|
This Post is now "wikipedia-ized"
Name: LoveandPeace
Password: qwerasdfzxcv
Rules for editing:
1- This is EVERYONE's project. Just help a little now and then, and when there are hundreds of people in TLnet community, this little community project will grow to something nice.
2- PREVIEW before updating. Back up the code BEFORE AND AFTER editing in case someone else updates right when you do, thus erasing your data.
3- If you see a TLPD VOD, please add it to the tree. If there is no branch for that build order, make one. Also, please add EXEnotes or edit the EXEnotes if you feel you have a good grasp of the idea behind the build.
4- Also feel free to add a build order branch without knowing a VOD. Other people may eventually put a VOD in.
5- Please try to keep the coding organized. If people add things haphazardly, things will get messy a bit quickly unfortunately.
6- Please don't mess up my account. There isn't much here... and if you do change the password, a lot of people will be angry at you.
7- When you update something, please post a message so people can know and migrate to marvel at your new work. (And so we know that the tree is actually growing)
Example Branch:
ZERG: 3 HATCH: --> TOSS: FE: --> ZERG: 4gasmutasunk: --> TOSS: Archon + goon:
Hi all. If this idea has been mentioned before, or if people don't like it, please just don't post and the topic will sink down into oblivion.
I thought it would be nice to index the different possible things that can happen in any matchup, and put all of them in one place. For each thing that can happen, we can have a youtube link (or a few) that gives examples of pro gamers in that situation in the TLPD.
I'd like to start with ZvP because it is in my opinion, the most lovely matchup. Blow is the "strategy tree". Beneath each strategy, I hope to post youtube links of that thing happening in a game... so people can learn from it. I don't have all the TLPD references yet, but if other people like watching TLPD, I'm hoping this can be a kind of chip-in-as-u-go sort of thing.
Also, please let me know if I am missing any parts on the strategy tree
-----------------------------------------
ZvP (assume map=Python. If not, specify otherwise)
-----------------------------------------
ZERG: 3 HATCH:
(TLPD Examples) + Show Spoiler +
Notes on Execution + Show Spoiler +12 Overlord, 12 Hatch, 11 pool, 14 hatch, then overlord and extractor asap. Should add 2-6 zerglings for killing scout and scouting. Should also add X number of sunks.
Idea is slower tech than 1 or 2 hatch, but with econ advantage. 2nd extractor typically goes up after lair finishes, but if opponent doesn't pressure, can mass drones and put 2nd extractor up earlier for more gas.
Continuation + Show Spoiler +
ZERG: 12 POOL:
(TLPD Examples) + Show Spoiler +
Notes on Execution + Show Spoiler +
Continuation + Show Spoiler +
ZERG: 2 HATCH:
(TLPD Examples) + Show Spoiler +
Notes on Execution + Show Spoiler +
Continuation + Show Spoiler +
ZERG: 1 HATCH:
(TLPD Examples) + Show Spoiler +
Notes on Execution + Show Spoiler +
Continuation + Show Spoiler +
|
Use [ ] instead of < > for spoilers.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
|
Calgary25980 Posts
In the mean time if you have any suggestions about what should be included or how this should operate, post them in this thread.
|
Right now, I have the
ZERG: 3 HATCH: --> TOSS: FE: --> ZERG: 4gasmutasunk: --> TOSS: Archon + goon:
layed out as kind of an example
This whole branch has TLPD
|
Good idea dude. Although you will obviously have to include all matchups.
|
On November 05 2007 10:37 RainmanMP wrote:
Good idea dude. Although you will obviously have to include all matchups.
Honestly, I am not familiar with matchups besides ZvT and ZvP. I wonder if there is some way to make this into a wikipedia-like project so everyone can chip in a little in their own area of expertise, and after they see a TLPD game they really like, to just add it to the index.
|
strategy wiki PLEEEEAASSSEE that would be so dope
|
I would absolutely love this. As a beginner it's hard to get to a competitive level this late in the game's course. There almost needs to be formal lessons. This would be a terrific thing for Beginners though.
|
On November 05 2007 11:21 bine wrote:
strategy wiki PLEEEEAASSSEE that would be so dope
Yes ~_~!
|
I very much approve.
Unfortunately, this is a HUGE task. It looks like it would suck to do. But filling it in a bit at a time wouldn't be too bad, and it would fill up relatively quickly after a few weeks worth of pro games.
GL.
|
On November 05 2007 12:29 Scorpion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2007 11:21 bine wrote:
strategy wiki PLEEEEAASSSEE that would be so dope Yes ~_~!
My god do it!
|
On November 05 2007 13:16 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2007 12:29 Scorpion wrote:On November 05 2007 11:21 bine wrote:
strategy wiki PLEEEEAASSSEE that would be so dope Yes ~_~! My god do it!
|
It'd probably be as simple as setting up a wiki and giving an example format. There's so much knowledge in the strategy forum it's a shame it isn't published in one super starcraft strategy/data index.
|
The only problem with doing this on wiki is that wiki doesn't allow spoiler tags. So here is how we will make This thread into a wiki.
Name: LoveandPeace
Password: qwerasdfzxcv
So hear ye hear ye, write a note and add your favorite strategy starting now. Let everyone chip in to make TLnet the best, newest, and most ingenious strategy guide ever to grace this planet. Whenever you watch anything new on TLPD, feel free to add it into the strategy tree, and add notes. If there is no branch, make one.
Back up the code before editing.
|
There are smarter ways of doing this.
|
On November 05 2007 15:47 SonuvBob wrote:There are smarter ways of doing this.
I want this in TLnet rather than some other webpage. the community feel is more important than gaining a little more ease-of-use.
Besides, Wikipedia doesn't have spoilers. We could list out all the build orders in a list without using spoilers... but that would get too huge. We could also make a special webpage for it, but that would take away from the easy-to-edit-by-everyone wikipedia feel and the community feel.
If this takes off really well, I could imagine someone writing some javascript to make it prettier and easier to do. Even wikipedia started out small =)
|
Updated: 3 hatch EXEnotes... just something short.
Updated: ZERG: 3 HATCH: --> TOSS: FE:
EXEnotes... but is very noob, as I am not toss player.
|
I think most other people would rather have it be another site. One thread can get very unorganized very fast, especially when multiple people have access to the administrative forum account. It could just be a wikipedia index with team liquids name on it if they want to sponsor it.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
I urge you not to do this. Not that I don't have faith in your abilities and dedication, but without a huge group of skilled moderations, a system open to anyone to edit just won't work. We are working on something similar to this endorsed by Team Liquid. It would be silly to have two of the same project going. Plus I think you're jumping into this way too fast without dealing with the problems that will arise first.
Then again, if you want to have an open sourced one and we will have the Team Liquid one, I guess you're free to go ahead.
|
I guess if TL is already working on something similar, there wont be much use in there being another project that does the same thing. I'm wondering if the TL version of this project can be made open source somehow so that the progress can be faster? A project like this seems much more suited for a wikipedia-like development, rather than development by a small group of people.
How is the progress on the TL version of this anyways?
|
Definitely use a wiki format. For spoiler concerns or whatever, we could just have a threshold for how recent the games can be, ie. wait 2 weeks before adding VODs of current games. I think it would be great to have it officially run via tl.net, but I agree it should be open edit. Otherwise it just won't have the same longevity or the same depth. It could also interface beautifully with TLPD obviously, maybe giving users the ability to tag a VOD with a certain build order, so that eventually we could have statistics for build usage across the TLPD. Imagine looking at a player and watching every 9pool they've ever done!
I know no one wants to blow their load and announce this early, but any information you could give us would be most appreciated. Something like this would be enough to make me want to play again, and I think could do more than you might imagine.
If there was comprehensive, intelligible way to learn how to play starcraft, the barrier to entry would be greatly lessened and I think we would encourage a lot more new players to start playing.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
It drives me INSANE when admins release a tiny bit of information and don't answer any followup questions regarding new features. Like WGT - "It's ready when it's ready" - Thanks guys -_-. So without getting ahead of myself, I'll tell you the status of this.
Right now we're working out the following two things.
1. Whether it should be Wiki based or simply coded into the TL forum in it's own section. I think they are leaning towards a wiki, but I don't fully understand the pros and cons of both so I've been avoiding the discussion and just reading it.
2. Whether it will be a fully open-sourced, or users will only be allowed to comment in a discussion section (while only TL staff will have access to the actual articles). There's obviously pros and cons to each. I am arguing for the latter, since people can still give their feedback, but administrators can pick what to update.
Further concerns:
Login tied to TL ID?
A "WIKI-ize your post" system - how to avoid overlap between this and TLPD.
Standardized article format and tone.
Some more stuff, but again I don't know how kosher it is for me to post this out. Fortunately, no one reads the strategy forum so they'll never find it 
Any suggestions and opinions on the above, or other foreseeable concerns, are appreciated.
|
I'd say wiki because you can moderate it and you can see any changes that are made to it. So if anyone is contributing but in a negative way, you can reset their changes and ban them since you need an account to login to the wiki to make alterations. Wikipedia is so successful because masses contribute and anything that is false information is wiped fairly quickly and efficiently. Since this will be about Starcraft Strategy only, it should be fairly manageable considering how good of a job our moderators do on the TL.net forums.
|
Chill summed it up pretty well.
The first thing is indeed to decide whether we want it 100% open to the TL members or only to admins + special "guests". If we pick the former, then the TL forum option would be obsolete, so let's answer that question first.
An intermediate solution would be to only allow TL members with a certain amount of posts (say, 500+) to add/edit wiki entries. We could optionally implement a wiki-ban feature so that people don't keep posting BS over and over (but a TL ban could work too).
And as SonuvBob pointed out in the admin thread, if the wiki's going to be open we also need to think about what kind of contents we want on it:
On November 06 2007 02:49 SonuvBob wrote:If we make an open/almost open wiki, we'll need some pretty strict rules about the format and scope (do we want articles on just strats/definitions? or also pros? leagues? top amateurs? really good games? tasty homemade pies?). If it's well-integrated and successful, we could probably move TL's articles there, and have them actually be read once in a while. 
|
Keep it strategy. There are a billion starcraft wikis that have what zeratul ate for breakfast and how many times GARIMTO won. If it's focused on strategies, build orders, mechanics (ie. an entry for spreading marines vs. lurkers), strategically important games, etc., it will have a much bigger shot at going deep. The biggest problem for something like this is that there will be an entry for everything, but that all of them will be "in progress" and shallow.
I recommend either keeping it open or limiting it to users with x number of posts. If it's just the staff, it will take way too much time and effort to get it to an amazing state. I agree we don't want random sc2 people posting their scout rush strategies or something, but looking at wikipedia as a model, the hardcore editors couldn't have written it themselves.
Also, definitely integrate the user tables (this shouldn't be too hard) and as much as possible try to make it feel integrated. If it's just a mediawiki installation with the same look as wikipedia, people will feel much less ownership of it. The key to this being successful is the forum regulars who know what they're doing to feel like it's theirs, and to work on it with that frame of mind.
|
I also agree that wikipedia will be the best way of doing this. Right now though, wikipedia lacks one main thing
1- easy way of building a strategy tree that you can click on. TLnet has spoilers that can accomplish this. A javascript thing will be even better. Wiki has nothing.
Youtube videos should still imbed automatically into wikipedia articles. I think it does that automatically for any webpage actually. Can anyone figure out a way to get something that combines wikipedia's open-source with being able to create a tree? I'd say with something like this, it's good to just figure out the first step and then to "just thoooooo it"! Changes can be easily made to the format later if they arise.
We can easily post the URL to some other forums too, even korean forums. There is no doubt that when we get this started, it'll grow very quickly without much micromanagement.
On November 06 2007 02:45 Chill wrote:
Further concerns:
Login tied to TL ID?
A "WIKI-ize your post" system - how to avoid overlap between this and TLPD.
Standardized article format and tone.
I don't see how this will conflict with TLPD. If anything, it'll complement it. Right now, TLPD is searchable by name. Why not have a TLPD sister project that indexes VODs by build order via a build order tree. It'll be a better way of searching through vods.
|
We don't really NEED a tree. There could just be multiple sub categories.
|
A strategy wiki would be hot and I would love to see one... a more general sc wiki might work as well
PGT had an SC wiki which was pretty decent quality, but lacked contributors, which we won't have problems here. So definitely don't close it to quality forum members. Either let all veteran/experienced posters edit (while using warnings and bans) or let people "apply" somehow. Like a sample of their writing or knowledge.
But yes, this would be so hot
|
On November 06 2007 06:06 LoveandPeace wrote:
Youtube videos should still imbed automatically into wikipedia articles. I think it does that automatically for any webpage actually. Can anyone figure out a way to get something that combines wikipedia's open-source with being able to create a tree? I'd say with something like this, it's good to just figure out the first step and then to "just thoooooo it"! Changes can be easily made to the format later if they arise.
I've been coding PHP forum for a while and I think its quite easy make what you want using MediaWiki - a open source PHP wiki. Just hyperlink those strategies, add a table in MySQL to store the hyperlinks (ie strategy A can go to strategy B as entry), so that visitors can see what Strategy A will leads to, and have a index page(generate from the extra table) which gives the overview of the developments of the strategy.
I have been coding forum mods for a while, I havnt goes into the MediaWiki code yet, but I guess if we want to add the above features to the Wiki source code, probably should be do some 1)modification to the existing code: editing the posting page (which makes extra input for child nodes. ie where the strategy goes to). Modify the output page, which will looks up the new table for child nodes. 2)Add new code: add a table in MySQL which store the links between strategies. add a index page which read the new table for generate a overview of the strategies.
Wont take long, may be just a day or two will be enough for me
I will be able to do some code if you guys need help. Just PM me or add my msn nameless_leung@hotmail.com =)
I will be free after my exam on 16th Nov
|
With an open wiki (well, with TL-membership required) the unwashed masses will probably outnumber the qualified writers pretty badly. Something like a 2-3 month, 500 post requirement would probably lower the bad to good ratio enough to make it easily manageable.
We'd definitely integrate the wiki into TL as best we can, so don't worry about that.
On November 06 2007 06:06 LoveandPeace wrote:
I also agree that wikipedia will be the best way of doing this. Right now though, wikipedia lacks one main thing
1- easy way of building a strategy tree that you can click on. TLnet has spoilers that can accomplish this. A javascript thing will be even better. Wiki has nothing.
Youtube videos should still imbed automatically into wikipedia articles. I think it does that automatically for any webpage actually. Can anyone figure out a way to get something that combines wikipedia's open-source with being able to create a tree? I'd say with something like this, it's good to just figure out the first step and then to "just thoooooo it"! Changes can be easily made to the format later if they arise.
We can easily post the URL to some other forums too, even korean forums. There is no doubt that when we get this started, it'll grow very quickly without much micromanagement.
I haven't looked at the mediawiki code in depth, but it should be easy to add features (we'd want to add TLPD-ize at least)
Show nested quote +On November 06 2007 02:45 Chill wrote:
Further concerns:
Login tied to TL ID?
A "WIKI-ize your post" system - how to avoid overlap between this and TLPD.
Standardized article format and tone.
I don't see how this will conflict with TLPD. If anything, it'll complement it. Right now, TLPD is searchable by name. Why not have a TLPD sister project that indexes VODs by build order via a build order tree. It'll be a better way of searching through vods.
It's an issue with TLPD-ize, not TLPD itself. Just a minor technical thing, we'll sort it out.
|
ZERG: 3 HATCH:Notes on Execution + Show Spoiler +12 Overlord, 12 Hatch, 11 pool, 14 hatch, then overlord and extractor asap. Should add 2-6 zerglings for killing scout and scouting. Should also add X number of sunks.
Idea is slower tech than 1 or 2 hatch, but with econ advantage. 2nd extractor typically goes up after lair finishes, but if opponent doesn't pressure, can mass drones and put 2nd extractor up earlier for more gas.
woah. wait. why 12 ovie? in all of my games that i've used 12 hatch, i have never done 12 ovie.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On November 06 2007 15:43 goldenkrnboi wrote:Show nested quote +ZERG: 3 HATCH:Notes on Execution + Show Spoiler +12 Overlord, 12 Hatch, 11 pool, 14 hatch, then overlord and extractor asap. Should add 2-6 zerglings for killing scout and scouting. Should also add X number of sunks.
Idea is slower tech than 1 or 2 hatch, but with econ advantage. 2nd extractor typically goes up after lair finishes, but if opponent doesn't pressure, can mass drones and put 2nd extractor up earlier for more gas. woah. wait. why 12 ovie? in all of my games that i've used 12 hatch, i have never done 12 ovie.
^^ Example of why I don't support open source haha.
It's 9 Overlord.
|
my bad. the bos are based on pro games, not my personal games.
|
On November 06 2007 22:50 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On November 06 2007 15:43 goldenkrnboi wrote:ZERG: 3 HATCH:Notes on Execution + Show Spoiler +12 Overlord, 12 Hatch, 11 pool, 14 hatch, then overlord and extractor asap. Should add 2-6 zerglings for killing scout and scouting. Should also add X number of sunks.
Idea is slower tech than 1 or 2 hatch, but with econ advantage. 2nd extractor typically goes up after lair finishes, but if opponent doesn't pressure, can mass drones and put 2nd extractor up earlier for more gas. woah. wait. why 12 ovie? in all of my games that i've used 12 hatch, i have never done 12 ovie. ^^ Example of why I don't support open source haha. It's 9 Overlord.
hehe
Just look at wikipedia though. It would be so easy to correct that one error, and the rest of the stuff might be a good basis. Again, especially if you limit this to users who have been around for a little while, it's not like a bunch of people who don't know what they are talking about will be super eager to write down what's in their head. And if they do, just do a wiki ban.
|
|
|
Whenever I see a toss doing an FE with a forge/canon first build. I run a drone in and proxy hatch. if they don't find it in time its GG. If they do find it they don't know how to react to it and either build a bunch of canons in shitty places or whatever (effectivly slowing their expo/tech) or they pull a bunch of probes and build a gate asap and try and take it down. If they get it really low I can always cancel and I'm now in the lead tech/economy.
Usually they will be short changed a bit on their expansion and not walling their ramp so I would not be able to break the expansion but I can run passed it and help fortify/harass inside their main. (with this build Its 2 hatch lings to proxy) constant ling pumping and 100 gas for speed.
|
i'd imagine that the strategy tree will be based off of pro build orders from TLPD and youtube. Making new strategy branches for personal favorites would really fuck up the project. Just focusing on pro build orders should be enough to make the project worthwhile and no weird strats. (Also, I think typically, it's 11 pool for 3 hatch builds. this is in case u get zealot rushed or bunker rushed.)
On November 08 2007 09:33 CharlieMurphy wrote:
Whenever I see a toss doing an FE with a forge/canon first build. I run a drone in and proxy hatch. if they don't find it in time its GG.
For this strat which I'm sure aren't in any pro games, I can imagine you can put them in the EXE notes that accompany each build order. Just personally though, if I see an EXE note that has this, I'll probably edit it and say "This is a very risky cheese strat. don't try vs higher level players".
|
No I'm pretty sure that even if they do find it its hard to deal with and screws them up. ONLY if they went forge/canon first though.
|
so far, Y0z2 and I have midterms this week, but over the weekend, he's up for making a php template, and I'm up for filling the template with some start info. Then i'm going to harass the admins a bit about giving this project a trial run on TLnet for a bunch of more experience people to edit, and I'll harass some other forums for their l33t strat posters too. Give it a few weeks and see where it's at. Even wikipedia started out small...
|
maybe it would be best to make a wiki but with approved people who can change it, perhaps we could make it a regulated open source where only people we know what they are saying should be able to update/run the index.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
Have tiered membership:
Bottom level: everyone, can make changes, but changes do not show up unless approved by admin
High level: Trusted members, can make changes without approval needed
Very high level: Known good members, can create pages & guides, etc.
Top level: Admin, approves changes, etc.
|
On November 09 2007 11:13 GrandInquisitor wrote:
Have tiered membership:
Bottom level: everyone, can make changes, but changes do not show up unless approved by admin
High level: Trusted members, can make changes without approval needed
Very high level: Known good members, can create pages & guides, etc.
Top level: Admin, approves changes, etc.
Agreed. I always wondered why Wikipedia didn't endorse a format like this :-/
|
On November 09 2007 11:13 GrandInquisitor wrote:
Have tiered membership:
Bottom level: everyone, can make changes, but changes do not show up unless approved by admin
High level: Trusted members, can make changes without approval needed
Very high level: Known good members, can create pages & guides, etc.
Top level: Admin, approves changes, etc.
thanks i'll implement this model in the strategy indexing project that im working on independently
|
to the other developers of this project,
how are you implementing your build order table?
mine goes like this (one row per bo):
id,race,notes,example,response,author,approved by
here's an example:
id: 1
race: zerg
notes: 12 Overlord, 12 Hatch, 11 pool, 14 hatch, then overlord and extractor asap. Should add 2-6 zerglings for killing scout and scouting. Should also add X number of sunks. Idea is slower tech than 1 or 2 hatch, but with econ advantage. 2nd extractor typically goes up after lair finishes, but if opponent doesn't pressure, can mass drones and put 2nd extractor up earlier for more gas.
example: htp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N9bA8yR4Ck
response: 213 (some row in this same table containing the build order that constitutes as the response to this opening)
author: someone
approved by: some admin
--------------------
what does your table look like?
|
I use ur example
Table 1 - Strategy table
strategy id: 1
race: zerg
match up: ZvP
description: 12 Overlord, 12 Hatch, 11 pool, 14 hatch, then overlord and extractor asap. Should add 2-6 zerglings for killing scout and scouting. Should also add X number of sunks. Idea is slower tech than 1 or 2 hatch, but with econ advantage. 2nd extractor typically goes up after lair finishes, but if opponent doesn't pressure, can mass drones and put 2nd extractor up earlier for more gas
author: someone
approved by: some admin
Table 2 - replay example link
replay id: 1
Strategy id: 1
description: yyyyyy vs zzzzzz starting from (time-sec) to (time-sec)
Table 3 - replays table
replay id: 1
map: Python
match up: ZvP
address: h t t p://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N9bA8yR4Ck
Table 4 - response table
Strategy id: 1
response strategy id: 213
note: use strategy 213 against strategy 1 have pro ...... and con.........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this formate is expandable, support multiple example for strategy, and multiple response.
while add all of them in one table will restricted to only one example and one response for each strategy
this is just a frame work, I will post more after I come up with more detail ideas
|
On November 06 2007 04:16 PoP wrote:
An intermediate solution would be to only allow TL members with a certain amount of posts (say, 500+) to add/edit wiki entries. We could optionally implement a wiki-ban feature so that people don't keep posting BS over and over (but a TL ban could work too).
this sounds great!
|
On November 10 2007 20:49 Y0z2 wrote:
I use ur example
Table 1 - Strategy table
strategy id: 1
race: zerg
match up: ZvP
description: 12 Overlord, 12 Hatch, 11 pool, 14 hatch, then overlord and extractor asap. Should add 2-6 zerglings for killing scout and scouting. Should also add X number of sunks. Idea is slower tech than 1 or 2 hatch, but with econ advantage. 2nd extractor typically goes up after lair finishes, but if opponent doesn't pressure, can mass drones and put 2nd extractor up earlier for more gas
author: someone
approved by: some admin
Table 2 - replay example link
replay id: 1
Strategy id: 1
description: yyyyyy vs zzzzzz starting from (time-sec) to (time-sec)
Table 3 - replays table
replay id: 1
map: Python
match up: ZvP
address: h t t p://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N9bA8yR4Ck
Table 4 - response table
Strategy id: 1
response strategy id: 213
note: use strategy 213 against strategy 1 have pro ...... and con.........
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this formate is expandable, support multiple example for strategy, and multiple response.
while add all of them in one table will restricted to only one example and one response for each strategy
this is just a frame work, I will post more after I come up with more detail ideas
you guys are awesome. I can't wait to see the template. I'll be the official cheerleader. Go strategy indexing project !!!!!! TLnet said they wanted to do one, but they aren't releasing info which basically means that theirs is at a standstill. go us! I get to add starter info and cheerlead to admins when template is done =)
|
i will finish my exam on this Friday, lets start the project this weekend
|
affirmative! Good luck with studying!
|
On November 10 2007 06:42 borg wrote:
to the other developers of this project,
how are you implementing your build order table?
mine goes like this (one row per bo):
id,race,notes,example,response,author,approved by
here's an example:
id: 1
race: zerg
notes: 12 Overlord, 12 Hatch, 11 pool, 14 hatch, then overlord and extractor asap. Should add 2-6 zerglings for killing scout and scouting. Should also add X number of sunks. Idea is slower tech than 1 or 2 hatch, but with econ advantage. 2nd extractor typically goes up after lair finishes, but if opponent doesn't pressure, can mass drones and put 2nd extractor up earlier for more gas.
example: htp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N9bA8yR4Ck
response: 213 (some row in this same table containing the build order that constitutes as the response to this opening)
author: someone
approved by: some admin
--------------------
what does your table look like?
Are you building your system from scratch or starting with some existing software? If you are building it from scratch, I'd image in your table you would also want a column for logical deletes (delete timestamp), last modified timestamp, insert timestamp, and maybe an approved timestamp. All these fields are useful in larger systems, especially when it comes to auditing data when something goes horribly wrong
|
On November 16 2007 01:37 rockstar101 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2007 06:42 borg wrote:
to the other developers of this project,
how are you implementing your build order table?
mine goes like this (one row per bo):
id,race,notes,example,response,author,approved by
here's an example:
id: 1
race: zerg
notes: 12 Overlord, 12 Hatch, 11 pool, 14 hatch, then overlord and extractor asap. Should add 2-6 zerglings for killing scout and scouting. Should also add X number of sunks. Idea is slower tech than 1 or 2 hatch, but with econ advantage. 2nd extractor typically goes up after lair finishes, but if opponent doesn't pressure, can mass drones and put 2nd extractor up earlier for more gas.
example: htp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_N9bA8yR4Ck
response: 213 (some row in this same table containing the build order that constitutes as the response to this opening)
author: someone
approved by: some admin
--------------------
what does your table look like? Are you building your system from scratch or starting with some existing software? If you are building it from scratch, I'd image in your table you would also want a column for logical deletes (delete timestamp), last modified timestamp, insert timestamp, and maybe an approved timestamp. All these fields are useful in larger systems, especially when it comes to auditing data when something goes horribly wrong
Yay thanks for the help. Y0z2 said he's studying for his midterms until Friday, but I think he'll appreciate your input. When he's done with coding a template, I'm going to add the starter data and harass some admins to give it a trial period on TLnet. Thanks... any help is much appreciated! ^___^
|
thx rockstar101, ill add that too. im doing it from scratch, i think y0z2 is also. i was away at a conference for a week, but now im back and ill continue this.
|
On November 18 2007 18:46 borg wrote:
thx rockstar101, ill add that too. im doing it from scratch, i think y0z2 is also. i was away at a conference for a week, but now im back and ill continue this.
whoa. conference *_____*
|
On November 05 2007 08:49 Chill wrote:
In the mean time if you have any suggestions about what should be included or how this should operate, post them in this thread.
Get a side-module for Strategy Threads.
Zerg Guide
Protoss Guide
Terran Guide
Under each guide, there will be articles specifically named. For example:
"Three Hatch Zerg", consisting of a couple tabs: [article (detailing implementation)], [VOD links]
|
On November 19 2007 16:11 WhatisProtoss wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2007 08:49 Chill wrote:
In the mean time if you have any suggestions about what should be included or how this should operate, post them in this thread. Get a side-module for Strategy Threads. Zerg Guide Protoss Guide Terran Guide Under each guide, there will be articles specifically named. For example: "Three Hatch Zerg", consisting of a couple tabs: [article (detailing implementation)], [VOD links]
Thanks for the suggestion! However, I don't think that's very plausible or useful. Nice try though!
|
hi all. apparently someone changed my username and password, so this is my new account. please disregard anything if my old name is lurking around.
PS. i hate you all. no wonder pgtour went down. i don't care if this project falls through either. you guys suck,
|
On November 22 2007 03:36 L0veandPeace wrote:
hi all. apparently someone changed my username and password, so this is my new account. please disregard anything if my old name is lurking around.
PS. i hate you all. no wonder pgtour went down. i don't care if this project falls through either. you guys suck,
This is a bit fishy, maybe check his IP?
|
If you don't want someone to mess with your account, maybe you shouldn't post your password on a public site. I'm amazed it took two weeks for that to happen.
|
Please disregard the imposter L0veandpeace. I am the real LoveandPeace, and I changed the password because someone has been making foul posts under my name. I'm surprised myself that this abuser has not changed my password.
This project is still under progress, and anyone can still post their opinions HERE.
|
Sorry buddy, IP check shows L0veandPeace is legit.
|
o.o
That was weird as hell.
|
L0veandPeace, havnt see u online for a long time
|
Calgary25980 Posts
What's the progress on this? A new section (non-wiki) was made in TL to be filled by staff, but I haven't had the effort to get a standard format together so I can start writing (and asking certain members to write) articles to fill it.
I just don't want to start if your wiki is already underway.
I also don't want to start if I'm going to put in 1000 man-hours to get it filled, and then 3 people read it.
Thoughts? O_O
|
awesome ^^. ya, you said that the staff version of this project wasn't releasing info, so i thought maybe it was one of those projects that nobody is working on... so if u guys are actually working on it, that would be so awesome. Y0z2 is doing the programming for this one. I'm sure that a lot of people will help with the man hours and people will use the project too, so don't worry ^^.
|
On November 30 2007 02:13 Chill wrote:
What's the progress on this? A new section (non-wiki) was made in TL to be filled by staff, but I haven't had the effort to get a standard format together so I can start writing (and asking certain members to write) articles to fill it.
I just don't want to start if your wiki is already underway.
I also don't want to start if I'm going to put in 1000 man-hours to get it filled, and then 3 people read it.
Thoughts? O_O
if it is actually useful (which it should be) I would imagine it will be super popular.
|
Calgary25980 Posts
I just worry about semantics. "It's 14 Pylon" "No it's 15 Pylon" "Your mother's a whore" kind of things. I'll fill a few sample Zerg articles, then maybe they can release it publicly and we'll see what kind of response it gets? I don't know...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
