|
On April 03 2014 03:27 SiskosGoatee wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2014 16:00 Big J wrote:What you want is aggressive openings that can't fall behind but can also win the game if the opponent makes a tiny mistake to be viable. We already have PvP (and to a certain extend early ZvZ) for that. It's bad enough. Yeah, mistakes being punished. ZvZ is the only matchup in the game currently for me which has any sembalance of strategy in the early game going on. All other matchups are just blind build order poker. ZvZ forces you to react to your opponent because if you don't, you die. If you just blindly do your build in ZvZ you don't die vs 'some builds' like it's in all the other matchups, you die vs almost any build. The margins of error are so tight that you are forced to play reactively. Show nested quote +OK; I really need to know how you play reactive in early ZvZ, because me and all other Zergs in the world like Soulkey have been struggling there to see inside eggs before they have even been queued. Like, a very common rush in ZvZ is to make only speed zerglings on your first or second inject. Meanwhile the opponent has to build units as well (or he is losing way too much larva spawn time/mining time). But how does he know what he has to react to, when at best he sees a bunch of eggs and that his opponent has mined 100gas or more and it could be all drones.
You can't play reactive to that kind of stuff, because you have to make decisions before you know what the opponent is doing. You either prepare blindly for such a rush after scouting a gas and you get ahead if you do, or you don't and you fall behind/die when he is commiting. And similarily with baneling rushes. I don't think Soulkey plays ZvZ blindly, or most pro Zergs. But the point is that casters do a really bad job at explaning what goes through the mind of players in ZvZ. Bitter is the only one who makes an attempt really but neither the casters nor the observers focus on explanation the logic behind ZvZ. Basic rules of ZvZ: - Always keep an overlord in vision of the natural mineral line and check if your opponent is droning it up. Casters and observers completely fail to highlight that in ZvZ both players are constantly monitoring the drone count of their opponent at the natural to either punish excessive greed or get ready for a defensive stance if an attack comes. - If your opponent takes gas, see if he or she continues to mine with 3 donres after 100 is mined and how much gas is mined by clicking on it. - Obviously always put overlords between you and your opponent to see army movements - Check queen count and if your opponent has a defensive spine. High queen count and a spine indicates that no aggression is coming and if it's coming it'll be pretty bad aggression that should be easily stopped. Low queen count and no spine means you should make units, even if your opponent is not making units your opponent will be hard pressed to hold your offensive.
Yeah, there goes a lot into it. Still, when Shine can go 5-0 vs Soulkey with like 5 different rushes, then I think the matchup does have too much volatility early.
Of course it isn't "just a gamble". But it is supervolatile early on. Like in any matchup, there are going to be some outstanding players. Even in the darkest ages of PvP gambles in 2010-11, MC had an amazing record vs Protoss. That doesn't proof you cannot win quite often by gambling, even if the opponent has a practical chance of scouting/reacting to it. Even practical chances are chances and I don't think it should be up to the defender to play perfectly not to die. It should be up to the aggressor to outplay the opponent so he can take a win. If that isn't the case (which it isn't in certain ZvZ/PvP scenarios as well as in general with some Protoss rushes like Immortal/Sentry that requires the Zerg to react perfectly and the Protoss to not FF perfectly) you just create a game of easy wins instead of back and forth games.
Show nested quote +
Yes, exactly. Protoss didn't 3gate expand anymore. Because the build had gotten figured out and Protoss were struggling with Zerg builds of that time. That's why they FFE'd whenever possible and the maps got changed so that Protoss could do so on every map, because without it they were in trouble - since, as I already said, gateway expands had been figured out.
FFE came as a response to map changes, not in reverse. It started on Shakuras Plateau simply because you could do it there. Which is honestly fine if only a few maps in the pool allow it because it allows for variety.
Tel'darim Altar, Terminus, Crevasse to name a few others were FFEs were good. And they also tried them on maps liek Metalopolis (before it got changed to make it a little better) or Crossfire.
Maybe FFE came to a certain extend because of map changes, the map changes however came because after MC's second GSL title Protoss winrates dropped down to 30-40% on the highest level.
Show nested quote +The only HotS matchup that you can be somewhat certain off what your opponent is doing is ZvT. Seeing how it is considered quite great and still features a lot of interaction (reapers/hellions; possibly banshees from the Terrans side; queens/zerglings, possibly roaches from the Zergs side) I'd even go as far as to say that in general people prefer to see somewhat generic, easily scoutable aggression, than having to react to things that can be easily missed in the early game. I'd say that currently Protoss in all matchups has the easiest time to know what their opponent is doing now that hallucination is innate and no longer costs any resource.
I meant the matchup in terms of predictability of BOs. Terrans are usually going to go for some 3CC+hellion build, Zergs are usually going to go for some 3base build with mutalisks.
|
On April 03 2014 03:59 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2014 03:27 SiskosGoatee wrote:On April 02 2014 16:00 Big J wrote:What you want is aggressive openings that can't fall behind but can also win the game if the opponent makes a tiny mistake to be viable. We already have PvP (and to a certain extend early ZvZ) for that. It's bad enough. Yeah, mistakes being punished. ZvZ is the only matchup in the game currently for me which has any sembalance of strategy in the early game going on. All other matchups are just blind build order poker. ZvZ forces you to react to your opponent because if you don't, you die. If you just blindly do your build in ZvZ you don't die vs 'some builds' like it's in all the other matchups, you die vs almost any build. The margins of error are so tight that you are forced to play reactively. OK; I really need to know how you play reactive in early ZvZ, because me and all other Zergs in the world like Soulkey have been struggling there to see inside eggs before they have even been queued. Like, a very common rush in ZvZ is to make only speed zerglings on your first or second inject. Meanwhile the opponent has to build units as well (or he is losing way too much larva spawn time/mining time). But how does he know what he has to react to, when at best he sees a bunch of eggs and that his opponent has mined 100gas or more and it could be all drones.
You can't play reactive to that kind of stuff, because you have to make decisions before you know what the opponent is doing. You either prepare blindly for such a rush after scouting a gas and you get ahead if you do, or you don't and you fall behind/die when he is commiting. And similarily with baneling rushes. I don't think Soulkey plays ZvZ blindly, or most pro Zergs. But the point is that casters do a really bad job at explaning what goes through the mind of players in ZvZ. Bitter is the only one who makes an attempt really but neither the casters nor the observers focus on explanation the logic behind ZvZ. Basic rules of ZvZ: - Always keep an overlord in vision of the natural mineral line and check if your opponent is droning it up. Casters and observers completely fail to highlight that in ZvZ both players are constantly monitoring the drone count of their opponent at the natural to either punish excessive greed or get ready for a defensive stance if an attack comes. - If your opponent takes gas, see if he or she continues to mine with 3 donres after 100 is mined and how much gas is mined by clicking on it. - Obviously always put overlords between you and your opponent to see army movements - Check queen count and if your opponent has a defensive spine. High queen count and a spine indicates that no aggression is coming and if it's coming it'll be pretty bad aggression that should be easily stopped. Low queen count and no spine means you should make units, even if your opponent is not making units your opponent will be hard pressed to hold your offensive. Yeah, there goes a lot into it. Still, when Shine can go 5-0 vs Soulkey with like 5 different rushes, then I think the matchup does have too much volatility early. Well, shine has shown capable of cheesing the best in any matchup and Maru could also 4-0 Innovation on the back of cheeses. Maybe Shine just figured out something about Soulkey's ZvZ, studied him and found a hole in his scouting patterns that no one thusfar was able to exploit? Just like Maru did with Innovation who fixed it afterwards.
ZvZ is still Soulkey's best matchup at 65%, it's hard to explain that with mere luck.
Of course it isn't "just a gamble". But it is supervolatile early on. It is, you make a mistake, you get punished. Forces you to not make them.
Like in any matchup, there are going to be some outstanding players. Even in the darkest ages of PvP gambles in 2010-11, MC had an amazing record vs Protoss. That doesn't proof you cannot win quite often by gambling, even if the opponent has a practical chance of scouting/reacting to it. It does proof that actually, and I never got why people called 4gate vs 4gate a gamble. It might have been stale and repetitive, but it was the opposite of gambling, everyone did the same strat, whoever had the best micro, in this case MC, won. Because of warpgate both sides had the exact same numbers, whoever microed it better won.
Even practical chances are chances and I don't think it should be up to the defender to play perfectly not to die. It should be up to the aggressor to outplay the opponent so he can take a win. If that isn't the case (which it isn't in certain ZvZ/PvP scenarios as well as in general with some Protoss rushes like Immortal/Sentry that requires the Zerg to react perfectly and the Protoss to not FF perfectly) you just create a game of easy wins instead of back and forth games. If it was up to the aggressor to outplay then no one would ever be aggressive any more. Rather what happens in this game are timing windows in matchups. There are simply times in matchups where aggression is rewarded and where defence is rewarded, this encourages players to move out at an appropriate time and then fall back to defend at a later time thereby encouraging interaction. Defenders advantage is not a constant.
Tel'darim Altar, Terminus, Crevasse to name a few others were FFEs were good.
These maps all came after Shakuras Plateau. This was the first map with a natural that could be walled so easily and where FFE started as a thing.
And they also tried them on maps liek Metalopolis (before it got changed to make it a little better) or Crossfire.
Maybe FFE came to a certain extend because of map changes, the map changes however came because after MC's second GSL title Protoss winrates dropped down to 30-40% on the highest level. Those map changes with TDA, Terminus and Crevasse in fact were added exactly in the GSL that MC won so I find it hard to belief that they were added in a reaction to bad protoss winrates after that point.
I meant the matchup in terms of predictability of BOs. Terrans are usually going to go for some 3CC+hellion build, Zergs are usually going to go for some 3base build with mutalisks.
Yeah, I can see that, but don't you rather have it that every game is a surprise? People started to complain that every TvZ was biomine after a while as well. The thing with Protoss, for all its faults, is at the very least that whatever protoss is going to do is a big surprise. Casters are always in PvZ/PvT/PvP talking about whatever the protoss is going to do because Protoss players seem to come up with a new build every week seemingly.
|
United States4883 Posts
|
It does proof that actually, and I never got why people called 4gate vs 4gate a gamble. It might have been stale and repetitive, but it was the opposite of gambling, everyone did the same strat, whoever had the best micro, in this case MC, won. Because of warpgate both sides had the exact same numbers, whoever microed it better won.
It wasn't just 4gate. Offensive 4gate was by far the most successful build, but there were defensive 4gates which were pretty good against offensive 4gates, and then there were 3gate/robo and 3gate/blink and 3gate/DT and stuff like that, which would often counter defensive 4gates etc. And there was really no way to know beforehand whether your opponent would stop probe production at 21 or 24.
If it was up to the aggressor to outplay then no one would ever be aggressive any more. Rather what happens in this game are timing windows in matchups. There are simply times in matchups where aggression is rewarded and where defence is rewarded, this encourages players to move out at an appropriate time and then fall back to defend at a later time thereby encouraging interaction. Defenders advantage is not a constant.
It already is on the aggressor to outplay the opponent in any matchup in which you don't just rely on scouting. Basically all aggression past 10mins is such that you have to outplay the opponent to make it work. The problem is the scouting/BO-interactions before that + the problem that every bigger attack against 2bases is an immidiate gameender when it succeeds. There is no "he got ahead by sniping the natural" like it is with 3rd or 4th bases. If you lose the natural, the game is immidiatly over. There is no back and forth with attacks that hit before players are spread out. It makes for boring games in which players just optimize the rush until it is maximum commitment with maximum power. Unlike later on in the game in which you have a decent army regardless of whether your opponent does a commited attack or just pokes around. And you have the strategical choices to give up some land or counterattack when you are under attack. All of that is not true if you play against an opponent who just built a fuckton of units and crashes into your frontdoor when your units are all just spawning because the reaction to scouting the 5extra gateways is that tight, or the reaction to scouting the 28zerglings spawning after the first injects is that tight.
It is, you make a mistake, you get punished. Forces you to not make them.
It doesn't work like that. Noone does or will ever play mistake-free. With that attitude you can justify every "imbalance" in the game because we don't know if it would have been imbalanced if Terrans stayed out of range perfectly upon seeing an infestor in WoL (which they often did, but not always), or if there wasn't a magic BO+scouting pattern that would always hold 5rax reaper if done perfectly.
Hell, even if you don't argue with balance and stuff, it is just boring if your opponent has a 50% winrate BO that can force you to play only zergling/baneling for 20mins "because that is the reaction to constant ling/bling pressure". Even when it is just 45% winrate, that's way too high for a way too easy build. It's a game of two players. It shouldn't be possible for one player to completely dictate what the other player is doing for a longer periode of time.
+ Show Spoiler +These maps all came after Shakuras Plateau. This was the first map with a natural that could be walled so easily and where FFE started as a thing.
Those map changes with TDA, Terminus and Crevasse in fact were added exactly in the GSL that MC won so I find it hard to belief that they were added in a reaction to bad protoss winrates after that point.
So, they came after Sharkuras. FFE wasn't a thing, not even on Shakuras, until after those maps were added. Apart from the one or other random occasion, everyone was 3gate expanding back then.
The map changes I was talking about were not "adding a bunch of maps that also turned out to be FFE-able", but over the course of 2011 replacing nearly all maps on which it wasn't possible to FFE with maps on which it was possible.
Also, it wasn't just lucky incidents that TDA, Terminus and Crevasse were FFE-able. Even without FFE, Protoss needs chokes to expand off forcefields as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
