EPTSimple Questions, Simple Answers - Page 389
| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
|
kogeT
Poland2038 Posts
| ||
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6635 Posts
On May 23 2018 11:58 Alpha-NP- wrote: Why does Sea sometimes play games with the minimap tabbed black the whole game? Is having the minimap tabbed black the best way to play on island maps? I've noticed that myself, the only answer I could come up with is that it's even more noticeable when an enemy units appears on the map and he knows the maps so well that he doesn't need the detail of the map itself on the minimap? | ||
|
Golgotha
Korea (South)8418 Posts
| ||
|
Alpha-NP-
United States1242 Posts
| ||
|
Highgamer
1407 Posts
On May 24 2018 01:28 Golgotha wrote: What is the correct response when playing TvP and the toss is rushing DTs with mass zealots? Can I delay tank and mass vultures instead? I can stop him with a couple of turrets but after that I am not sure how to punish him since Science vessels take so long to get and I cant really move out without detection. I mean I have scans but not enough to sustain me. As this is so uncommon, I'd like to know if there's a "correct" answer, too. I'd assume that quick vultures should shut that down.Try to fight the zealots in the open field where your vults have room to manoeuvre, a few DTs chasing your vults shouldn't do much. Then speed-vultures with mines and 2 comsats should give you full map-control. If P went for double expand behind the DT/zealot-push, make those as costly for him/her as possible by forcing more DTs, pylon-walls, cannons or gateway-units with your vults and expand yourself. If there are really no/few goons your vultures can keep poking and do a lot of (indirect) damage. Don't miss the point when P gets several goons and observers though as you'll need tanks then. Make sure to not let another (ninja-)base go up for P. Transition into a normal game. As you save the gas from the tanks you can get a quick starport for vulture drops. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8654 Posts
On May 24 2018 01:28 Golgotha wrote: What is the correct response when playing TvP and the toss is rushing DTs with mass zealots? Can I delay tank and mass vultures instead? I can stop him with a couple of turrets but after that I am not sure how to punish him since Science vessels take so long to get and I cant really move out without detection. I mean I have scans but not enough to sustain me. depends on your build, how well you scouted and how many marines you produced at the start. a typical 1 rax fe with fairly good scouting (you see the mass zealots as they leave) can block it easily by just building 2 bunkers, vultures and repair. you block the attack and the game is won right there. obviously this is assuming u have the detection for the dts also. if you didnt then youre in trouble even without the zealots siege expand auto wins because you have a wall in. the response for fe or 2 fac is difficult because its too dependent on a lot of different factors (scout timing, army location at time of scouting etc.) | ||
|
Dead9
United States4725 Posts
should be the same vs dt/speedlot, sounds like a weaker version of speedlot allin tbh you'll have like 3 tanks 2 vults vs 6 goon 4~6 speedlot with a typical siege expand | ||
|
Golgotha
Korea (South)8418 Posts
the part that I have a hard time with is what to do when the toss just sits back with his DTs and he double exapnds. he has DTs at all three locations and DTs at my front. I can't scan everything. Is rushing Science vessel effective at this junction? I think dropping with starport might be effective as highgamer suggested. Or I simply stand back and take my third and push out once I have a science vessel. | ||
|
Dead9
United States4725 Posts
versus fast dts get vults on the map and take your 3rd. obs will be delayed so it's very annoying for P to move around 2base arb has first recall at 11ish so watch out for that | ||
|
Dead9
United States4725 Posts
5fac does not, however, work against the more typical dt expand into 2base arbs | ||
|
Highgamer
1407 Posts
On May 24 2018 11:33 evilfatsh1t wrote: depends on your build, how well you scouted and how many marines you produced at the start. a typical 1 rax fe with fairly good scouting (you see the mass zealots as they leave) can block it easily by just building 2 bunkers, vultures and repair. you block the attack and the game is won right there. obviously this is assuming u have the detection for the dts also. if you didnt then youre in trouble even without the zealots siege expand auto wins because you have a wall in. the response for fe or 2 fac is difficult because its too dependent on a lot of different factors (scout timing, army location at time of scouting etc.) Out of painful experience, even if you mean it in the best sense, I'd refrain from these kinds of statements if you talk to players who're learning the game. "It's a won game" is only true if a) you and your opponents level are about the same, which is hardly the case these days if you're a beginner, and a superior opponent can just wing it even after a bad start, and b) if you do not only know in theory, but can actually perform what you have to do step by step until P is dead in his goo, not only until the P's attack is over. And you have to have done it a couple of times to get the hang of it. What you have to do might sound self-explanatory in theory, but low/mid-level games are lost to "stupid" mistakes 90% of the time. Without quick reaction and continous repair-commands, even if you have a wall - "auto win" - the zealots just walk up the ramp, destroy a depot and kill you. Without the multitasking and knowledge how to use speed-vults and mines to your advantage, a handful of DTs can give P full mapcontrol until vessels are out. But you read on the forum it's an auto win, strange... If you face these builds for the first few times, you hold them narrowly, then you're cornered, and the next thing you know is a P that has 3 bases and a massive army in a game that feels even at best. edit: I'd even go so far as to say, considering how much leeway players have to make comebacks in BW (or RTS in general), talking about a "won game" like this just means falling for a theorycrafting fallacy. A temporary advantage is a temporary advantage, a won game is a won game. Luckily in BW the one thing doesn't necessarily lead to the other, but rather minor or medium advantages are flattened out by the game over a relatively short time - and going for the kill early, even if you're at an advantage, involves a risk. | ||
|
Immaterial
Canada510 Posts
At the moment I am playing on FS, Circuit Breakers, Destination and Tau Cross but only because I am most familiar with those maps (in the order I listed them). But I'm definitely down to learn Gladiator etc. if it is a good map for P, though Transistor is a map that I think I will probably never get the hang of. Thanks!~ | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8654 Posts
On May 26 2018 00:51 Highgamer wrote: Out of painful experience, even if you mean it in the best sense, I'd refrain from these kinds of statements if you talk to players who're learning the game. "It's a won game" is only true if a) you and your opponents level are about the same, which is hardly the case these days if you're a beginner, and a superior opponent can just wing it even after a bad start, and b) if you do not only know in theory, but can actually perform what you have to do step by step until P is dead in his goo, not only until the P's attack is over. And you have to have done it a couple of times to get the hang of it. What you have to do might sound self-explanatory in theory, but low/mid-level games are lost to "stupid" mistakes 90% of the time. Without quick reaction and continous repair-commands, even if you have a wall - "auto win" - the zealots just walk up the ramp, destroy a depot and kill you. Without the multitasking and knowledge how to use speed-vults and mines to your advantage, a handful of DTs can give P full mapcontrol until vessels are out. But you read on the forum it's an auto win, strange... If you face these builds for the first few times, you hold them narrowly, then you're cornered, and the next thing you know is a P that has 3 bases and a massive army in a game that feels even at best. edit: I'd even go so far as to say, considering how much leeway players have to make comebacks in BW (or RTS in general), talking about a "won game" like this just means falling for a theorycrafting fallacy. A temporary advantage is a temporary advantage, a won game is a won game. Luckily in BW the one thing doesn't necessarily lead to the other, but rather minor or medium advantages are flattened out by the game over a relatively short time - and going for the kill early, even if you're at an advantage, involves a risk. well obviously in reality people make mistakes and games are lost. but phrases like auto win and "game is already won" etc are used so commonly because if you dont make a mistake you literally cannot lose. its very commonly used even on streams when pros watch each other. if you lose a won game just take it as that youve made really big mistakes, not because the opponent played well. also it helps to know that you were on the path to success prior to the screw up, rather than having to doubt the entire game | ||
|
Dead9
United States4725 Posts
On May 26 2018 03:25 Immaterial wrote: Does anyone have thoughts on which of the current ladder maps in frontier league are considered to be generally more P favored? At the moment I am playing on FS, Circuit Breakers, Destination and Tau Cross but only because I am most familiar with those maps (in the order I listed them). But I'm definitely down to learn Gladiator etc. if it is a good map for P, though Transistor is a map that I think I will probably never get the hang of. Thanks!~ fs, cb are both fine longi, transistor are both protoss maps desti, tau suck (both hard pvz) glad is ok, its p>t z>=p | ||
|
Highgamer
1407 Posts
On May 26 2018 14:09 evilfatsh1t wrote: well obviously in reality people make mistakes and games are lost. but phrases like auto win and "game is already won" etc are used so commonly because if you dont make a mistake you literally cannot lose. its very commonly used even on streams when pros watch each other. if you lose a won game just take it as that youve made really big mistakes, not because the opponent played well. also it helps to know that you were on the path to success prior to the screw up, rather than having to doubt the entire game I'm fine with the use of the term when, e.g., T has 3 bases and P has 1 and army-counts are even. My problem is the excessive over-use that gives people a wrong idea about slight/medium advantages and the dynamic of the game. A temporary advantage can by no means only disappear through big mistakes, but just by cautious and resilient play by the disadvantaged player, exactly because he/she played well and nothing else. I can't understand how a seasoned BW-player/observer can be so ignorant about this. And why the constant mix-up between pro-level (!) and the rest? And if they say something wrong, it's a law we have to repeat it? Look at the case at hand: You wrote "siege expand auto wins because you have a wall in." With a siege expo against the guy with a bunch of zealots and DTs who double expands - how is that a "won game"? You have to wait for academy or leap-frog turrets until you can get your natural up, wait for vulture upgrades, and P keeps the zealots and few DTs for later... Siege expo is a very safe opening, you don't die, but you hardly end up with an unsurmountable advantage against pretty much anything P does... Talking about a won game is just plain wrong, isn't it? And see what golgotha wrote aftewards: "the part that I have a hard time with is what to do when the toss just sits back with his DTs and he double exapnds." | ||
|
Highgamer
1407 Posts
| ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8654 Posts
On May 26 2018 19:54 Highgamer wrote: I'm fine with the use of the term when, e.g., T has 3 bases and P has 1 and army-counts are even. My problem is the excessive over-use that gives people a wrong idea about slight/medium advantages and the dynamic of the game. A temporary advantage can by no means only disappear through big mistakes, but just by cautious and resilient play by the disadvantaged player, exactly because he/she played well and nothing else. I can't understand how a seasoned BW-player/observer can be so ignorant about this. And why the constant mix-up between pro-level (!) and the rest? And if they say something wrong, it's a law we have to repeat it? Look at the case at hand: You wrote "siege expand auto wins because you have a wall in." With a siege expo against the guy with a bunch of zealots and DTs who double expands - how is that a "won game"? You have to wait for academy or leap-frog turrets until you can get your natural up, wait for vulture upgrades, and P keeps the zealots and few DTs for later... Siege expo is a very safe opening, you don't die, but you hardly end up with an unsurmountable advantage against pretty much anything P does... Talking about a won game is just plain wrong, isn't it? And see what golgotha wrote aftewards: "the part that I have a hard time with is what to do when the toss just sits back with his DTs and he double exapnds." i was under the impression the original question about zealots and dt was an all-in. if it isnt an all-in then theres no reason for terran to sit behind the wall and turtle. taking nat asap, speed and mine upgrades asap, taking a quick 3rd and dominating the map is an easy way to follow up. sure, the game isnt won but i didnt think this scenario was part of the question to begin with. my description of "won games" are apt descriptions in the scenario where toss is all-inning to bust you with zealots and dts. there was no excessive use. and i fail to see what the issue is with comparisons to pro games. lower level players dont improve by abusing win strategies, they win by improving their understanding of the game. the best way to do this is to see and hear what pros do and say about games and take that information in. if a pro calls something a "sure-win", there are reasons for it. im sure a beginner would get more value out of knowing somethings supposed to be a sure win | ||
|
Highgamer
1407 Posts
I guess it's also helpful to point out that, against players who just are a few levels above you, they can comeback from literally anything... On May 26 2018 20:01 evilfatsh1t wrote: lower level players dont improve by abusing win strategies, they win by improving their understanding of the game. the best way to do this is to see and hear what pros do and say about games and take that information in. if a pro calls something a "sure-win", there are reasons for it. im sure a beginner would get more value out of knowing somethings supposed to be a sure win You're right (I never said anything about "win strategies" though), but understanding the game also means to put things in perspective. You have to judge situations very differently depending on which level of play you talk about. Pros talk about a different level of the game that almost has laws of its own. Flash can do things with a few SCVs and marines that basically only a handful of other players can do. Or JD could talk about a won-game because he can micro two muta floks at the same time and includes that in his judgement. If you take Flash's or JD's advice on sure-wins and sure-losses, they do by no means apply to your own games... | ||
|
Frauenarzt
Germany22 Posts
i saw some pro streams and they played normal 1v1 on ums fs with dark archons and bc in the middle where u had mindcontrol them every minute ? and at the top is a ~10min counter also i saw circuit breaker with infested spawning every minute or so ? what are those kor maps and wtf are they used for ?  its not really multitasking training for progamers anyway if they just have to mindcontrol a unit once every minute ? | ||
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6635 Posts
On May 31 2018 12:47 Frauenarzt wrote: ok i have a question i saw some pro streams and they played normal 1v1 on ums fs with dark archons and bc in the middle where u had mindcontrol them every minute ? and at the top is a ~10min counter also i saw circuit breaker with infested spawning every minute or so ? what are those kor maps and wtf are they used for ? its not really multitasking training for progamers anyway if they just have to mindcontrol a unit once every minute ?There's a similar version of Python where the players seem to randomly spawn units, they might get a probe that can kill anything in one shot or your units randomly teleport around the map and stuff, I'm pretty sure they're playing these just for fun, it's usually very late at night when they're playing it. | ||
| ||
