|
United States11 Posts
Sm3agol, try hitting enter every few sentences. Easier on the eyes. You made a good post and more people will read it if it's not a block of text.
I really wish there was a build order posted. I have no idea why there hasn't been yet, it's crazy that this thread got to seven pages and I still have very little idea as to what this build actually is (probably for the best since I play Terran XD).
So you build workers, get 2 racks (no addons, no gas) and pump out two marines at a time? And then when you get your orbital you scan their base? Oh, and somewhere in there, you cut an SCV? Then when you attack you bring 8 scvs with you?
Why 8? Aren't you basically all-in anyway? Why not just bring them all? Wouldn't just getting a quick refinery and banking 100 gas increase your production? Obviously it would kick in a little bit later, but still, if the game lasts more than four minutes the reactors will easily allow you to outproduce 2 racks.
Of course I'm a total noob (Plat) so take everything with a grain of salt. Still, it funny the thread got this long with no build order XD. Only Artosis.
|
On November 20 2010 04:33 Kinney wrote:
Sm3agol, try hitting enter every few sentences. Easier on the eyes. You made a good post and more people will read it if it's not a block of text.
I really wish there was a build order posted. I have no idea why there hasn't been yet, it's crazy that this thread got to seven pages and I still have very little idea as to what this build actually is (probably for the best since I play Terran XD).
So you build workers, get 2 racks (no addons, no gas) and pump out two marines at a time? And then when you get your orbital you scan their base? Oh, and somewhere in there, you cut an SCV? Then when you attack you bring 8 scvs with you?
Why 8? Aren't you basically all-in anyway? Why not just bring them all? Wouldn't just getting a quick refinery and banking 100 gas increase your production? Obviously it would kick in a little bit later, but still, if the game lasts more than four minutes the reactors will easily allow you to outproduce 2 racks.
Of course I'm a total noob (Plat) so take everything with a grain of salt. Still, it funny the thread got this long with no build order XD. Only Artosis.
Fixed, lol.
And I think the reason you keep some of your scvs mining is so you can sustain the marine push if you, say, kill all his zerglings, but only have a few marines left. That way you can have some on the way to reinforce your push and keep the pressure on.
But it's still basically a cheese all-in, the only difference being that it comes so early that the damage you have to do to stay ahead is pretty low. It's not like a cloak banshee all in or something like that where if you scout it and get queens and detection out in time, you'll be able to just roll him over with no trouble whatsoever because you'll already have tech up, and probably a lot more units.
This build actually has a some durability as a T, because it WILL do some damage, and if you save the SCVs, you can put them back on mining, call down a few mules, bunker up, and maybe get back into the game.
|
What if they made it so that reactors build units at half the speed? That way mass marine and medivac is nerfed. It also reduces the impact of reactionary Vikings, improving the viability of carriers, void rays and brood lords. Those units require a long term investment to start production and the Terran already has enough production capability of Vikings to hold them off.
|
On November 20 2010 04:44 Kraz.Del wrote:
What if they made it so that reactors build units at half the speed? That way mass marine and medivac is nerfed. It also reduces the impact of reactionary Vikings, improving the viability of carriers, void rays and brood lords. Those units require a long term investment to start production and the Terran already has enough production capability of Vikings to hold them off.
If you have a reactor, you can build 2 units in one unit's build time. If a reactor built units at 50% speed, you would essentially have 2 units every 40 seconds instead of 1 every 20. The first of the two provides equal army to no add-on, so there would be essentially worthless.
It wouldn't affect this at all, though, as this appears to use no gas.
|
On November 20 2010 04:52 Aequos wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2010 04:44 Kraz.Del wrote:
What if they made it so that reactors build units at half the speed? That way mass marine and medivac is nerfed. It also reduces the impact of reactionary Vikings, improving the viability of carriers, void rays and brood lords. Those units require a long term investment to start production and the Terran already has enough production capability of Vikings to hold them off. If you have a reactor, you can build 2 units in one unit's build time. If a reactor built units at 50% speed, you would essentially have 2 units every 40 seconds instead of 1 every 20. The first of the two provides equal army to no add-on, so there would be essentially worthless. It wouldn't affect this at all, though, as this appears to use no gas.
That's not right at all... If 1 unit builds in 20 seconds the other would build in 40. So you'd have 3 in 40
|
On November 20 2010 04:55 SMoneyMonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2010 04:52 Aequos wrote:On November 20 2010 04:44 Kraz.Del wrote:
What if they made it so that reactors build units at half the speed? That way mass marine and medivac is nerfed. It also reduces the impact of reactionary Vikings, improving the viability of carriers, void rays and brood lords. Those units require a long term investment to start production and the Terran already has enough production capability of Vikings to hold them off. If you have a reactor, you can build 2 units in one unit's build time. If a reactor built units at 50% speed, you would essentially have 2 units every 40 seconds instead of 1 every 20. The first of the two provides equal army to no add-on, so there would be essentially worthless. It wouldn't affect this at all, though, as this appears to use no gas. That's not right at all... If 1 unit builds in 20 seconds the other would build in 40. So you'd have 3 in 40
I misunderstood, I assumed he meant all units built out of a reactor barracks built at 50%, as opposed to just the additional one. Apologies to the first person I quoted.
|
watch out zerg the marine are incoming  i"ll try that $hit tonight
|
On November 19 2010 11:54 sjschmidt93 wrote:
Could this break GSL3, as almost half of it is TvZ?
So there is no problem that almsot half of it is TvZ, give toss some love man.
|
i really want to see a replay about this
|
The title of the thread is really mis-informative though...
Its unscoutable, not unbeatable.
|
On November 20 2010 05:19 Jermstuddog wrote:
The title of the thread is really mis-informative though...
Its unscoutable, not unbeatable.
And even thats not true. No gas for terran is alarm bells ringing for zerg. This is a ridiculous thread discussing a strategy that we dont even know the build order / details of. This should be locked.
|
It's funny how on almost every single high level TvZ this is whats happening. Look at the finals with nestea and foxer. It's kinda like how every TvZ used to be 5 rax reaper =/
|
On November 20 2010 05:28 timbo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2010 05:19 Jermstuddog wrote:
The title of the thread is really mis-informative though...
Its unscoutable, not unbeatable. And even thats not true. No gas for terran is alarm bells ringing for zerg. This is a ridiculous thread discussing a strategy that we dont even know the build order / details of. This should be locked.
So your solution to getting the details of the build and then assessing its stopability is to....lock the thread that is discussing it? Stop posting please.
|
Every now and than artosis says something without thinking and probably untrue (I'm not saying this is the case)
ie - gsl2 ro16 race distribution is a lot better than gls1 (in gls 1 ro16 we had 2 zergs, in gls 2 we had 3 protosses, I wouldn't call that a lot better distribution)
- when talking to incontrol he said scraps station is one of most balanced maps. incontrol gives him THE LOOK. so artosis goes to elaborate that's it's balanced because it's more of a terran map (?) wtf
- in gsl2 (I believe it was tvt matchup with boxer or something like that) he kept explaining how you can see mule falling from the sky in fog of war so you can see terran's timings and scout for main. (while in fact you can only see mule in the sky if you have vision of that specific "sky". you can't see mule falling in fog of war)
- there was some cockup about xelnaga towers in gls 1
- he claimed hatch first was instant win for terran in close position.
+ Show Spoiler +later on nestea won gsl2 with hatch first almost every game
... etc etc
Even though I LOVE his commentaries so much I sometimes feel he's such a whiner : ) (I find that cute)
this is how I'd imagine story behind 2 rax build happened.
artosis lost game.
omg he only made marines and I could only scout that with overlord or with first drone.
(calls idra)
A - Greg I've lost a game : (
I - was it against terran?
A - yes
I - op noobs!!!
A - (nods)
I - did you atleast made him apologize for using mules?
A - no : ( actually he used scan instead.
I - (*pause*).... scans are imba!
A - yes : ( he used build I could only countered with OL sac, spine crawlers, roaches or banes : ( but not with speedlings : (
I - skill-less bastard! marine A move. ttt. doesn't he know that any aggression against Z before he have mutas is considered cheese! did you atleast tweet about it and explained to community how weak zergs really are?
A (Tweets about it without providing any replays or serious analysis)
warning... this post may contain sarcasm!
Just to clarify I'm not trying to say there is no new 2rax build. I'm just trying to explain that artosis is just human and there is no point in discussion sometime we've never seen. It's literally like talking about aliens and discussing how to fight them off.
|
Every now and than artosis says something without thinking and probably untrue (I'm not saying this is the case)
ie - gsl2 ro16 race distribution is a lot better than gls1 (in gls 1 ro16 we had 2 zergs, in gls 2 we had 3 protosses, I wouldn't call that a lot better distribution)
- when talking to incontrol he said scraps station is one of most balanced maps. incontrol gives him THE LOOK. so artosis goes to elaborate that's it's balanced because it's more of a terran map (?) wtf
- in gsl2 (I believe it was tvt matchup with boxer or something like that) he kept explaining how you can see mule falling from the sky in fog of war so you can see terran's timings and scout for main. (while in fact you can only see mule in the sky if you have vision of that specific "sky". you can't see mule falling in fog of war)
- there was some cockup about xelnaga towers in gls 1
- he claimed hatch first was instant win for terran in close position.
+ Show Spoiler +
... etc etc
Even though I LOVE his commentaries so much I sometimes feel he's such a whiner : ) (I find that cute)
this is how I'd imagine story behind 2 rax build happened.
artosis lost game.
omg he only made marines and I could only scout that with overlord or with first drone.
(calls idra)
A - Greg I've lost a game : (
I - was it against terran?
A - yes
I - op noobs!!!
A - (nods)
I - did you atleast made him apologize for using mules?
A - no : ( actually he used scan instead.
I - (*pause*).... scans are imba!
A - yes : ( he used build I could only countered with OL sac, spine crawlers, roaches or banes : ( but not with speedlings : (
I - skill-less bastard! marine A move. ttt. doesn't he know that any aggression against Z before he have mutas is considered cheese! did you atleast tweet about it and explained to community how weak zergs really are?
A (Tweets about it without providing any replays or serious analysis)
warning... this post may contain sarcasm!
Just to clarify I'm not trying to say there is no new 2rax build. I'm just trying to explain that artosis is just human and there is no point in discussion sometime we've never seen. It's literally like talking about aliens and discussing how to fight them off.
I believe there is some truth to this statement. I support the claim that many claim something is unbeatable and is obviously overpowered if they haven't yet found a way to beat it. I believe Idra and Artosis are no exception to this. I imagine it is true that this strategy is difficult to deal with, but that we need more time to determine whether or not it is as scary as some believe it is.
For the record, we should fight aliens with zerglings.
|
On November 20 2010 06:41 GosuSheep wrote:
I believe there is some truth to this statement. I support the claim that many claim something is unbeatable and is obviously overpowered if they haven't yet found a way to beat it. I believe Idra and Artosis are no exception to this. I imagine it is true that this strategy is difficult to deal with, but that we need more time to determine whether or not it is as scary as some believe it is.
For the record, we should fight aliens with zerglings.
psssst he said UNSCOUTABLE.
NOT "unbeatable"
|
On November 20 2010 06:55 zhurai wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2010 06:41 GosuSheep wrote:
I believe there is some truth to this statement. I support the claim that many claim something is unbeatable and is obviously overpowered if they haven't yet found a way to beat it. I believe Idra and Artosis are no exception to this. I imagine it is true that this strategy is difficult to deal with, but that we need more time to determine whether or not it is as scary as some believe it is.
For the record, we should fight aliens with zerglings. psssst he said UNSCOUTABLE. NOT "unbeatable"
If the only way to beat a strategy is to scout it, but it is impossible to scout, then it is also unbeatable. It's simple logic, you see these all the time on IQ tests:
1) Strategy A is unscoutable;
2) Strategy A is unstoppable if it is not scouted;
3) Given 1 and 2, strategy A is unstoppable.
|
i did it a few times today in remembrance of last gsl, won some lost some :/ 1900diamond so not really a proof of any kind - i will say though the push strength has nothing to do with timings on how many scv/marines, or largely none to me.
its a "Mule" imo rush cause u build 2 rax and make a crippling push that has to get the zerg below 10ish drones... wich is crippling enough that an orbital and 4-5 scv (imo max 1 scv per patch) will outproduce... to me the magic number of raxx is 3, with 2 (hidden) i don't see how the 2 rax is ever better unless u are getting gas or expanding.
|
I think what many of you posting in this thread need to remember is that Artosis is one of the top Zergs in StarCraft 2 right now; sure, he hasn't qualified for GSL since season one, but he practises a ton, way more than all of you, and on a harder server. Sometimes he exaggerates a little bit, but he has a really good understanding of what's going on and what trends will become popular.
|
On November 20 2010 07:22 natewOw wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2010 06:55 zhurai wrote:On November 20 2010 06:41 GosuSheep wrote:
I believe there is some truth to this statement. I support the claim that many claim something is unbeatable and is obviously overpowered if they haven't yet found a way to beat it. I believe Idra and Artosis are no exception to this. I imagine it is true that this strategy is difficult to deal with, but that we need more time to determine whether or not it is as scary as some believe it is.
For the record, we should fight aliens with zerglings. psssst he said UNSCOUTABLE. NOT "unbeatable" If the only way to beat a strategy is to scout it, but it is impossible to scout, then it is also unbeatable. It's simple logic, you see these all the time on IQ tests: 1) Strategy A is unscoutable; 2) Strategy A is unstoppable if it is not scouted; 3) Given 1 and 2, strategy A is unstoppable.
This is more less untrue. In sandbox logic like that maybe, but this game isnt that simple. One example being, It may be possible to setup your opening to be safe(or safe-ish) vs this push blindly if you think there is a good possibility it will come.
The question then becomes to determine how bad you have to gimp your economy to be able to hold off the attack, in relation to the economy of Terran when doing a opening where this is possible.
All in all im sure this will get dissected and a stable build for zerg vs this will come about soon. If this was anything but a Zerg problem I would be worried by Artosis post. But knowing him, he gets...."passionate" about his race...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
