EPTSimple Questions, Simple Answers - Page 466
| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
|
Optimate
249 Posts
| ||
|
joolz
United States67 Posts
i thought they were the same in terms of gameplay. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8762 Posts
what i would typically refer to as a "reverse ramp" would be a nat on a higher ground than the main, which obviously isnt the case here. the differences in defending for that are a no brainer. i think hes referring to the fact that the opponent is holding his ramp and he has to push out of a narrow choke which is "in reverse" to how his ramp is ideally supposed to be utilised? which would be that he holds the top and opponent pushes through choke. weird way to explain the situation and these dumb made up terminologies will only confuse new players. also every clip i see of him linked in tl is just him being the saltiest player ive ever seen rofl. salt bae couldnt touch this dude | ||
|
Cryoc
Germany909 Posts
So, reverse ramps are indeed worse for defending than a standard ramp. | ||
|
Highgamer
1441 Posts
On April 16 2021 06:41 Cryoc wrote: When the game released there were no ramps with high ground on the bottom and low ground on the top of the ramp. I assume most people would figure out what you mean here, but as it is still a little bit confusing - "high ground on the bottom [of the ramp]"? WTF, the bottom of a ramp is always lower - I have the craving to clarify this (and I hope I don't mess it up, lel): The 'bottom of the ramp' Cryoc is talking about here is the same bottom as 'the bottom of your screen', so it has nothing to do with the ramp leading up to a high-ground or down to a low-ground. So, if I got it right, originally, there were no ramps in the game that allowed you to place a high-ground 'at the bottom/at the south' of a ramp, at the part of a ramp that is lower on your screen. So the only ramps you could create would lead up to a highground further to the top of your screen. To build a ramp like in Artosis' game at 5 o'clock, that leads 'up to a highground that lies in direction of the bottom of your screen' would require a certain map-maker-magic - at the cost of some of those tiles 'to the south' of that ramp looking like high-ground, but actually behaving like low ground. Don't thank me  | ||
|
Anc13nt
1557 Posts
| ||
|
Jealous
10228 Posts
On April 26 2021 14:56 Anc13nt wrote: how do you beat 3 hatch hydra into lurker contain? I can't get a good angle against the contain. What is the right comp to deal with it? Guessing you're talking about PvZ. The angle depends on the map, really. The approach is pretty straightforward, just a bit harder to execute. Your robo needs to be timely. You need Observers and to micro/protect them well. You need Dragoons. You need HT with storm. Lurkers die to 1 storm + 1 Dragoon shot and you want to try to hit them close to one another time-wise because they can unburrow the Lurker and run from the storm, so it is best to do both almost simultaneously. You can justify going 8 Gate off of 2 base to bust out. Reavers may help but usually by the time you react by adding them, it's already a bit too late. Try to bust out in as few attempts as possible. Consider alternate paths if you have that option (on maps like FS, you can try going around your 3rd which should at least force Zerg to react and may make them pay less attention to the front). You can also use harass to distract them to have a better chance of busting out, whether with Corsair or by adding a Shuttle. It mostly comes down to your execution vs. theirs, but you're on a timer - you have to bust out before they can hold onto more bases and get a booming eco/Hive tech. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
Because of this dynamic I like a pro-active approach that secures that area for you before the zerg player gets a chance to claim it. The key is to force your game onto the opponent. Try to play an aggressive game, keep your containment area clean from zerg units while he doesn't have lurkers yet and always be on the lookout so the lurker containment doesn't have to happen in the first place - or if it does it should somehow be to the zerg player's disadvantage. When you take a fight, it's important to fight uncompromisingly, meaning you either fight with great aggression or you run before a meaningful fight can take place. Protoss units often take a lot of damage while running around, that's because they're less agile than zerg units and typically smaller in numbers, so they often run through lines of fire or they get surrounded. Dragoons aren't typically good at stutter-stepping. That's why in PvZ, dragoons would prefer to be stationary and lined up behind the zealots if that's an option. Meanwhile zealots shouldn't be moving in and out of hydra fire, as that just wastes their defenses. Therefore zealots should typically be used very decisively, either engaging hard or running away, so they spend as little time as possible within hydra range. All of this explains why protoss must typically be very uncompromising in a fight, with exceptions usually being situations where they have the high ground or are defending/attacking a base. Another thing I'd keep an eye on is upgrades. If possible you should have two forges spinning pretty much at all times, that has proven successful even for S-class players. | ||
|
Jealous
10228 Posts
For your notes, few of them actually apply as a response to 3HH -> Lurker contain. You're not the aggressor in this scenario if you're Protoss so there is no such thing as committing to an attack or engagement or not. You won't have Dragoons in any meaningful number by the time the Hydras hit. In fact you should be trying to limit your engagements as much as possible and getting your Cannons up first and foremost. You shouldn't have your Zealots in front of your Dragoons when trying to break a Lurker contain, they should be waiting for any aggressive movement from the Hydras who may try to run in and snipe Templar/engage with the Dragoons. Using Zealots in front is a great way to lose the game outright against Lurkers. Your advice is sound as general notes for PvZ engagements, but isn't applicable here. Furthermore, 2 Forges on 2 Gas is not viable in a scenario where you have to get Dragoons, Range, Obs, Templar, and Storm in a short period of time to bust out of a Lurker contain. Your funds are heavily taxed at this point and diverting gas away from key units/tech is not favorable in this situation IMO. I suggest posting a replay so that people can point out areas of improvement instead of arguing theoreticals, though. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On April 27 2021 02:09 Jealous wrote: The problem with suggesting a preventative approach is that there isn't much Protoss can do to prevent 3HH from taking map control. My bad, I somehow didn't notice the question was just about that build. In that case the only advice I'd add is - if the build allows it - to drop a DT outside the base and send it across the map to harass drones. It can soften the containment and distract zerg with little added effort for protoss. | ||
|
HaFnium
United Kingdom1074 Posts
| ||
|
Jealous
10228 Posts
On May 04 2021 07:40 HaFnium wrote: I was watching the Scan/Nyoken ASL cast and scan was mentioning something about mineral mining optimisation in early game (i.e. horizontal/vertical mining). He's mentioning about workers "bouncing off" the base etc... Just wondering how is that done? Maybe this? https://tl.net/forum/bw-strategy/530231-mineral-boosting | ||
|
Optimate
249 Posts
| ||
|
Jealous
10228 Posts
On May 13 2021 23:29 Optimate wrote: Played a 2v2 where my ally’s Overlord followed my Carriers every which way they turned. How do I do this so I can replicate this trick? Do you just patrol click the overlord on a Carrier and it follows it all around the map? Thanks. Just right click on the unit you want to follow. | ||
|
Counc1l
33 Posts
| ||
BigFan
TLADT24920 Posts
On May 15 2021 05:15 Counc1l wrote: I just had a funny idea (that is most likely not feasible) and was wondering what people thought of it. In ZvT I noticed a lot of zergs have developed ways to limit the amount of valuable targets a terran can irradiate at a given time by doing things like stacking lurkers and putting overlords over them and hiding the defilers by sending them through a nydus canal (but sometimes the zerg won't be able to react in time before the defiler can be sent through the canal). I thought it'd be funny if zergs bought the ventral sacs overlord upgrade to hide defilers inside for when they needed them. It's a very expensive upgrade when zerg needs to carefully manage gas and I definitely don't think it's a very good idea, but I'd like to see someone use it just to surprise people. I'm pretty certain this has been done before. | ||
|
Counc1l
33 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28706 Posts
Basically when vessels come in for an irradiate raid and irradiate your defilers, it sucks in one way - you're losing 150 gas. But it also means you get a warning - once that happens, you throw down swarm before the defiler dies, and then you're safe until you get another defiler brought there. If you choose to have your defilers in overlords, what might instead happen is terran scans, sees no defiler, stims in with rines, instantly kills the 2 lurkers that are there and then you're like ohfuck!! wheres the overlord! oh there it is drop defiler thrown down swarm oh damn the lurkers are already dead. While if you had the defiler there in the first place terran wouldve instead irradiated the defiler and then you got the warning to throw down swarms. Zvt/Tvz are two matchups where what you are able to execute is as big of a factor as what is theoretically smart, and where every single player, even at the very top pro level, is very limited compared to what is theoretically possible. Generally, part of how terran approaches the matchup post-defiler is through straining zerg's attention so thinly that zerg isn't able to respond to everything - but we also see that zerg has no problems handling any terran attack that they have enough attention to fend off. Dealing with 1 drop isn't a problem. Dealing with mm+vessels pushing a natural isn't a problem. Dealing with 2 bcs isn't a problem. But if terran drops your main and your third while sending bcs to your fourth while pushing your natural with their main mm+vessel army, then you see top, top class zergs breaking in one of those locations, which can often result in game-ending damage. | ||
|
Counc1l
33 Posts
| ||
|
radley
Poland582 Posts
| ||
| ||
