*Note that the VOD list is outdated by almost half a year and not finished for TvT as I have been too busy and will updated when I have more time. It's still a good reference for TvZ/TvP games in early '10 and before.
[G] How to Improve
Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
![]()
Ver
United States2186 Posts
*Note that the VOD list is outdated by almost half a year and not finished for TvT as I have been too busy and will updated when I have more time. It's still a good reference for TvZ/TvP games in early '10 and before. | ||
Lightwip
United States5497 Posts
Tbh you should get some toss/zerg to help add to the guide, especially in VODs. | ||
LarJarsE
United States1378 Posts
Great read though! | ||
Misrah
United States1695 Posts
![]() Once again, good work, thanks for the time and effort- and i plan on memorizing this ![]() | ||
KP_CollectoR
United States744 Posts
| ||
Saracen
United States5139 Posts
| ||
ella_guru
Canada1741 Posts
Some real nuggets in there! I really like stuff like this that have general maxims but specific examples. I like when you talk about perspectives/biases/mindsets and that sort of stuff, because it's really relevant and easily applicable to my music. | ||
FyRe_DragOn
Canada2055 Posts
| ||
![]()
FakeSteve[TPR]
Valhalla18444 Posts
| ||
Zed.iii
50 Posts
| ||
Lightwip
United States5497 Posts
On July 13 2010 06:26 Zed.iii wrote: with which program should I open this file? lol Acrobat reader reads PDF's. | ||
AoN.DimSum
United States2983 Posts
| ||
H.k[D]
United States260 Posts
| ||
Hautamaki
Canada1311 Posts
| ||
88.inspades
Philippines32 Posts
![]() | ||
Selth
United States469 Posts
| ||
endy
Switzerland8970 Posts
| ||
.Soul
Canada81 Posts
| ||
KiLL_ORdeR
United States1518 Posts
EDIT: On July 14 2010 02:04 .Soul wrote: Great read! I'm not a BW myself, what I've read will help me improve my SC2 game alot! Just saw this. This guide goes way beyond the scope of SC, or any RTS game for that matter. Sure the specifics are obviously focused on BW, since he wrote it before SC2 came out. But the "broad strokes" as Day[9] would say, or the basic core principles, are the same in pretty much every area of life. But in short, yes this will help you improve in SC2. | ||
Knickknack
United States1187 Posts
The worst part about the second problem is that due to the inherent nature of learning, the initial period of growth is always slow and will show little results. A beginning student cannot effectively comprehend the nature of what they are seeing because they have not built the mental framework to place it in: to them an SC game, especially a pro one, is just a series of actions happening for seemingly incomprehensible reasons. They can't understand their own games, so how could they even begin to relate to one played many levels higher? The slow growth during this period can easily lead to discouragement and is a stumbling block for many people; the inability to establish a mental framework is likely the reason why only a small fraction of SC players can ever get above the level of a d/d+ iccup player. The mental framework is a structural glue of sorts that stores and relates every known idea about the subject. It cannot be fully realized until one can, at least at a basic level, incorporate together the patterns that govern the activity. Some people I have tried to help give up after several lessons. Not enough dedication, don't understand what I'm saying well or don't put into action well. Slow progress so they get discouraged. Mental framework is absolutely key, but difficult to talk about. Probably the best mention I have found of it is this chess article: "The capacity for abstract thought. Correct generalizations, based on experience, produce the so-called “positional instinct” of a chess master. The ability to distribute attention over a number of different factors such as are always involved in a “combination.” This avoids the overlooking of moves, which is the biggest weakness of most chess amateurs and beginners. A disciplined will capable of forcing the speed and concentration of the thinking process far above the normal powers of a player." http://www.chess.com/article/view/mentality-and-chess Of course my issues are disciplined will and drive (motivation), which no article really helps. | ||
Silentness
United States2821 Posts
Will be reading this during my 12 hour shift. Thanks for the write up Ver. | ||
ironcell
Chile1127 Posts
| ||
poboxy
Canada48 Posts
| ||
mmp
United States2130 Posts
I think watching VODs and acquiring replays is the only way to meaningfully fill this gap (Liquipedia can't hold your hand forever), but sad as it is to say - Liquipedia just isn't what it could be. Most TL users probably don't feel qualified to comment on inadequate articles - and aside from your work on the Terran articles, I'm not aware of any user that has made significant contributions. That said, it isn't fair to accuse players (say, D-C range) of being gimmicky or shortsighted when the resources they have are not up to date, are not comprehensive, and don't offer suggestions for when "your opponent perfectly counters your predictable build." The advice is always, practice practice practice and your mechanics will make up for it. Frankly, I'm not interested in emulating Flash's robotic macro - but I would like to get a feel for the strategic options at my disposal. For example, playing against yellow-rank opponents I know my only chance to win is with predictable solid play. But achieving a meaningful win rate at this level takes hours of routine practice that I just don't have the time to maintain. I've found cheese strategies a fun way to mix things up, but I also like to explore the full depth of options, just so I know I'm not playing into what my opponent expects and is ready to exploit - sometimes I'm the one that gets the upper hand. This may not get me to a high rank any time soon, but at least I'm not wearing out my hands, my mind, and my love for the game. Or another example, I open predictable TvP siege expand FE and my opponent does a 1gate FE into a greedy 3rd (1gate) seeing that I'm just doing mah build order. I should add a quick 2nd fac (or Stylish's 3fac is good here too I think) and make a "fac-cc-fac" push... but I won't even read about this situation or counter-strategy on Liquipedia (it's in the forums though, thanks to Idra's commentary). The majority of Liquipedia articles are similarly vague in their notion of what your options are and how you can respond. So I'll just die when my 3base timing push is outnumbered. Now I can mass a hundred games and "figure it out" but it would be simpler if someone just told me up front that Protoss is being greedy here. Practicing and mass gaming are important to improvement and intuition, but there is no need to hit our heads against brick walls just because information isn't in the open. I'll wrap this up short and just summarize that I think your critique of weaker players should be more focused on their ignorance of educational resources that clearly demonstrate ways to improve, instead of attacking what you perceive to be intellectual malaise (probably the case for many noobies) and greed to find a quick gimmicky win (who doesn't like easy wins?). A lot of players want to get better but are afraid they need insane apm, think practicing one build a hundred times is boring, or just don't know what to read on Liquipedia ("so many historically significant 2facs to choose from..."). I know we've had this discussion several times now, and one thread made a good attempt at reasoning the full range of strategic options in a match - hardly any high level players took the time to drop some advice and the project turned into more of a scavenger hunt through preexisting threads. What I'm trying to say here is that TL has many small threads that relate to certain situations, and Liquipedia should represent all of this collective wisdom when in fact it is a project far from complete. Getting this information organized and well-documented will do far more to improve players than insulting their work ethic. | ||
MisteR
Netherlands595 Posts
I do hope that you will change your views on Horang2 by the way, since he is really stepping up his game. Also, I'm interested whether you think a player like Kwanro is bad. I see terrans often have only appreciation for a good late game, when it seems reasonable to me that in a sport like this both early and late game are equally important. In fencing you've got the same differentation as in starcraft: three weapons, foil, epee and sabre. In practice foil is the defensive weapon, sabre the offensive and epee is in between, terran, zerg and protoss, respectively. Now my point is, that the way an epee fencer should learn his game, is in many points different from that of a sabre or foil fencer. Not only the technical aspect, which is obvious, but also the mental aspect. Playing zerg really good, requires a different mindset from playing terran or protoss. What I notice on this website is a bias for the playstyle of terrans. While that's ok, it does mean that the protoss and zerg players often get a lack of respect. Players like Horang2 and Shine, who are both mentioned in your work, are actually better than you give hem credit for. It is really hard to constantly beat your opponent in the early game, when he knows you're coming. Look at Arjen Robben in the WC and how he constantly was able to beat his man and try for a shot with his left leg. Same principle. And it is also deserving of respect when Horang2 comes out with another amazing cheese, that somehow allows him to dictate to way the game is played. To make another WC reference, look at midfield playmakers like Verron from Argentina or Xavi/Xavi Alonso/Fabregas from Spain. They seem lazy ass players who only pass the ball around, but somehow it is always one of them that gives the deciding pass. Though I can recognize quality when I see it, I can't actually use this excellent guide all that much, since I'm not a terran user. It would be interesting whether this could be replicated for a broader public, but it might just be impossible to cater to all audiences. Anyway, I'm sure many people will be helped by it, and to be honest I've found quite a few interesting thoughts, so take what I just said with a grain of salt, please ![]() | ||
Hautamaki
Canada1311 Posts
For zerg, the last good writer for zerg was Tsunami and that's all 1.07/early 1.08 era stuff so pretty much you're on your own for zerg and you'll have to get by watching vods/reps for the most part =[ | ||
Silentness
United States2821 Posts
I was hoping for more advanced Terran information. | ||
Gustav_Wind
United States646 Posts
On July 14 2010 18:40 Silentness wrote: I read the PDF... it was pretty much everything I already knew. I found Oov's "gotta rape" quote entertaining, but nothing in there that I haven't had told to me a thousand times. I was hoping for more advanced Terran information. maybe consider that you aren't the target audience then? I mean, it's "How to improve", not "the details of Terran strategy". @ Mister: I think you missed the point with the bit about Horang2. Well-designed "Creative" or "Aggressive" plays are a good way to win individual games, but focusing on such plays is not a good way to improve at all. You can say that Horang2 and Shine have valid styles (this is debatable), but they are not good styles to emulate if you are serious about developing as a player. This isn't a Terran bias, either. Horang2 and Shine aren't respected because they tend to fall apart whenever the game enters mid-late game on even footing, not because they play Protoss and Zerg. (Horang2 seems to have tightened up his play considerably, but back when he was known for doing random cheeses he really was quite a bad player.) It's about the developing the skillset which supports stability, low variance, and versatility. | ||
nbaker
United States1341 Posts
| ||
Esper[mb]
United States88 Posts
![]() | ||
![]()
Ver
United States2186 Posts
@mmp- I agree Liquipedia is far from what it could be. The user impetus, especially from other players with a good understanding, simply isn't there. We tried to figure out solutions but there was too much apathy in general to contributing and in the end came up blank. At time there was a drive to collect advice from top strategy forum posters but we simply lacked motivated personal and it fizzled. As for the rest, I'm rather confused. The resources they have at their disposal are incredible, namely TLPD. That alone is enough, but that's not all. Day9's podcasts, and more importantly his strategic analyses are great assets for forming a mental framework and refining it. Then you have the forum posts and while most contributions in the forum frankly aren't very helpful, there definitely are some gold mines. When I was learning I didn't have anyone like Day, Idra, or myself to help out, just pro vods and replays of a select few players and a bunch of second-rate explanations, and I managed quite well in months. People now are swimming in riches to get through the toughest parts, but evidently its not helping much and I'm certain the approach is at fault. The strategic options at one's disposal are abundantly clear just from watching a select few player's games. You might say, 'well that takes a long time to watch 20 flash tvz's (even though you could just watch the openings and note what he does), but if you want to get good you need to watch those games anyways so why avoid it. Like I said in the guide you can't get good at an efficient rate without watching pro games. Of course there are faster ways of finding out and you should be making use of them (search the posts of people who give good advice maybe? start a thread?), but those are merely supplementary. The vast majority of foreigners, low or high level, simply do not make sufficient use of pro games, and they pay the price for it. Low level players do not have enough patterns stored, and high level players have no idea what they are doing. You seem to think that you can shortcut learning by finding correct explanations of everything, but sadly this is a trap; it just isn't that simple. You may find the answer to that problem very quickly but you will just run into another one that you need an answer to, and so on. It becomes a never-ending cycle because there is no greater framework to store it in. That is what happens to most strategy forum questions. People get an answer for one specific problem, then they run into something else. I've seen it happen dozens of times to my students and strategy forum goers. Like it or not there are going to be plateaus, but there will also be very large leaps. The way to circumvent this is by storing a large number of correct patterns over time (from watching pro games and playing). In the beginning it will be hard to make sense but as time goes on things will start to be clearer and soon after your learning will skyrocket because everything fits. For example for me right now, I can see a new strategy or concept and it will make sense within minutes, as if it just fits into place naturally. It may seem like this approach takes longer because you can't solve individual problems quickly in the start but it really is much quicker over the long run because you gain the ability to solve many problems instantly on your own and tie everything together. It certainly helps to look for specific answers as well (from the right sources) but forming correct patterns through watching pro games and playing the right way is not an option: it is a requirement. The rest of what you said is answered in the guide. This was too but it appears I might not have explained it well enough. @Mister- Gustav said it all. Race is irrelevant and this applies to other matchups just as easily (I play/study ZvT, not TvT btw). Look at the best players of every race right now, of every great player in history. Every single one was capable of defeating his opponents decisively in any phase of the game. They certainly could use allins, but they didn't have to. Julyzerg was a serious threat in the early game but he was still the strongest Zerg in the mid and late game as well. Effort won an OSL with ling allins and runbys but he is still a very fearsome late game player (as in the MSL game vs Flash). Ra had many creative allins and openings but he was also the best player at midgame timing attacks and was pretty much the only player to beat Savior in a late game PvZ. The list goes on and on. As for Horang2, sorry but I haven't had the time to pay serious attention to SC for about 6 months (the majority of this was written that long ago) so I'm not up to date on most things. As for Kwanro (at least how he was), he is simply a player with a low ceiling. Kwanro is never going to win a final in his present form no matter how lucky of a bracket he gets. He certainly has the ability to get wins but he isn't a complete player. @silentness- Really? That's quite surprising. I'm not sure what you were expecting then as this is an improvement guide, i,e how to improve rather than 'here are resources to use to improve.' If you want to ask some Terran analysis questions now go ahead I don't mind. But the principles of improving to very high levels will use the same principles and techniques as what I described; some things just become more important while others are already internalized. @everyone else- thank you for the kind words ![]() | ||
pangshai
Chinatown5333 Posts
| ||
Scarecrow
Korea (South)9172 Posts
| ||
Lebesgue
4542 Posts
| ||
SuperChad
Canada3 Posts
| ||
duckett
United States589 Posts
thanks for this amazing article, and your help in the past | ||
Kare
Norway786 Posts
| ||
endieg
Germany49 Posts
| ||
tOne
1 Post
Kudos to Ver | ||
shin_toss
Philippines2589 Posts
| ||
Boomsheka
United States3 Posts
| ||
Rio
Vietnam598 Posts
This is awsome | ||
Tempora
United States78 Posts
| ||
ArobAce
United States2 Posts
| ||
Entaro[AoV]
United States184 Posts
| ||
MaRiNe23
United States747 Posts
You listed alot of tvp strategies but you didn't include fantasy's style For these reasons I been trying to do the mass vulture harrass style of fantasy but you didn't include it in your guide and im just wondering if u forgot or u don't consider it a viable strategy? Also ur tvp reppack would be very helpful if u can. thx | ||
HickleStine
Australia276 Posts
On July 31 2010 11:48 MaRiNe23 wrote: For these reasons I been trying to do the mass vulture harrass style of fantasy but you didn't include it in your guide and im just wondering if u forgot or u don't consider it a viable strategy? Also ur tvp reppack would be very helpful if u can. thx It's the iloveoov build, Ver did include videos of it. Three of them have fantasy playing. | ||
monosofo
Peru2 Posts
| ||
alsowikk
109 Posts
![]() | ||
Servius_Fulvius
United States947 Posts
On August 01 2010 11:31 alsowikk wrote: God this is making me feel inferrior! I keep on trying to improve but, I can't get out of...bronze ![]() Make a topic by logging in and clicking on the forum name (Like under the Starcraft 2 Strategy. When you click on this you will see the "Starcraft 2 Strategy" label on top with a red folder that says "New Topic". Post away!). About your inquiry, what you should do, especially about early defense, is think of what you want to accomplish and try different things to accomplish this idea. The optimization is a "build order". The article suggests using old BW videos (or in your case, high level SC2 tournaments and streams) and getting your ideas from those people. Sure, it's more fun for some to think up their own, and that's a legitimate way of doing things, but if you're looking to improve really fast that's the way to go. Progamers have a lot of practice time to try ideas out. It's a shame we don't see the failed ideas so much, but by examining games from years ago we can see old styles, what they beat, and what beats them. You don't need a "strong build order", you need a good idea, practice the mechanics of the idea, and then test it and see where you need to make adjustments. | ||
Mobius
Canada1268 Posts
some of the info really suprised me ahah thanks so much | ||
Gustav_Wind
United States646 Posts
On July 31 2010 11:48 MaRiNe23 wrote: Ver what kind of style do you play in TvP? Do you have like a reppack or something of your tvp games? You listed alot of tvp strategies but you didn't include fantasy's style For these reasons I been trying to do the mass vulture harrass style of fantasy but you didn't include it in your guide and im just wondering if u forgot or u don't consider it a viable strategy? Also ur tvp reppack would be very helpful if u can. thx The "fantasy style" (iloveoov build) is pretty unstable as it really depends on doing a lot of damage with the harass. I mean, fantasy himself almost never does it anymore... The common tvp build right now in progames seems to be, take a fast 3rd + armory, but unlike the flash build you mass factories before starting the 4th. Around 2-1/near max you can make an aggressive move. If the timing of your 3rd is reasonably relative to the protoss' and your macro is good they shouldn't have time to get an enormous economy AND mass arbiters + templar by the time you push out. A defense of mines/turrets in your main makes a recall backstab a costly exchange if they try to do that while you push out. I love the fantasy/iloveoov build style but if you don't consider standard TvP play viable I think you need to work on your mechanics a bit. | ||
Nick_54
United States2230 Posts
| ||
![]()
Ver
United States2186 Posts
On July 19 2010 13:51 SuperChad wrote: As soon as a saw LaTeX, I knew this would be great. I wonder if you are a mathematics or comp. science major? Thank Stet_tcl for the latex, he and the Liquipedia team were a big help in making this look presentable. My interests are actually in Military History and Strategy. On July 31 2010 11:48 MaRiNe23 wrote: Ver what kind of style do you play in TvP? Do you have like a reppack or something of your tvp games? You listed alot of tvp strategies but you didn't include fantasy's style For these reasons I been trying to do the mass vulture harrass style of fantasy but you didn't include it in your guide and im just wondering if u forgot or u don't consider it a viable strategy? Also ur tvp reppack would be very helpful if u can. thx My replays...uh I might be able to get some? That will take some time though as all my good TvP games against good players are from mid-2009 and I might or might not have them anymore. Although I can see why it would be useful given what I have written, watching pro games is much better than watching even someone like me because my understanding of the game is much greater than my playing ability due to extreme lack of games played. I'll see what I can do though. As for oov's build, it's obviously not the only way or else all non-SKT1 Terrans wouldn't be winning so much lately ![]() On July 23 2010 10:15 Boomsheka wrote: Ver, What is your suggestion for people who are coming into Starcraft 2 without a BW background? I'm assuming they are going to have a tough time researching then translating BW skill over to Starcraft 2 skill since they barely know what they are seeing and there is very little Top Level Korean replays or players this early....How do they not fall into the trap of watching what appears to be a high level player who truly is not....worse yet how do we even know what's really good right now. SC2 at the moment does not have the same rules as SC does right now to a certain degree but a modified approach of this guide will still work as I've used it for other games in their infancy (Guild Wars). There will be balance changes and expansions in addition to normal strategical evolution, so while copying what the best players do will help to some degree, it's not stable. You don't want to be copying with the thought of making them your 'standard' for any significant amount of time. Rather, the point of learning from the best would be to gain understanding of what works so you can have the foundation to figure out other things that work. Skilled SC2 players that come from competitive RTS backgrounds (i,e the ex-SC1 pros, they would be my pick to learn from) will have a lot of things inherent in their play that is worth learning especially for those without that BW background. SC2 is similar enough to BW in structure that by learning from those experienced in it you can still make use of the 11 years of strategy evolution that BW has made. Everyone will experience the same uncertainty that comes from being a new game far from its boundaries and the constant outside tinkerings, but those that really grasp the underlying structure of the game will be able to adapt much more readily to changing circumstances than others. On August 02 2010 00:09 Gustav_Wind wrote: The "fantasy style" (iloveoov build) is pretty unstable as it really depends on doing a lot of damage with the harass. I mean, fantasy himself almost never does it anymore... The common tvp build right now in progames seems to be, take a fast 3rd + armory, but unlike the flash build you mass factories before starting the 4th. Around 2-1/near max you can make an aggressive move. If the timing of your 3rd is reasonably relative to the protoss' and your macro is good they shouldn't have time to get an enormous economy AND mass arbiters + templar by the time you push out. A defense of mines/turrets in your main makes a recall backstab a costly exchange if they try to do that while you push out. I love the fantasy/iloveoov build style but if you don't consider standard TvP play viable I think you need to work on your mechanics a bit. A minor quibble: Fantasy doesn't do his build every game because he is not versatile enough and only the threat of other builds would let him use his build. Early game TvP the Protoss cannot get enough information fast enough to accurately counter everything the Terran can do so they either have to play it safe and the Terran can get ahead with very fast expansions or they need to take risks and cut corners, opening themselves up to some timing attack or another. The issue with all the top Terrans at various times is that they don't have enough variety in their play. For the longest time an opponent would know exactly what Flash would do and could play; the same goes for Fantasy. If you know he will do oov's build you can stop it by slowing down your 3rd base, but you can't stop it without being behind versus more economic builds. And without knowing before the game, you can't get the information needed without being vulnerable to something like fact cc fact. So while Fantasy was playing the same build over and over, the Protoss could safely blindly play against that build without fearing the repercussions. TvP is all about trade-offs and risks. + Show Spoiler [Relevant TvP strategy pm] + Your questions are good and I'm happy to see you are watching the games you have listed. It's not a problem that things don't make full sense right now, just keep asking questions and learning patterns and it will come. I could write for dozens of pages on this and still not be able to explain everything fully so I'll try to focus on a few key points. A great deal of TvP comes down to information. Protoss have a technical map hack potential in the observer but it is something they must use and fight for, not be given. The Terran is the one who directs the flow of the match and the Protoss reacts, so if they are denied information, they will not know what to react to properly. Sometimes, getting the observers themselves opens them up to timing windows. For example, the fact cc fact you mentioned. This build has several ways it can work, depending on how each side opened (fact cc/rax cc, 1 gate expand, 1 gate obs expand; doesn't apply if Protoss 12 Nex, 2 gate expand or later or does reaver/dt off 1 base). In each case the Protoss is sacrificing a 2nd gateway of dragoons in order to get something else (tech/nexus) and you will have a window for unit superiority. The fact that this exists (and it is probably the most popular strategy at the moment) hurts Protoss options as well; if they want their observers fast they have to take a major risk. If they want to avoid that risk (say 1 gate expand -> 2nd gate before robo), they are delaying their observers and making it harder to figure out what is going on. The 2/1 timing attack variation is one of the most flexible (and therefore least allin strategies). If for example you do the Hiya build (fact cc cc armory -> mass fact timing attack) you are cutting upgrades and tech and expansions in order to deliver a powerful knockout blow. This makes your attack comparatively stronger, but if the Protoss can avoid critical damage, they will be way ahead. That is not the case for the 2/1 timing attack (assuming an even game up till that point), where you are not sacrificing anything, but more going a middle path. So long as you don't get routed you will still get a protected 4th base up, have excellent upgrades and tech, and still have map control potential. At the same time, you aren't going to win that battle and win the game right there nearly as easily. A big part of it is also the complete immunity to 2 base tech builds. The fast armory/academy means that you will repel any 2 base reaver/dt (which are very good otherwise) with ease; this is what opens up the window for the 2/1 timing in the first place back when the strategy was created as the Protoss invested in an attack that can't do damage. If for example you would do the Hiya build mentioned above and gear towards the timing of the Protoss taking an overly fast 4th base (which they would like to against a 2/1 timing), a 2 base reaver or dt drop would likely do solid damage and be an effective deterrent to that timing push. But as a general rule of thumb, attack upgrades in TvP are game-changing. The 2/1 attack rushes that 2nd attack as fast as possible and gears the attack around the strongest a Terran army can be with it, regardless of the Protoss actions. Now why can't the Protoss just optimize, take 3 bases really fast, get some gates/tech and take a 4th? They don't know what the Terran is doing. If they want to take a risk they can go arbiters and take a 3rd base off 2 gate (dies to oov build/fact cc fact), or do 1 gate double expand (dies to same thing). If they don't want to take a risk they might 2 gate obs nexus and have defending chances vs oov build and repel a fact cc fact, but be weaker against a 2/1 or Hiya build, and they will certainly be behind if the Terran takes a very fast 4th base. A great example of the information problem is in Bisu vs Flash on Medusa here. Flash goes fact cc armory cc and repels Bisu's early pressure (tiny lead). The key point is Flash's turrets prevented Bisu from knowing what he was doing, forcing Bisu to make some assumptions. I'm not quite sure what Bisu though he would do (I'm guessing 2/1 timing attack) but Bisu was certainly confused when he saw Flash take his 4th before attacking (Flash did it off of 2 factories!!). Had Bisu gotten the key information of factory and troop count he would have crushed Flash's middle position and had a winning advantage (he had 200 supply to 120). But he didn't know, and this lack of information made him hesitant. Instead of either attacking or expanding fast to 3, he held on 4 bases in order to mass up and prevent an attack (that didn't come!). When he thought Flash was turtling instead of attacking when he needed to, he made a recall that was a minute or two late. Instead of Bisu killing an expo and eventually stalling Flash's attack (which would have happened if Flash had taken his 4th later in the same continuation), Flash has enough income and army to dominate the key Protoss natural choke, repel the recall and reinforce, and therefore win the game. As for Stork/Flash on Tau, make sure you assess the whole game. Flash is able to do damage with a fact cc fact and gain an advantage while Stork gets 2 base reaver and does little. This advantage lets Flash continue to expand rapid to 4 bases while getting upgrades and tech and keep up the harass (Stork can't attack the fast exapnsions or he dies to harass, he can't defend from harass fully due to lack of units/money for cannons). Flash keeps up his harass for as long as feasible and he has a really flexible window of when to move out given his large advantage. He just needs to attack before Stork can recover from all the harass. For Flash/Shuttle on RotK, Shuttle goes 1 gate obs nexus -> 2 base reaver Nexus. The fast observer lets him confirm Flash's intentions at least for the start (to go for 3 base with armory, but he can't know if he goes for 2/1 timing or fast 4th) and he is economically behind. Flash's drop does no damage, so the game is pretty equal at that point. The problem comes in that Flash goes for a 2/1 timing but he doesn't actually make the attack, possibly sensing that it wouldn't work well due to his failed drop and Shuttle's expansion timing (I'm not quite sure). So Flash takes his 4th at 2/1 timing (he could've taken it much faster and been ahead) and the position isn't looking good for him. His harass does slow Shuttle down a bit in taking more expansions (ideally he would've wanted all the bases at 11 up sooner) but Flash's decision making wasn't the best this game or this series (he screwed up and lost the first game too). Now the game turns more into a contest of maneuvering. Flash either needs to fight a battle at a vastly superior position and win decisively (as Shuttle simply has so many expansions), then rapidly kill of Shuttle's expansions and prevent him from amassing a new army, or he needs to slowly take the expansions at 1, establish an impregnable defensive position and simultaneously prevent Shuttle from doing so. This is why Flash is spending so much time with his vultures during this otherwise idle period, and why Shuttle is moving his army around constantly to stop the vultures. Note that Flash does not have to commit to either plan, he just has to execute one successfully. However, the 'win a big battle' plan needs to happen before Shuttle can establish a full second battery of gateways at 11 (which the harass did delay). Flash's best hope is that Shuttle screwed up and maxed too quickly with only one arbiter (though he has templars). The key point comes when Flash lures Shuttles army away from the middle into clearing mines at the mid right and then into 1 (Shuttle can't get observers in position to see Flash's maneuvers due to goliaths + vessels and turrets). Flash quickly takes the high ground and mines up, putting himself at a massive advantage. Shuttle will die if he attacks the position from the single ramp, especially with the lack of stasis available. Shuttle's retreat path is very long and Flash can easily attack his natural or 11 expansions from a vastly superior position(countering is not an option due to the mines/terrain/central position superiority). His attack up the ramp was a bad one but it was a move of desperation; he could have made a fight had he retreated north and tried to await an opening. ----------------------------------------- Original Message: First off, I absolutely love the guide you wrote. It states with certainty many of the things that I have suspected since I started playing Broodwar. The list of VODs and advice on how to improve has so much common sense and sound reasoning behind it. I'm a rather terrible Terran player with a short history in broodwar. I was looking through the builds you listed examples for, and it looks to me that two of them (FE into 2fact timing and 4fact) are designed to hit the protoss when he is either taking a third or I suppose teching too fast to arbiters. That's what I would summarize the overall 'goal' of the build as (correct me if I'm totally off). However, I don't at all understand the 'goal' of the Flash build. The explanations I've read (not ideal, I guess) suggest that the build aims for a timing attack when you reach 2/1 upgrades. This does not make very much sense to me. Unless there's some direct consequence of these 2/1 upgrades that I am missing (like +1 zealot attacks in PvZ), isn't the idea of pushing out blindly at 2/1 well, rather foolish. Why shouldn't the protoss simply optimize his economy to have the maximum number of units when this push comes out? How can a 'timing attack' not be based on how the Protoss is spending his money? I went to liquipedia, and while it informs me that 2/1 is merely a guideline, and that terrans should push to take advantage of a protoss expansion to teching to Arbiters/Carriers. While this makes more sense, I have a hard time ... well, believing it. I can see how 400 minerals might be a major concern in the early game (explaining why the 4fact and CC into 2fact timing builds work). However, in armies that are presumably 150 food, can 3 dragoons really make such a big difference? I also tend to have a hard time understanding why Flash pushes when he does. In some games, like Flash vs Sangho on Medusa, its seems to be rather obvious. However, in other games such as Flash vs Shuttle on ROTK and Flash vs Stork on Tau Cross, I really have no idea. At best what I can think of is that Flash pushed relatively soon after Shuttle's first arbiter was out in his game on ROTK. What kind of timing is that hoping to exploit? Shuttle has already spent on the Stargate and Arbiter Tribunal, so while he might be short that many units minus the gateway cost, he's already reaped the benefits of his investment, hasn't he? Or is there some critical mass of Arbiters that makes the army that much more effective? I guess in more general terms, there's something I must be missing about the concept of a timing attack. Like I said, I can sort of grasp the idea of pushing based on tech: a Terran pushing out with 3 tanks to exploit the lack of defilers and pressure the Zerg front, a +1 zealot attack in PvZ, etc. It seems to me that these attacks have less to do with where money is being spent and more to do with ... unit counters, for lack of a better term. However, pushing out against a maxed protoss because he spent 400 minerals - none of which could actually go into army production because of the supply cap anyway - seems questionable. Is that actually the reasoning? I appreciate any response you might have to my overly simplistic and probably rather foolish questions =) | ||
Silentness
United States2821 Posts
| ||
![]()
Ver
United States2186 Posts
On July 23 2010 10:15 Boomsheka wrote: Ver, What is your suggestion for people who are coming into Starcraft 2 without a BW background? I'm assuming they are going to have a tough time researching then translating BW skill over to Starcraft 2 skill since they barely know what they are seeing and there is very little Top Level Korean replays or players this early....How do they not fall into the trap of watching what appears to be a high level player who truly is not....worse yet how do we even know what's really good right now. One very important point I forgot. The current chaotic state of SC2 means that there will be a good amount of available games where top players beat down much weaker ones, which is excellent learning material. Keep a special look for those games and pour over them. | ||
Frigo
Hungary1023 Posts
One PvP game the guy exploited my 2gate forge opening by dropping DTs into my main, killing my nexus, and after I rebuilt it, he attacked my natural and took it out as well. Then... he let me rebuild it and macro up like a fucker off 3 bases (1 hidden) and simply handed me the game. One PvT game I tried to fast exp off 1gate and defend it with DTs. The guy killed my nexus with some "fake double" (after siege exp), and then... 10 minutes of inactivity. Again, I double exped first, macro whore'd and took out his tiny push with the usual zeal/goon/arb. One PvT game where the guy kept doing nice vulture drops all the time, except I deflected them and was taking my 4th by then, all the while he had 2 factories and 3 CCs standing idle (the 3rd didn't even have any mining SCVs). Too bad I disconnected, my transformation into MacroWhore was almost complete, and I could have 1a2a3a'd him easily. Numerous PvZ games where the zerg loved a single unit so much, they never wanted to make anything else. 2gate sair and zeal/archon push into zerg main? I'll make more mutas! Toss taking his 4th? I know, let's keep throwing hydras at him! My advice: - Know thy followup, should your strategy succeed or fail - Push your advantage - Think it through what the hell are you doing, seriously | ||
writer22816
United States5775 Posts
| ||
Never.Die
Japan189 Posts
| ||
zengrz
Canada37 Posts
Hope it can help me~ | ||
Licmyobelisk
Philippines3682 Posts
| ||
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
Starscreamer
3 Posts
| ||
Boom_Headshot
Australia1 Post
we need more poeople like you doing this kind of legwork. Congrats on the effort and hard word | ||
Mutaller2
United States7 Posts
| ||
Silentenigma
Turkey2037 Posts
| ||
NationInArms
United States1553 Posts
| ||
Crunchums
United States11143 Posts
| ||
Scrimpton
United Kingdom465 Posts
This doesn't get enough praise or attention, and is a great example of how the sc community kicks so much ass. These thoughts and strategies apply to so many things in life, It's kind of embarrassing that you can learn more about learning... from a video game forum than from 10 years of schooling. But that's a rant for another time.. edit: Oh, it should also be requisite for sc2 forum ^_^ | ||
Deleted User 135096
3624 Posts
| ||
SkinDeep
Singapore7 Posts
Constantly producing probes ans SCVs Drones are an exception. and DONT GET SUPPLY BLOCKED!! if you follow these you should see an improvment. | ||
IamBach
United States1059 Posts
On February 10 2011 12:17 SkinDeep wrote: One thing i have found with SC2 that improved my play quite a bit is two things. Constantly producing probes ans SCVs Drones are an exception. and DONT GET SUPPLY BLOCKED!! if you follow these you should see an improvment. Lol maybe in SC2 but in BW, you should have both those mastered pretty much by d+. | ||
Silentness
United States2821 Posts
On February 10 2011 12:35 etheovermind wrote: Lol maybe in SC2 but in BW, you should have both those mastered pretty much by d+. hell you should master that like halfway through D. | ||
SkinDeep
Singapore7 Posts
| ||
ToFu.
331 Posts
so yeah most D's should not have problems with this. | ||
SkinDeep
Singapore7 Posts
| ||
meowmasta
146 Posts
![]() | ||
pyrogenetix
United Arab Emirates5091 Posts
| ||
dvlmn
Canada3 Posts
| ||
AfecksN
United Kingdom53 Posts
Still have it saved next to my Starcraft folder for reminding on the correct mind-set :3 | ||
getSome[703]
United States753 Posts
| ||
firehand101
Australia3152 Posts
| ||
Zergneedsfood
United States10671 Posts
I even added this on my Kindle for me to read. | ||
JOHNYBRAVO
27 Posts
![]() | ||
iRk
Sweden83 Posts
| ||
![]()
2Pacalypse-
Croatia9489 Posts
On June 12 2011 20:53 JOHNYBRAVO wrote: Nice reading, thanks a lot but I'm wondering about switching to sc2 unfortunately. That's really hard to found a game lately... ![]() Why would you switch to sc2? That's like the opposite of what you should be doing! | ||
zyce
United States649 Posts
Thanks ![]() | ||
Black[CAT]
Malaysia2589 Posts
On June 12 2011 20:53 JOHNYBRAVO wrote: Nice reading, thanks a lot but I'm wondering about switching to sc2 unfortunately. That's really hard to found a game lately... ![]() Hard to find a BW game? Have you really tried playing? It so easy to get games, even on iccup ladder. Unless you have problems in ports. | ||
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
![]() | ||
don_kyuhote
3006 Posts
Damn.. | ||
Zickzackzick
Taiwan99 Posts
| ||
DyEnasTy
United States3714 Posts
| ||
Sawamura
Malaysia7602 Posts
| ||
Skeggaba
Korea (South)1556 Posts
Is iccup still around, and does anyone still play? | ||
NationInArms
United States1553 Posts
| ||
gvb
United States30 Posts
| ||
KenNage
Chile885 Posts
| ||
Theeakoz
United States1114 Posts
| ||
erikzbi
China43 Posts
| ||
gu-val
59 Posts
iccup is still around, maybe 500 players online at any given time, 800 tops I think. http://81.200.1.199/sconline/test.php the script I made when was active on iccup.Max population since August, was detected at 2011-08-15, 23:10:00, 1076 people. Timezone is GMT+3 or something (Moscow time). | ||
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
| ||
Ilikestarcraft
Korea (South)17726 Posts
Pretty much all from this thread http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=106115 | ||
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
| ||
kRis[Mb]
Hungary3 Posts
Thanks | ||
[sc1f]eonzerg
Belgium6505 Posts
![]() | ||
mtwow789
67 Posts
My PvT improved significantly after reading this guide. This thread suggests using 12 nexus, and I think I am winning 10 in a row with diff opponents each time. 12 Nexus makes 2 fac Terran game a easy win. I used to use bulldog toss, and always lost to better T players.nse. | ||
tryummm
774 Posts
On November 30 2011 03:16 mtwow789 wrote: Wow... My PvT improved significantly after reading this guide. This thread suggests using 12 nexus, and I think I am winning 10 in a row with diff opponents each time. 12 Nexus makes 2 fac Terran game a easy win. I used to use bulldog toss, and always lost to better T players.nse. The 12 Nexus is a very powerful tool to have, but make sure you can use all the openings on all the maps they are viable on. For instance, on a map like Bloody Ridge or Alternative a 12 Nexus might not be as strong as on La Mancha, Jade, or Electric Circuit. Being able to properly execute the 3 Dragoon expand and other 1 Gateway openings will really solidify your understanding of the game and in game mechanics, if you learn them correctly. However, if you always resort in the 12 Nexus opening (Which most players on iCCup have no idea how to play against) I question how much you will actually improve, especially in a BOX series or tournament play. | ||
aznboi918
United States70 Posts
![]() ![]() | ||
MaV_gGSC
Canada1345 Posts
| ||
CheyRa
United Kingdom62 Posts
| ||
keyStorm
Canada316 Posts
p.m me!! | ||
theleo_ua
Ukraine150 Posts
On July 13 2010 03:25 Ver wrote:On the other hand, if your goal is trying to improve as much as possible, why would you waste your time doing allins at the start? What is that going to teach you but a small subset of the game? At best, you'll become Horang2, a completely unpredictable entity that loses more than he wins because his core skillset doesn't exist. If you want to only steal the odd game from higher leveled players, then someone like Horang2 is a great guide to follow. If you don't want to improve and just want to do whatever crazy strategy you think of, well just go do that. So before you start off, figure out what you want to aim for, then adjust the means to that goal. http://img849.imageshack.us/img849/6339/203horang2eng.jpg ![]() | ||
krzych113
United Kingdom547 Posts
| ||
CenturionSC2
United States51 Posts
| ||
Steelo_Rivers
United States1968 Posts
| ||
iloveav
Poland1478 Posts
Ive coached a good amount of players in my days and my first step when players were noobs was telling them to watch pro reps and explain to me why they do what they do. At the moment when they started to get the hang of it, they were ready to learn by themselves. | ||
| ||