I just want to end this matchup quickly, because PvT is my worst matchup, I lose most of my PvT's, once even went 4 days without beating a single terran while playing +10 games/day.
|
I'm Protoss, and my feeling is that I generally win more games that are shorter than 15 minutes in PvP and PvZ, and win more games that are longer than 15 minutes in PvT. I'm good at late-game large army engagements PvT, but I have serious problems in PvP because I have an aversion to making mass Colossus and I rarely win games that make it to the mass Muta stage of the currently popular Muta-heavy ZvP strategies because I'm bad, but Zergs are getting so predictable about going for Mutas that I can usually get a win off of a 6-gate timing push.
|
It sounds as though you may also be playing a little greedy which when your opponent doesn't punish it (blindly or not) you have an advantage that is letting you win 2/3 of the longer games. If you are losing to cheese a lot you need to scout more and adjust your build.
|
On November 18 2011 18:28 omgCRAZY wrote:
It sounds as though you may also be playing a little greedy which when your opponent doesn't punish it (blindly or not) you have an advantage that is letting you win 2/3 of the longer games. If you are losing to cheese a lot you need to scout more and adjust your build.
Sure, that may be a problem. I generally always try to do the safest build, that does't leave me behind, for a while I went 1/3 gate sentry expands to make sure I wouldn't get roach rushed, but I have abandoned that and accepted that FFE is the way to go. I've also been working a lot to on being more courageous with my expansions, taking my nat on one stalker against terran for instance if I feel like I'm safe. But of course the problem arise if I misread the situation because of lack of scouting, and expands at an inopportune moment. I wouldn't say I'm a greedy player myself, though, my hands always get sweaty when I try to get one base ahead. Though I do have a tendency to over-probe when under pressure, so you point may very well be valid.
|
As a zerg, I lose a lot early game and win a lot mid-late game. For me, I aim to hit the 20 min mark on every game if possible because I'd rather play and learn to macro, deal with harass, army composition, my own harass and sense of the game. Length of in-game time playing doesn't mean all too much. Most diamond/low-mid masters players abuse their race to the fullest on ladder, proxy raxes, early pools, 4 gates etc.
Play to your strengths I say. If your forte is shorter more micro intensive games, then aim for shorter games. If your forte is in long macro games then play them. It's all about you, how you play the best, and how to maximize your potential.
Btw, your third point is silly imo. You lose the games because you didn't have the game sense to end the game. It takes A LOT of game sense(experience to some) to safely execute a 'get more ahead' style, you might over-commit to the 'get more ahead', and your opponent doesn't know how to deal with it so you think it's 'safe' or under-commit and let your opponent web his way back into the game, but still barely win on even ground, and you won't know any better.
It requires a lot of experience to execute it, so do this:
Get your friends to play against you and do 3 things to get ahead:
Counter attack and end the game,
Counter attack while expanding,
Expand while turtling.
I would do the 3 things 3 times through, all on different friends so you can experience the different mechanics of each person. For example, a counter attack might work on your macro-orientated friend, while it won't on your micro orientated friend.
You NEED to pick up on these things whilst you're playing. If you notice your opponent microing really well, make sure when you do counter attack or whatever, you do actually out number your opponent. If you see his micro isn't too good, but he makes up for it in macro, then you should feel safe using counter attacks. And if you feel pretty even in your skill levels then you just expand and turtle. You need to adapt your 'Get more ahead' strategy based on your opponent and your experience in the game. There is only one way that is a 'safe' general broad way to get ahead, and it's by teching or expanding.
That's just my experience so far though. Since I'm a zerg I base the way I play off of my opponent. I don't really know if it applies to Protoss, but it can't help to throw such general advice out ^^
So yeah, it all comes down to doing what you feel comfortable doing. If you have an NA account I'll gladly play with you anytime, just PM if you do ^_^
EDIT: Forgot a word, and fixed a sentence that made no sense :x
|
@MonkSEA I admit that the reason I loose the games are because of mistakes I made, but that's not the point of 3. The point is that if you adhere to "when ahead, get more ahead" it will invariably lead to longer games. I was simply commenting on my experience with longer games. I fully admit that my game sense needs work, It's not Tastosis fault that I retreat with 20 stalkers against 10 roaches. 
I can borrow a NA account I believe, so I just might take you up on that offer, I really need work on PvZ, right now I'm 10 of 26, and it's hands down my worst matchup.
|
I don't really like the idea that artosis and some others play by (the get more ahead thing) for exactly the reason you mentioned. Or at least it is misleading to the general listener.
#1 It's fucking pussy and weak to not kill someone when you have a clear shot at it. If you get ahead, scout like crazy for something to exploit to win the game. If there isn't something glaringly obvious then just get more ahead.
#2 It wastes your time and the opponents time. You're giving the opponent false hope because he knows he should be dead now/soon and it doesn't come. Its almost like you are BM/teasing him to make a come back but instead wait til you have 200/200 to finish him off. Clean him up and get onto the next game.
#3 You can actually fuck up and lose when you try to get more ahead.
#4 It's more entertaining if anyone is watching the game to see action and calculated risks/attacks than to see someone get really ahead and then just sit around building up like nothing happened.
The ultimate goal of the game is to defeat the other player. Not practice your macro, or take a bunch of bases, or max out tech/supply.
|
@SpoR I think you're making this more clear cut then it is. I don't do this because I want to practice my macro, I do it because I believe that in that particular situation, it gives me the biggest chances of winning, If I feel fairly certain that I can just end the game I will of course try that. The problem of course comes when you have to decide. For while my game plan was to deny the Zergs third with a sentry heavy attack, and while I was successful at this most of the times, I would loose games overcommitting to killing my opponent right then and there. A zerg can still produce quite a bit of roaches of two base, and If you didn't count how many you've killed already, which I really don't have the overview to do, for me at least it's hard to asses whether you can kill your opponent or not.
But, if the opponent knows he should be dead and I don't, nothing is stopping him from GG'ing.
|
On November 18 2011 18:45 danakaz wrote:@MonkSEA I admit that the reason I loose the games are because of mistakes I made, but that's not the point of 3. The point is that if you adhere to "when ahead, get more ahead" it will invariably lead to longer games. I was simply commenting on my experience with longer games. I fully admit that my game sense needs work, It's not Tastosis fault that I retreat with 20 stalkers against 10 roaches. I can borrow a NA account I believe, so I just might take you up on that offer, I really need work on PvZ, right now I'm 10 of 26, and it's hands down my worst matchup.
That's my point though. That saying in my eyes, has been torn apart. It doesn't have to lead to longer games. Some people take the extremes of getting ahead by being on 4 base against a 2 base zerg. Just fucking kill them. It's as simple as that.
Example:
You just lost most of your gateway army, but maintained your void rays/collosi/immortals and killed off your opponents units(especially expensive units like the infestor and ghost)? Counter attack with reinforcing gateway units. Most players who adhere to that rule of getting ahead just stop sit back turtle up and expand or tech. No. NO. You're letting your opponent come back into the game. Everyone has done this, you can only hit unique situations. Your experience will take you so far, the rest you have to compute in your head.
While playing make a checklist of sorts when you feel like you could end the game.
My one is sort of like this:
Do I have enough of my own army to deal with the reinforcements and the units that stayed alive, as well as any scouted static defense?
Did I kill expensive, time consuming units, and did I lose any of my own?
Are my upgrades on par, or better then my opponents?
Based on my last engagement, and scouting information, do I need to tech switch?
This should be self explanatory, but it's really hard to put in use. I only just made this a month or two ago, when I was still in Diamond. Now I'm in masters on two servers, so I think this alone has helped me more then anything to get into masters. A simple mental checklist that can save you from losing a game that you could of won easily.
|
I have to go with spor on this. If you aren't finishing games just to practice your macro then what are you doing? If you don't know if you can finish them then just scout better. If you scout better but still don't know what to do, watch more pro reps.
Openings are just that. Just because you open macro doesn't mean you can't finish early. If your response to everything is just to take more bases it is a complete misuse of scouting info.
|
Well ya, If you're 4 bases to 2, you should probably have killed your opponent earlier. But I generally don't go one up on the Zerg, since in my experience, often he can just swarm you with units while you're macroing. It's been a while since I've made as bad decisions as you outline, but I get what you're saying.
The list is a very interesting idea. Thank you for that.
|
United Kingdom20343 Posts
On November 18 2011 19:17 danakaz wrote:
Well ya, If you're 4 bases to 2, you should probably have killed your opponent earlier. But I generally don't go one up on the Zerg, since in my experience, often he can just swarm you with units while you're macroing. It's been a while since I've made as bad decisions as you outline, but I get what you're saying.
The list is a very interesting idea. Thank you for that.
Yea if you are equal bases with a zerg, unless he makes >10 spine crawlers, just put your money in a better army instead of bases. Having a better army he cant deal with now OR later (ie 6 cols, a few vrays, ton of bstalkers and sentries when he is on low econ and not hive) is also a form of getting ahead, faaaaar ahead
|
I've done some investigationz myself!!
Whenever I play worse oponents I win 2/3
When I play someone better it dramaticly shifts to 1/3
Ok, that's what I got so far.
Ps, Fractals isn't a pussy.
|
I sense somehow that you're making fun of me, but I'm not sure I get it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
