EPThttp://www.goear.com/listen.php?v=22f73c5
admin can figure out how to embed because i have no clue how to
CHEERS! ^_^
[edit]
embed is 5 posts down
[Audio]Building Triggers by Day[9]
| Forum Index > Brood War Strategy |
|
Day[9]
United States7366 Posts
http://www.goear.com/listen.php?v=22f73c5 admin can figure out how to embed because i have no clue how to CHEERS! ^_^ [edit] embed is 5 posts down | ||
|
emperorchampion
Canada9496 Posts
| ||
|
Bosu
United States3247 Posts
| ||
|
emperorchampion
Canada9496 Posts
EDIT: nvm its 25 mins long | ||
|
qrs
United States3637 Posts
OK, left off at 8:40. If anyone feels like picking it up, feel free, otherwise maybe I'll get back to it sometime later. Edit: Thanks to tribal_warfare for transcribing the second (larger) part. Hey everyone, this is Day[9], and I want to talk about a pretty advanced concept called Building Triggers and the Imaginary Player. So I created the Gimme questions thread a while ago, asking about questions people had, just for me to rant on about, and a huge number of them were about builds, like, If he does this, how do I respond with this? or, When's a good timing push, what's a good build, on this matchup, on this map? And so, rather than going into specific advice and trying to answer those questions, I figure it would be really nice to give some general advice that you guys can apply in a wide variety of situations. And I mentioned two at the start: the first is what's called "Building Triggers" and the second is what's called "The Imaginary Player". So let's begin with Building Triggers The notion of a trigger is pretty straightforward in itself: that if A happens, you do B. And even though this is really a sort of simple idea, it has powerful, powerful applications for improving you play. So let's begin with some really simple examples that I know everyone is familiar with: As Protoss, when your shuttle is halfway done, you start building a Robotics Support Bay. That way, when your shuttle finishes, you'll be able to start the reaver right on time. Or, in another example, when your Spire is at 300 hitpoints, you stop making things at all of your hatcheries: that way, when the Spire finishes, you have three larvae ready to roll at each hatchery, and you can pump out a whole bunch of mutalisks. Virtually everyone has experienced the two triggers that I just mentioned, because they crop up in almost every single game. Any time Zerg is going for a Spire, he's going to be obeying this sort of Law of Larva-Timing. But, in terms of other triggers, people seem to treat them as though they're this mystical knowledge, that there's this oracle that appears every hundred years and dishes out some sorts of timings or whatever. But the fact remains that any player can build his own triggers if he does so in a simple incremental fashion, which is exactly what I'm going to talk about, with a personal example of my own: Let's talk about Zerg vs. Terran on Gaia, one of my absolute favorite matchups ever. Now, assuming that I'm not in vertical positions with my opponent, I love going hydralisk/lurker, because of the way that the middle of the map is kind of wide open but also kind of looks like a large path. Now, the problem that I have when I go hydralisk/lurk--or really that any hydralisk/lurk player has--is that if the Terran gets too many tanks, it becomes increasingly difficult to stop Terran pushes. If you have some number of medic/marine and 15 well-placed tanks, it's virtually impossible to break that with any number of hydralisk/lurkers. So, in the logic of constructing my build on this map, I knew there was a point where I needed to get Guardians, and the question is: when do I get Guardians. At this point, a critical mistake that so, so, so many players make is to think that when late-game rolls around they can just feel it out: they'll be able somehow to "feel" when Terran has too many tanks and then they'll get the Hive. That logic does not work and you should avoid this at all costs. I mean, consider early-game: suppose I'm Protoss and I want to 2-gate rush a Zerg player: I never "feel it out". I never just say, "Well I can just wing this 2-gate rush." Instead what I do is get a precise, exact, optimized build, and follow that every single time I want to 2-gate rush a Zerg player and I make subtle adjustments based upon what the Zerg player is doing. There is no reason why you can't do this late-game. And that is exactly what I'm saying: that you want to have a precise plan of what to do late-game by creating your trigger and then you make subtle adjustments based upon what's going on. With that in mind, let's discuss how I came to answer the question, "When do I get Guardians in Zerg vs. Terran on Gaia?" Step 1, and by far the most important step in building your own trigger: I chose a timing completely arbitrarily. I said to myself, "Let's get a Hive at 125 food: that's when I'm going to get my Queen's Nest and start teching up to Guardians." And I told myself I would play at least 10 games using this exact timing to see how it felt. In the actual games, I got crushed by tank pushes every single time: the Guardians were way late. So, great: now, all of a sudden, rather than trying to "feel my way" through the late-game, I instead established a hard decision with a very clear adjustment, which was: "Get the hive earlier." At this point, I backed off a little bit, and said, "Well, let me try doing it at 90 food." And when I did it at 90 food, the results were better--I was able to hold off the pushes a little bit more effectively in the late-game, but then, all of a sudden, I was losing in the middle-game: when the Terran's first push came out, I just didn't have enough hydra/lurk to kill it off. So immediately, I know that the trigger I'm looking for, the timing I'm looking for, is somewhere between 90 and 125 food, and I ended up settling at around 100 food as a decent time to start making the Queen's Nest and teching towards those Guardians. An important note is that I didn't need to use food as a basis for establishing these triggers. I could have used any number of wacky things. I could have said, "I'll start making my Queen's Nest when my +1 attack upgrade is 75% done." Or I could have said, "Gee, let me start making my Queen's Nest when I get my gas done at my fourth base." I mean, anything you want to use as your trigger, totally go for it. Again, the most important concept in building your own trigger is first choosing a starting point and then incrementally adjusting that based upon your experiences in play. And the most important word there is "incrementally". By far the biggest mistake that you can make when establishing these sorts of triggers is to be too hasty in making your adjustments. That's why I said that I devoted 10 games to getting my Hive at 125 food. I devoted 10 games to getting my Hive at 90 food. Because I wanted to make sure that I wasn't making some sort of fluke in those games that would incorrectly make me adjust my play in a wrong direction. There are two key aspects of this example I briefly want to touch on. The first is that this is a late-game situation. Many players feel really daunted by late-game scenarios, because it feels like there are so many variables and deviations, and there's a million ways you could have gotten there, and it seems like an intractable problem, trying to close down on a solid solution. But, as we saw in this example, I had a very simple question and there was a very simple process I followed. And, remember, if you just break it down into small enough chunks, there is no problem that is too hard for any player at any level to solve. The second key point--and this is so, so, so important: if there is one thing you remember from this entire recording, let it be this--I never stopped to question whether my play was right or wrong. That is, I never said, "Should I be going Guardians?" I never stopped to do that; I never stopped to question whether I should be going hydralisk/lurker or anything like that. Rather, I said, "I am going hydralisk/lurker on this map, it feels like I need to go Guardians, when do I get those Guardians?" and I tried only to answer the question when. That is it. That is so important in the improvement of your play: to focus on a question and work on that. There are countless players in Starcraft who think the goal is to find "the right build". You see these players all the time: they're 2-gate rushing, you know, one week and then the next week they're going early-expand, Bisu-style, and then the next week they're just doing whatever the current trend in Proleague is. They keep changing and changing and changing. That is not your goal. Your goal in Starcraft is not to try to find "the right build"; rather, it is to find a build that you like that is based on solid logic, and then to adjust that build, and to work on it, and to incorporate newer, better triggers that make that build work. _________________________________________________________________________ finished by tribal_warfare _________________________________________________________________________ For example, one day I woke up and said "You know what, I'm tired of going mutalisk/zerling in zerg vs zerg. I want to go hydralisk." and I spent one season on PG tour just working on that build, making adjustments, trying to form new sets of logics, doing different openings until finally I had a solid build down. The following season I went 56-1 against zerg, I was playing an A+ level; and I say that not to brag but to point out that there was absolutely nothing special about my play. I simply started with some logic and then adjusted and adjusted and adjusted. I mean the one loss I had, was not to a phenomenal player at all. It was one of the first games I played that season. But he showed me that when I was doing my opening I needed to get twelve zerglings instead of ten. I had been relying on getting ten but it was just too little for his aggressive nine pool opening. And after that adjustment I could face nine pools in the future and hold that off. Again it was just these subtle adjustments. I'd like to take the time now to answer a question I saw in the questions thread I created as well as to dicuss a conversation I had with Xeris about this very topic of building triggers, so I apologise in advance for potentially butchering your name but Oystein from Norway asked, "When you have taken expansions outside your natural in zerg vs terran do you ever make units from the expansions or do you stick strictly to drone?" I love this question because it has a clear motivation, it has an answer with some foundational logic and it can be turned into a question that can help develop a trigger to improve your play. So first of all, let me begin with the motivation. This totally was a question that came up in my experience as a Zerg player. You know, say the map is python and I take my main and my natural and then I take another main because I'm going for the standard sort of hive tech defiler play and what not. And I remember early on in my life time I would wonder when I had that expansion, should I just keep making drones? It seemed to make sense because I wanted to have my economy slowly getting better and better and the more drones the merrier right? Moreover, I could have a nydas canal linking my main and this expansion so I could have units in both places at once, and also when I take the natural as my forth base I can just transfer drones from that expansion on down. It seemed like I could keep making drones. At the same time I saw all sorts of benefits to making units from that expansion. If I'm making a lot of units at that expansion then I'll have a small little army that I can just move right down the ramp and I can use that to defend my newly building forth expansion. Also, if I'm occasionally making a defiler and some lurkers at that third base I can use those units to counter attack and a good example of this is GGplay vs Iris in the everstar league finals game five. So I saw benefits to both. That said, to answer your question Oystein, yes, there is a time you want to stop making drones from that expansion and begin making units and the logic to this is that you have all your hatcheries make the number of drones that you want to get to the level of economy you want and then that hatchery can join in unit production and that ends up being much more efficient then just slowly adding drones one at a time at that expansion. But what is so key about Oystein's question is that now we can ask ourselves, when do we stop making drones? What is the appropriate level of economy? And now we are just starting an exercise in building a new trigger that will help us improve our play. And again, what I love so much about Oystein's question is that it has a natural motivation, it can be stated as a simple problem and all we have to do is use some simple logic to reword that that as a trigger building exercise. In another example I was talking to my friend Xeris on the phone about one base dragoon/reaver on Requiem. Because Requiem has really close starting positions, one base and its aggressive play is really great against Zerg because the zerg has to stay low econ in the early game. So if you can get a really good timing push in there with dragoon/reaver it's surprisingly difficult to stop. As I was discussing this build with Xeris he asked me, when do I get Dragoon range? I know I want to have range when I make my push but I'm not sure if I need to get it earlier, you know, to hold off some sort of hydra/ling bust at my front. And I think that is a perfectly worded question for a trigger building exercise. So lets just outline the process that we would use in that situation. It's now time to pretend that I am a budding, young protoss super star. That I have taken it upon myself to figure out precisely when to get dragoon range on Requiem. Step one. I need to choose an arbitrary time to start getting dragoon range so I have some place to work with, so I have some benchmark for comparision. When I say arbitrary, it's important to note that I do not mean stupid. You should always use some sort of logic to make sure you have a reasonable starting point. So, in my eyes a reasonable starting point is to get dragoon range to finish right before I make that dragoon/reaver push. So I'll say to myself that I want dragoon range to finish right as my reaver finishes. All of a sudden I have a complete army with shuttle, reaver and a bunch of dragoons with range, so now is a good time to attack. So my arbitrary timing might be, start dragoon range right when my reaver starts. What I might discover after a game or two is that the reaver finishes much more quickly then range. At this point I might say to myself, "Ok, I need to back range up. I'm going to start getting range when my shuttle begins as opposed to when my reaver begins." and lets say that timing works perfectly. So now, right as my reaver pops out, my dragoon range finishes and I'm ready to roll out. Then suppose at this time I find that my push gets crushed over and over again. I think to myself, "Hmm, I need to get that second reaver before my attack." As a result, I no longer need to get dragoon range so early. Let me start getting dragoon range when my first reaver begins, as opposed to when my shuttle begins. And then lets say that timing lines up well, and right as my second reaver pops out dragoon range finishes and I'm ready to roll out once more. I've made a minor adjustment based upon the success of this push and again, kept the focus in my mind on when that dragoon range upgrade was beginning. Further suppose that at this point I play made ten, fifteen, games and against every hydralisk/ling player, this push crushes them. I'm steamrolling zerg after zerg and I'm feeling much more confident in my play until I get to a player who is going two-base mutalisk instead of doing this zergling/hydralisk on opening. Against this sort of player I might find myself helpless against his mutalisks early on because I don't get dragoon range until right when these reavers finish so I might be having a huge difficulty dealing with mutalisk harass. It's important then to say, "Well, gee, maybe I should get dragoon range earlier." And then you plan it and try to get the timing aligned for when his mutalisks pop out. Having adjusted the dragoon range timing, I need to make sure my push hasn't been delayed too much because if I'm really good at holding off mutalisks players now I need to make sure that I don't equally suck against the hydraling players. What may be the case is that I find that I can get away with upgrading dragoon range early to hold off mutalisk players and my push has not been delayed so much that my push can't crush the hydraling players. Although this was an entirely theoretical exercise I think it is a completely reasonable exercise of how you would be adjusting play game after game. Note, I never stopped to say, "Is dragoon range good on Requiem?" I just began with the assumption that it was and tried to adjust the timing until I found one that worked just right for me. As I mentioned earlier, what you'll sometimes find is that there are situations when you can delay dragoon range sometimes and will have to get it earlier some other times. All your logic will eventually condense down into a theorem that will allow you to precisely get dragoon range at just the right time every single game. I've spent a long time talking about building triggers so now I want to talk about an abstract and very related concept called the imaginary player. This is the notion that, because you cannot see what your opposing player is doing through the fog of war you have to account for all possibilities of his play until you know exactly what he is doing. For instance, if I'm playing against a terran player and he went one-base fast gas and I can't get up his ramp to see what he's doing he could be going for a fast two-factory push, he could be going for a fast two-port wraith, he could be going for fast dropship, he could be going factory vulture harass to an expansion. I just don't know what he's doing yet. So I must assume that I'm playing against all of those possibilities, all of those imaginary players until I know precisely which one my opponent is. To many of you, I'm sure this sounds like I'm saying, "Be sure to account for these possibilites." but the notion of the imaginary player is in fact much, much deeper than that and it's critical for you to work out all sorts of timings and triggers to truely become a great player. Once I have a build that I really like, that I think is solid, what I do is I get about five replays of that build against all the possible types of players I could play against. So, for example, lets go back to my zerg vs terran on gaia. Lets say I really like my lurker\hydralisk build. I'm going to make sure I've played this build style against fast expand, two barracks fast factory, fast gas and all the variations I mentioned earlier, against two rax fast expand, and against weird sorts of all ins and bunker rushes. I make sure I have replays against all of these variations. And that is when I figure out the timings for imaginary players. For example, I'll watch five replays of a terran who goes two rax into medic marine fast expand and I'll mentally line up all his timings with mine. I'll say something like, "Ok, I'll see his command center when my lair finishes." and I'll line up other things like say my evolution chamber generally finishes when his engineering bay starts or he makes his academy when my hatchery has this many hitpoints from being finished. All these sorts of little things. I can even doing things like "He makes this building when my food is at this much." I mean, every player is used to saying things like, "I make my overlord at eighteen." and I'm telling you that you should think things like "When I make my overlord at eighteen, that's when he makes his academy." and then I'll extend this further. I'll watch five replays against a player who went two port wraith and I'll get all those timings worked out: when his starports start and finish in relation to my lair. Against a two factory player I know exactly when that push leaves his base based upon what my food is. After hours of studying these replays I now have a complete mental picture of what all possible Terrans are doing based upon my play and the numbers I get from my build. When every game begins I'm always aware of all the things my imaginary terran opponents are doing and throughout the early parts of the game I'm constantly thinking to myself, "Which imaginary players can I cross off?". Which brings me to an absolutely critical idea that all high level players abuse relentlessly, and that is what I call the non-trigger. The basic idea of a non-trigger is that if you know your opponents timings well enough, you know that if you see nothing at certain points in time you can cross imaginary players off your list. For example, suppose my terran opponent goes two rax and that's all I get to see. He could be going for a fast tank push, medic marine and early expand, or some sort of aggressive one base play. Those are the three imaginary players I have in my mind, and three imaginary players whose timings I know intimately. For example, if my player is early expanding I know exactly when I first see that command center and I can go "three, two, one," and if I see nothing I know immediately that he isn't fast expanding and I can begin preparing myself for a fast tank push and preparing myself to play against a one basing terran player. This seemingly counter-intuitive idea is unbelievably powerful. That you always know exactly what your opponent is doing. That you can cross off all imaginary players until you have pin pointed exactly who your opponent is purely through key periods of nothing. Many players incorrectly assume certain situations in starcraft are rock, paper, scissors because they don't acknowledge the power of non-triggers. They'll watch two professional players play and neither of them will scout each other very much, and when they finally confront each other the first player will have an army that absolutely crushes the second player. Many amateurs will look at that and say that "Oh well, the first player just won because of his opening build." but the fact remains that the opening player is constantly adjusting his opening because he is seeing nothing from the second player at key periods of time. Never assume that starcraft is rock, paper, scissors. There is always a solution there. If you spend time practicing keeping track of all the imaginary players, focusing on what the non-triggers tell you, you will never be surprised in starcraft. I probably get surprised by what my opponent is doing once every thousand games because I'm always keeping track of all the possibilities in my head. Well, that about wraps up my rant for today. Hopefully some of you found that useful. I really hope that you guys can incorporate the ideas of building triggers on only to generally improve your play but also to discover timings in the builds that you like. Because there is no point playing a game like starcraft if you're having someone elses fun. I also hope that you can incorporate the notion of the imaginary player into your play. Not just because it's obviously helpful and it will greatly bulster your confidence in game as you'll never be surprised but more importantly, I think that one of the most rewarding feelings I get in starcraft consistently is just knowing what my opponent is doing, and then when I rewatch the replay, I was right. That is just such a powerfully cool feeling to be able to go "I know he's making his academy here and his engineering bay here and his expansion should be finishing about now" and when you rewatch it you're just dead on the money, and that's just such a confidence booster that you're right on track. Hopefully you'll use the imaginary player logic to build your own clever non-triggers that will give you perhaps the greatest joy possible in starcraft - being accused of being a map hacker. That concludes my rant. This is Day[9], thank you very much for listening. Cheers. | ||
GTR
51436 Posts
| ||
|
Crunchums
United States11143 Posts
 | ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
going gas before rax to look like some cut econ fast vult then blocking with 2 scvs, leaving only 3 marines on ramp while keeping the rest in the back so im like heh 2port.. etc (cross out marine builds) so i make some hydras( the build u do in zvt vs mech ) then blam 3rax+1 I like going hive when my 2nd defense upgrade is 50% done so i can get my 3rd + the "timing" i base around that the arbitary timing and one set build...great for iccup but... do you still do well in a series match? i mean, people who've done all the builds.. can pick the best one vs urs and/or switch it up. can u talk about playing offraces vs ur main to get the feel of timings? can u talk about mind games? I really like your audio commentaries. The last one on ZvT mech was eeh but this was really good keep it up! | ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
LOL 56-1 BWHAAH GG reppack yo ! | ||
|
Raithed
China7078 Posts
| ||
|
selboN
United States2523 Posts
On January 20 2009 11:32 HeavOnEarth wrote: LOL one season hydra vs zerg LOL 56-1 BWHAAH GG reppack yo ! +1 | ||
Heyoka
Katowice25012 Posts
| ||
|
RLTY
United States965 Posts
Now to go make some imaginary players. heh. | ||
|
Not_Computer
Canada2277 Posts
| ||
|
Tropics
United Kingdom1132 Posts
one of the best learning bw things ive ever seen/heard/read | ||
|
erin[go]bragh
United States815 Posts
| ||
|
alphafuzard
United States1610 Posts
i've been accused of mh'ing before but that was more luck, and less crossing out imaginary players  Phenomenal info and hopefully I will have the follow-through to put these ideas into action. One can always hope.... edit: Recommended threads gogogo? | ||
|
Not_Computer
Canada2277 Posts
WOW, this was such a good listen! I knew vaguely about most of the things you covered but now I realized that all the details of these ideals and strategic theories I have are lacking so much. Too bad I don't have enough time/commitment right now to put it into practice but I'll keep it in mind for the future. Btw, every time you say "absolutely CRITICAL", it makes me sit up straight and listen intently, rofl. | ||
|
Day[9]
United States7366 Posts
On January 20 2009 12:53 Not_Computer wrote: Btw, every time you say "absolutely CRITICAL", it makes me sit up straight and listen intently, rofl. aahahahahahah this makes me giggle teheheheheheheh | ||
|
Divinek
Canada4045 Posts
| ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
One of my questions: + Show Spoiler + Example: TvP Othello Using your trigger theory. Let's say you open with a 1 fact FE, and the daring protoss like many seem to do nowadays goes 1 gate goons into fe (with obs/reaver drop/DT/etc. I don't think it matters much) and no one does any major damage. You try to get some vult harass in, he denies it, he tries DT drop you, you fend it off with any losses. So now he is going for his fast 3rd and you are going for a 6fact timing push, which is one of the triggers you had planned to use for a standard game like this. Assuming you were playing a player with equal macro/micro/mechanics/etc you push out at whatever your supply count is. This supply count has been chosen as one of your triggers. For ex. TvP on this map for a 6fact timing push you push out at 80 supply. Another one of your triggers is "right when I push out at 80 supply with my timing push I will take my 3rd". So you push out and one of the 3 options happens: a) your push is successful, you either contain him, do major damage, or kill him b) your armies were about equal in strength and he 1a2a3 flanks you, both your armies are basically dead. c) he just just just overmacroed you and after destroying your push his remaining units come to pressure your 3rd that you just start. If a) happens, you would continue on with your "triggers" (for ex. when my 3rd finishes I will add 2 more facts then build a CC for my 4th). everything is all good. But what about b) or c)? In your plan are you supposed to have a backup for when you can't continue on with your triggers? If you did add 2 more facts and start your 4th CC like you planned right after c) has happened, he will continue to pressure you, killing off your 3rd and you are extremely behind. This really throws me off when it happens to me. I go into the game with the mindset that "I will not forget to expand, when I push out with my 6fact timing push at ___ supply i will remember to start my 3rd immediately." Then I find out that c) happened and I'm totally lost. I either end up continuing on taking my 3rd, and I get crushed, or I come up with something completely random like mass vult harass and I end up forgetting to expand while doing that. If I try to slow push or something and take my 3rd, I then realize he is just about to recall in my base, or has carriers. Are you ever too far behind where you don't have the economy to continue on with your triggers and defend against the imaginary player at the same time? So in summary, do I need backup triggers? If so should I ever just stop and think that "I'm too far behind, there's no way my planned out triggers will work anymore?" Sorry for the long question... | ||
|
anderoo
Canada1876 Posts
thanks Day | ||
|
Day[9]
United States7366 Posts
i hope i'm understanding your question right. correct me if i'm wrong, but i believe you are asking the following: "My plan is X. If plan X fails miserably, I fully intend on making an adjustment after the game. However, I'm confused when plan X only kinda doesn't work. Should I immediately leave the game and focus on how to make plan X work? Should I continue to play and get back on the track of plan X? Should I abandon plan X completely?" Let me try to answer THAT question. If ever your game goes in a completely unexpected and undesired direction, I think it's critical to rework your trigger to ensure that the game flows in the proper direction. If your plan kinda fails, I recommend the following: treat the "before messup" portion of the game as a learning experience for reworking the trigger. treat the "after messup" portion of the game as a learning experience for managing a crisis. i always have some vague "backup" plan that I practice in those situations. For example: In ZvP, suppose I have a style that involves making a big lurker/ling/hydra army and controlling the center of the map. Theoretically, I desire to keep the protoss from ever getting too close to my expansions via ground. Occasionally, protoss will walk over my center army and crush me immediately. Obviously, I rework the build. Suppose though, that he only barely kills off my main army. At this point, I can no longer do my "big lurker/ling/hydra control middle" army, so I turtle hard w/ lurkers+sunkens and become that annoying zerg that drops all over the place until he has 50 billion ultras. In this instance, i use the early game to help me analyze my original theory of play, whereas i use the lategame to help me practice some brutal tactics and high intensity in game decision making. I hope that sorta answers what you were going for | ||
|
Emptyeye
United States34 Posts
| ||
|
anotak
United States1537 Posts
Upmagic vs. By.Hero on destination -- upmagic hides his starting barracks in the back of his main. By.Hero doesn't see it and thinks proxy barracks. he loses the entire game based on this choice. Upmagic vs. some toss on hitchhiker -- upmagic builds 2rax at start. toss scouts. upmagic kills probe. upmagic lifts rax and then builds a CC and FEs for free while the toss builds cannons and blocks his ramp with zealots and dragoons and doesn't figure it out until it's too late. edit: i got accused of maphacking once but it was only because i scouted the guy opening 3rax. in TERRAN VS. TERRAN????... so i went 2 fact vult and cleaned him up. he called me a hacker and disconected after going 1base BC and it failing miserably after i contained him and mass expo'd. I looked at the replay in bwchart and he had autosplit hacks... he was probably maphacking. double edit: talking about it backfiring isn't meant as a criticism, this is a wonderful post Day i love it seriously thanks dude | ||
|
Grobyc
Canada18410 Posts
On January 20 2009 13:49 Day[9] wrote: Grobyc: i hope i'm understanding your question right. correct me if i'm wrong, but i believe you are asking the following: "My plan is X. If plan X fails miserably, I fully intend on making an adjustment after the game. However, I'm confused when plan X only kinda doesn't work. Should I immediately leave the game and focus on how to make plan X work? Should I continue to play and get back on the track of plan X? Should I abandon plan X completely?" Let me try to answer THAT question. If ever your game goes in a completely unexpected and undesired direction, I think it's critical to rework your trigger to ensure that the game flows in the proper direction. If your plan kinda fails, I recommend the following: treat the "before messup" portion of the game as a learning experience for reworking the trigger. treat the "after messup" portion of the game as a learning experience for managing a crisis. i always have some vague "backup" plan that I practice in those situations. For example: In ZvP, suppose I have a style that involves making a big lurker/ling/hydra army and controlling the center of the map. Theoretically, I desire to keep the protoss from ever getting too close to my expansions via ground. Occasionally, protoss will walk over my center army and crush me immediately. Obviously, I rework the build. Suppose though, that he only barely kills off my main army. At this point, I can no longer do my "big lurker/ling/hydra control middle" army, so I turtle hard w/ lurkers+sunkens and become that annoying zerg that drops all over the place until he has 50 billion ultras. In this instance, i use the early game to help me analyze my original theory of play, whereas i use the lategame to help me practice some brutal tactics and high intensity in game decision making. I hope that sorta answers what you were going for Alright so If that scenario happened and followed up with c) where my push got pretty raped, then I would be better off making one of those large changes in your plan, like going from 125 supply hive to 90 supply hive? Maybe instead of pushing out to his base next time I'll just secure my 3rd. I guess when this happens your triggers become much more vague and I would just have to do my best to harass and catch up without a guideline to do it. Although if b) happened and I didn't get the desired result but it was wasn't as bad as it could have been then I would best be off just tweaking my build, (like when he gets his 3rd extra early like he might have done in that game after watching the replay) where I go for a quicker 4/5 fact push instead? You did get my question right though, thanks. | ||
|
Day[9]
United States7366 Posts
On January 20 2009 14:02 anotak wrote: Triggers and non-triggers backfiring: Upmagic vs. By.Hero on destination -- upmagic hides his starting barracks in the back of his main. By.Hero doesn't see it and thinks proxy barracks. he loses the entire game based on this choice. Upmagic vs. some toss on hitchhiker -- upmagic builds 2rax at start. toss scouts. upmagic kills probe. upmagic lifts rax and then builds a CC and FEs for free while the toss builds cannons and blocks his ramp with zealots and dragoons and doesn't figure it out until it's too late. double edit: talking about it backfiring isn't meant as a criticism, this is a wonderful post Day i love it seriously thanks dude oh i totally didn't take it as criticism! i think its an excellent illustration of how deep a game starcraft is (and how cool nontriggers are ;P) | ||
|
Ideas
United States8088 Posts
| ||
|
VelkanKnight
United States69 Posts
thanks a lot :D | ||
|
Day[9]
United States7366 Posts
an EXCELLENT example of the "imaginary player" in action is a simple 9pool speedling vs protoss fast expand. the protoss has a VERY long time with virtually NO knowledge, and hence he must account for a huge number of imaginary opponents. consequently, the info-starved protoss MUST make extra cannons/units in order to hold off potential attacks (ling bust, hydra bust, muta rush, fast lurker drop) that may come while still holding off more standard transitions (mass midgame hydra, standard lurker/ling tech play etc etc etc) yarr! | ||
|
PvPTZ
United States9 Posts
On January 20 2009 14:43 PvPTZ wrote: Jesus... sombody give this guy a damned medal cuz he helped me out twice now http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=86369 after listening to that i decided this thread is crap and i can do it all on my own and would be better on my own anyways lol ty day[9]you just helped me in so many ways that i can barely just now begin to understand. edit: lol i liked the ending where you said something like, "being accused of being a maphacker becuase your so dead on with timings" is so enjoyable lol thats funny tehee i hope i get that good. | ||
|
-orb-
United States5770 Posts
Seriously this is a VERY helpful way of looking at things. Not only how to develop timings and such, but also the imaginary player part was very interesting, although the base concept is albeit very simple. It seems so simple but I never did it before. Now I'll start thinking "okay exactly what strategies could he be doing right now and what are their timings" and learning from the replays about those timings | ||
|
Motiva
United States1774 Posts
| ||
|
Rucky
United States717 Posts
some POWERFUL stuff! : map hacker! : >:D hehe, you just imaginery! : wtf?? | ||
|
LeperKahn
Romania1838 Posts
In the past I've found that "General" advice isn't very helpful to me. Most of it comes as simple concepts that are found in playing the game for even a little amount of time and serve only as an introduction to players who would rather read/listen about the game than play it. However, this recording blew me away. Put simply, this recording was a conclusion that, while seemingly obvious after the fact, isn't clear to players trying desperately to improve. Many players, as you said and myself included, cling to a progamer's build without analyzing the deeper aspects of the play. Often times coming to rock-paper-scissors conclusions. Throwing away things they feel comfortable with simply because it didn't work in their favorite Zerg versus Terran recent proleague game. THIS is analyzing your game play. Possibly the most important aspect of playing Starcraft. Do it well, and do it right. Thank you Day[9]. | ||
LosingID8
CA10827 Posts
 | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
I'll listen right away, btw I love your voice day ^^ | ||
|
niteReloaded
Croatia5281 Posts
meh, I think I got molested to much by icc protosses. | ||
|
Mastermind
Canada7096 Posts
| ||
|
stet_tcl
Greece319 Posts
Thank you very much for making this, very interesting stuff there... Keep it up please Seriously, this answers like 70% of the strat forum threads that have come up lately.. Edit: Zomg, now i have to study more for sc than for my exams! | ||
NonY
8748 Posts
non-triggers are so powerful against good players i would add that you need to re-evaluate everything as your mechanics improve and/or your opponents' mechanics improve. im always cautious about advising people with my triggers and non-triggers because the things that my micro and macro can make possible, and my opponent's micro and macro can make possible, can vastly change the triggers. some tricky triggers / non-triggers that i use: for pvt, when range is done and i have a dragoon chasing an scv, i change to a move command for a while and then stop chasing. the terran knows my range should be done, but it's clearly not, so he prepares for some really fast DT or reaver when i go 2gate obs, and my goons are harrassing his wall and see the CC, then i don't need the obs for a while, since i know his build. i either don't build obs, or i don't send them to his base. if he sees the little blurs, then he knows that i've gone 2gate obs. NOT seeing the obs could be a non-trigger for him. i don't let him have that info | ||
|
Deathfate
Spain555 Posts
| ||
|
noxing
16 Posts
really helpful. keep it up man. | ||
|
volcane
United Kingdom24 Posts
| ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On January 20 2009 21:48 Battle wrote: I like your audios, you should provide also a direct link to hear it like a podcast. Thank you Day[9] monthly/weekly podcast! YEAH! | ||
|
Navane
Netherlands2748 Posts
On January 20 2009 13:03 Day[9] wrote: aahahahahahah this makes me giggle teheheheheheheh I actually rewinded when you said "If you remember one part, let it be this" Thanks again for this great lecture. I wish my teachers could talk this comprehensive and clear. | ||
|
kaisr
Canada715 Posts
| ||
|
fishyjoes
Germany644 Posts
+1 | ||
|
anderoo
Canada1876 Posts
| ||
|
Zerum
Sweden348 Posts
thanks alot. | ||
|
MER
Bulgaria125 Posts
wow, Starcraft is science! +1 | ||
|
Zozma
United States1626 Posts
| ||
|
Commander-Zerg
Canada341 Posts
Will still listen later | ||
|
MasterZilla
Sweden234 Posts
As an aspiring Zerg player (and an aspiring competitive player in general) I feel really happy that you are investing your time in providing these guides or commentaries or rants or whatever you'd like to call them. I think this one is on a level that is above where I'm at right now, but it is something that I will keep in the back of my head as I improve, and I don't doubt having heard this will help make me a better player in the end. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
I can't wait to hear your next audio guide. I'd really love to see an audio about mechanics/macro/hotkeys, the technical aspect of SC since this seems to be what gives me the most trouble. As a D- player, not being able to execute a simple mech push is pretty frustrating :/ Then again it's probably too broad a topic to really talk about much. Can't wait for the next audio! :D | ||
|
sixghost
United States2096 Posts
On January 20 2009 14:36 Day[9] wrote: OH also an EXCELLENT example of the "imaginary player" in action is a simple 9pool speedling vs protoss fast expand. the protoss has a VERY long time with virtually NO knowledge, and hence he must account for a huge number of imaginary opponents. consequently, the info-starved protoss MUST make extra cannons/units in order to hold off potential attacks (ling bust, hydra bust, muta rush, fast lurker drop) that may come while still holding off more standard transitions (mass midgame hydra, standard lurker/ling tech play etc etc etc) yarr! I have a question involving the invisible player for your opponent. A while ago I was solely doing overpool into 6 speedlings and denying scout while taking 2 bases, and against the people who were experienced enough to be afraid of the sight of speedlings this earlier, I was able to catch up in economy despite the low drone number, just by the threat of a runby, 2hatch hydra/lurk/muta, when the P cautiously added cannons at his nat/main. But sometimes I find when playing at the lower levels, D through C-, the players will add no additional defenses anywhere, and be perfectly safe as they continue their planned build as if no threat ever existed, as I won't be able to punish them with just 6 lings that late into the game. So my question is, do you stay away from these builds that are in large part based on the fear of an early cheese when playing against people who don't take into consideration the invisible player? Also a 2nd question, how do you change your mindset and the builds you use when playing against people that you are extremely familiar with. On iccup I tend to just stick to 1-2 builds max per MU, as the people you are playing have no past experience playing you, and whether you've done a build 1 or 100 times in a row has no effect on this 1 game. After months of playing games with teammates I've noticed the consistency of my builds are starting to work against me, and players who in the past would play even games with me, are starting to roll me just by virtue of knowing what I'm going to do. Part of this is the notion that going 3hat muta in zvt is accepted as the best way to get better at the MU, but part of it for me is also that I feel very uncomfortable playing when starting off with a 2hatch build instead of a 3hatch. If the game goes past 10 minutes I notice a considerable drop in my management of the game. Could you provide some insight in how to continue with a game that opening in an unorthadox way, but continues past the opening in a more orthadox way? I find that too many of my timings and triggers are based on 1 particular opening. My last 2 questions are these. How(if at all) do you change how you play given there is lots of history between you and your opponent. And how important is it for your overall ability as a player to be able to be comfortable using 5-6 builds per MU. | ||
|
Day[9]
United States7366 Posts
On January 21 2009 05:51 lgdDante wrote: I have a question involving the invisible player for your opponent. A while ago I was solely doing overpool into 6 speedlings and denying scout while taking 2 bases, and against the people who were experienced enough to be afraid of the sight of speedlings this earlier, I was able to catch up in economy despite the low drone number, just by the threat of a runby, 2hatch hydra/lurk/muta, when the P cautiously added cannons at his nat/main. But sometimes I find when playing at the lower levels, D through C-, the players will add no additional defenses anywhere, and be perfectly safe as they continue their planned build as if no threat ever existed, as I won't be able to punish them with just 6 lings that late into the game. So my question is, do you stay away from these builds that are in large part based on the fear of an early cheese when playing against people who don't take into consideration the invisible player? It seems your question is "what if he DOESNT worry about my deviations, and that he somehow just plays the 1 thing that works vs my build and sucks vs all the things i didn't (but could have) done?" What you're asking about is something I'd call the potential advantages of a build. Let's first consider a straightforward example: going 3hatch mutalisk opening vs terran (a very standard opening). The goal of mutalisks is to perform some harass: to kill some SCVs and marines, force him to make turrets, and gain some map control. This harass is a [i]necessary, intentional component of 3hatch openings. HOWEVER, the mutalisk harass has the potential advantage to win the game outright if the terran player is not careful. When planning a 3hatch opening out, the zerg player doesn't rely on the "potential win," rather he plans on performing SOME harassment with a later game plan in mind. In your 9pool example, its critical to note that one of the potential advantages of the 9pool is to force the player to make certain buildings later on (cannons in the back, more cannons at the front etc). Forcing these buildings delays later protoss aggression. However, such forcing is NOT critical. Critical components of the 9pool would be forcing the forge before the nexus (delaying the expo), killing scouting probes (you don't worry about proxy buildings and you gain map control), the opportunity to power drones (you can send overlords in and you have speedlings to help in case of emergencies) etc etc etc. A fundamental mistake many players make is failing to distinguish between potential advantages and necessary components of certain build orders. That said, suppose you are playing an opponent who is (incorrectly) staying super light on defenses and your 9pool doesn't feel effective. I would then say that there are other faults of your 9pool style that must be worked out to account for such players. Believe me, I know EXACTLY what you're talking about and its annoying, but there ARE solutions. You want to exploit the weaknesses that DO occur, not scratch your head when he doesn't make the mistakes you want. On January 21 2009 05:51 lgdDante wrote: Also a 2nd question, how do you change your mindset and the builds you use when playing against people that you are extremely familiar with. On iccup I tend to just stick to 1-2 builds max per MU, as the people you are playing have no past experience playing you, and whether you've done a build 1 or 100 times in a row has no effect on this 1 game. After months of playing games with teammates I've noticed the consistency of my builds are starting to work against me, and players who in the past would play even games with me, are starting to roll me just by virtue of knowing what I'm going to do. Part of this is the notion that going 3hat muta in zvt is accepted as the best way to get better at the MU, but part of it for me is also that I feel very uncomfortable playing when starting off with a 2hatch build instead of a 3hatch. If the game goes past 10 minutes I notice a considerable drop in my management of the game. Could you provide some insight in how to continue with a game that opening in an unorthadox way, but continues past the opening in a more orthadox way? I find that too many of my timings and triggers are based on 1 particular opening. My last 2 questions are these. How(if at all) do you change how you play given there is lots of history between you and your opponent. And how important is it for your overall ability as a player to be able to be comfortable using 5-6 builds per MU. One of THE WORST mistakes I see players make is to think that you need to have "a variety of builds under your belt." If your build struggles to beat a player you've played several times, then your build is flawed. I've had multiple experiences where I played a player 10 games in a row and performed the exact same build in each game and won all of them. Consider the following concept: you fine tune your builds to beat a specific RACE, NOT a specific player. A terran player who knows you intimately is STILL JUST A TERRAN. Abuse the apparent weaknesses in the race. I do empathize with your concern of repetition. For some reason, it's easy to feel "uncomfortable" doing the same opening for the 3rd game in a row. Your brain tells you "do something else." Definitely practice ignoring what your brain is telling you. Comfortably perform the same build over and over and over and over again whether you are playing the same player or a different one. As I said in the audio, NOTHING surprises me ever. This is not a consequence of my understanding of the player, but rather my understanding of the race. In my general scheme of practice, every time there's a new map of the week, I create a new account on iCCUP (or PGT back then) and forge a new build and practice ONLY that build for the week. By the end of the week, after working out all sorts of kinks, I'm sitting pretty on a new solid build on a new map, a build solid enough to beat the same player time in and time out. In fact, when I'm training for a tournament my practice partners, I VERY regularly give my opponents vision. I play in the dark while he has complete knowledge of what i'm doing. I still win an overwhelming majority of games, not because I know my opponents well, but rather because I know when and how each race can win and lose.[/b] | ||
|
liger13
United States1060 Posts
these imaginary players sound more like quantum players (every possibility is actually there until observed)Definitely good information... no wonder good players can rape with any race... they know all the timings down | ||
|
Crunchums
United States11143 Posts
| ||
|
andiCR
Costa Rica2273 Posts
Hope you keep these up man, it's inspiring and rare to hear such a good narration on such complex topics on this community. Im gonna use this as sleeping CDs so this burns in haha | ||
|
Ethelis
United States2396 Posts
On January 20 2009 19:45 Liquid`NonY wrote: 100% agree and endorse non-triggers are so powerful against good players i would add that you need to re-evaluate everything as your mechanics improve and/or your opponents' mechanics improve. im always cautious about advising people with my triggers and non-triggers because the things that my micro and macro can make possible, and my opponent's micro and macro can make possible, can vastly change the triggers. some tricky triggers / non-triggers that i use: for pvt, when range is done and i have a dragoon chasing an scv, i change to a move command for a while and then stop chasing. the terran knows my range should be done, but it's clearly not, so he prepares for some really fast DT or reaver when i go 2gate obs, and my goons are harrassing his wall and see the CC, then i don't need the obs for a while, since i know his build. i either don't build obs, or i don't send them to his base. if he sees the little blurs, then he knows that i've gone 2gate obs. NOT seeing the obs could be a non-trigger for him. i don't let him have that info very good advice specially (for me) with the goon range even though its something similar in a way to trying to hide ling speed i never thought of it | ||
|
Erafiel
Norway12 Posts
Takes a bit of commitment that I guess many dont want to put out to develop such a vast mental map of triggers to cover all the potential "imaginary players" as you put it. But anyway, short, concrete, convincing way to structure your training. | ||
|
Ragnorak
Australia54 Posts
| ||
|
RedTerror
New Zealand742 Posts
| ||
|
fusionsdf
Canada15390 Posts
| ||
|
WhenHellfreezes
United States81 Posts
On January 21 2009 10:17 liger13 wrote: lol.... these imaginary players sound more like quantum players (every possibility is actually there until observed)Definitely good information... no wonder good players can rape with any race... they know all the timings down lol i had a similar feeling when he first was talking about the imaginary player. Good stuff day[9] keep them comming. | ||
|
StylishVODs
Sweden5331 Posts
Casy vs July This is so damn pimp Anyone, once you start using this stuff it will help you in many cases and also opens up for new strategies vs good players, when you can fool them in different way. Makes bw so much deeper. | ||
|
Ilikestarcraft
Korea (South)17726 Posts
Upgrade range and when scv dies cancel and build a citadel of adun. | ||
|
Rucky
United States717 Posts
On January 21 2009 17:37 AnOth3rDAy wrote: One of the best imaginary players backfireing. Casy vs July This is so damn pimp Anyone, once you start using this stuff it will help you in many cases and also opens up for new strategies vs good players, when you can fool them in different way. Makes bw so much deeper. WOW that is JUST mind games man! the imaginary player failed July here though....so it's like even if you think they're going something you gotta confirm it with scouting. | ||
|
StylishVODs
Sweden5331 Posts
On January 21 2009 18:09 Rucky wrote: WOW that is JUST mind games man! the imaginary player failed July here though....so it's like even if you think they're going something you gotta confirm it with scouting. Yeah when you play on high level. Or on very low level when a players timing is way of and you think like, oh he's not expanding but he is, but too slow. Also day you said u never get surprised;) There must be builds that you've met for the first time some times no? | ||
|
TaP.Nuada
United States428 Posts
On January 21 2009 17:37 AnOth3rDAy wrote: One of the best imaginary players backfireing. Casy vs July This is so damn pimp Anyone, once you start using this stuff it will help you in many cases and also opens up for new strategies vs good players, when you can fool them in different way. Makes bw so much deeper. That game is actually a pimpest play. I don't remember from which year, though. Really liked the audio "rant" Day[9] really good stuff. Great for all players, IMO. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5540 Posts
On January 21 2009 19:45 TaP.Nuada wrote: That game is actually a pimpest play. I don't remember from which year, though. Really liked the audio "rant" Day[9] really good stuff. Great for all players, IMO. I believe the game is from 2007, so it's hasn't been features by the PP yet. I'm sure it's a MUST, though. Waiting for PP 07! :D | ||
|
Osmoses
Sweden5302 Posts
| ||
|
NeVeR
1352 Posts
Edit: The only thing I want to mention is that I don't think it's a very good idea to use supply count as a basis for a trigger, since supply count is largely influenced by early and mid game skirmishes/battles, whereas other variables such as the build progress of tech structures are to a much lesser extent. | ||
|
Knickknack
United States1187 Posts
| ||
|
anderoo
Canada1876 Posts
How do you go about making your triggers from scratch? In a build where there is really only one trigger you need to figure out process and elimination works fine, but what about when you are just starting on the build and there are multiple triggers to worry about? Do you just watch the replay and make notes on the 5-6 different things you want to adjust? Or do you go one trigger at a time until the build is 100% to the point it should be at that time? EDIT: if you covered this I'm sorry for being annoying, but I don't think if you mentioned any methods for doing multiple trigs at once | ||
|
TaP.Nuada
United States428 Posts
On January 20 2009 12:23 Not_Computer wrote: is there any way/link I can download/save this so I can listen to it later? Download Helper for Firefox Found here I actually use it to rip music from goear.com and other streaming music sites. | ||
|
NeVeR
1352 Posts
| ||
|
freelander
Hungary4707 Posts
somehow I think I used the imaginary player concept in my play(especially when I played in a relaxed mood), but I never articaulated it in my mind.. well this sounds stupid I guess very good stuff d9ay you take a lot of effort to make people play consciously so to say | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
|
freelander
Hungary4707 Posts
On January 22 2009 07:26 anderoo wrote: Day: How do you go about making your triggers from scratch? In a build where there is really only one trigger you need to figure out process and elimination works fine, but what about when you are just starting on the build and there are multiple triggers to worry about? Do you just watch the replay and make notes on the 5-6 different things you want to adjust? Or do you go one trigger at a time until the build is 100% to the point it should be at that time? EDIT: if you covered this I'm sorry for being annoying, but I don't think if you mentioned any methods for doing multiple trigs at once I think you should watch a replay when that one build is executed perfectly. Copy that, and start building in triggers one by one. Learn the cases where you have alter your build etc. | ||
|
TaP.Nuada
United States428 Posts
On January 22 2009 08:00 NeVeR wrote: Can it rip audio from YouTube vids? I'm not sure, I know it can rip the whole video, but I've never tried either one. I've also uploaded the mp3 of Day[9]'s second rant, and it will be available to download for a short while here | ||
|
Centric
United States1989 Posts
| ||
|
TaP.Nuada
United States428 Posts
On January 22 2009 08:48 Centric wrote: You should Podcast this stuff...I'd like to listen to it on my iPod so I don't have to sit at a desk and listen. I found it really, really useful. Definitely changes the way I think about the game. Thanks for this Day. You can download it an put the mp3 on your ipod? It's possible to rip files from goear.com, I linked to a utility to do just that earlier. | ||
|
Seraphim
United States4467 Posts
| ||
|
Odds
Canada1188 Posts
| ||
|
sixghost
United States2096 Posts
| ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
but scouting was always tough for me, i never did it and im still trying to understand it. this idea of "eliminating possilbilies" is just fantastic. if i see late gas i know they arent going fast high tech... if i see early gas on Terran and a barracks, maybe 2, i know its less likely im being proxy'd. these are a huge help to a player thats learning how to scout. cant thank you enough. | ||
|
NatsuTerran
United States364 Posts
| ||
|
shenlong
219 Posts
| ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On March 12 2009 06:08 zEroMiCro wrote: awesome dude And the reason of this bump was? | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
At least when Day[9] start doing more (if he does) there should be a stickied or frequently bumped collection thread. Which brings me to ask, are you working on a new one? | ||
|
Fontong
United States6454 Posts
| ||
|
EscPlan9
United States2777 Posts
| ||
|
gm.tOSS
Germany898 Posts
| ||
|
anderoo
Canada1876 Posts
why naught? | ||
|
Jayme
United States5866 Posts
Because it's amazing, this has just helped me so much I don't even know where to begin. It's basically completely changed how I view the game and scouting. | ||
|
Day[9]
United States7366 Posts
i'm just waiting to upload them to the TL.net server. i don't really know what to do once they're uploaded! (reply to my PM zatic!!! haha) : ] | ||
|
Archaic
United States4024 Posts
On March 12 2009 10:10 Day[9] wrote: i've actually recorded 4 more i'm just waiting to upload them to the TL.net server. i don't really know what to do once they're uploaded! (reply to my PM zatic!!! haha) : ] This is why I love you =). Now I feel sorry for zatic's inbox o-o... | ||
|
number1gog
United States1081 Posts
On January 29 2009 03:52 sixghost wrote: Day, you mentioned one season you went 45-1 or something using a hydra BO in zvz, could you post a little outline of the build you used, or if you still have some reps from back then? Well now that this has been bumped I don't feel so bad about re-asking this question. Not to take your work for granted, or treat you like a magical source of any information asked of you, but if you had a replay of this ZvZ build.... oh man that would be amazing. | ||
|
Kletus
Canada580 Posts
This is some awesome stuff. Thank you Day[9]. I remember playing with some friends on a hamachi network ZvP. I would constantly be owned by 2gate rushes on maps with close positions. This was before I started scouting with a drone so I didn't know it was coming. Eventually I knew the exact timing of when I should see a zealot with my ovy coming to my base. I then adjusted my build in when to make sunkens. If I didn't see that zealot, I knew he was doing something else. Never lost to another one of my friends 2gates after that. It really does help. Ohh and in one game i said "heh 2gate?" and one of the observers said, "How did he know?" Very satisfying. Thanks again. | ||
|
qrs
United States3637 Posts
anyway, just to let people know: tribal_warfare finished off the transcription (in my post on page 1) in case anyone needs/wants a non-audio version of this. | ||
|
nttea
Sweden4353 Posts
| ||
|
dP1
United States7 Posts
| ||
| ||
