|
On October 14 2009 00:04 TossNub wrote:
Kinda off topic o_O i wrote it all and read it and realized this has nothing to do with DA lol
As for the APM matter, i've always been confused as to why people joke around like "1a2a3a toss" it's not that toss doesn't need micro, but it takes longer for toss to macro. for example (by the way 1a2a3a is late game, so i'm setting up scenarios in late game)
If a zerg players wants to mass up 12 units (with no lings) they require 4 "unit building actions". to match that a toss player is required to do i would say around 6 to 8 "unit building actions" depending on the unit composition and upgrades. in the beginning it doesn't seem like that big of a deal but late game, when zerg is pouring out from 9 to 12 "unit building actions" toss is required to spend a lot more time macroing their units. not to mention the fact that zerg can just save up their larvas and produce, while toss has to keep their gates constantly pumping.
Against terran it's a little different, which is why i think toss does have some advantage against terran. If a terran player produces from 8 facts, toss is required to produce from 10 gates or so (due to terran units being more effective... especially late game with upgrades). which only requires very small time spent on "unit producing actions" than the terran player.
So a zerg player with 200 apm could spend a considerably longer time microing his units while a toss player with 200 apm is busy keep their unit count up to par. Against terran you do see more micro, such as zelot bombing or running your zelots, making sure your goons aren't hiting the building that's floating around for meat shield. etc etc. So yeah, toss does micro less than zerg/terran players, but it's because we want to keep out with zerg/terran's macro.
That's just my 2 cents o_O. Don't bash me too much.
1. Protoss units cost more
2. Protoss units take longer to build
3. Protoss units are strong
4. Protoss has fewer overall units than zerg and less "death ball" factor than Terran
All this combines to make Protoss army control extremely micro oriented. 1a2a3a is just a joke, if anyone takes it seriously then that explains why they're bad at the game. Terran is the most micro intensive, obviously, but good micro of your army with P is extremely important because they can't be quickly replaced, and you have an unforgiving macro mechanic on top of that (my gates don't multiply themselves when I don't macro correctly).
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
As a bad Terran player, I have little practical expertise to contribute here...
But I do want to say that this is what make TL so wonderful- it's already been the biggest and best site for SC coverage in the world, but with liquipedia and the strategy forum, TL is becoming the foremost engine for SC strategy and tactical discussion outside of the SC Team houses.
Foreign players are well served for now, and will certainly be with SC2. This can only help narrow the gap in skill between Korea and everywhere else.
|
On October 14 2009 00:04 TossNub wrote:
Kinda off topic o_O i wrote it all and read it and realized this has nothing to do with DA lol
As for the APM matter, i've always been confused as to why people joke around like "1a2a3a toss" it's not that toss doesn't need micro, but it takes longer for toss to macro. for example (by the way 1a2a3a is late game, so i'm setting up scenarios in late game)
If a zerg players wants to mass up 12 units (with no lings) they require 4 "unit building actions". to match that a toss player is required to do i would say around 6 to 8 "unit building actions" depending on the unit composition and upgrades. in the beginning it doesn't seem like that big of a deal but late game, when zerg is pouring out from 9 to 12 "unit building actions" toss is required to spend a lot more time macroing their units. not to mention the fact that zerg can just save up their larvas and produce, while toss has to keep their gates constantly pumping.
Against terran it's a little different, which is why i think toss does have some advantage against terran. If a terran player produces from 8 facts, toss is required to produce from 10 gates or so (due to terran units being more effective... especially late game with upgrades). which only requires very small time spent on "unit producing actions" than the terran player.
So a zerg player with 200 apm could spend a considerably longer time microing his units while a toss player with 200 apm is busy keep their unit count up to par. Against terran you do see more micro, such as zelot bombing or running your zelots, making sure your goons aren't hiting the building that's floating around for meat shield. etc etc. So yeah, toss does micro less than zerg/terran players, but it's because we want to keep out with zerg/terran's macro.
That's just my 2 cents o_O. Don't bash me too much.
Toss macro is quite certainly the easiest.
Terran, tvz bio: go back to your main every 10-15 seconds and select 10 rax, produce 1 rine each. Even pros don't always do that, instead the produce 2-3 rines per rax. Which also takes a lot of time, after all that's 30-40 actions.
Terran, any mech build: vults build extremely fast as well, but overall mech isn't extremely hard to macro. Facts can be put in one place.
Zerg: If you don't have all your hatches hotkeyed, you have to move over X places, where X is the number of bases, ctrl-click and hatch some unit. You only have 3 F-Keys to help with that, and even then it is quite ugly to jump around everywhere. Once you are 4 bases you have to scroll the map or use both hotkeys and F-Keys, which is quite confusing. You have to make sure to produce the right units at the right places, but that requires you to take the time and check what is needed at the place where you are currently macroing. You also should never wait until you have 3 larvae or else you will "lose" larvae, so your macro window is somewhere between 13 and 35 seconds.
Toss: Their units take forever to produce. No idea how long it actually is, but you certainly have plenty of time between two macro cycles. Toss can conveniently put all the gates in a single place, and an additional gate to compensate for bad macro in times when you have to do other stuff doesn't cost 350 minerals + 1 larva or 200/100 + 50/50. Toss only has to use a single hotkey to access the macro location. And that's when they don't even need 9 hotkeys for units. If toss has robos at expansions it is easy to make the right units - reavers at all robos, except for sometimes an obs or shuttle in your main.
|
Nongmin won two pretty intense ZvP games last night simply because the Protoss had a lapse in macro. PvZ micro is seriously intense, and due to it you might screw up in unit production in mid to late game PvZ. The Protoss seriously won every single fight by huge margins until Nongmin's hive tech kicked in. The thing is, Even if the Zerg messed up and stacked up three larva, you can still pump freaking three units from the hatchery. You cannot do the same with Protoss unit production buildings. Due to this, Zerg unit production seriously is more forgiving than Protoss unit production. The players weren't scrubs either. They were both extremely good players despite some of their flaws (Nongmin tossing a billion Zerglings to die and the Protoss collapsing in unit production in the late game).
I have no idea why you're talking about how Protoss gets to put all their gateways in the same place when Terran does the exact same, and additional unit production hatcheries that aren't used for expos are generally all placed in the same place as well.
|
To clarify about "1a2a3a
As you get better in PvZ, army movement is REALLY key. Minimizing damage by moving units around to stop alot of hits on a few units, not taking any losses (i.e move a few units back so the zerg units die faster), storming the right spot to stop a strike force of zerglings/hydras coming - these all add up. Losing 8 unnessesary units in mid game because you had them out of position is actually pretty costly for a protoss vs zerg. At lower levels, zerg can't macro up anything enough to weaken, let alone kill a protoss with a decently macro'd army. That's why most zergs cheese, and facing cheese as protoss is very hard until you have an understanding of the matchup and know how to multitask your scouting probe
|
On October 14 2009 01:49 koreasilver wrote:
Nongmin won two pretty intense ZvP games last night simply because the Protoss had a lapse in macro. PvZ micro is seriously intense, and due to it you might screw up in unit production in mid to late game PvZ. The Protoss seriously won every single fight by huge margins until Nongmin's hive tech kicked in. The thing is, Even if the Zerg messed up and stacked up three larva, you can still pump freaking three units from the hatchery. You cannot do the same with Protoss unit production buildings. Due to this, Zerg unit production seriously is more forgiving than Protoss unit production. The players weren't scrubs either. They were both extremely good players despite some of their flaws (Nongmin tossing a billion Zerglings to die and the Protoss collapsing in unit production in the late game).
I have no idea why you're talking about how Protoss gets to put all their gateways in the same place when Terran does the exact same, and additional unit production hatcheries that aren't used for expos are generally all placed in the same place as well.
Even though you try to mass several hatcheries, the fact remains that zerg has his production spread over 4-5 places in lategame, while toss usually only produces from 1 or 2 places. Also, if zerg doesn't use his larvae perfectly, he has to get additional hatcheries which cost 350 minerals + 1 larva + mining time each, while an additional gate only costs 150 minerals and only 8-16 minerals due to lost mining time.
In lategame, zerg will most likely macro on the time frame limit as well, so he will always stack 2 or almost 3 larvae before he starts the next production round. If he loses larvae and doesn't have excess hatcheries, he will pile up resources. If the zerg builds additional hatcheries to compensate for bad macro, the toss will be able to build twice as many additional gates.
Of course this doesn't take into account that ultras are less larva intensive and thus you might have more hatcheries from midgame than you will need in lategame. But it gets quite complicated here as you also have to take the gas cost into account and what not. It's true that zerg macro can be more forgiving, but essentially you are losing resources compared to perfect macro. Resources that toss should be able to lose in the same way, by having more gates than necessary for perfect macro.
I also mentioned that facts can be put in a single place too, and thus terran mech macro isn't so extremely hard either. Yes you can clump rax too, but then terran bio still has the shortest macro interval, or else requires the most actions.
I am not trying to say that toss macro is way easier than any other race's. I'd even be ok with saying they are equally hard.
My main point with that above post was that toss has to spend less time/hotkeys/etc on macro than zerg. I have to admit that I didn't really argue in that direction. So, for the mentioned reasons, my point is that toss has more time/etc to micro than zerg (and toss needs that time).
|
Why didnt this derailment stop with louders response? It was pretty much perfect.
So how about those dark archons
|
On October 12 2009 06:13 MuffinDude wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2009 05:10 valaki wrote:
If the zerg ever gets to ultras it would be awesome to just mind control 6-7 of them. Vs lurk/hyra it's simply not worth it/you can use your apm for storms or reaver micro instead. MC sux. Too much energy and it only gets one unit.
Unless you hace 3-5 DA's and you MC dropping ovies.
|
o_O i didn't mean to change the subject of the board... lol but i'm impressed that i did.
On the off topic issue: I never said toss macro was hard. I admit toss prob. has the easiest macro. untill mid game unit composition is pretty simple, and gates are all built at the same place. But i wasn't talking about macro at all o_O i was talking about microing... even if toss has easier time macroing doesn't change the fact that toss has to spend more time macroing than zerg... and... there for... saying toss is 1a2a3a is.... kinda ridic. toss hasn't been 1a2a3a in forever....
Back on topic O_o DAs... idk, how useful are they against hydras? i have no idea how useful they are. I mean, by the time hydras start pounding at your entrance, you can get off 1 maelstrom. is that enough, cause call me a noob but usually it takes me like 2 storms to fend that off... especially if the opponent is microing their hydras.
|
On October 13 2009 12:37 JohannesH wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2009 07:33 pyrogenetix wrote:
and no there will not be a shift in metagame because if everyone did it then zergs would stop trying to ht snipe with mutastacks. 1 less option for zergs then. But if everyone stopped sniping hts with muta then nobody would get DA for that anymore... Then muta ht sniping would be safe again :O So I dont think its that simple.
This is like saying that if everyone stopped going speedlings because of the forge FE then no one would build cannons again and thus speedlings would be safe again, imo this is stupid logic.
Plus everyone still seems to be forgetting the other uses of dark archons... they aren't like Corsairs where they are out primarily to stop mutas, rather you can use them to maelstrom just about anything, for example lurkers, getting his lurkers before they are burrowed is hugely valuable to a toss, and maelstrom makes that much easier, plus if there is nothing else to maelstrom, just get hydras, stopping the hydras in front makes it much harder to micro a hydra force and you are still dealing damage with your units...
Anyways the threat factor was mentioned and should be emphasized, the typical zerg relies on mobility for alot of his tactics, from early game lings, to muta harass, to ultras and cracklings later, thus maelstrom is a great threat to make a zerg think twice about running in to attack, because he may run the chance of not being able to retreat. SO think like a terran now, the terran advantage is hugely powerful units in a great composition, the terran weakness? Mobility. You are fully committed to attacking/defending a position with siege tanks. Thus if you get defeated by a larger army you lose everything.
Now in terms of a zerg player who often has a less powerful army than a protoss, are you going to do alot of harassing/micro attacks when there is a good chance of loosing a good portion of your army?
|
On October 14 2009 02:59 TossNub wrote:
Back on topic O_o DAs... idk, how useful are they against hydras? i have no idea how useful they are.
exactly my point... and OP's point... protoss are not using that unit enough to know the real value of it, specially in mid game.
So I will suggest that all the protoss that are advocating for this idea, start playing and trying the techniq and then upload the replay so we can analyze them... even those that they lose in the process.
The point of it is to check the timings and compare how effective it would be or not to use those 2 darks that you already created in a different way... I will try to upload mines, but all the zergs I played today are on cheese mode... :S
When I see the opportunity I will try the DAs and post replay of it.
|
On October 14 2009 02:59 TossNub wrote:
o_O i didn't mean to change the subject of the board... lol but i'm impressed that i did.
On the off topic issue: I never said toss macro was hard. I admit toss prob. has the easiest macro. untill mid game unit composition is pretty simple, and gates are all built at the same place. But i wasn't talking about macro at all o_O i was talking about microing... even if toss has easier time macroing doesn't change the fact that toss has to spend more time macroing than zerg... and... there for... saying toss is 1a2a3a is.... kinda ridic. toss hasn't been 1a2a3a in forever....
Back on topic O_o DAs... idk, how useful are they against hydras? i have no idea how useful they are. I mean, by the time hydras start pounding at your entrance, you can get off 1 maelstrom. is that enough, cause call me a noob but usually it takes me like 2 storms to fend that off... especially if the opponent is microing their hydras.
Well and I was arguing that toss has to spend less time on macro than zerg and thus has more time for micro.
The point is not to maelstrom hydras that attack your entrance. You would still get your HTs with storm and make the DA from the two DTs you make for harrassment. Or you'd get the DA later, except if you know that the zerg is making mutas, then you'd get an Archon and a DA, possibly skipping storm for a while. The DA is meant to prevent the zerg from HT sniping, which happens a while after the first wave of hydras is out, about the time the toss would want to expand again.
It's clear that a DA is inferior to HTs if there are no mutas, but if there are no mutas, the toss army is strong enough to compensate for the small loss of strength because there is no huge loss of strength aka HT sniping. If HT sniping wouldn't give the zerg a decent advantage compared to not sniping, zergs wouldn't do it. So if you can deny it, you can accept a small cost. After all, you shouldn't be looking for a kill-all build, but for a build that safely carries you through mid- and lategame where you can overwhelm your opponent through superior mechanics/etc., or even get into the phase where the map is mined out, where toss has a huge advantage, especially with DAs.
|
On October 14 2009 03:15 RaptorX wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2009 02:59 TossNub wrote:
Back on topic O_o DAs... idk, how useful are they against hydras? i have no idea how useful they are. exactly my point... and OP's point... protoss are not using that unit enough to know the real value of it, specially in mid game. So I will suggest that all the protoss that are advocating for this idea, start playing and trying the techniq and then upload the replay so we can analyze them... even those that they lose in the process. The point of it is to check the timings and compare how effective it would be or not to use those 2 darks that you already created in a different way... I will try to upload mines, but all the zergs I played today are on cheese mode... :S When I see the opportunity I will try the DAs and post replay of it.
I'll help though im only D+ and most of my games ill probably lose :/
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
If you want to see why Dark Archons suck go watch JangBi vs RorO.
And yes, Roro was aware of the DA.
|
On October 14 2009 04:17 iNfeRnaL wrote:
If you want to see why Dark Archons suck go watch JangBi vs RorO.
And yes, Roro was aware of the DA.
+1
it was hilarious that i watched that game after reading this thread. i was like "EXAMPLE"
|
On October 14 2009 03:13 Traveler wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2009 12:37 JohannesH wrote:On October 13 2009 07:33 pyrogenetix wrote:
and no there will not be a shift in metagame because if everyone did it then zergs would stop trying to ht snipe with mutastacks. 1 less option for zergs then. But if everyone stopped sniping hts with muta then nobody would get DA for that anymore... Then muta ht sniping would be safe again :O So I dont think its that simple. This is like saying that if everyone stopped going speedlings because of the forge FE then no one would build cannons again and thus speedlings would be safe again, imo this is stupid logic.
Reading comprehension ftw... The whole point of my post was to point out thats stupid logic.
|
On October 14 2009 04:17 iNfeRnaL wrote:
If you want to see why Dark Archons suck go watch JangBi vs RorO.
And yes, Roro was aware of the DA.
+ Show Spoiler +That wasn't the DA's fault, really. Having 0 defense against mutas isn't advisable, even if you have a DA. And in various other occasions JangBi made some serious mistakes (losing 2 HTs in the middle of the map, miles from his army, losing a full shuttle, ...). Having 2 HTs and 2 Zealots instead wouldn't have made a difference in that game.
Jumping to conclusions from a single bad game isn't exactly what helps you at getting better.
Oh no, I lost with proxy 2 gate, I'll never do that again, it sucks.
Oh no, I lost with 1 gate tech, I'll never do that again, it sucks.
Oh no, I lost with forge fe, I'll never do that again, it sucks.
Oh no... I'll go play WoW instead.
|
On October 14 2009 04:24 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2009 04:17 iNfeRnaL wrote:
If you want to see why Dark Archons suck go watch JangBi vs RorO.
And yes, Roro was aware of the DA. + Show Spoiler +That wasn't the DA's fault, really. Having 0 defense against mutas isn't advisable, even if you have a DA. And in various other occasions JangBi made some serious mistakes (losing 2 HTs in the middle of the map, miles from his army, losing a full shuttle, ...). Having 2 HTs and 2 Zealots instead wouldn't have made a difference in that game. Jumping to conclusions from a single bad game isn't exactly what helps you at getting better. Oh no, I lost with proxy 2 gate, I'll never do that again, it sucks. Oh no, I lost with 1 gate tech, I'll never do that again, it sucks. Oh no, I lost with forge fe, I'll never do that again, it sucks. Oh no... I'll go play WoW instead.
++1
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
Toss macro is easiest in lategame PvT. Easiest lategame macro period unless you have 20+ gates. Just build gateways and pylons and produce zeal/goon.
Toss macro is hardest in midgame PvZ (has to build a TON of shit, all three techs with a large production burst and lots of pylons and don't forget upgrading like mad) and very demanding in late game PvZ when you build/rebuild cannons like a madman.
Actually, the hardest macro task is not queuing units, but constructing buildings because you need to hit exactly the right spot and be at the same time fast and precise with mouse. Unit queuing - yes zerg is hardest here because all their hatcheries are at different corners of the map, but when it comes to the amount of buildings you make in PvZ and the precision with which you have to place them, I'd say toss doesn't suffer an easier fate than other races. Toss has best macro with production facilities costing only minerals and building fast, but best doesn't equal easy.
|
On October 13 2009 19:38 spinesheath wrote:
Most avoidable Arbiter deaths I see don't happen during an attack, but a bit afterwards, when the toss goes back to macro. Imo this will change over time. It could be prevented easily, anyways: Hotkey all your Arbs in one group and once you return to your base after a battle, select that group and right klick anywhere in your base. That would mostly be another macro task, nothing more. Tosses are used to macroing right before and right after the main part of a battle has been fought out. Adding 2 actions to the routine takes a lot of time and practice, but at some point you will do it unconciously.
I don't see how DAs are sniped easier than Archons. DAs have no attack, so they RUN if they are hit. Archons ATTACK the hydras. And if the two units are following the same order (move, attack move, patrol, hold) they are sniped equally well.
Um, running vs getting hit is irrelevant. I'm talking about when you're actually advancing. HT are generally safe when they are in the actual Protoss expansion... it's when you're moving out to pressure hte Zerg that the HT get sniped by mutas. Thus when you're moving your armies I often see DA going out ahead in huge engagements (while the APM is being used to storm, etc). It's just the cost of managing another unit. DA can take quite a bit less hits from hydras than archons as well. They are quite the easy target to snipe.
And it's still the same concept as arbiters, toss usually are focusing attention elsewhere. The only reason you don't notice it with TvP is because turrets take FOREVER to kill the fucking arbiter which has a ton of hp. So if a DA does the same vs hydralisks, it's done in a second. Just like how if an arbiter does that and goliaths are around, it's done in seconds. That's how I view it at least, and have experienced it from personal use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
