|
This entire discussion is based on the fact that P opts into having the pressure put on him because he plays this strategy. He gives himself as much of an economic edge as possible with the forge expand. Shoud he go 1 base 3 gate goon with legs behind it or something he'd put the pressure on Z. You basically have 3 zealots and 2 cannons on 2 base when you could have like 5 goons and 6 zealots on 1 base. And you could have that comp earlier because your gateway count is higher earlier. It's just the choice of strategies that puts the pressure to "out-play" on the P. Just that simple.
|
Bisutopia19202 Posts
On April 10 2020 01:21 Uldridge wrote: This entire discussion is based on the fact that P opts into having the pressure put on him because he plays this strategy. He gives himself as much of an economic edge as possible with the forge expand. Shoud he go 1 base 3 gate goon with legs behind it or something he'd put the pressure on Z. You basically have 3 zealots and 2 cannons on 2 base when you could have like 5 goons and 6 zealots on 1 base. And you could have that comp earlier because your gateway count is higher earlier. It's just the choice of strategies that puts the pressure to "out-play" on the P. Just that simple. Skipping cannons makes you very vulnerable to lings running around your base and potentially costing you lost workers. Skipping a nexus could be plausible, but is there really another build that can keep lings from harassing besides cannons? Overpool seems like it would wreck a one base meta. I'm definitely open to the idea of one base if there was a viable ling defensive build order.
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On April 10 2020 04:33 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2020 01:21 Uldridge wrote: This entire discussion is based on the fact that P opts into having the pressure put on him because he plays this strategy. He gives himself as much of an economic edge as possible with the forge expand. Shoud he go 1 base 3 gate goon with legs behind it or something he'd put the pressure on Z. You basically have 3 zealots and 2 cannons on 2 base when you could have like 5 goons and 6 zealots on 1 base. And you could have that comp earlier because your gateway count is higher earlier. It's just the choice of strategies that puts the pressure to "out-play" on the P. Just that simple. Skipping cannons makes you very vulnerable to lings running around your base and potentially costing you lost workers. Skipping a nexus could be plausible, but is there really another build that can keep lings from harassing besides cannons? Overpool seems like it would wreck a one base meta. I'm definitely open to the idea of one base if there was a viable ling defensive build order. There is. It's called putting 2 zealots on hold on a ramp after your army moves out, thus preventing any runbys in the first place I tend to agree with the idea that there are options. I remember when Bisu went 1 base against hero on Sniper Ridge years ago and ended up winning with good decisions overall. Protoss players have gotten so used to going forge FE or gate FE that one basing will probably feel like new territory to a few in PvZ.
|
I do wonder why P plays one base so rarely. I still remember the first jangbi game vs zero when he went DTs. Logical conclusion for the lack of these builds would be that they are normally not viable.
|
If you go Forge FE every game in a Bo5, it feels like you haven't really tried to play much of the strategic side, and just try to win on raw mechanics.
|
Can someone post the soma's afreeca stream url please, I cant find it by myself, thanks.
|
On April 10 2020 01:08 Rainalcar wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 20:40 Barneyk wrote:On April 09 2020 20:07 Sr18 wrote: My anecdotal Zerg experience is totally different. If you invest in hydras and upgrades, you're going to be way behind on workers. If you don't deal massive damage, you are behind. There is no: make lots of hydras before first corsair and then do nothing and drone up to an equal economy.
This was maybe true before the 9734 build was popularized. Even if you as Zerg put so many larva and resources into hydras and upgrades, if you see the protoss make a lot of cannons so a hydra bust is to risky to try you can start to drone up because Protoss won't be able to push out fast enough to punish you since they put so much minerals into cannons and not gateways. The hydras you built and upgrades is enough to defend against what protoss can push out with. Of course I am oversimplifying the game a lot here, but saying there is no "make lots of hydras before first corsair and then do nothing and drone up to an equal economy" is weird when that is pretty much what the 9734 build is about. If they don't build enough cannons, bust it. If they do build enough cannons, drone up. There is a lot more to it of course, but I think you are just flat out wrong. EDIT: And to add a comment about balance, how the meta shifts and depending on maps etc. I don't see a balance problem per se, but Zerg is a tricky and narrow matchup for protoss. Especially since cracklings and dark swarm makes the lategame something you want to avoid as well. This. The most that P can get from the situation is a chance to win, which, depending on the flow of the game, can be above, but also below 50%. The worst that can happen to P is instant loss. P doesn't have depth at this point of the game for a meta shift - the only way to defend against hydras is cannons; and cannon number cannot be hidden while hydras or their numbers can be hidden. Forge FE doesn't provide many options to counter this, while 1base builds or proxy gates have a small window to succeed vZ. I don't agree, however, with delaying hydra upgrades as a solution. A slightly faster cannon warp-in could affect the balance even less and work quite well.
Faster cannon warping would definitely affect more match ups than slightly delayed hydra upgrades. It would potentially change pvp openers/builds, more cheese cannon rush vs Zerg behind mineral line. There’s no other match up where hydra upgrades would affect as much as giving Protoss just a few more precious seconds to prepare. In ZvT there isn’t some timing vulture harassment that would be abused if hydras weren’t upgraded or Zerg not being able to take map control sooner if their hydras weren’t upgraded yet because you usually wait for OL speed and even then hydras have about the same range as a vulture without upgrades. And Zerg has sim city to wall off vulture harass anyways.
Also with one base openers they can be mixed in a bo5 match just to mix things up but I think pro gamers generally agree one base play is always going to be subpar vs FE builds. The ratio of economy is just vastly different with 1 base toss back 2 base Zerg vs 2 base toss and 3 base Zerg. Not to mention Protoss units can only trade efficiently when they have splash damage units or higher upgrades which takes a lot of gas. Something one base play can’t afford to spread out so thin while also trying to build corsairs. The times where one base play works is when Zerg plays inoptimally or didn’t scout what Protoss was doing properly. Basically it’s zergs game to lose if they didn’t play to their best potential.
|
Soma's biggest outplay this series was keeping Bisu in the dark. vs someone who's as good at micro as KTY, that's no mean feat
|
On April 09 2020 14:56 EsportsJohn wrote:Show nested quote +On April 09 2020 12:24 Moopower wrote:On April 09 2020 08:15 EsportsJohn wrote:On April 08 2020 13:43 kaspa84 wrote:On April 08 2020 13:07 EsportsJohn wrote:On April 08 2020 12:31 Moopower wrote:On April 07 2020 23:31 BisuDagger wrote: Let's take the focus off cannons: Game 1: Bisu lost way too many zealots in the early game. In every PvZ, after 2 early Zealots are lost the counter in my head starts going off. You can't trade 3 or more zealots pre-hyrda bust to only lings. It is a guaranteed bargain for the zerg every time. Those loses cost him the game, not the cannons.
Game 2: Soma out smarted Bisu. One of the most genius things he did was spread his scourge to the top left corner of match point. Remember when that first corsair was running from scourge, took a left turn and immediately got hit by a scourge forcing the corsair back down again? The scourge placement blocked Bisu from flying to the top left before heading back to his main. Later Bisu had what SC2 games call an F2 moment. Bisu had 4 zealots in a control group. He split two to scout the top left base, but then control group ordered his zealots to the other side of the map. Bisu failed to see it twice with major credit to Soma.
Game 3-4: We know how that went
Game 5: Bisu saved his zealots and you immediately see the major difference in defense. Bisu's huge mistake was building a robo and a templar archives. If Bisu skips robo, it leaves him gas for a faster templar archives into a faster DT. It also leaves him minerals for a crucial extra cannon. Then he invested in a shuttle instead of an extra cannon again. The double high tech is what ultimately killed him in that game. The DT that did major damage to Soma traveled by ground and proved that Bisu didn't need the shuttle to make the hold.
Argue about cannons all you want, but there were many other factors that left Bisu too weak to win. I agree Bisu made mistakes that cost him the game ultimately. However I will say the margin of error is certainly pretty thin when it comes to PvZ. Bisu should have saw that hydra in game while the zealot was at his third base in game 1 hydra bust but Bisu didn't seem to react to the hydra and probably was focused on multitasking and didn't see the hydra until later when the other zealots got picked off in the middle of the map. If Bisu pulled probes sooner and had them actually in front of the cannons ready to stop hydras from sniping the cannons so quick, he would've held. So those 2 crucial mistakes cost him the game. I'd still argue that PvZ is still favored to Zerg. That's why historically we always see protoss losing to zerg all ins. There's always too much to anticipate and in the opposite match ups like TvP, Protoss is the aggressor in what Terran has to react while Protoss has the bag of builds. However Terran's defense is so much more robust and effective that even if Terran is caught off guard, Protoss builds usually never end the game outright but the game can continue with some healthy margins. To keep Zerg in check in the meta, I'd argue it would be nice if Zerg's hydralisk speed and atk range upgrades cost a bit more or took slightly longer to research. It doesn't affect TvZ or ZvZ at all, so doing so would help out protoss in the no scouting period between getting probes denied by speedlings and 1st corsair. I mean think about if Zerg had perfect control of his speedlings and zoned out any probes trying to scout. How is Protoss expected to scout the Zerg without relying on Zerg to make a mistake? The times where we do see Protoss scouting zerg in time it is usually due to the Zerg player not on top of zoning the map and denying scouting. With the movement speed of the lings vs probes/zealots. This is achievable to absolute denial of any scouting, provided they play well/perfectly. If they just changed hydra upgrades slightly that will give Protoss a little extra breathing room to scout in time. The risk is not balanced with rewards. Usually when you do an all in type of strategy you should lose or be in huge disadvantage if it doesn't work. But here we see Zerg can continue a perfectly normal game even after Protoss defends this without losing too many probes. When you scout a cheese rush strat you understand that when you don't scout it you can lose outright or win if you scout it. That's high risk high reward type situation. Here in the Zerg's perspective, it's relatively low risk (continue regular game) if it doesn't work vs winning outright. I think you're vastly underestimating how close the last game was. Soma had 6 drones left. He had 0 gas income. If his last push hadn't broken through the cannons, it would have been a Zerg loss. Bisu fucked up several minor things that all added up to him not being able to hold the push (the primary one being his zealots being out of position and still on hold when Soma attacked in the first time because he was microing his zealot at the 3rd base), but there was never a world where Soma transitions to a solid macro game after Bisu holds. I basically agree with everything Moopower said, except that Hydra nerfing would affect TvZ by making Vulture/Wraith early harassment better. Yeah, Bisu did make mistakes, but the whole point is that P margin for error is so much smaller than Zerg's. And the fact that game 5 was close doesn't change that fact, but is another evidence of it, since Soma made a huge blunder losing lots of drones to a DT (or maybe he even didnt care?) but Bisu only made small mistakes and lost anyway. I don't think you're getting it. The margin for error is super slim for Zerg too. We saw that in G3 when Soma went for a risky all-in which failed and then immediately GG'd. Either it works and we get people complaining that ZvP is unfair and impossible to play or it fails and everyone says "Wow, that Zerg player was an idiot." The truth is sharp timings are incredibly mercurial in nature because they are sharp. No, Game 3 when Soma went for an all in type build, that was a high risk high reward play. 3 Hatch hydra in particular is where I'm saying there's relatively low risk high reward. If your all in build gets scouted you should be expected to lose or at least be in a huge disadvantage. We don't see much of a margin of opportunity for Protoss to scout 3 hatch hydra busts in time consistently where the Zerg zones out probe/zealot scouts perfectly. 3 hatch hydra isn't an all -in type of build anymore like it used to be because of how precise zerg progamers have been with droning and sniping cannons quickly and forcing protoss to sacrifice probes just to defend. Game 5 where it was pretty close, was due to a blunder by soma. He did not anticipate dt drop and let bisu massacre his drones. That's why it was closer than it should've been. However I will say if Bisu decided to play it safer and just defend the hydra bust by getting storm instead of spreading himself too thin with both robo and templar tech, the game would've been different. Bisu made some crucial mistakes that cost him the game ultimately but that's not the point. The argument is the margin of error on the Protoss side is small and disadvantaged in PvZ. I don't see any TvZ game where having hydra upgrades researched a few seconds later would've made a huge difference against mech strategies. There aren't vulture harassments that can be abused if hydras don't get ranged atk or speed faster because of sim city. So having hydra upgrades taking a little bit longer would not affect any other match up other than PvZ. By the time Zerg in ZvT against mech gets OL speed, having hydra upgrade take slightly longer would not affect moving out on the map at all. Also for arguments saying that Protoss should hide probes around the map to sneak a scout in, is basically saying you're hoping the Zerg plays inoptimally or has to make a mistake for Protoss to get a chance. If they are determined to deny your probe/zealot scouting, a high caliber zerg will not let you see their hydras until it is time. Like I mentioned in an earlier post, speedlings are so much faster than probes/zealots that the margin for zerg to find your scouting probe is very large and they can catch up fast enough to deny. A watchful zerg would've seen you try to sneak out probes from your natural anyways and would be on the lookout for the missing probe. We saw this before in KSL I think season 2 or 3. It was Rain vs JD. Rain was trying to push out with some zealots to try to get some scouting intel. The critical mistake that Rain did in that game was that he left his cannon wall open and didn't plug in with probes to replace after the zealots left. Rain didn't anticipate a large speedling group to sneak back but it cost him the game because by the time he warped in new cannons the speedlings bought JD enough time for his hydras to do serious economic dmg so even Rain held barely he was severely behind. And even if Rain used his zealots to try to scout and blocked wall with probes, if JD decided to mop up those 5-6 zealots moving out on the map he could've done so easily or Rain would've had to back off and retreat and be denied any scouting intel. Until +1 atk, or splash dmg with a better army composition, zealots trade inefficiently against cheap zerglings. Which is why Protoss scouting options are limited until corsair. Zerg has a lot of choices while Protoss has a critical lack of intel that often cost them games. Terran units all have range so they will always be able to defend normally even if caught off guard initially. But Protoss units don't, dragoons suck vs every zerg unit unless supported by a good mix of zealots and hts. Corsairs don't come fast enough to scout zerg if Protoss opens zealot pressure. There are so many holes in Protoss's arsenal that can be abused by zerg because they need time to tech up for obs, against lurkers, or cannons in main and sairs against muta play or cannons at the front against hydra bust. I'm not saying anything other than hydra busting is hard to stop because unlike hydra busts, they are all high risk/ high reward strategies. Meaning if Protoss defends successfully, they are significantly ahead. 3 hatch hydra is the only build in my opinion that can be between an all in build and a transition into a long macro game depending on how much Zerg forced Protoss to spend on cannons and sacrificing probes. Let's just say I disagree. Remember when 1-1-1 was an all-in build? Show nested quote +Should Protoss players be punished for a small micro mistake where their 1st few zealots took one too many hits that they are denied scouting and map control until they get up to corsair and risk losing to a hydra bust? This is the slim margin of error of Protoss. They have to play near perfectly in order to have a chance if Zerg is determined to play mind games with hydra busting. This is wayyyyy over-exaggerated. 1-1-1 was figured out within a year, 3 hatch hydra busts have always been an easy way to take out Protoss relative to other strategies. Again I’m not saying 3 hatch hydra is impossible to defend but on a margin scale it’s definitely not as fair for the Protoss compared to Zergs reaction to 1-1-1 or any other historical meta shifts.
|
Agreed with BisuDagger, problem with 1base build is definately the lings run by. And BigFan, this is not about blocking your ramp. Its about getting your exp up later on.
One of the reasons protoss FE is that they secure the only path to their 2 bases early.
|
If Protoss needs to get ahead from one base he should go 3 gate robo (obs -> reaver) then get the expansion with your first reaver while it shoots lurkers (this is the most likely contain to face imo) from the ramp, edging down, while playing the micro minigame of keeping your ramp blocked. I'm sure you can keep pumping reavers and while they're super vulnerable if you have a decent meat shield of zealots you can mount a massive defense with 2/3 early reavers defending.. much better than cannons could imo.
Does a reaver die faster than a cannon?
|
On April 10 2020 07:16 ppp87 wrote: Can someone post the soma's afreeca stream url please, I cant find it by myself, thanks. play.afreecatv.com/thakzkf
When he streams you can see him on the list of live streams.
|
Show nested quote +
I don't agree, however, with delaying hydra upgrades as a solution. A slightly faster cannon warp-in could affect the balance even less and work quite well.
Faster cannon warping would definitely affect more match ups than slightly delayed hydra upgrades. It would potentially change pvp openers/builds, more cheese cannon rush vs Zerg behind mineral line. There’s no other match up where hydra upgrades would affect as much as giving Protoss just a few more precious seconds to prepare. In ZvT there isn’t some timing vulture harassment that would be abused if hydras weren’t upgraded or Zerg not being able to take map control sooner if their hydras weren’t upgraded yet because you usually wait for OL speed and even then hydras have about the same range as a vulture without upgrades. And Zerg has sim city to wall off vulture harass anyways.
How do you think PvP would change? What comes to mind is some DT timings and scrambling defense vs Dragoons. As far as I am concerned, I could live with both, I don't mind actually.
vZ yes, there will be more chance to pull of a cannon rush, but Z definitely can play against this and it is very map dependent.
Hydra upgrades also don't affect things much, true. Perhaps slightly in hydra breaks vT. But I would rather the weaker race helped as long as the change doesn't affect at all the other non-mirror matchup, and PvT is practically not affected at all.
|
Bisutopia19202 Posts
On April 10 2020 22:49 Rainalcar wrote:Show nested quote +
I don't agree, however, with delaying hydra upgrades as a solution. A slightly faster cannon warp-in could affect the balance even less and work quite well.
Faster cannon warping would definitely affect more match ups than slightly delayed hydra upgrades. It would potentially change pvp openers/builds, more cheese cannon rush vs Zerg behind mineral line. There’s no other match up where hydra upgrades would affect as much as giving Protoss just a few more precious seconds to prepare. In ZvT there isn’t some timing vulture harassment that would be abused if hydras weren’t upgraded or Zerg not being able to take map control sooner if their hydras weren’t upgraded yet because you usually wait for OL speed and even then hydras have about the same range as a vulture without upgrades. And Zerg has sim city to wall off vulture harass anyways. How do you think PvP would change? What comes to mind is some DT timings and scrambling defense vs Dragoons. As far as I am concerned, I could live with both, I don't mind actually. vZ yes, there will be more chance to pull of a cannon rush, but Z definitely can play against this and it is very map dependent. Hydra upgrades also don't affect things much, true. Perhaps slightly in hydra breaks vT. But I would rather the weaker race helped as long as the change doesn't affect at all the other non-mirror matchup, and PvT is practically not affected at all. Changing anything about the cannon would be too dangerous in its effect on the game. However, if we had to choose a way to change cannons, how about cannons start with their shields at 50/100 so that it fills up to 100/100 shields before health maxes out, but finishes constructing at the same set time. This would obviously strengthen cannon rushes, but would greatly help defense.
|
Hahaha I knew this series was gonna inspire some mad when I watched it, just like in the good old days... but 24 pages? I'm overwhelmed.
Can we get this kind of activity on all the LR threads again?
|
This is just a random thought, but in my opinion the major problem after getting an expansion up is the way protoss is priorizing probes from 2 nexus over tech/units in the most critical moment of the game. Pretty much what Bisu did in this series. I loved how rain prepared a super fast nexus in his first game vs sacsri in ASL 8 ro8. It was just brillant and completely catched the zerg off guard. I think it is relevant that the few protoss who had success against zergs in the history of brood war were those who were applying pressure early games instead of an economy build (Bisu, nal_rA, mini...) and macro oriented protoss did struggle more with the match up (Stork, Best...)
Also, can someone elaborate on why FE+2 gates in the wall (or 1 in wall + 1 in main if the map doesnt allow you to build a good wall against lings runby) going for more zealots early pressure isnt more used at the pro level? I would like to see a game of this build used properly, aka priorizing zeals and making probes for only 1 nexus for a while, etc
|
On April 11 2020 00:14 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2020 22:49 Rainalcar wrote:
I don't agree, however, with delaying hydra upgrades as a solution. A slightly faster cannon warp-in could affect the balance even less and work quite well.
Faster cannon warping would definitely affect more match ups than slightly delayed hydra upgrades. It would potentially change pvp openers/builds, more cheese cannon rush vs Zerg behind mineral line. There’s no other match up where hydra upgrades would affect as much as giving Protoss just a few more precious seconds to prepare. In ZvT there isn’t some timing vulture harassment that would be abused if hydras weren’t upgraded or Zerg not being able to take map control sooner if their hydras weren’t upgraded yet because you usually wait for OL speed and even then hydras have about the same range as a vulture without upgrades. And Zerg has sim city to wall off vulture harass anyways. How do you think PvP would change? What comes to mind is some DT timings and scrambling defense vs Dragoons. As far as I am concerned, I could live with both, I don't mind actually. vZ yes, there will be more chance to pull of a cannon rush, but Z definitely can play against this and it is very map dependent. Hydra upgrades also don't affect things much, true. Perhaps slightly in hydra breaks vT. But I would rather the weaker race helped as long as the change doesn't affect at all the other non-mirror matchup, and PvT is practically not affected at all. Changing anything about the cannon would be too dangerous in its effect on the game. However, if we had to choose a way to change cannons, how about cannons start with their shields at 50/100 so that it fills up to 100/100 shields before health maxes out, but finishes constructing at the same set time. This would obviously strengthen cannon rushes, but would greatly help defense.
The issue is still the inability to scout vZ. If cannons never finish, they will be sniped in seconds. But I guess it is also a thing to consider.
|
On April 10 2020 20:47 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2020 07:16 ppp87 wrote: Can someone post the soma's afreeca stream url please, I cant find it by myself, thanks. play.afreecatv.com/thakzkf When he streams you can see him on the list of live streams.
|
On April 10 2020 19:15 Uldridge wrote: If Protoss needs to get ahead from one base he should go 3 gate robo (obs -> reaver) then get the expansion with your first reaver while it shoots lurkers (this is the most likely contain to face imo) from the ramp, edging down, while playing the micro minigame of keeping your ramp blocked. I'm sure you can keep pumping reavers and while they're super vulnerable if you have a decent meat shield of zealots you can mount a massive defense with 2/3 early reavers defending.. much better than cannons could imo.
Does a reaver die faster than a cannon? I would love to see experimentation of the kind you describe and I would love to see it be successful.
That being said, if P is on one base and Z is on two, Z can afford more tech than P. Sure, corsairs can fight mutas and reaver/obs can fight lurkers. But does P really have enough gas to make corsairs and reavers and observers? Also, if you don’t make shuttles, reavers can never apply pressure, so if two-base Z contains P on one base for just a little while, they can grow to three-base Z. Now you’re making shuttles, reavers, and observers... can you do it on a single robo fac?
I suspect that your proposed opening has too many bottlenecks that can be exploited. Without cannons, one-Stargate corsairs are overwhelmed by muta/scourge. Without a second robo fac, losing a single shuttle or obs will be a devastating setback. And on one base, how can you produce from more than one stargate plus one robo fac?
Basically it comes down to what someone already said: One base against two is a worse ratio than two bases against three. So the few one-base P games I’ve seen aren’t about using high-tech units to defend a late natural, but rather about using high-tech units to deliver a crippling blow at the right timing.
@TornadoSteve: That’s another plausible idea. Alternatively, I wonder if a focus on goon production, coupled with outrageous goon micro, could be viable. Cadenzie recently played a Bo5 against a BW bot (Locutus) and lost both games in which the bot started amassing a goon ball. In one game she had nearly busted the P natural, but enough goons were hovering behind the nexus to protect it and mount a counterattack. I don’t know if the bot’s micro was unattainably good, but goons prevailed over hydras even though the bot’s decision making was poor. So could there be a build where P just micromanages like crazy and occasionally presses 1d2d3d4d?
|
On April 11 2020 08:35 Djabanete wrote:Show nested quote +On April 10 2020 19:15 Uldridge wrote: If Protoss needs to get ahead from one base he should go 3 gate robo (obs -> reaver) then get the expansion with your first reaver while it shoots lurkers (this is the most likely contain to face imo) from the ramp, edging down, while playing the micro minigame of keeping your ramp blocked. I'm sure you can keep pumping reavers and while they're super vulnerable if you have a decent meat shield of zealots you can mount a massive defense with 2/3 early reavers defending.. much better than cannons could imo.
Does a reaver die faster than a cannon? I would love to see experimentation of the kind you describe and I would love to see it be successful. That being said, if P is on one base and Z is on two, Z can afford more tech than P. Sure, corsairs can fight mutas and reaver/obs can fight lurkers. But does P really have enough gas to make corsairs and reavers and observers? Also, if you don’t make shuttles, reavers can never apply pressure, so if two-base Z contains P on one base for just a little while, they can grow to three-base Z. Now you’re making shuttles, reavers, and observers... can you do it on a single robo fac? I suspect that your proposed opening has too many bottlenecks that can be exploited. Without cannons, one-Stargate corsairs are overwhelmed by muta/scourge. Without a second robo fac, losing a single shuttle or obs will be a devastating setback. And on one base, how can you produce from more than one stargate plus one robo fac? Basically it comes down to what someone already said: One base against two is a worse ratio than two bases against three. So the few one-base P games I’ve seen aren’t about using high-tech units to defend a late natural, but rather about using high-tech units to deliver a crippling blow at the right timing. @TornadoSteve: That’s another plausible idea. Alternatively, I wonder if a focus on goon production, coupled with outrageous goon micro, could be viable. Cadenzie recently played a Bo5 against a BW bot (Locutus) and lost both games in which the bot started amassing a goon ball. In one game she had nearly busted the P natural, but enough goons were hovering behind the nexus to protect it and mount a counterattack. I don’t know if the bot’s micro was unattainably good, but goons prevailed over hydras even though the bot’s decision making was poor. So could there be a build where P just micromanages like crazy and occasionally presses 1d2d3d4d?
Yes, 1-basing as Protoss just allows Z too much room to tech up faster and macro up. The general idea of 1-basing is to mount a timing attack early-game that can end the game, kill the opponent's expo, or harass so well for you to expand behind and overtake your opponent's early economic lead (e.g. TvZ). Any 1-base build to defend a 2-base build - that's frankly quite sad...
So the question is whether there is any viable way for a 1-base Protoss to apply maximum pressure on the Zerg to expand behind and build a lead?
And going back to Protoss FE builds, what are the pros and cons between gate and forge first?
|
|
|
|