This build got me 67% win rate in high diamond last season.. I've beat quite a few low masters with it. I spawn as random... But I often reveal what I am and always tell when asked. It works against everything they throw at you early game. 10p no prob, hatch first no prob, 3 hatch before pool please do 14/15 pool with gas has the best chance of coming out even or ahead for zerg. I see mostly 15 pools because I'm random.. and that's generally safe against everything.
This build is way outside the meta. It's not for everyone. But it IS a lot of fun. This build is user friendly when your natural can easily be walled, I don't recommend this on a variety of #dreampool maps. Xel'naga and Metalopolis will not be a fun time with this build. (I did just use it on xel'naga and won, but I don't recommend it) Large 4 player maps like deadwing is harder to pull off but still do-able.. mostly because of greedy play from zergs
ok, on to the build.
Step 1. Probe production non-stop 9- As random I always 9 pylon scout. Gotta check for them early pools. Pylon goes at your main ramp. 13/14- gateway depending on your preference, I like 14, If you scout 10p put it down earlier obviously. 16- second pylon at main ramp. Back up pylon in case 10pool comes and you scouted wrong starting position. 17- second gateway at your ramp. Leave only 1 zealot width to pass through. Walling is essential as this is a sentry-less build (omg you crazy) 20- take 1 gas and put 3 probes on it *keep an eye on pylon timings, don't want supply blocks as they ruin this build big time
Step 2. Chrono goes exclusively into probes until your first gateway finnishes. If timed correctly you will have a chrono for your first zealot. You're making 5 total zealots. Your 4th pylon goes at your natural ramp Once you que the 5th zealot stop probe production. As soon as it pops send them on their way to the zerg... and Build your natural nexus ___________________________________
ok at this point if you haven't faced a 10p your zerg opponent is confused. Common reactions: 1 or 2 spines at natural (sometimes Ive even seen 3?!?) a shit ton of lings and queens a rushed roach warren and 4 or 5 roaches or he is completely blind sided and you just win the game
Step 3. As your amazing zealots trudge to the zerg, I recommend building a 6th zealot if they have speed or there's way more lings than you thought. I often skip him though. Then drop a forge and cyber at your natural ramp make another pylon to tighten the wall and start 2nd gas you can start probes again
Step 4. Judgement call with zealots. if you see ample defense turn around and save zealots. If you can trade efficiently or deal damage just attack with them. Losing them is ok if they trade well.. you just dont want to have 25 lings or a bunch of roaches left over for a big counter attack. If they over commit to natural defense- jut walk by it and go into their main. queens are slow and spines take forever. IGNORE any early 3rd they may haven taken. If they built a 3rd they will likely take massive damage from zealots or die outright.
Step 5. Make a single cannon at your natural if you see no roaches.. make 2 if you see roaches the second the cyber is done make a stargate, start your msc and warp tech.. You can afford it all at once since you've been banking gas off 1 assimilator Send the msc to their 3rd spaning loc to check for 3rd as soon as it's done. Make a voidray ASAP and chrono it. The goal with the msc and voidray is to deny 3rd. If you saved zealots send them along too... it is usually easier to kill it with them. If no 3rd just sit at home and macro, you're ahead!
Step 6. Choices! You can drop a 3rd with your void defense, drop more gas and make collosus, or just add a ton of gates and all-in. Keep an eye out for muta! Surprise muta do well vs. this so try your best to scout for spire.
How do I lose? I lose to 2 base Hydra/ling. Usually a terrible build vs protoss but if they rush it fast enough and I'm too greedy I do die.
Have fun let me know if you try it out! I have some replays if you want to see it in action!
Seems like a fun build but I personally don't think it's that viable. Of course, I could be wrong! I'm guessing you attack right around 6:00 mark with 5 zealots? I don't see how a 2 Hatch/Pool with some form of early gas into a slightly delayed 3rd(soO style) doesn't completely shut this down. Even 3 Hatch into pool seems fine, albeit with a bit of early micro if you push out with your first 2 zealots. From there you can either counter/deny your natrual right? Or power drone and still hit a pre 11:00 min timing with 12+ ranged hydra and 40+ speedling.
On November 14 2014 03:39 11B wrote: Seems like a fun build but I personally don't think it's that viable. Of course, I could be wrong! I'm guessing you attack right around 6:00 mark with 5 zealots? I don't see how a 2 Hatch/Pool with some form of early gas into a slightly delayed 3rd(soO style) doesn't completely shut this down. Even 3 Hatch into pool seems fine, albeit with a bit of early micro if you push out with your first 2 zealots. From there you can either counter/deny your natrual right? Or power drone and still hit a pre 11:00 min timing with 12+ ranged hydra and 40+ speedling.
Replays and timings would be nice.
Depends on your definition of "viable" of course. Could Life stop this with nothing but amazing queen/ling micro? Probably. Does it win ladder games against low Masters players? Definitely. I've seen this build in action - it sounds retarded. It looks retarded. It's out of the meta. It wins games. If you're a ladder hero trying to get some ez PvZ wins try it out.
On November 14 2014 03:21 Defenestrator wrote: What exactly distinguishes this from a 2gate opening into expand? This is a pretty common build.
Is that really true? I've literally never seen a pro open 2gate. Also I am a zerg main with 1000+ ladder games and I can only recall 1-2 occasions where someone 2gated me. It was popular in BW but didn't seem to make it to SC2.
On November 14 2014 03:21 Defenestrator wrote: What exactly distinguishes this from a 2gate opening into expand? This is a pretty common build.
lol really? interesting... i have like 2K plus games as zerg and have never once seen 2 gate into expand proxy gates maybe.. but that is NOT and expand build
On November 14 2014 03:39 11B wrote: Seems like a fun build but I personally don't think it's that viable. Of course, I could be wrong! I'm guessing you attack right around 6:00 mark with 5 zealots? I don't see how a 2 Hatch/Pool with some form of early gas into a slightly delayed 3rd(soO style) doesn't completely shut this down. Even 3 Hatch into pool seems fine, albeit with a bit of early micro if you push out with your first 2 zealots. From there you can either counter/deny your natrual right? Or power drone and still hit a pre 11:00 min timing with 12+ ranged hydra and 40+ speedling.
Replays and timings would be nice.
thanks for the comment! I've seen all kinds of reactions to it when scouted. The goal isnt necessarily to have the zealots to kill them. it's to generate a reaction. If they over make units, losing larva that early is big for zerg. and f they under prepare they will take damage.
I just checked on sc2gears, the 5th zealot finishes around 3:24 so regardless of the distance to your opponents base it hits way before 6 mins. In fact i start the void around 5:40 not sure if sc2gears is real time or blizz time though
The last guy who tried 3 hatch before pool vs. this was on habitation station.. he took the gold... he still lost though.
Fair enough. In my thinking, the zealots aren't ending the game versus a decent player. Protoss has delayed their tech, income, and most importantly, sentry count to what end? If the zealots get some work done or the Zerg reacts wrong then everything is GREAT! If not I don't see how the Protoss player isn't very far behind.
Although I'm way way out of practice, I'd be more than willing to mess around with a few games vs the build. Would help me learn to defend and maybe, if I play "ok", might help refine the build order for the OP.
EDIT: upload the replay man!! I messed around with Toss before making even my 1st post and with a 14g/17g I wasn't able to finish 5 zealots anywhere near that early.
On November 14 2014 04:13 11B wrote: Fair enough. In my thinking, the zealots aren't ending the game versus a decent player. Protoss has delayed their tech, income, and most importantly, sentry count to what end? If the zealots get some work done or the Zerg reacts wrong then everything is GREAT! If not I don't see how the Protoss player isn't very far behind.
Although I'm way way out of practice, I'd be more than willing to mess around with a few games vs the build. Would help me learn to defend and maybe, if I play "ok", might help refine the build order for the OP.
EDIT: upload the replay man!! I messed around with Toss before making even my 1st post and with a 14g/17g I wasn't able to finish 5 zealots anywhere near that early.
absolutely, the zealots rarely win the game outright.. sometimes they do but most zergs have no problem stopping the initial assault. I cut sentries with this build.. if you're a big sentry user this is not for you..you will probably feel naked. BUT cutting the sentries means you don't delay your tech as much as you'd think. If I'd have to guess I'd say I go collo about 75% of the time off this build.. and they come out in time for hydra/roach attacks. I usually keep the void production going aswell.. so it goes nicely into voidray/collosus
Okay, cool ^^. I was freaking out man. I even left early with 4 zealots because IMO that is actually a better timing. I think it's a better timing because 15H/16pool injected larvae finishes at 5:25-27ish, while 14/15 Pool into Hatch finish injected larvae pop at 5:30 - 5:37ish. So with 4 zealots I was able to hit right around 5:45 with has more potential to damage before lings hatch yea?
But even then I'm still dubious when reacting right ^^. You wanna play a few? Although I am rusty, for real!
Edit: If ya wanna refine the build or own me up a bit just send me a PM
On November 14 2014 04:22 11B wrote: Okay, cool ^^. I was freaking out man. I even left early with 4 zealots because IMO that is actually a better timing. I think it's a better timing because 15H/16pool injected larvae finishes at 5:25-27ish, while 14/15 Pool into Hatch finish injected larvae pop at 5:30 - 5:37ish. So with 4 zealots I was able to hit right around 5:45 with has more potential to damage before lings hatch yea?
But even then I'm still dubious when reacting right ^^. You wanna play a few? Although I am rusty, for real!
Edit: If ya wanna refine the build or own me up a bit just send me a PM
nice I might just do that.
4 could work, I've just always just sent 5. It could come down to the map when you send them. If you can get them there with those inject timings ironed out per map I bet you could refine it pretty nicely.
this is so weird, ive been messing around with a very similiar opener on ladder... i offrace toss at like a high plat/low dia level and i mostly do troll builds/weird experimental stuff. only difference is i make 3 zealots and then go nexus, double gas, core, sentry/MSC and always transition into a quick 2gate DT with the twilight and dark shrine proxied off the third pylon, then straight into a blink allin with 2 base saturation. it's obviously 100% a meta/misdirection build that's better against middling players who aren't sure how to react, but it's a lot of fun :D it's surprising how much you can do with zealot micro when there isn't a spine or more than one queen
Definitely looks like that kind of build that works because it confuses opponents to death - until a certain level. I wouldn't advice it at masters level or above.
I don't see this working well vs hatch first economy or mass roach or mass zergling build (the latter two being unlikely).
If going against a hatch first and you wait for 5 zealots before attacking, that's giving the hatch first zerg plenty of time to react while maintaining a lead. Against an aggressive roach or zergling build (not that they are common that I know of) it could be difficult or impossible to expand before teching more which could also result in being behind.
On November 14 2014 07:15 Xapti wrote: I don't see this working well vs hatch first economy or mass roach or mass zergling build (the latter two being unlikely).
If going against a hatch first and you wait for 5 zealots before attacking, that's giving the hatch first zerg plenty of time to react while maintaining a lead. Against an aggressive roach or zergling build (not that they are common that I know of) it could be difficult or impossible to expand before teching more which could also result in being behind.
I do see hatch first quite a bit. But the 9 scout on 2 player maps almost always triggers pool first since they assume my probe will block their hatch.. and they usually don't know if I have a forge that early.
have a counter you have in mind? an example of an "aggressive" ling/roach attack? I don't lose in the early game with this build pretty much ever.. usually it's a specific timing off of 3+ base zerg that catches me.. but I can't think of a game where I didn't get my natural up. The voidray stops most of the roach counters... and adding in more cannons is always an option depending on the size of their army.. just as it would be for an FFE
I mean.. even 10pools get shut down hard. then again I haven't faced a 7 roach rush in a couple years lol I would hope I'd catch that with my 9 scout
PvZ and the P does something unusual which requires a response walking a fine line between econ and army, and a specific, early response to the follow up? Yeah. Yeah I see that working.
- Any variation of 15Hat//16Pool (hat/pool in general) or any variation of 14 or 15Pool/XHatch - 3 Queens and 2 spines (helping choke towards your ramp w/Queen help) - 5:00 2xgas - Drone up to 2 base saturation minus 1 gas. Take 3rd gas around 7:00 (16x2 and 3x3; 41) - 6:00 Hatch in main (yep, weird back at ya) followed by zergling speed (6:05) - 6:30 2x evo - 7:05 +1/1 (melee/cara) - 7:00 a double injected eggs hatch > Lings - 7:45 another double inject of Lings + start Lair > pressure/harrass/deny Protoss 3rd. - 8:30 a triple inject eggs hatch > Lings (Total of 75-80 Lings and attack before 10:00 with +1/1) - 9:00 4th Hatch at Expo > drone drone drone into IP and tech path of your choice. Pretty much 1 more inject cycle and a few more drones and your saturated.
It's not perfect cause I just threw it together. I.e., the 2nd spine in conjunction with 2x gas at 5:00 gives you a few idle larvae but even then, you can still afford to start zergling speed, double upgrades (just after 7:00) and reach 41 drones nlt 6:40-50. You're first inject cycle larvae into lings will also have about 2-3 idle larvae (cant afford). However, past that you don't have any problems spending your $$ and still reach the final Ling benchmarks I mention.
Lol this is some 2004, Reach vs Yellow type shit. Even if it doesn't work it's still manly as fuck. You sir are a true warrior of Aiur. Even though realistically this wouldn't work if your opponent knew it was coming and had played vs it a few times.
On November 14 2014 03:21 Defenestrator wrote: What exactly distinguishes this from a 2gate opening into expand? This is a pretty common build.
lol really? interesting... i have like 2K plus games as zerg and have never once seen 2 gate into expand proxy gates maybe.. but that is NOT and expand build
*shrug* maybe it's out of the meta now, but 2gate into expand has been around since at least 2011. Maybe not many people do it anymore, but I've played against it a few times. Pros don't do it really, but on ladder you see all kinds of shit.
I guess it's uncommon enough that people are commenting on it, so I guess it really has fallen out of the meta =P
On November 14 2014 03:21 Defenestrator wrote: What exactly distinguishes this from a 2gate opening into expand? This is a pretty common build.
lol really? interesting... i have like 2K plus games as zerg and have never once seen 2 gate into expand proxy gates maybe.. but that is NOT and expand build
*shrug* maybe it's out of the meta now, but 2gate into expand has been around since at least 2011. Maybe not many people do it anymore, but I've played against it a few times. Pros don't do it really, but on ladder you see all kinds of shit.
I guess it's uncommon enough that people are commenting on it, so I guess it really has fallen out of the meta =P
It's pretty much been used by no one. NoNy use to do it on ladder for a couple weeks in like 2011, and MC did it in an NASL game against Machine on Crossfire (by memory?) but apart from that it pretty much doesn't exist. I also tried it on the ladder a bit and it's not completely terrible but it isn't a thing for a reason. Definitely not pretty common, i'd go as far that it has never truly existed in the metagame at any point in time, except for a couple people briefly experimenting. It hasn't fallen out of the meta, because it was never in the meta lol. In fact, you probably wouldn't even find proper builds written up for it, any 2gate builds you would find would be 2 gate sentry expands, which is a completely different thing.
On November 14 2014 03:21 Defenestrator wrote: What exactly distinguishes this from a 2gate opening into expand? This is a pretty common build.
lol really? interesting... i have like 2K plus games as zerg and have never once seen 2 gate into expand proxy gates maybe.. but that is NOT and expand build
*shrug* maybe it's out of the meta now, but 2gate into expand has been around since at least 2011. Maybe not many people do it anymore, but I've played against it a few times. Pros don't do it really, but on ladder you see all kinds of shit.
I guess it's uncommon enough that people are commenting on it, so I guess it really has fallen out of the meta =P
It's pretty much been used by no one. NoNy use to do it on ladder for a couple weeks in like 2011, and MC did it in an NASL game against Machine on Crossfire (by memory?) but apart from that it pretty much doesn't exist. I also tried it on the ladder a bit and it's not completely terrible but it isn't a thing for a reason. Definitely not pretty common, i'd go as far that it has never truly existed in the metagame at any point in time, except for a couple people briefly experimenting. It hasn't fallen out of the meta, because it was never in the meta lol. In fact, you probably wouldn't even find proper builds written up for it, any 2gate builds you would find would be 2 gate sentry expands, which is a completely different thing.
Saying it was ever part of the "standard meta" is probably going too far, but I remember 1 pro who used to do this pretty often.... his name eludes me, he's since retired, I think he used to play for ROOT.
Also, as a reminder, zealot build times were increased by a few seconds (5 seconds I think) because of 2gate, and I'm not talking about proxy 2-gate, we're talking cross-map pressure (though maps were smaller back then).
As a side note to OP: a friend of a friend apparently uses a 2gate build, but blocks the hatch with a pylon. That way it's a lot harder to get a spine in place in time to defend the nat by the time you hit.
Obviously it's possible to tailor a build to counter this if you know it's coming, but most people have no idea what's going on when it hits them. It's so far out of the meta that it catches people unaware nearly every game.
Yeah 2 gate I guess *used* to be part of the meta but that was on maps like Xelnaga and Metalopolis where you couldn't move out at all to secure your natural for obvious reasons... but even on the #dreampool this build is soooo far out of the meta.
2 gate into exp was a very common build in Brood War before forge expand became the standard. I think this is only viable vs someone who doesn't know how to react.
I find quick 3 zealots + MSC to be much more effective. If you make 5 zealots and they make say 2-3 spines they're still ahead, whereas if they do it with just 3 zealots and msc (for killing drones once queen is gone) if they make 2-3 spines, you're ahead for the most part.
Haha opening was extremely common during the WoL beta and first year in PvZ. Either 10gate / double gate zealot aggression into air into 2 base deathball while getting a third.
This build is very potent not because its weird but because its strong vs very aggressive 10 pool zerg and very greedy openings. You will do well vs anything else too because you almost allways force defenses. Important to note is that you should totally suicide your zealots if you can deal significant amounts of damage with them. 4-5 zealots is a magical number that early in the game as you can kite and 1 shot small numbers of lings easily. 3 zealots + MSC must be a strong option too!
The stargate is to punish overreactions like roaches and the fact that zerg cant be aggressive against it. Its a very nice opening and very versataile. Mutas are indeed a problem but you can support your army with phoenixes if you scout it early enough.
On November 22 2014 11:45 clickrush wrote: Haha opening was extremely common during the WoL beta and first year in PvZ. Either 10gate / double gate zealot aggression into air into 2 base deathball while getting a third.
This build is very potent not because its weird but because its strong vs very aggressive 10 pool zerg and very greedy openings. You will do well vs anything else too because you almost allways force defenses. Important to note is that you should totally suicide your zealots if you can deal significant amounts of damage with them. 4-5 zealots is a magical number that early in the game as you can kite and 1 shot small numbers of lings easily. 3 zealots + MSC must be a strong option too!
The stargate is to punish overreactions like roaches and the fact that zerg cant be aggressive against it. Its a very nice opening and very versataile. Mutas are indeed a problem but you can support your army with phoenixes if you scout it early enough.
It doesn't do well vs "anything else." 7RR hard-counters this build (not like anyone does that anymore... for the inundated, 7RR = "7 roach rush" off of 1 base into expo at around 32-34 supply), and is even more potent now that you can get burrow. Alternately if Z defends properly with 1 spine, queen + some lings and doesn't over-produce units, Z has a nice lead going into the early-midgame.
Zerg just needs to continuously build Queens as soon as he or she sees this and happily be on the way to a happily established midgame while the Zealots significantly delays almost everything for Protoss.
On November 22 2014 11:45 clickrush wrote: Haha opening was extremely common during the WoL beta and first year in PvZ. Either 10gate / double gate zealot aggression into air into 2 base deathball while getting a third.
While reading this I also felt we have gone in a (very, very) large circle here haha.
If I remember correctly, this opening was the main reason why the zealot buildtime was changed to 38 seconds with one of the first WoL patches.
This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns.
I'm high masters and used to use a 2gate opening quite a bit, until the reinforcement cutoff strat really boned me over. Because slowlings are so much faster than zealots, they can chase away reinforcing zelaots until they group up. This buys the Zerg ample time to defend the initial zealots at it's hatch with 3 queens and a single spine. Then you're notably far behind due to very delayed expansion, while Zerg's is already up.
There's also little reason to build your second gateway so late - you can afford 13 gate and second gate at 15. Admittedly I don't probe scout, but I can't imagine it would make that much of a difference. I also built the gates at the nat in order to shorten the rush distance and start the wall early - if Zerg has early speed, he can delay any expo with mass ling if you build in the main.
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns.
I'm high masters and used to use a 2gate opening quite a bit, until the reinforcement cutoff strat really boned me over. Because slowlings are so much faster than zealots, they can chase away reinforcing zelaots until they group up. This buys the Zerg ample time to defend the initial zealots at it's hatch with 3 queens and a single spine. Then you're notably far behind due to very delayed expansion, while Zerg's is already up.
There's also little reason to build your second gateway so late - you can afford 13 gate and second gate at 15. Admittedly I don't probe scout, but I can't imagine it would make that much of a difference. I also built the gates at the nat in order to shorten the rush distance and start the wall early - if Zerg has early speed, he can delay any expo with mass ling if you build in the main.
what reinforcing spawns? did you even read the build?
there is no 'reinforcing'.. it's basically pool 5 zealots then go.. i don't send them as they spawn. also building the gate at the natural is a bad idea IMO.. if they early pool (with or w/o speed) you could get fucked by losing the pylon etc.. the distance to pull probe to protect it is very far and not worth it. This isn't a 'proxy' 2 gate in your natural.. your build sounds more like a zealot rush of some kind
walling your main ramp is essential and saved me a few times from early pools.
I do a somewhat similar build and it works decent at the NA GM level. It's not sustainable, but it's not cheesy either. With practice and scouting a zerg will always come out a little ahead vs this build, but won't have a game winning advantage. If a zerg doesn't scout or overreacts and under reacts the protoss can have a BIG advantage =]
I don't really do this build much aymore, but it's nice for BoX games. Strong vs hatch first or no scout, and auto wins vs 3h before pool and 6-10 pools =]
Hey OP, I've been doing this build more or less since WoL. My take on it though is to start off with Gateway and forge and chrono +1 attack since it makes zealots kill lings in two hits in stead of three. The zealots end up doing more than twice as much damage but game gets stressful if they fast roaches or surprise mutas. I often am forced to build 3 to 5 cannons at the natural if they properly respond with roaches. Mutas pretty much end it for me if I had to pay out for 5 cannons. Have you ever tried the +1 attack or is the voidray timing too important?
Reminds me of an old build called the Love build back from WoL but more economic with less early damage potential.
I've experimented with things like this having a later 2nd Gateway, etc, but I just haven't had as much success personally. Maybe it's because I don't get my Natural up early enough, I don't know, but the Love build does seem to work better for me than builds with earlier or later Gateways.
The Love build, in case you want to try it:
9 Pylon @Natural, Chrono Probes x1 @Pylon completion Scout, try to keep Probe alive. 13 Gateway 13 2nd Gateway (yes, 2 Gateways @13), Chrono Probes x1 16 Pylon (try to block Zerg Natural with this, but don't delay the Pylon if it's not possible to do so) 16 Zealot (Chrono) Probes and Zealots (Chrono as much as possible on Zealots), push @ 3 Zealots
My version:
Send Zealots ASAP right when they come out unless holding off cheese with them because the Zerg usually won't have enough at the time to kill the Zealot if it's micro'd well before others arrive (temporary retreat for grouping with reinforcements if necessary). Also bring a single Probe (or keep scouting Probe alive and use it) because 2 Zealot hits + 1 Probe hit kills a Ling. Follow up with expo and tech, or more Zealots if I need them or think I can win.
Small note on Zealot micro: In small numbers of Zealots vs Lings, "kiting" with Zealots to avoid surrounds can be very effective.
Pros:
-- Holds cheesy Pools. -- Forces lots of Zerglings early. -- Often kills Natural vs Hatch-first if Zerg slips up on micro and/or making enough Zerglings. -- Able to choose between going for Natural or going for Drones in main, either forces units. -- Often trades quite well with good micro.
Cons:
-- NOT a large map build. -- Requires good Zealot micro and multitasking to work well. -- Not as techy as a 1-Gate Cyber expo. -- Not as economic as an FFE. -- Not the best vs 14- and 15-Pools, though not as bad as normal cheese builds against them economically.
Where 1-Gate Cyber FEs rely on earlier tech as a tradeoff for delayed economy, and FFEs rely on delayed tech for safety and a better economy, builds like the Ignorant build and the Love build rely on forcing the Zerg to delay their economy to even out the delayed economy of the build. They are designed to force the Zerg to react earlier on instead of the Protoss staying mostly defensive. It's basically a tradeoff of economy with a chance to deal major damage. Either the opponent makes a lot of units and/or Spines to defend (possibly evening up the economy or putting it in your favor if the Zerg overcommits) or doesn't make enough defense and takes major, often game-ending, damage.
How do you 2gate at your choke , build 5 zealots, then attack , and Zergs not hold it?
lol...
I don't see this working ever...I really hope Protoss players do this to me on ladder so I can have free wins....
All you have to do is drone scout or good ovie scout, see he is 2gating, by the time you scout he would at most have 2-3 zealots, once you scout his minerals (if you do) , you will know he is just building more zealots, especially since i'm sure you are chrono boosting them....
All zerg has to do is Hatch first, 4 queens, multiple spines, some lings, gg you lose by default.
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns.
I'm high masters and used to use a 2gate opening quite a bit, until the reinforcement cutoff strat really boned me over. Because slowlings are so much faster than zealots, they can chase away reinforcing zelaots until they group up. This buys the Zerg ample time to defend the initial zealots at it's hatch with 3 queens and a single spine. Then you're notably far behind due to very delayed expansion, while Zerg's is already up.
There's also little reason to build your second gateway so late - you can afford 13 gate and second gate at 15. Admittedly I don't probe scout, but I can't imagine it would make that much of a difference. I also built the gates at the nat in order to shorten the rush distance and start the wall early - if Zerg has early speed, he can delay any expo with mass ling if you build in the main.
what reinforcing spawns? did you even read the build?
there is no 'reinforcing'.. it's basically pool 5 zealots then go.. i don't send them as they spawn. also building the gate at the natural is a bad idea IMO.. if they early pool (with or w/o speed) you could get fucked by losing the pylon etc.. the distance to pull probe to protect it is very far and not worth it. This isn't a 'proxy' 2 gate in your natural.. your build sounds more like a zealot rush of some kind
walling your main ramp is essential and saved me a few times from early pools.
There's absolutely no benefit of "pooling" them originally, beyond hoping your opponent doesn't know what they're reading. It's substantially worse to pool them.
If they get an early pool without speed, you're at an advantage because you can simply chrono out Zealots and then counter. An early pool with speed is map dependent - if you're on a map like shakuras, you simply finish the wall with a forge, or you build a second pylon on teh ramp and stick a zealot in, and still get a cannon ASAP prior to nexus.
Once again, you're relying on a complete element of misreading despite fully allowing your opponent to scout your build, which is fairly ridiculous. Some builds that are unorthodox are OK in the sense your opponent has no idea it's coming. With your build, it's absolutely clear far in advance it's coming. Which is probably why it would work in Diamond.
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns.
I'm high masters and used to use a 2gate opening quite a bit, until the reinforcement cutoff strat really boned me over. Because slowlings are so much faster than zealots, they can chase away reinforcing zelaots until they group up. This buys the Zerg ample time to defend the initial zealots at it's hatch with 3 queens and a single spine. Then you're notably far behind due to very delayed expansion, while Zerg's is already up.
There's also little reason to build your second gateway so late - you can afford 13 gate and second gate at 15. Admittedly I don't probe scout, but I can't imagine it would make that much of a difference. I also built the gates at the nat in order to shorten the rush distance and start the wall early - if Zerg has early speed, he can delay any expo with mass ling if you build in the main.
what reinforcing spawns? did you even read the build?
there is no 'reinforcing'.. it's basically pool 5 zealots then go.. i don't send them as they spawn. also building the gate at the natural is a bad idea IMO.. if they early pool (with or w/o speed) you could get fucked by losing the pylon etc.. the distance to pull probe to protect it is very far and not worth it. This isn't a 'proxy' 2 gate in your natural.. your build sounds more like a zealot rush of some kind
walling your main ramp is essential and saved me a few times from early pools.
There's absolutely no benefit of "pooling" them originally, beyond hoping your opponent doesn't know what they're reading. It's substantially worse to pool them.
If they get an early pool without speed, you're at an advantage because you can simply chrono out Zealots and then counter. An early pool with speed is map dependent - if you're on a map like shakuras, you simply finish the wall with a forge, or you build a second pylon on teh ramp and stick a zealot in, and still get a cannon ASAP prior to nexus.
Once again, you're relying on a complete element of misreading despite fully allowing your opponent to scout your build, which is fairly ridiculous. Some builds that are unorthodox are OK in the sense your opponent has no idea it's coming. With your build, it's absolutely clear far in advance it's coming. Which is probably why it would work in Diamond.
I said at the very start this works at my level... i never claimed it would be a new standard build for masters to use....
Sending in 1 zealot at a time across the map is suicidal.. and ez to 'ignore' like you mentioned.. when 5 come at once you can't engage with slow lings in the middle of the map.. they also provide defense vs. early pools and keeps the zergs from doing just what you said they'd do.. it lets you get your natural wall up before they can do anything about ..
plus if you can't do enough damage you just bring them back home and use them to try and snipe the 3rd... so many people arguing that it shouldn't work.. yet i've given proof of it working over and over again at the high diamond level...
On December 06 2014 14:33 GGzerG wrote: How do you 2gate at your choke , build 5 zealots, then attack , and Zergs not hold it?
lol...
I don't see this working ever...I really hope Protoss players do this to me on ladder so I can have free wins....
All you have to do is drone scout or good ovie scout, see he is 2gating, by the time you scout he would at most have 2-3 zealots, once you scout his minerals (if you do) , you will know he is just building more zealots, especially since i'm sure you are chrono boosting them....
All zerg has to do is Hatch first, 4 queens, multiple spines, some lings, gg you lose by default.
I just watched a GM zerg fail to react "properly" to this build even when ovie scouting... and with a 9 scout probe few zergs go hatch first in fear of getting it delayed with a pylon or even a cannon rush threat
you dont see it working ever.. but i've shown proof of it working..
On December 06 2014 14:18 NinjaDuckBob wrote: Reminds me of an old build called the Love build back from WoL but more economic with less early damage potential.
I've experimented with things like this having a later 2nd Gateway, etc, but I just haven't had as much success personally. Maybe it's because I don't get my Natural up early enough, I don't know, but the Love build does seem to work better for me than builds with earlier or later Gateways.
The Love build, in case you want to try it:
9 Pylon @Natural, Chrono Probes x1 @Pylon completion Scout, try to keep Probe alive. 13 Gateway 13 2nd Gateway (yes, 2 Gateways @13), Chrono Probes x1 16 Pylon (try to block Zerg Natural with this, but don't delay the Pylon if it's not possible to do so) 16 Zealot (Chrono) Probes and Zealots (Chrono as much as possible on Zealots), push @ 3 Zealots
My version:
Send Zealots ASAP right when they come out unless holding off cheese with them because the Zerg usually won't have enough at the time to kill the Zealot if it's micro'd well before others arrive (temporary retreat for grouping with reinforcements if necessary). Also bring a single Probe (or keep scouting Probe alive and use it) because 2 Zealot hits + 1 Probe hit kills a Ling. Follow up with expo and tech, or more Zealots if I need them or think I can win.
Small note on Zealot micro: In small numbers of Zealots vs Lings, "kiting" with Zealots to avoid surrounds can be very effective.
Pros:
-- Holds cheesy Pools. -- Forces lots of Zerglings early. -- Often kills Natural vs Hatch-first if Zerg slips up on micro and/or making enough Zerglings. -- Able to choose between going for Natural or going for Drones in main, either forces units. -- Often trades quite well with good micro.
Cons:
-- NOT a large map build. -- Requires good Zealot micro and multitasking to work well. -- Not as techy as a 1-Gate Cyber expo. -- Not as economic as an FFE. -- Not the best vs 14- and 15-Pools, though not as bad as normal cheese builds against them economically.
Where 1-Gate Cyber FEs rely on earlier tech as a tradeoff for delayed economy, and FFEs rely on delayed tech for safety and a better economy, builds like the Ignorant build and the Love build rely on forcing the Zerg to delay their economy to even out the delayed economy of the build. They are designed to force the Zerg to react earlier on instead of the Protoss staying mostly defensive. It's basically a tradeoff of economy with a chance to deal major damage. Either the opponent makes a lot of units and/or Spines to defend (possibly evening up the economy or putting it in your favor if the Zerg overcommits) or doesn't make enough defense and takes major, often game-ending, damage.
sounds cool. not sure i have the4 micro for that though lol
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns.
I'm high masters and used to use a 2gate opening quite a bit, until the reinforcement cutoff strat really boned me over. Because slowlings are so much faster than zealots, they can chase away reinforcing zelaots until they group up. This buys the Zerg ample time to defend the initial zealots at it's hatch with 3 queens and a single spine. Then you're notably far behind due to very delayed expansion, while Zerg's is already up.
There's also little reason to build your second gateway so late - you can afford 13 gate and second gate at 15. Admittedly I don't probe scout, but I can't imagine it would make that much of a difference. I also built the gates at the nat in order to shorten the rush distance and start the wall early - if Zerg has early speed, he can delay any expo with mass ling if you build in the main.
what reinforcing spawns? did you even read the build?
there is no 'reinforcing'.. it's basically pool 5 zealots then go.. i don't send them as they spawn. also building the gate at the natural is a bad idea IMO.. if they early pool (with or w/o speed) you could get fucked by losing the pylon etc.. the distance to pull probe to protect it is very far and not worth it. This isn't a 'proxy' 2 gate in your natural.. your build sounds more like a zealot rush of some kind
walling your main ramp is essential and saved me a few times from early pools.
There's absolutely no benefit of "pooling" them originally, beyond hoping your opponent doesn't know what they're reading. It's substantially worse to pool them.
If they get an early pool without speed, you're at an advantage because you can simply chrono out Zealots and then counter. An early pool with speed is map dependent - if you're on a map like shakuras, you simply finish the wall with a forge, or you build a second pylon on teh ramp and stick a zealot in, and still get a cannon ASAP prior to nexus.
Once again, you're relying on a complete element of misreading despite fully allowing your opponent to scout your build, which is fairly ridiculous. Some builds that are unorthodox are OK in the sense your opponent has no idea it's coming. With your build, it's absolutely clear far in advance it's coming. Which is probably why it would work in Diamond.
I said at the very start this works at my level... i never claimed it would be a new standard build for masters to use....
Sending in 1 zealot at a time across the map is suicidal.. and ez to 'ignore' like you mentioned.. when 5 come at once you can't engage with slow lings in the middle of the map.. they also provide defense vs. early pools and keeps the zergs from doing just what you said they'd do.. it lets you get your natural wall up before they can do anything about ..
plus if you can't do enough damage you just bring them back home and use them to try and snipe the 3rd... so many people arguing that it shouldn't work.. yet i've given proof of it working over and over again at the high diamond level...
On December 06 2014 14:33 GGzerG wrote: How do you 2gate at your choke , build 5 zealots, then attack , and Zergs not hold it?
lol...
I don't see this working ever...I really hope Protoss players do this to me on ladder so I can have free wins....
All you have to do is drone scout or good ovie scout, see he is 2gating, by the time you scout he would at most have 2-3 zealots, once you scout his minerals (if you do) , you will know he is just building more zealots, especially since i'm sure you are chrono boosting them....
All zerg has to do is Hatch first, 4 queens, multiple spines, some lings, gg you lose by default.
I just watched a GM zerg fail to react "properly" to this build even when ovie scouting... and with a 9 scout probe few zergs go hatch first in fear of getting it delayed with a pylon or even a cannon rush threat
you dont see it working ever.. but i've shown proof of it working..
I don't think you have a grasp on the difference between sending them 1 by 1 and pooling them. Saying it's suicidal is nonsensical. You don't lose any of the zealots that you send 1 by 1. So you still have 5 by the end. You just apply pressure in the meantime, cause drones to be pulled, etc.
On December 07 2014 01:50 Ignorant prodigy wrote: sounds cool. not sure i have the4 micro for that though lol
The micro is just a matter of practice. Just microing your Zealots to avoid being surrounded, choosing whether to attack Queens, Lings, or Drones, doing your best to distribute the damage evenly between your Zealots, etc. I actually find it easier than trying to use Zealots at a later time since the Zerg will usually have less units (if you wanted, you could also make 5 Zealots which hit at an earlier time than your build but your expo will be delayed more). It also seems forcing units/Spines a little earlier makes it harder on the Zerg's part as far as commitment level is concerned.
The hardest part is the multitasking in the early stage, but I'm sure high Diamonds + can deal with that with a little practice.
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns.
I'm high masters and used to use a 2gate opening quite a bit, until the reinforcement cutoff strat really boned me over. Because slowlings are so much faster than zealots, they can chase away reinforcing zelaots until they group up. This buys the Zerg ample time to defend the initial zealots at it's hatch with 3 queens and a single spine. Then you're notably far behind due to very delayed expansion, while Zerg's is already up.
There's also little reason to build your second gateway so late - you can afford 13 gate and second gate at 15. Admittedly I don't probe scout, but I can't imagine it would make that much of a difference. I also built the gates at the nat in order to shorten the rush distance and start the wall early - if Zerg has early speed, he can delay any expo with mass ling if you build in the main.
what reinforcing spawns? did you even read the build?
there is no 'reinforcing'.. it's basically pool 5 zealots then go.. i don't send them as they spawn. also building the gate at the natural is a bad idea IMO.. if they early pool (with or w/o speed) you could get fucked by losing the pylon etc.. the distance to pull probe to protect it is very far and not worth it. This isn't a 'proxy' 2 gate in your natural.. your build sounds more like a zealot rush of some kind
walling your main ramp is essential and saved me a few times from early pools.
There's absolutely no benefit of "pooling" them originally, beyond hoping your opponent doesn't know what they're reading. It's substantially worse to pool them.
If they get an early pool without speed, you're at an advantage because you can simply chrono out Zealots and then counter. An early pool with speed is map dependent - if you're on a map like shakuras, you simply finish the wall with a forge, or you build a second pylon on teh ramp and stick a zealot in, and still get a cannon ASAP prior to nexus.
Once again, you're relying on a complete element of misreading despite fully allowing your opponent to scout your build, which is fairly ridiculous. Some builds that are unorthodox are OK in the sense your opponent has no idea it's coming. With your build, it's absolutely clear far in advance it's coming. Which is probably why it would work in Diamond.
I said at the very start this works at my level... i never claimed it would be a new standard build for masters to use....
Sending in 1 zealot at a time across the map is suicidal.. and ez to 'ignore' like you mentioned.. when 5 come at once you can't engage with slow lings in the middle of the map.. they also provide defense vs. early pools and keeps the zergs from doing just what you said they'd do.. it lets you get your natural wall up before they can do anything about ..
plus if you can't do enough damage you just bring them back home and use them to try and snipe the 3rd... so many people arguing that it shouldn't work.. yet i've given proof of it working over and over again at the high diamond level...
On December 06 2014 14:33 GGzerG wrote: How do you 2gate at your choke , build 5 zealots, then attack , and Zergs not hold it?
lol...
I don't see this working ever...I really hope Protoss players do this to me on ladder so I can have free wins....
All you have to do is drone scout or good ovie scout, see he is 2gating, by the time you scout he would at most have 2-3 zealots, once you scout his minerals (if you do) , you will know he is just building more zealots, especially since i'm sure you are chrono boosting them....
All zerg has to do is Hatch first, 4 queens, multiple spines, some lings, gg you lose by default.
I just watched a GM zerg fail to react "properly" to this build even when ovie scouting... and with a 9 scout probe few zergs go hatch first in fear of getting it delayed with a pylon or even a cannon rush threat
you dont see it working ever.. but i've shown proof of it working..
I don't think you have a grasp on the difference between sending them 1 by 1 and pooling them. Saying it's suicidal is nonsensical. You don't lose any of the zealots that you send 1 by 1. So you still have 5 by the end. You just apply pressure in the meantime, cause drones to be pulled, etc.
honestly, you may have the grasp but you definitely fail to make your point. Reading your first comment (accentuations by me):
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns. (...)
and then your more recent one:
On December 07 2014 02:15 FabledIntegral wrote: (...) You don't lose any of the zealots that you send 1 by 1. (...)
makes one believe you might want to tone down your condescending way
so the problem is, in gm after building 5 zealots like that and heading home cuz of lings and spine, there will be 12 hydras and 3 full base eco bases greeting my air units :D
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns.
I'm high masters and used to use a 2gate opening quite a bit, until the reinforcement cutoff strat really boned me over. Because slowlings are so much faster than zealots, they can chase away reinforcing zelaots until they group up. This buys the Zerg ample time to defend the initial zealots at it's hatch with 3 queens and a single spine. Then you're notably far behind due to very delayed expansion, while Zerg's is already up.
There's also little reason to build your second gateway so late - you can afford 13 gate and second gate at 15. Admittedly I don't probe scout, but I can't imagine it would make that much of a difference. I also built the gates at the nat in order to shorten the rush distance and start the wall early - if Zerg has early speed, he can delay any expo with mass ling if you build in the main.
what reinforcing spawns? did you even read the build?
there is no 'reinforcing'.. it's basically pool 5 zealots then go.. i don't send them as they spawn. also building the gate at the natural is a bad idea IMO.. if they early pool (with or w/o speed) you could get fucked by losing the pylon etc.. the distance to pull probe to protect it is very far and not worth it. This isn't a 'proxy' 2 gate in your natural.. your build sounds more like a zealot rush of some kind
walling your main ramp is essential and saved me a few times from early pools.
There's absolutely no benefit of "pooling" them originally, beyond hoping your opponent doesn't know what they're reading. It's substantially worse to pool them.
If they get an early pool without speed, you're at an advantage because you can simply chrono out Zealots and then counter. An early pool with speed is map dependent - if you're on a map like shakuras, you simply finish the wall with a forge, or you build a second pylon on teh ramp and stick a zealot in, and still get a cannon ASAP prior to nexus.
Once again, you're relying on a complete element of misreading despite fully allowing your opponent to scout your build, which is fairly ridiculous. Some builds that are unorthodox are OK in the sense your opponent has no idea it's coming. With your build, it's absolutely clear far in advance it's coming. Which is probably why it would work in Diamond.
I said at the very start this works at my level... i never claimed it would be a new standard build for masters to use....
Sending in 1 zealot at a time across the map is suicidal.. and ez to 'ignore' like you mentioned.. when 5 come at once you can't engage with slow lings in the middle of the map.. they also provide defense vs. early pools and keeps the zergs from doing just what you said they'd do.. it lets you get your natural wall up before they can do anything about ..
plus if you can't do enough damage you just bring them back home and use them to try and snipe the 3rd... so many people arguing that it shouldn't work.. yet i've given proof of it working over and over again at the high diamond level...
On December 06 2014 14:33 GGzerG wrote: How do you 2gate at your choke , build 5 zealots, then attack , and Zergs not hold it?
lol...
I don't see this working ever...I really hope Protoss players do this to me on ladder so I can have free wins....
All you have to do is drone scout or good ovie scout, see he is 2gating, by the time you scout he would at most have 2-3 zealots, once you scout his minerals (if you do) , you will know he is just building more zealots, especially since i'm sure you are chrono boosting them....
All zerg has to do is Hatch first, 4 queens, multiple spines, some lings, gg you lose by default.
I just watched a GM zerg fail to react "properly" to this build even when ovie scouting... and with a 9 scout probe few zergs go hatch first in fear of getting it delayed with a pylon or even a cannon rush threat
you dont see it working ever.. but i've shown proof of it working..
I don't think you have a grasp on the difference between sending them 1 by 1 and pooling them. Saying it's suicidal is nonsensical. You don't lose any of the zealots that you send 1 by 1. So you still have 5 by the end. You just apply pressure in the meantime, cause drones to be pulled, etc.
honestly, you may have the grasp but you definitely fail to make your point. Reading your first comment (accentuations by me):
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns. (...)
On December 07 2014 02:15 FabledIntegral wrote: (...) You don't lose any of the zealots that you send 1 by 1. (...)
makes one believe you might want to tone down your condescending way
You're right - I jumped the gun and even contradicted myself as I assumed it was a variant of a normal 2gate, in which sending them 1 by 1 is what forces the pressure and how every 2gate has been performed. The entire reason 2gate failed as a build in the longrun is that zergs could simply send 8 lings to cut off reinforcements and use queens to protect against the initial 2-3 zealots.
The protoss's typical goal then became to send zealots 1 by 1 and not let any reinforcements die, but still pressure. However, the resulting pressure ended up being so light that Zergs ended up miles ahead of the Protoss. You still wouldn't lose any zealots, however, when doing this.
His build is only substantially worse than the "pressure" build that doesn't even work anymore. Instead of having 5 zealots in the middle of the map constantly pressuring and forcing Zerglings and reduced mining time (which doesn't even work itself), he just pools 5 zealots, has an insanely delayed natural, and then to top it off, absolutely no way to defend that natural.
I mixed up his build at first, only because his actual build ended up being even worse. I don't really understand the point in even pressing on builds that work in "high diamond." I have 20 builds I do that work in low GM that still suck (I play random), a 2gate variant one of them included.
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns.
I'm high masters and used to use a 2gate opening quite a bit, until the reinforcement cutoff strat really boned me over. Because slowlings are so much faster than zealots, they can chase away reinforcing zelaots until they group up. This buys the Zerg ample time to defend the initial zealots at it's hatch with 3 queens and a single spine. Then you're notably far behind due to very delayed expansion, while Zerg's is already up.
There's also little reason to build your second gateway so late - you can afford 13 gate and second gate at 15. Admittedly I don't probe scout, but I can't imagine it would make that much of a difference. I also built the gates at the nat in order to shorten the rush distance and start the wall early - if Zerg has early speed, he can delay any expo with mass ling if you build in the main.
what reinforcing spawns? did you even read the build?
there is no 'reinforcing'.. it's basically pool 5 zealots then go.. i don't send them as they spawn. also building the gate at the natural is a bad idea IMO.. if they early pool (with or w/o speed) you could get fucked by losing the pylon etc.. the distance to pull probe to protect it is very far and not worth it. This isn't a 'proxy' 2 gate in your natural.. your build sounds more like a zealot rush of some kind
walling your main ramp is essential and saved me a few times from early pools.
There's absolutely no benefit of "pooling" them originally, beyond hoping your opponent doesn't know what they're reading. It's substantially worse to pool them.
If they get an early pool without speed, you're at an advantage because you can simply chrono out Zealots and then counter. An early pool with speed is map dependent - if you're on a map like shakuras, you simply finish the wall with a forge, or you build a second pylon on teh ramp and stick a zealot in, and still get a cannon ASAP prior to nexus.
Once again, you're relying on a complete element of misreading despite fully allowing your opponent to scout your build, which is fairly ridiculous. Some builds that are unorthodox are OK in the sense your opponent has no idea it's coming. With your build, it's absolutely clear far in advance it's coming. Which is probably why it would work in Diamond.
I said at the very start this works at my level... i never claimed it would be a new standard build for masters to use....
Sending in 1 zealot at a time across the map is suicidal.. and ez to 'ignore' like you mentioned.. when 5 come at once you can't engage with slow lings in the middle of the map.. they also provide defense vs. early pools and keeps the zergs from doing just what you said they'd do.. it lets you get your natural wall up before they can do anything about ..
plus if you can't do enough damage you just bring them back home and use them to try and snipe the 3rd... so many people arguing that it shouldn't work.. yet i've given proof of it working over and over again at the high diamond level...
On December 06 2014 14:33 GGzerG wrote: How do you 2gate at your choke , build 5 zealots, then attack , and Zergs not hold it?
lol...
I don't see this working ever...I really hope Protoss players do this to me on ladder so I can have free wins....
All you have to do is drone scout or good ovie scout, see he is 2gating, by the time you scout he would at most have 2-3 zealots, once you scout his minerals (if you do) , you will know he is just building more zealots, especially since i'm sure you are chrono boosting them....
All zerg has to do is Hatch first, 4 queens, multiple spines, some lings, gg you lose by default.
I just watched a GM zerg fail to react "properly" to this build even when ovie scouting... and with a 9 scout probe few zergs go hatch first in fear of getting it delayed with a pylon or even a cannon rush threat
you dont see it working ever.. but i've shown proof of it working..
I don't think you have a grasp on the difference between sending them 1 by 1 and pooling them. Saying it's suicidal is nonsensical. You don't lose any of the zealots that you send 1 by 1. So you still have 5 by the end. You just apply pressure in the meantime, cause drones to be pulled, etc.
honestly, you may have the grasp but you definitely fail to make your point. Reading your first comment (accentuations by me):
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns. (...)
I remember using a very similar build way back in the beta/early WoL. You'd open 2 gate zealot into expansion, however I always tried a lame attempt at a Phoenix DT follow up with not so good results. It is quite fun to play these types of builds though. Seems quite common today that zergs go speedling -> hydra -> hydra/swarmhost/corruptor, which makes me afraid to use these types of builds anymore.
On December 06 2014 08:42 Ignorant prodigy wrote:
7-2 so far on #dreampool
i lost on metal.. that should be obvious.. and akilon.. but it was late game when i lost.
the 7 wins weren't close.. just sayin'.. pretty viable at my level..
ranked top 5 dia currently.
Speaking of statistics, I don't think it is a good way of proving viability of a build. This season I have used the the following build for my PvZ:
1. Go the fastest Dark Shrine you can (Get 1 stalker to keep overlords out) 2. Add 2 more gates (3 total) 3. Get your expansion 4. Warp in 3 DTs 5. Select DTs, right click enemy hatchery 6. Collect win
Obscure builds tend to do well on the ladder, especially in PvZ. As long as you have a plan anything that is early game reliant seems to work. I think it comes down to the reasons why you play the game, is it just for fun and to do crazy stuff, if so anything is viable. Or is it to get better at the game? The big difference I feel is that if you play to actually get better, then you probably do not want to play builds that rely solely on the fact that your opponent doesn't know how to respond, for example like the good old DT build I use.
I hope more people starts using fun builds to spice things up!
I used to do something similar for a while in masters. I would move out with 4 zealots and 1 at the wall, when the zealots are half way across the map I would scout the natural with a hidden probe to gauge the response and would either go home or attack and sac the zealots in exchange for a late over-reaction or a queen and some drone mining time, etc.
Then I would either start a nexus at home or tech to stargate (I've done it for a long time, so went through a lot of variations.)
I think intelligent reaction from the zerg sets you squarely behind. One cool thing you can do though to try and put on more pressure and avoid having your zealots picked off the way Fabled said they would is chrono the first zealot, which causes your 2 gateways to build zealots synchronously, so that they can travel in pairs and then you can move out earlier.
I feel like win rates are a good way to measure if a build is successful. I mean.. if I lost 68% of the time you feel like that shows it's not successful?
at the minimum i guess you could say it's viable if it gets you ahead or at least even when it hits mid-game.... and if you lose past that point it's not the openers fault.. which i could agree with. At my level I feel like it does just that.
Also.. I have played plenty of diamond friends who know exactly what I do in PvZ.. and they still don't get a substantial lead. yes.. your natural is delayed.. but so is their 3rd.. and they're sacking larva and resources very early to not take damage.. it's a very thin line zergs have to walk.. and I don't personally feel like zergs come out as ahead (if at all) as most of you are thinking
One cool thing you can do though to try and put on more pressure and avoid having your zealots picked off the way Fabled said ]
this isn't a problem of this build.. this is a problem of Fabled's build but with my build the zealots come out just as you suggest.. 2 by 2 for the final 4.. i just disagree with sending them. It's easier to micro against and kill 1 or 2 zealots than it is 5.
On December 08 2014 01:12 JulDraGoN wrote: Obscure builds tend to do well on the ladder, especially in PvZ. As long as you have a plan anything that is early game reliant seems to work.
On December 08 2014 01:12 JulDraGoN wrote: Obscure builds tend to do well on the ladder, especially in PvZ. As long as you have a plan anything that is early game reliant seems to work.
On December 08 2014 02:44 Ignorant prodigy wrote: I feel like win rates are a good way to measure if a build is successful. I mean.. if I lost 68% of the time you feel like that shows it's not successful?
It depends who you're playing against. Obscure PvZ builds have a place, because it will push you ahead against a zerg who overreacts or underreacts. But a proper reaction will put you behind.
Winrates on their own mean nothing, I could have a 100% winrate just by four-gating in every match up until diamond or so.
We're simply telling you that this build will end up setting you behind. The pooling of zealots is something that will definitely set you back. Pooling zealots on a 2 gate build means that the zerg can hover their overlord on top of your gateways and see if anything is being produced, which means that they always know exactly how many zealots you have coming.
The weakness of all 2 gate zealot aggression builds is that as aggressor you never know ahead of time whether you should continue committing to zealots or not. By limiting yourself to building a certain limited amount of them (such as 3 or 4 or 5 or 7,) you are basically saying to the zerg "Here, I'm going to build x amount of zealots, you will see how many I build ahead of time, if you react well, you WILL end up being significantly ahead, the ball is in your court."
That's not a good mindset to go into a PvZ with because the more certainty you give a zerg in the early stages of the game the longer it will take you to catch up to him economically.
at the minimum i guess you could say it's viable if it gets you ahead or at least even when it hits mid-game.... and if you lose past that point it's not the openers fault.. which i could agree with. At my level I feel like it does just that.
That's what we're saying it won't get you even or ahead against a good reaction, it can't possibly do so because it is too easily telegraphed.
Also.. I have played plenty of diamond friends who know exactly what I do in PvZ.. and they still don't get a substantial lead.
Then they're not asking the right question. They should be asking "How can I invest as little resources as late as possible in order to be able to kill 5 zealots just in time to reach my base if I know exactly when they leave. That's a very easy question for a zerg to answer. One annoying thing they can do is brings 2 zerglings after your zealots leave and camp your natural so that you can't get it until after you get a stalker or mothership core and that's an investment of only 1 larva and 50 minerals.
yes.. your natural is delayed.. but so is their 3rd.. and they're sacking larva and resources very early to not take damage.. it's a very thin line zergs have to walk.. and I don't personally feel like zergs come out as ahead (if at all) as most of you are thinking
Not very early, you're pooling zealots. They will get an overlord on top of your 2 gateways as you move out and they will know everything about your gas and cybernetics timings.
this isn't a problem of this build.. this is a problem of Fabled's build but with my build the zealots come out just as you suggest.. 2 by 2 for the final 4.. i just disagree with sending them. It's easier to micro against and kill 1 or 2 zealots than it is 5.
Well the reason fabled brought up the possibility of getting your zealots picked off is because POOLING gives your opponent a huge advantage if he is able to quickly answer the question of "how do I kill 5 zealots." By pooling your zealots you're giving your opponent time to build drones out of 2 hatcheries and not have to react as early.
By sending zealots earlier you're forcing your opponent to react earlier.
If you move out with the first 2 zealots your opponent will have to ask himself 2 questions:
1) How do I deal with 2 zealots by investing as little as possible.
2) How do I deal with 5 zealots by investing as little as possible after having already prepared for 2 zealots earlier.
Clearly this puts the zerg in a more difficult situation than simply skipping to step 2 immediately without the 5 zealots arriving any earlier than they would have had they left the base 2 at a time.
On December 08 2014 02:44 Ignorant prodigy wrote: I feel like win rates are a good way to measure if a build is successful. I mean.. if I lost 68% of the time you feel like that shows it's not successful?
at the minimum i guess you could say it's viable if it gets you ahead or at least even when it hits mid-game.... and if you lose past that point it's not the openers fault.. which i could agree with. At my level I feel like it does just that.
Also.. I have played plenty of diamond friends who know exactly what I do in PvZ.. and they still don't get a substantial lead. yes.. your natural is delayed.. but so is their 3rd.. and they're sacking larva and resources very early to not take damage.. it's a very thin line zergs have to walk.. and I don't personally feel like zergs come out as ahead (if at all) as most of you are thinking
One cool thing you can do though to try and put on more pressure and avoid having your zealots picked off the way Fabled said ]
this isn't a problem of this build.. this is a problem of Fabled's build but with my build the zealots come out just as you suggest.. 2 by 2 for the final 4.. i just disagree with sending them. It's easier to micro against and kill 1 or 2 zealots than it is 5.
There are no benefits though of not sending them. You're saying it's "easier" but by being "easier" it defeats the entire purpose of putting on aggression early on and trying to punish them. You don't make any valid points on why not to at least try to pressure.
Both builds accomplish the same thing of having 5 zealots at the enemy (well, in your case you choose to cut at 5). The only difference is yours doesn't force the zerg at any point to pull drones or drag down queens off creep. For the purpose of being safe... in a build that's meant to be more aggressive than typical. That's the point I'm trying to make.
One annoying thing they can do is brings 2 zerglings after your zealots leave and camp your natural so that you can't get it until after you get a stalker or mothership core and that's an investment of only 1 larva and 50 minerals.
2 lings does jack squat vs 5 zealots...????
you realize my natural nexus is going down right as the zealots leave the base right? did you watch any of the vods? I'm not ever waiting for a stalker or msc to kill 2 lings.. sorry 2 lings are not ever delaying my natural with this build.. in 60+ games of this build I have never not once got my natural up.. the VAST majority of zergs see the 2 gates and watch the zealots leave my base... yet i magically win 68% or more of my games.. I'm not that good and playing from behind I promise you
you guys can argue sending the zealots earlier till your face is blue.. I simply disagree with your reasoning
One annoying thing they can do is brings 2 zerglings after your zealots leave and camp your natural so that you can't get it until after you get a stalker or mothership core and that's an investment of only 1 larva and 50 minerals.
2 lings does jack squat vs 5 zealots...????
you realize my natural nexus is going down right as the zealots leave the base right? did you watch any of the vods? I'm not ever waiting for a stalker or msc to kill 2 lings.. sorry 2 lings are not ever delaying my natural with this build.. in 60+ games of this build I have never not once got my natural up.. the VAST majority of zergs see the 2 gates and watch the zealots leave my base... yet i magically win 68% or more of my games.. I'm not that good and playing from behind I promise you
you guys can argue sending the zealots earlier till your face is blue.. I simply disagree with your reasoning
So you catch 2 lings with 5 zealots? Sounds like a good use of your pooled up zealots...
Quite frankly, apparently the vast majority of zergs you're playing suck. Play against Fabled or someone else who plays zerg and you'll see that you fall far behind with no feats of control or micro from your opponent. Just an intelligent response.
yes.. thats it.. the only explanation is more than half of the diamond zergs i play suck... eureka
obviously the only way to make this right.. is i'd have to play someone on here who knows exactly how to play against it and know the exact build order to prove it's a build worth using.. riiiight
On December 08 2014 14:50 Ignorant prodigy wrote: yes.. thats it.. the only explanation is more than half of the diamond zergs i play suck... eureka
obviously the only way to make this right.. is i'd have to play someone on here who knows exactly how to play against it and know the exact build order to prove it's a build worth using.. riiiight
I'm not saying it's not a build worth using... I'm saying that it's a build that fully puts the ball in zerg's court for whether or not you end up ahead, and the near worst case scenario for you which sets the zerg squarely ahead isn't achieved with some incredible feats of zerg micro, but simply by making the right units at the right time.
edit: it's up to you to decide whether it's worth using. I'm just warning you what you're gonna run in against when you play against more experienced zerg
name an aggressive build that doesnt require your opponent to make the right units at the right time?
I mean.. 1 base blink builds still exists at the pro level.. yet if scouted and prepared for people still do it... are you going to hop into those build threads and do your public service too?
On December 08 2014 14:50 Ignorant prodigy wrote: yes.. thats it.. the only explanation is more than half of the diamond zergs i play suck... eureka
obviously the only way to make this right.. is i'd have to play someone on here who knows exactly how to play against it and know the exact build order to prove it's a build worth using.. riiiight
Well, I mean... yeah...
The point I've made is you're completely relying on someone having no idea what they're actually seeing. Your build falls flat on its face vs. anyone that knows what they're doing (most Diamond players do not).
You're sooo insanely far behind, you can't do anything vs a proper response AND you let yourself get scouted. It's not even a cheese that hides anything. At least with a pressure build it doesn't matter if they scout you and know how to respond, you can arguably try to get something done (still not well).
You're just trying an outdated build and playing it suboptimally at that. You're relying on opponents botching a response that they've scouted, and that's the problem.
On December 08 2014 15:19 Ignorant prodigy wrote: it's a diamond ladder build...which was clearly stated
Which means nothing in itself. I could pull out 20 different builds that work in Diamond. When pointing out a crucial flaw, you just dig your head in the hand and say "nahhhh" and "clearly this build DOES work."
On December 08 2014 15:09 Ignorant prodigy wrote: name an aggressive build that doesnt require your opponent to make the right units at the right time?
I mean.. 1 base blink builds still exists at the pro level.. yet if scouted and prepared for people still do it... are you going to hop into those build threads and do your public service too?
Other aggressive builds that are used have enough nuance in them that you can expect your opponent to miss something or not scout or to miscontrol or you get some kind of positional advantage such as denying creep, etc.
Your build literally consists of 5 zealots which can't even hold map control because if they are still in the middle of the map when your opponent's ling speed finishes he can either surround and kill your zealots or defend and run-by at the same time.
Your build can not realistically rely on not being scouted. When it gets scouted it gets scouted COMPLETELY, because double gate and zealots means delayed gas and cyber which means that the overlord can camp your gateways and constantly check for more production, so he knows EXACTLY how many zealots are coming.
if you think this game is so simple that you can build 5 units early on in the game, with no attempt to hide them or your future tech from your opponent and somehow force enough of a reaction in order to get consistently ahead, then you're mistaken. The game isn't that easy. If your build actually did what you claim it does literally everybody would use it.
edit:
"Diamond build." What does that even mean? This would be like me creating a thread on drone rushing and claiming unironically that it's a legitimate build.
Sure, it's "legitimate," but it doesn't do a lot of the things that you claim it does and that's what I'm pointing out.
I can't design a build for players in masters or GM because I am not masters or GM.. I was just stating.. like a broken record.. that according to my record.. and the examples ive shown.. it works at diamond level..
You've claimed that it sets you even or ahead repeatedly. On some occasions you've appended it with "at my level." You also said that the line that zergs have to walk to defend successfully is pretty thin, which is a vague statement that's hard to contradict absolutely, but it should be noted hat this "thin line," is significantly thicker than that for most aggressive builds used in the current meta.
I don't believe that "at my level" is a particularly sound footnote, especially in this case. It may be sound if the build required godlike micro in order to hold successfully. For example someone can say "ZvT, baneling-ling is really strong at my level," because it's notoriously difficult to effectively split bio and lower level players simply don't have the necessary micro. Strategically, however to say something works "at my level" is kind of silly, especially when it requires a single tier of guaranteed scouting and response. Because of this a player who is actually worse than diamond due to some insight, or even luck could respond in a way that will set him ahead, because such responses are in no way impressive feats of skill. So "at my level" really gets translated to "if the person doesn't know how to react to it" which is a footnote that very well deserves a follow-up footnote that if your opponent DOES know how to react to it you will be convincingly behind.
On December 08 2014 15:31 Ignorant prodigy wrote: I can't design a build for players in masters or GM because I am not masters or GM.. I was just stating.. like a broken record.. that according to my record.. and the examples ive shown.. it works at diamond level..
i'm not sure what you want me to say?
The point is that you post a build with flaws, people better than you comment on what makes it flawed, and as mentioned, you dig yourself a hole in the sand saying "la la la I disagree, and I have proof to show it works."
The reason I came off as more aggressive is because people come out of nowhere all the time, trying to name builds after themselves that quite frankly suck. It's not limited to you, but there's really no point in teaching other people to play in a way that is just so... bad.
lmao the build is called 'the ignorant build'.. and you're in here attacking the name and saying it's bad... there is a little irony there lol
The reason I came off as more aggressive is because people come out of nowhere all the time, trying to name builds after themselves that quite frankly suck. It's not limited to you, but there's really no point in teaching other people to play in a way that is just so... bad.
man you sound like an elitist ..
we should try and get TL to have a build committee.. you can be on it.. you can judge whether builds are bad or good regardless of win rates and vods/replays... just simply by your opinion... you dont even have to try them and only those build you deem worthy will be allowed to be posted on here.
On December 08 2014 15:53 Ignorant prodigy wrote: whaaa.....?
what is a sound footnote exactly?
your opinion? is that it?.. ok lets go with that
No, a sound a footnote is one that holds any water objectively.
I'm glad that you are able to conclude from 9 games that your build works, at "your level" whatever that even means, but quite frankly, I have doubts about that because I don't trust conclusions that players at "your level" can draw from having played 9 games.
That being said, I don't even need to mistrust your conclusions based on "your level" because I know for a fact that you're wrong. It's a build that's been used a lot before. I have used the build a lot myself even way after it has gone out of style and it certainly can yield an advantage against some poor response, but good responses crush it.
You end up arriving with your void-ray to your opponent's third and it gets defend by a couple of queens, because there's no way to hide the stargate (especially the way you placed it at the wall in the 1 game that I saw from your vod.)
And you realize you have no map presence.
Your stargate tech can't kill any drones because it's so late. You can't afford any sentries without being getting stuck on stargate (which will lose you the game to a fast lair hydraling attack like you've mentioned in the OP.)
Your warpgate is late and you only have 2 gateways so you can't put on any pressure to keep the zerg from droning on 3 bases.
If you decide to not get the sentries, there's a good chance your opponent will max on roaches super fast (ala Stephano in wings,) and you'll never be able to take your third and then you lose from there.
If you do get sentries and don't get crushed by hydras your AOE tech is super delayed and you probably don't have blink to deal with a muta switch from 3 bases (because after stargate you're practically forced to rush to colossus.)
At that point your best bet becomes some colossus-voidray all in with enough sentries just for guardian shield and a mix of zealot/stalker, which is a guaranteed loss against a muta base-trade and a very likely loss against a standard composition unless the zerg takes a ridiculously bad fight.
On December 08 2014 15:55 Ignorant prodigy wrote: lmao the build is called 'the ignorant build'.. and you're in here attacking the name and saying it's bad... there is a little irony there lol
...I don't see the Irony at all, except for maybe the fact that you are ignorant to why people are disagreeing with you, your ID is ignorant, and the build is called ignorant.
On December 08 2014 15:55 Ignorant prodigy wrote: lmao the build is called 'the ignorant build'.. and you're in here attacking the name and saying it's bad... there is a little irony there lol
The reason I came off as more aggressive is because people come out of nowhere all the time, trying to name builds after themselves that quite frankly suck. It's not limited to you, but there's really no point in teaching other people to play in a way that is just so... bad.
man you sound like an elitist ..
we should try and get TL to have a build committee.. you can be on it.. you can judge whether builds are bad or good regardless of win rates and vods/replays... just simply by your opinion... you dont even have to try them and only those build you deem worthy will be allowed to be posted on here.
btw thanks.. I'm up to 5 pages woot
If you're saying I don't think Diamonds should post their own builds stating "they work" (caveat, diamond only) without being receptive of feedback, then yes, you're correct.
Theorycrafting is another story, but that's clearly not what you're doing.
This build achieve nothing but crossing fingers and exepecting a bad reaction, any other early pressure build like for example a 4-Gate pressure will give you more micro potential and better follow-up. I'll not write more because everything has been discuss before, Moreover, it feels like you are not open to feedback.
I'll just add that being top 5 Diamond in your league doesn't mean you are top diamond level because point doesn't reflect your skill before master/GM but more like you activity IMO but that's something else and it is off topic.
i'm open to feedback, just having a spirited argument
the logic behind pooling the zealots is considered bad by a few here. You may not like the build or the reasons why I made the decisions I made.. which is fine.. but it doesn't stop it from being fun and setting me up to win more than I lose. I can only play people that match up to me on ladder so I don't see why there's so many comments 'this wont work if you opponent is any good' etc.. if you feel that way that's ok but it's not a matter of me thinking it works.. it DOES work .. for me atleast... and I wanted to share so others could try it and see if it'd work for them
I pool the zealots for a couple reasons 1. when the 5th zealots finishes I can usually start my natural nexus as they leave.. it allows me to get it up w/o fear of lings delaying or denying it. If they chose to run by with lings (which happens a lot) I can split them up and defend and attack... I also build a 6th zealot sometimes judging on how many lings they have. Its takes a little while to kill 5 zealots which gives me time to get a cannon up. when they eventually die it's 2 base to 2 base and I have a stargate on the way. Most games I have a worker lead. If they chose few lings and queens then more often than not they don't have speed.. which means they can't pressure me at all and I can often take my 3rd relatively early
2. sending them in single file IMO makes it easier for zergs to kill them. Part of the build is a judgment when the zealots get there.. if they committed a lot to defense then saving them is often worth it. If you lose them early on by sending them 1 by 1 then you've effectively lost that option
It seems to be a common theme that it's relatively easy to stop the 5 zealots from doing damage and giving the zergs a lead. I don't know how to dispute that other than say I win with the build.. so that's why it may sound like i'm not open to feedback.. but if it were easy.. then why do so many have issues? by saying it's because they're diamond is a reason.. but when I started the build I said I win with this at diamond and low masters.. so that should be a given? I didn't claim it'd work mid-high masters, GM, or pro level...
I am also not denying there's a level of coin flippy-ness to it.. if they react well or rush hydra and muta this build has its issues.. but I stated that in the very first post
I'm glad that you are able to conclude from 9 games that your build works, at "your level" whatever that even means, but quite frankly, I have doubts about that because I don't trust conclusions that players at "your level" can draw from having played 9 games.
I've used this build for almost a year now.. I've only had 9 games this season.... but I probably have about 50-60 games with this build. So the conclusion isn't after just 9 games.. it's far more than that
To be fair, there's a huge difference between a build that wins you games on ladder, and one that is actually good.
For the millionth time, i've had stupid amounts of success (as in losing 2-3 games out of dozens) with every sort of 4gate>dt pvz build you could possibly imagine, at a level that is much higher than diamond, over a period of over 2 years. It doesn't make those builds good per se, it's just that non standard gimmicky play on ladder (or in a clan war if you need to snipe a better player) is always going to be very succesful.
None in the world could open with this (or with the tasteless build) every game in a bo3/5/7 and win with it against an opponent of reasonably similar skill, so calling builds like this viable is a stretch at best. Ladder is a very different environment than pros playing in a tournament, and frankly, people tend to obsess over wether something is viable or not too much. On ladder you can win with pretty much anything.
At the end of the day, wierd styles that work on ladder are bad per se, and in fact they are extremely fun to play, but that doesn't make them legitimate/viable/whatever.
The 1 vod i saw of your play (the first game of one of the videos of your stream) your opponent literally built absolutely nothing before zealots got there.
One really safe way to defend this is to wait until the zealots move out and when they do start a single spine in range of both your nat hatch and your ramp and place both queens at ramp to block while making zerglings up to 10-14.
1 spine and 14 lings cost as much 5 zealots, but it defends this attack really safely, with no micro required.
In practice however, the spine isn't needed can be generally just replaced with a third queen which the zerg was gonna get anyways
But until the zealots move out, the zerg can make nothing but drones.
The reason we're telling you that pooling the zealots is bad is because if you wait with them in your base your opponent doesn't have to start reacting immediately, so they can just build drones.
If you were to move out with your first zealots then they would have start building lings or a spine or pull drones earlier, that way you start hurting their economy earlier. All you need to do is micro a bit and be conservative with your zealots until the last ones arrive, they will still arrive there at the same time as if you had left your base with all 5 at the same time. It's basically guaranteed to do extra economic damage at the cost of just a little micro.
However, even so if you DO rally your zealots right away a good response will still set you behind.
Here's a guy saying "I am diamond and this is a thing I do on the ladder and I win with it" and everyone's in here with a stick up their ass calling the build bad/not viable/etc.
1) He is in Diamond. He's not advocating that PartinG should use this to win GSL. He's just mentioning that it works FOR HIM in Diamond and sharing it in case people want to copy it.
2) In Diamond, the build is viable. In StarCraft there is one objective: to win the game. This build achieves this objective at a high enough rate that Ignorant is satisfied with it. Saying that it's not viable is pretty much the dumbest thing you can say. It wins games at like a 70% rate at his MMR. It is viable. This is not for debate really.
3) Finally, it's completely out of the meta, and anything weird is likely to throw off the opponent. Anyone claiming "it's easy if you react properly" is wasting their breath. Anything is easily countered "if you react properly." That is the definition of reacting properly. Builds that are outside the meta make it harder to react properly because you're less used to reacting that particular way. This is science.
TLDR: In DIAMOND, Ignorant consistently wins games with this build and has fun doing so. So don't hate.
PS - A GM player we know also tried this in GM and won with it a few times. FYI.
On December 09 2014 05:12 Kiarip wrote: The 1 vod i saw of your play (the first game of one of the videos of your stream) your opponent literally built absolutely nothing before zealots got there.
One really safe way to defend this is to wait until the zealots move out and when they do start a single spine in range of both your nat hatch and your ramp and place both queens at ramp to block while making zerglings up to 10-14.
1 spine and 14 lings cost as much 5 zealots, but it defends this attack really safely, with no micro required.
In practice however, the spine isn't needed can be generally just replaced with a third queen which the zerg was gonna get anyways
But until the zealots move out, the zerg can make nothing but drones.
The reason we're telling you that pooling the zealots is bad is because if you wait with them in your base your opponent doesn't have to start reacting immediately, so they can just build drones.
If you were to move out with your first zealots then they would have start building lings or a spine or pull drones earlier, that way you start hurting their economy earlier. All you need to do is micro a bit and be conservative with your zealots until the last ones arrive, they will still arrive there at the same time as if you had left your base with all 5 at the same time. It's basically guaranteed to do extra economic damage at the cost of just a little micro.
However, even so if you DO rally your zealots right away a good response will still set you behind.
i hear you.. i do.. but it's not a given the zergs are ahead. your reaction as a zerg is not the same as most zergs i face.. keep in mind you know exactly what the follow up is.. you also know im still making probes and you know there's only 2 gateways the zergs on ladder don't know exactly what they're facing.. they're working on limited info.
I just checked sc2gears I went back to May. I'm 32-17 doing this build (65%) (keep in mind sc2gears only counts the first 6 structures)
zergs built 2 spines 8 times.. they're 4-4.. this response shares the best record for zerg at 50% zergs built 1 spine 14 times.. they're 7-7.. sharing again the best record with 50% zergs built 3 spines 5 times.. they're 2-3 zergs have gone banelings 2 times.. they're 1-1 zergs went fast roaches 20 times.. they only won 2 games.. they lost 18 times when going roach warren within the first 6 structures.. this is by far the most common response zergs go some variant of 2 base lair 9 times..they're 4-5 zergs go pool first 19 times.. they're 8-11 zergs go gas first, then pool 10 times...they're 1-9
there's some overlap between stats there. for example sometimes they go a single spine and roach warren..etc but these stuck out to me
I do want to point out that if you judge by win rate*..(which some disagree with) not one zerg build gives a significant advantage.. the best they've done is 50% according to sc2gears.. which doesn't provide units in the multi-replay analysis build screen
On December 09 2014 06:03 DinoMight wrote: This argument is stupid.
Here's a guy saying "I am diamond and this is a thing I do on the ladder and I win with it" and everyone's in here with a stick up their ass calling the build bad/not viable/etc.
1) He is in Diamond. He's not advocating that PartinG should use this to win GSL. He's just mentioning that it works FOR HIM in Diamond and sharing it in case people want to copy it.
2) In Diamond, the build is viable. In StarCraft there is one objective: to win the game. This build achieves this objective at a high enough rate that Ignorant is satisfied with it. Saying that it's not viable is pretty much the dumbest thing you can say. It wins games at like a 70% rate at his MMR. It is viable. This is not for debate really.
3) Finally, it's completely out of the meta, and anything weird is likely to throw off the opponent. Anyone claiming "it's easy if you react properly" is wasting their breath. Anything is easily countered "if you react properly." That is the definition of reacting properly. Builds that are outside the meta make it harder to react properly because you're less used to reacting that particular way. This is science.
TLDR: In DIAMOND, Ignorant consistently wins games with this build and has fun doing so. So don't hate.
PS - A GM player we know also tried this in GM and won with it a few times. FYI.
I mean its a flawed version of a good build. Players that lose to poorly designed builds that are aggressive, also lose to well designed builds that are aggressive. If you're happy in diamond, it frankly doesn't matter. It's not that the scoreboard gives you bonus points for how far ahead you were when you won.
On December 09 2014 00:23 Ignorant prodigy wrote: i'm open to feedback, just having a spirited argument
the logic behind pooling the zealots is considered bad by a few here. You may not like the build or the reasons why I made the decisions I made.. which is fine.. but it doesn't stop it from being fun and setting me up to win more than I lose. I can only play people that match up to me on ladder so I don't see why there's so many comments 'this wont work if you opponent is any good' etc.. if you feel that way that's ok but it's not a matter of me thinking it works.. it DOES work .. for me atleast... and I wanted to share so others could try it and see if it'd work for them
I pool the zealots for a couple reasons 1. when the 5th zealots finishes I can usually start my natural nexus as they leave.. it allows me to get it up w/o fear of lings delaying or denying it. If they chose to run by with lings (which happens a lot) I can split them up and defend and attack... I also build a 6th zealot sometimes judging on how many lings they have. Its takes a little while to kill 5 zealots which gives me time to get a cannon up. when they eventually die it's 2 base to 2 base and I have a stargate on the way. Most games I have a worker lead. If they chose few lings and queens then more often than not they don't have speed.. which means they can't pressure me at all and I can often take my 3rd relatively early
2. sending them in single file IMO makes it easier for zergs to kill them. Part of the build is a judgment when the zealots get there.. if they committed a lot to defense then saving them is often worth it. If you lose them early on by sending them 1 by 1 then you've effectively lost that option
It seems to be a common theme that it's relatively easy to stop the 5 zealots from doing damage and giving the zergs a lead. I don't know how to dispute that other than say I win with the build.. so that's why it may sound like i'm not open to feedback.. but if it were easy.. then why do so many have issues? by saying it's because they're diamond is a reason.. but when I started the build I said I win with this at diamond and low masters.. so that should be a given? I didn't claim it'd work mid-high masters, GM, or pro level...
I am also not denying there's a level of coin flippy-ness to it.. if they react well or rush hydra and muta this build has its issues.. but I stated that in the very first post
To be perfectly honest, it's fruitless to continue on the theorycrafting behind pooling 5 zealots since you've already admitted that its the worse way to play it. It will work with inferior pressure because you're playing diamonds and they're making mistakes against an unorthodox build. If you wanted to develop the build into something you could mix into higher leagues, I think you'd have let on by now. It does save us a lot of breath talking about why an earlier attack focusing on saving zealots is the better path, knowing that you're unable and unwilling to deviate from your preferred transition to expansion and expansion defense.
On December 09 2014 06:03 DinoMight wrote: This argument is stupid.
Here's a guy saying "I am diamond and this is a thing I do on the ladder and I win with it" and everyone's in here with a stick up their ass calling the build bad/not viable/etc.
1) He is in Diamond. He's not advocating that PartinG should use this to win GSL. He's just mentioning that it works FOR HIM in Diamond and sharing it in case people want to copy it.
2) In Diamond, the build is viable. In StarCraft there is one objective: to win the game. This build achieves this objective at a high enough rate that Ignorant is satisfied with it. Saying that it's not viable is pretty much the dumbest thing you can say. It wins games at like a 70% rate at his MMR. It is viable. This is not for debate really.
3) Finally, it's completely out of the meta, and anything weird is likely to throw off the opponent. Anyone claiming "it's easy if you react properly" is wasting their breath. Anything is easily countered "if you react properly." That is the definition of reacting properly. Builds that are outside the meta make it harder to react properly because you're less used to reacting that particular way. This is science.
TLDR: In DIAMOND, Ignorant consistently wins games with this build and has fun doing so. So don't hate.
PS - A GM player we know also tried this in GM and won with it a few times. FYI.
This forum would be terrible if every other player posted a build that worked for them at their level but was quite clearly flawed otherwise.
Theorycrafting on its strengths and trying to improve it is one thing. Posting a build that works in a lower league, is completely reliant on a poor reaction (as in, you WILL lose if your opponent reacts properly, which makes it a gamble given they can completely scout you), and trying to defend it is another thing.
Everything isn't easily countered "if you react properly." That's why we have standard builds in the first place. The majority of builds require you to outplay your opponent to win, which is entirely different than reacting properly. Reacting "properly" to a 1rax reaper expand in ZvT doesn't guarantee a win whatsoever.
This PvZ opener on the other hand is a completely different matter - any proper reaction should result in nearly an instant loss for the user of the build, regardless of how they decide to play it, after the initial execution of the build. That is the point that is trying to be made.
Someone in Gold could also post that they have a cannon rush build where they start a pylon super far away from the opponent base and will creep like 5-6 cannons towards their main and catch their opponent off guard. It may work for them all the time in their PvX matchup. Doesn't mean it's not a terrible version of a cannon rush. Having a thread like that would quite simply be a waste of time.
OK I just watched the replay. You posted a replay of the build I was advocating! All you've done is prove the build I posted is viable (which I maintain it's not), not that your version is...
1) The build I said was better was 2gates before second pylon, which is what happens in the replay. 2) He builds both gateways at the natural, as I said. You even replied stating NOT to build your gateways at the natural. 3) Even more specifically, he attempts to do the 13gate/15gate that I specifically mention in my build, but due to chatting with his opponent, drops it at 16. Screen shot below. 4) As mentioned, he doesn't pool 5 zealots. He only pools 3, which in fact does not accomplish anything more than simply sending 1 by 1 as I would advocate. 5) The Zerg opens almost as suboptimally as possible with a gasless 14 pool. This is probably one of the worst openers a Zerg can even do, and the build you absolutely pray for if the Toss 2gates. Late enough pool you can't pressure the natural, but also not a hatch first. And he only does it because the Protoss GM tells him not to hatch first (the most ideal build vs this). So you're on even footing vs this Zerg opener but behind vs the vast majority of other ones. 6) The Zerg played terribly, continuing to build lings after you expanded and the Zealots died? He also was reacting to what the Protoss was telling him to do. It was nearly a setup situation for failure.
TL:DR - the Protoss GM in the match you posted used the build that I posted, not your build.
EDIT: In response to the below, where you ask "did you even read the build"
On December 01 2014 15:25 FabledIntegral wrote: This is countered if the Zerg player builders 8 lings and ignores the zealots and just kills the reinforcing spawns.
I'm high masters and used to use a 2gate opening quite a bit, until the reinforcement cutoff strat really boned me over. Because slowlings are so much faster than zealots, they can chase away reinforcing zelaots until they group up. This buys the Zerg ample time to defend the initial zealots at it's hatch with 3 queens and a single spine. Then you're notably far behind due to very delayed expansion, while Zerg's is already up.
There's also little reason to build your second gateway so late - you can afford 13 gate and second gate at 15. Admittedly I don't probe scout, but I can't imagine it would make that much of a difference. I also built the gates at the nat in order to shorten the rush distance and start the wall early - if Zerg has early speed, he can delay any expo with mass ling if you build in the main.
what reinforcing spawns? did you even read the build?
there is no 'reinforcing'.. it's basically pool 5 zealots then go.. i don't send them as they spawn. also building the gate at the natural is a bad idea IMO.. if they early pool (with or w/o speed) you could get fucked by losing the pylon etc.. the distance to pull probe to protect it is very far and not worth it. This isn't a 'proxy' 2 gate in your natural.. your build sounds more like a zealot rush of some kind
walling your main ramp is essential and saved me a few times from early pools.
On December 09 2014 06:03 DinoMight wrote: This argument is stupid.
Here's a guy saying "I am diamond and this is a thing I do on the ladder and I win with it" and everyone's in here with a stick up their ass calling the build bad/not viable/etc.
1) He is in Diamond. He's not advocating that PartinG should use this to win GSL. He's just mentioning that it works FOR HIM in Diamond and sharing it in case people want to copy it.
2) In Diamond, the build is viable. In StarCraft there is one objective: to win the game. This build achieves this objective at a high enough rate that Ignorant is satisfied with it. Saying that it's not viable is pretty much the dumbest thing you can say. It wins games at like a 70% rate at his MMR. It is viable. This is not for debate really.
3) Finally, it's completely out of the meta, and anything weird is likely to throw off the opponent. Anyone claiming "it's easy if you react properly" is wasting their breath. Anything is easily countered "if you react properly." That is the definition of reacting properly. Builds that are outside the meta make it harder to react properly because you're less used to reacting that particular way. This is science.
TLDR: In DIAMOND, Ignorant consistently wins games with this build and has fun doing so. So don't hate.
PS - A GM player we know also tried this in GM and won with it a few times. FYI.
This is all good and true. TeamLiquid has always been a place where people come for high level information. It is the way it has always been. There are plenty of other places to discuss low level builds and strategies. Does this mean you shouldn't post low level builds? Of course not, go ahead.
My point is though that the poster needs to be aware that when the words such as "viable" gets thrown around, on TeamLiquid it means for high level play. No matter how you try to qualify it (viable at diamond, viable at bronze, viable for people with three arms).
The responses will always be from people looking at it from high level and tournament level play. This is something you have to expect when posting on this glorious strategy forum. And that is a good thing, people discussing your builds looking at it from the highest of level of play. Just imagine how much faster you can optimize and evolve a build with some help rather than doing it solely on your own.
Now, if the OP had been a little bit more open minded about the changes suggested I don't think he would have gotten so many angry words from other posters. For example, if he tried some of the suggested changes out, added them to the OP as variations or suggestions.
Just stating that it works in diamond and the build is perfect for that reason, is a strange mindset to have. It will get you a lot of frowns and steer the thread in a direction away from the strategy discussions, just like these posts.
Extracts from the Forum guidelines regarding guides:
Guides are complete, detailed, and comprehensive advice for a specific strategy or tactic that can be generally executed and is not situational. Guides are held up against the highest standards of quality in this forum. They are the most valuable resource for the average player. Writing a good guide may yield you wide appreciation and e-fame, but comes with a lot of work and responsibility.
A guide is always evolving as the game is being more and more understood and as people find counter strategies. As the author it is your job to keep the guide up to date. If other players find weaknesses or suggest changes to the build, it is your job to alter it accordingly. If you disagree, fall back to Rule No 1: Post a replay or some other form of proof that the criticism isn’t valid.
Diamond is the top 20% of StarCraft 2 players. This means that at least 80% of StarCraft 2 players can benefit from this guide.
Not everyone is interested in being a pro and/or playing like one. Obviously some people do. In that case - it's fine, they don't have to do this build. I think Ignorant has been very clear that this works for him and at his level.
There's an argument to be made that posting certain pro builds is pointless because they're actually bad for most players. PartinG's blink builds are USELESS TO ME because they require ungodly micro that even in Diamond (top 20% of StarCraft players) I don't come remotely close to. Pooling the Zealots may be bad at the pro level. But it makes the build easier to execute, and it potentially surprises them more if they scouted poorly. It makes sense at a Diamond level.
Sure I understand that there is a "correct" way to play the game at the pro level and a "standard" that is widely accepted... but I don't think that everyone cares about that to be honest.
The guys in Gold struggling with PvZ will look at this build and say "you know what, that sounds doable, let me try it."
On December 09 2014 17:55 Teoita wrote: Calm down everyone. If you don't keep the conversation in this thread civil i'll have to close it.
don't close it
agree to disagree on the zealots is all I can say. I didn't honestly think that tiny detail would generate so much negativity. the concept of the build is what matters, if the player decides sending the zealots and building his structures at his natural-then it's still essentially the same build, just executed slightly different for different reasons.
any more on the subject is just beating a dead horse
As a protoss in plat who was consistantly losing every single PvZ I switched to this build and now I'm doing a LOT better.
Note, I didn't read about this and then switch, I just wanted to be more aggressive because watching my replays, zergs were being SUPER greedy which ended in me dieing horribly.
The difference in my build is that I get my gates a bit sooner (2 gates on 12, cutting probes) and then chrono the first 3 zealots. IF an overlord scouts this I send them immediately and rally 2 more to their nat, resuming probe production and FFE to my nat. If the zerg hasn't sent their OL to my main ramp and scouted my gates then I'll wait for 5 zealots. In my opinion if you're going for a zealot rush intoi expand, commit to rushing those zealots out asap. Don't half arse a cheesy opening.
I'm well aware that I'm relying on the zerg being bad. Once or twice I've hit a zerg who built just enough defense and then immediately drones onto 3 bases, but it's pretty rare at my level.
my follow up is not a stargate voidrays however. I did this for a while and it felt really super coin flippy. If zerg gets extra queens you're dead. If they responsd with hydra you'll never hold the 3rd. Instead as soon as possible I get +1 attack, a m-core and 6 gates and go again with zealots. Behind that I'm putting down a robo and a stargate while taking a 3rd. When my zealots hit their 3rd I can see what units they are making. this allows me to commit hard to colossus, immortals or phoenix. By forcing an engagement on their side of the map I buy the time I need to make the units I need vs their chosen composition.
Something that the better players here might not realise is that at lower levels zerg players are TERRIBLE. So many times I see no creep spread and assume mutas and start getting phoenix only to get rolled by a late, off creep roach hydra push. Zergs regularly get all tech and then seem to roll the dice on what they build. Scouting a hydra den or a spire doesn't mean anything. They could literally be making anything. I've opened phoenix, killed 15 mutas only to have a zerg double down and just make more mutas. I've seen zergs open with a small roach hydra count and then go muta. Or swarm host. Or super fast hive, rushing for BL.
The point is that the only way to know what a zerg is doing down in shitty plat level is to attack them and see what they make. Either that or go for a middle of the road blink stalker colossus build that can sort of deal with everything, but I HATE stalkers. I hate them so much. Stupid pew pew unit.
On December 10 2014 02:55 DinoMight wrote: Guys...
Diamond is the top 20% of StarCraft 2 players. This means that at least 80% of StarCraft 2 players can benefit from this guide.
Not everyone is interested in being a pro and/or playing like one. Obviously some people do. In that case - it's fine, they don't have to do this build. I think Ignorant has been very clear that this works for him and at his level.
There's an argument to be made that posting certain pro builds is pointless because they're actually bad for most players. PartinG's blink builds are USELESS TO ME because they require ungodly micro that even in Diamond (top 20% of StarCraft players) I don't come remotely close to. Pooling the Zealots may be bad at the pro level. But it makes the build easier to execute, and it potentially surprises them more if they scouted poorly. It makes sense at a Diamond level.
Sure I understand that there is a "correct" way to play the game at the pro level and a "standard" that is widely accepted... but I don't think that everyone cares about that to be honest.
The guys in Gold struggling with PvZ will look at this build and say "you know what, that sounds doable, let me try it."
To say that 80% of people would benefit is fallacious. It's a guide that describes a clearly suboptimal way to play. I posted a build that is similar to his build, but nearly improved in every way. He then posts a replay that is exactly in line with what I posted. That's the frustration.
As seen in the other post, this thread resembles nothing on what a Teamliquid guide should be. Guides are meant to be critiqued and improved upon. He has no intention of doing so - and that's the problem.
I don't even know why the thread hasn't been closed - the actual discussion has gone nowhere given the OP's reluctance to actually state why his way is superior to the already established build that I posted (and once again, that he posted a replay of).
On December 10 2014 09:28 Kharnage wrote: As a protoss in plat who was consistantly losing every single PvZ I switched to this build and now I'm doing a LOT better.
Note, I didn't read about this and then switch, I just wanted to be more aggressive because watching my replays, zergs were being SUPER greedy which ended in me dieing horribly.
The difference in my build is that I get my gates a bit sooner (2 gates on 12, cutting probes) and then chrono the first 3 zealots. IF an overlord scouts this I send them immediately and rally 2 more to their nat, resuming probe production and FFE to my nat. If the zerg hasn't sent their OL to my main ramp and scouted my gates then I'll wait for 5 zealots. In my opinion if you're going for a zealot rush intoi expand, commit to rushing those zealots out asap. Don't half arse a cheesy opening.
I'm well aware that I'm relying on the zerg being bad. Once or twice I've hit a zerg who built just enough defense and then immediately drones onto 3 bases, but it's pretty rare at my level.
my follow up is not a stargate voidrays however. I did this for a while and it felt really super coin flippy. If zerg gets extra queens you're dead. If they responsd with hydra you'll never hold the 3rd. Instead as soon as possible I get +1 attack, a m-core and 6 gates and go again with zealots. Behind that I'm putting down a robo and a stargate while taking a 3rd. When my zealots hit their 3rd I can see what units they are making. this allows me to commit hard to colossus, immortals or phoenix. By forcing an engagement on their side of the map I buy the time I need to make the units I need vs their chosen composition.
Something that the better players here might not realise is that at lower levels zerg players are TERRIBLE. So many times I see no creep spread and assume mutas and start getting phoenix only to get rolled by a late, off creep roach hydra push. Zergs regularly get all tech and then seem to roll the dice on what they build. Scouting a hydra den or a spire doesn't mean anything. They could literally be making anything. I've opened phoenix, killed 15 mutas only to have a zerg double down and just make more mutas. I've seen zergs open with a small roach hydra count and then go muta. Or swarm host. Or super fast hive, rushing for BL.
The point is that the only way to know what a zerg is doing down in shitty plat level is to attack them and see what they make. Either that or go for a middle of the road blink stalker colossus build that can sort of deal with everything, but I HATE stalkers. I hate them so much. Stupid pew pew unit.
12/12 gate is actually another relatively common variant of the now retired 2gate build. The big exception is that upon confirming that the Zerg did not open a quick speed build, you would pull 2-3 probes as well (slightly later than when the zealots move out given they are faster) to aid in a fight against the enemy. The timing works out that they can't engage you early on. This variant died out more so when the queen buff hit, but could still be useful. Something to consider if you like the more aggressive option, although clearly it's notably more "all-in" given you're pulling workers.
Biggest fear is that you had cut workers for 12/12, use all that chrono, but then fail to accomplish anything with it.
On December 10 2014 09:28 Kharnage wrote: As a protoss in plat who was consistantly losing every single PvZ I switched to this build and now I'm doing a LOT better.
Note, I didn't read about this and then switch, I just wanted to be more aggressive because watching my replays, zergs were being SUPER greedy which ended in me dieing horribly.
The difference in my build is that I get my gates a bit sooner (2 gates on 12, cutting probes) and then chrono the first 3 zealots. IF an overlord scouts this I send them immediately and rally 2 more to their nat, resuming probe production and FFE to my nat. If the zerg hasn't sent their OL to my main ramp and scouted my gates then I'll wait for 5 zealots. In my opinion if you're going for a zealot rush intoi expand, commit to rushing those zealots out asap. Don't half arse a cheesy opening.
I'm well aware that I'm relying on the zerg being bad. Once or twice I've hit a zerg who built just enough defense and then immediately drones onto 3 bases, but it's pretty rare at my level.
my follow up is not a stargate voidrays however. I did this for a while and it felt really super coin flippy. If zerg gets extra queens you're dead. If they responsd with hydra you'll never hold the 3rd. Instead as soon as possible I get +1 attack, a m-core and 6 gates and go again with zealots. Behind that I'm putting down a robo and a stargate while taking a 3rd. When my zealots hit their 3rd I can see what units they are making. this allows me to commit hard to colossus, immortals or phoenix. By forcing an engagement on their side of the map I buy the time I need to make the units I need vs their chosen composition.
Something that the better players here might not realise is that at lower levels zerg players are TERRIBLE. So many times I see no creep spread and assume mutas and start getting phoenix only to get rolled by a late, off creep roach hydra push. Zergs regularly get all tech and then seem to roll the dice on what they build. Scouting a hydra den or a spire doesn't mean anything. They could literally be making anything. I've opened phoenix, killed 15 mutas only to have a zerg double down and just make more mutas. I've seen zergs open with a small roach hydra count and then go muta. Or swarm host. Or super fast hive, rushing for BL.
The point is that the only way to know what a zerg is doing down in shitty plat level is to attack them and see what they make. Either that or go for a middle of the road blink stalker colossus build that can sort of deal with everything, but I HATE stalkers. I hate them so much. Stupid pew pew unit.
12/12 gate is actually another relatively common variant of the now retired 2gate build. The big exception is that upon confirming that the Zerg did not open a quick speed build, you would pull 2-3 probes as well (slightly later than when the zealots move out given they are faster) to aid in a fight against the enemy. The timing works out that they can't engage you early on. This variant died out more so when the queen buff hit, but could still be useful. Something to consider if you like the more aggressive option, although clearly it's notably more "all-in" given you're pulling workers.
Biggest fear is that you had cut workers for 12/12, use all that chrono, but then fail to accomplish anything with it.
Yeah, it definitly HAS to do damage. just forcing units is good, but unless i get a queen or kill a bunch of drones i consider myself behind. If the zerg over reacts with too many lings then it's fine too since they can't break my wall with just lings.
On December 10 2014 13:49 Ignorant prodigy wrote: give it a rest
Give what a rest? this build, or pretty much this build with a slightly different tweak turned PvZ from by far my worst MU to one of my strongest. Glad to see I'm not the only one.
On December 10 2014 13:49 Ignorant prodigy wrote: give it a rest
Give what a rest? this build, or pretty much this build with a slightly different tweak turned PvZ from by far my worst MU to one of my strongest. Glad to see I'm not the only one.
On December 10 2014 09:28 Kharnage wrote: As a protoss in plat who was consistantly losing every single PvZ I switched to this build and now I'm doing a LOT better.
Note, I didn't read about this and then switch, I just wanted to be more aggressive because watching my replays, zergs were being SUPER greedy which ended in me dieing horribly.
The difference in my build is that I get my gates a bit sooner (2 gates on 12, cutting probes) and then chrono the first 3 zealots. IF an overlord scouts this I send them immediately and rally 2 more to their nat, resuming probe production and FFE to my nat. If the zerg hasn't sent their OL to my main ramp and scouted my gates then I'll wait for 5 zealots. In my opinion if you're going for a zealot rush intoi expand, commit to rushing those zealots out asap. Don't half arse a cheesy opening.
I'm well aware that I'm relying on the zerg being bad. Once or twice I've hit a zerg who built just enough defense and then immediately drones onto 3 bases, but it's pretty rare at my level.
my follow up is not a stargate voidrays however. I did this for a while and it felt really super coin flippy. If zerg gets extra queens you're dead. If they responsd with hydra you'll never hold the 3rd. Instead as soon as possible I get +1 attack, a m-core and 6 gates and go again with zealots. Behind that I'm putting down a robo and a stargate while taking a 3rd. When my zealots hit their 3rd I can see what units they are making. this allows me to commit hard to colossus, immortals or phoenix. By forcing an engagement on their side of the map I buy the time I need to make the units I need vs their chosen composition.
Something that the better players here might not realise is that at lower levels zerg players are TERRIBLE. So many times I see no creep spread and assume mutas and start getting phoenix only to get rolled by a late, off creep roach hydra push. Zergs regularly get all tech and then seem to roll the dice on what they build. Scouting a hydra den or a spire doesn't mean anything. They could literally be making anything. I've opened phoenix, killed 15 mutas only to have a zerg double down and just make more mutas. I've seen zergs open with a small roach hydra count and then go muta. Or swarm host. Or super fast hive, rushing for BL.
The point is that the only way to know what a zerg is doing down in shitty plat level is to attack them and see what they make. Either that or go for a middle of the road blink stalker colossus build that can sort of deal with everything, but I HATE stalkers. I hate them so much. Stupid pew pew unit.
12/12 gate is actually another relatively common variant of the now retired 2gate build. The big exception is that upon confirming that the Zerg did not open a quick speed build, you would pull 2-3 probes as well (slightly later than when the zealots move out given they are faster) to aid in a fight against the enemy. The timing works out that they can't engage you early on. This variant died out more so when the queen buff hit, but could still be useful. Something to consider if you like the more aggressive option, although clearly it's notably more "all-in" given you're pulling workers.
Biggest fear is that you had cut workers for 12/12, use all that chrono, but then fail to accomplish anything with it.
Yeah, it definitly HAS to do damage. just forcing units is good, but unless i get a queen or kill a bunch of drones i consider myself behind. If the zerg over reacts with too many lings then it's fine too since they can't break my wall with just lings.
I'd recommend on maps with smaller nat chokes (doesnt work on xel naga or metal, but will on maps like cloud kingdom and daybreak) to building your 12/12 gate at your nat. I'd recommend building the first gate and second gate at roughly the same time too since your probe is already down there, but it's not to critical. This way if they counter you, they cant pin you in your main, you're still free to expand.
On December 10 2014 09:28 Kharnage wrote: As a protoss in plat who was consistantly losing every single PvZ I switched to this build and now I'm doing a LOT better.
Note, I didn't read about this and then switch, I just wanted to be more aggressive because watching my replays, zergs were being SUPER greedy which ended in me dieing horribly.
The difference in my build is that I get my gates a bit sooner (2 gates on 12, cutting probes) and then chrono the first 3 zealots. IF an overlord scouts this I send them immediately and rally 2 more to their nat, resuming probe production and FFE to my nat. If the zerg hasn't sent their OL to my main ramp and scouted my gates then I'll wait for 5 zealots. In my opinion if you're going for a zealot rush intoi expand, commit to rushing those zealots out asap. Don't half arse a cheesy opening.
I'm well aware that I'm relying on the zerg being bad. Once or twice I've hit a zerg who built just enough defense and then immediately drones onto 3 bases, but it's pretty rare at my level.
my follow up is not a stargate voidrays however. I did this for a while and it felt really super coin flippy. If zerg gets extra queens you're dead. If they responsd with hydra you'll never hold the 3rd. Instead as soon as possible I get +1 attack, a m-core and 6 gates and go again with zealots. Behind that I'm putting down a robo and a stargate while taking a 3rd. When my zealots hit their 3rd I can see what units they are making. this allows me to commit hard to colossus, immortals or phoenix. By forcing an engagement on their side of the map I buy the time I need to make the units I need vs their chosen composition.
Something that the better players here might not realise is that at lower levels zerg players are TERRIBLE. So many times I see no creep spread and assume mutas and start getting phoenix only to get rolled by a late, off creep roach hydra push. Zergs regularly get all tech and then seem to roll the dice on what they build. Scouting a hydra den or a spire doesn't mean anything. They could literally be making anything. I've opened phoenix, killed 15 mutas only to have a zerg double down and just make more mutas. I've seen zergs open with a small roach hydra count and then go muta. Or swarm host. Or super fast hive, rushing for BL.
The point is that the only way to know what a zerg is doing down in shitty plat level is to attack them and see what they make. Either that or go for a middle of the road blink stalker colossus build that can sort of deal with everything, but I HATE stalkers. I hate them so much. Stupid pew pew unit.
12/12 gate is actually another relatively common variant of the now retired 2gate build. The big exception is that upon confirming that the Zerg did not open a quick speed build, you would pull 2-3 probes as well (slightly later than when the zealots move out given they are faster) to aid in a fight against the enemy. The timing works out that they can't engage you early on. This variant died out more so when the queen buff hit, but could still be useful. Something to consider if you like the more aggressive option, although clearly it's notably more "all-in" given you're pulling workers.
Biggest fear is that you had cut workers for 12/12, use all that chrono, but then fail to accomplish anything with it.
Yeah, it definitly HAS to do damage. just forcing units is good, but unless i get a queen or kill a bunch of drones i consider myself behind. If the zerg over reacts with too many lings then it's fine too since they can't break my wall with just lings.
I'd recommend on maps with smaller nat chokes (doesnt work on xel naga or metal, but will on maps like cloud kingdom and daybreak) to building your 12/12 gate at your nat. I'd recommend building the first gate and second gate at roughly the same time too since your probe is already down there, but it's not to critical. This way if they counter you, they cant pin you in your main, you're still free to expand.
Yeah, I did that for a while but occasionally it would lose me a game to something like a 7 pool. Ignorant is right in that if they are doing a super early pool you can just lose with that. being able to drop a pylon to complete my main ramp wall in has saved me when they have run past with 6 lings. Usually my zealots do so much damage in their base that i can win from there.
I find there isn't a 'lot' of difference so long as my 3rd pylon is on my nat ramp. I really want that cyber and forge up asap so I can use them to make the wall. The 'risk' there is that more important structures are vulnerable I guess. ideally I go pylon, forge, nexus, cannon, cyber, pylon with a zealot to block the gap. Even if my gateways are on the nat I still need to build all those buildings in pretty much that order.
On December 10 2014 13:49 Ignorant prodigy wrote: give it a rest
The exact type of attitude I'm talking about that makes this a terrible thread.
On December 10 2014 13:53 Kharnage wrote:
On December 10 2014 13:39 FabledIntegral wrote:
On December 10 2014 09:28 Kharnage wrote: As a protoss in plat who was consistantly losing every single PvZ I switched to this build and now I'm doing a LOT better.
Note, I didn't read about this and then switch, I just wanted to be more aggressive because watching my replays, zergs were being SUPER greedy which ended in me dieing horribly.
The difference in my build is that I get my gates a bit sooner (2 gates on 12, cutting probes) and then chrono the first 3 zealots. IF an overlord scouts this I send them immediately and rally 2 more to their nat, resuming probe production and FFE to my nat. If the zerg hasn't sent their OL to my main ramp and scouted my gates then I'll wait for 5 zealots. In my opinion if you're going for a zealot rush intoi expand, commit to rushing those zealots out asap. Don't half arse a cheesy opening.
I'm well aware that I'm relying on the zerg being bad. Once or twice I've hit a zerg who built just enough defense and then immediately drones onto 3 bases, but it's pretty rare at my level.
my follow up is not a stargate voidrays however. I did this for a while and it felt really super coin flippy. If zerg gets extra queens you're dead. If they responsd with hydra you'll never hold the 3rd. Instead as soon as possible I get +1 attack, a m-core and 6 gates and go again with zealots. Behind that I'm putting down a robo and a stargate while taking a 3rd. When my zealots hit their 3rd I can see what units they are making. this allows me to commit hard to colossus, immortals or phoenix. By forcing an engagement on their side of the map I buy the time I need to make the units I need vs their chosen composition.
Something that the better players here might not realise is that at lower levels zerg players are TERRIBLE. So many times I see no creep spread and assume mutas and start getting phoenix only to get rolled by a late, off creep roach hydra push. Zergs regularly get all tech and then seem to roll the dice on what they build. Scouting a hydra den or a spire doesn't mean anything. They could literally be making anything. I've opened phoenix, killed 15 mutas only to have a zerg double down and just make more mutas. I've seen zergs open with a small roach hydra count and then go muta. Or swarm host. Or super fast hive, rushing for BL.
The point is that the only way to know what a zerg is doing down in shitty plat level is to attack them and see what they make. Either that or go for a middle of the road blink stalker colossus build that can sort of deal with everything, but I HATE stalkers. I hate them so much. Stupid pew pew unit.
12/12 gate is actually another relatively common variant of the now retired 2gate build. The big exception is that upon confirming that the Zerg did not open a quick speed build, you would pull 2-3 probes as well (slightly later than when the zealots move out given they are faster) to aid in a fight against the enemy. The timing works out that they can't engage you early on. This variant died out more so when the queen buff hit, but could still be useful. Something to consider if you like the more aggressive option, although clearly it's notably more "all-in" given you're pulling workers.
Biggest fear is that you had cut workers for 12/12, use all that chrono, but then fail to accomplish anything with it.
Yeah, it definitly HAS to do damage. just forcing units is good, but unless i get a queen or kill a bunch of drones i consider myself behind. If the zerg over reacts with too many lings then it's fine too since they can't break my wall with just lings.
I'd recommend on maps with smaller nat chokes (doesnt work on xel naga or metal, but will on maps like cloud kingdom and daybreak) to building your 12/12 gate at your nat. I'd recommend building the first gate and second gate at roughly the same time too since your probe is already down there, but it's not to critical. This way if they counter you, they cant pin you in your main, you're still free to expand.
Yeah, I did that for a while but occasionally it would lose me a game to something like a 7 pool. Ignorant is right in that if they are doing a super early pool you can just lose with that. being able to drop a pylon to complete my main ramp wall in has saved me when they have run past with 6 lings. Usually my zealots do so much damage in their base that i can win from there.
I find there isn't a 'lot' of difference so long as my 3rd pylon is on my nat ramp. I really want that cyber and forge up asap so I can use them to make the wall. The 'risk' there is that more important structures are vulnerable I guess. ideally I go pylon, forge, nexus, cannon, cyber, pylon with a zealot to block the gap. Even if my gateways are on the nat I still need to build all those buildings in pretty much that order.
You should be able to hold off a 7pool fairly easily with this build assuming you scout it coming, although it is indeed better to have the gates in your main if facing this build specifically (or a 6pool). It may be easier to counter a 7pool at your main ramp, but it makes it notably harder to expand if the Zerg counters your zealots with speed. Typically if a Zerg scouts a 2gate, they will immediately take a gas to get speed ASAP, at least in higher levels.
You just continue to build your second pylon at the ramp as well, creating a single hex opening (or even better you can just wall off completely with a third gateway), depending how early you scout it. Also, depending on how it's going, you have the option to expand prior to getting gas/core, if you'd rather go that option.
I guess it really depends the frequency with which you experience early pools in plat and how early you scout with this build. Based on the build you just posted, it would be more optimal to simply build both the nexus and cyber prior to forge and cannon. Of course, this is entirely dependent on what the Zerg is doing and allows you to do, but being able to hold the Nexus and cyber without a forge is much easier with the existing gateway wall (can counter large amounts of lings with limited zealot numbers using the existing wall to limit surface area).
On December 10 2014 13:49 Ignorant prodigy wrote: give it a rest
The exact type of attitude I'm talking about that makes this a terrible thread.
On December 10 2014 13:53 Kharnage wrote:
On December 10 2014 13:39 FabledIntegral wrote:
On December 10 2014 09:28 Kharnage wrote: As a protoss in plat who was consistantly losing every single PvZ I switched to this build and now I'm doing a LOT better.
Note, I didn't read about this and then switch, I just wanted to be more aggressive because watching my replays, zergs were being SUPER greedy which ended in me dieing horribly.
The difference in my build is that I get my gates a bit sooner (2 gates on 12, cutting probes) and then chrono the first 3 zealots. IF an overlord scouts this I send them immediately and rally 2 more to their nat, resuming probe production and FFE to my nat. If the zerg hasn't sent their OL to my main ramp and scouted my gates then I'll wait for 5 zealots. In my opinion if you're going for a zealot rush intoi expand, commit to rushing those zealots out asap. Don't half arse a cheesy opening.
I'm well aware that I'm relying on the zerg being bad. Once or twice I've hit a zerg who built just enough defense and then immediately drones onto 3 bases, but it's pretty rare at my level.
my follow up is not a stargate voidrays however. I did this for a while and it felt really super coin flippy. If zerg gets extra queens you're dead. If they responsd with hydra you'll never hold the 3rd. Instead as soon as possible I get +1 attack, a m-core and 6 gates and go again with zealots. Behind that I'm putting down a robo and a stargate while taking a 3rd. When my zealots hit their 3rd I can see what units they are making. this allows me to commit hard to colossus, immortals or phoenix. By forcing an engagement on their side of the map I buy the time I need to make the units I need vs their chosen composition.
Something that the better players here might not realise is that at lower levels zerg players are TERRIBLE. So many times I see no creep spread and assume mutas and start getting phoenix only to get rolled by a late, off creep roach hydra push. Zergs regularly get all tech and then seem to roll the dice on what they build. Scouting a hydra den or a spire doesn't mean anything. They could literally be making anything. I've opened phoenix, killed 15 mutas only to have a zerg double down and just make more mutas. I've seen zergs open with a small roach hydra count and then go muta. Or swarm host. Or super fast hive, rushing for BL.
The point is that the only way to know what a zerg is doing down in shitty plat level is to attack them and see what they make. Either that or go for a middle of the road blink stalker colossus build that can sort of deal with everything, but I HATE stalkers. I hate them so much. Stupid pew pew unit.
12/12 gate is actually another relatively common variant of the now retired 2gate build. The big exception is that upon confirming that the Zerg did not open a quick speed build, you would pull 2-3 probes as well (slightly later than when the zealots move out given they are faster) to aid in a fight against the enemy. The timing works out that they can't engage you early on. This variant died out more so when the queen buff hit, but could still be useful. Something to consider if you like the more aggressive option, although clearly it's notably more "all-in" given you're pulling workers.
Biggest fear is that you had cut workers for 12/12, use all that chrono, but then fail to accomplish anything with it.
Yeah, it definitly HAS to do damage. just forcing units is good, but unless i get a queen or kill a bunch of drones i consider myself behind. If the zerg over reacts with too many lings then it's fine too since they can't break my wall with just lings.
I'd recommend on maps with smaller nat chokes (doesnt work on xel naga or metal, but will on maps like cloud kingdom and daybreak) to building your 12/12 gate at your nat. I'd recommend building the first gate and second gate at roughly the same time too since your probe is already down there, but it's not to critical. This way if they counter you, they cant pin you in your main, you're still free to expand.
Yeah, I did that for a while but occasionally it would lose me a game to something like a 7 pool. Ignorant is right in that if they are doing a super early pool you can just lose with that. being able to drop a pylon to complete my main ramp wall in has saved me when they have run past with 6 lings. Usually my zealots do so much damage in their base that i can win from there.
I find there isn't a 'lot' of difference so long as my 3rd pylon is on my nat ramp. I really want that cyber and forge up asap so I can use them to make the wall. The 'risk' there is that more important structures are vulnerable I guess. ideally I go pylon, forge, nexus, cannon, cyber, pylon with a zealot to block the gap. Even if my gateways are on the nat I still need to build all those buildings in pretty much that order.
You should be able to hold off a 7pool fairly easily with this build assuming you scout it coming, although it is indeed better to have the gates in your main if facing this build specifically (or a 6pool). It may be easier to counter a 7pool at your main ramp, but it makes it notably harder to expand if the Zerg counters your zealots with speed. Typically if a Zerg scouts a 2gate, they will immediately take a gas to get speed ASAP, at least in higher levels.
You just continue to build your second pylon at the ramp as well, creating a single hex opening (or even better you can just wall off completely with a third gateway), depending how early you scout it.
Also, depending on how it's going, you have the option to expand prior to getting gas/core, if you'd rather go that option.
I guess it really depends the frequency with which you experience early pools in plat and how early you scout with this build.
That's a good point. I'm actually skipping the scout until both gates are going up because of the economy hit i'm already taking by stopping probe production at 12 until that point.
The other consideration I've had is that zerg first OL usually goes tot he Nat, not the main ramp, so the opening is hidden for just a little bit longer if they are not drone scouting. I don't know if this really matters or not. I'll try out gateways on the nat and see if it feels better. if nothing else it has slightly less walk time for the zealots i guess...
Putting the gateways at your main ramp is much safer IMO. The build doesn't get sentries so you need some sort of wall.
Pooling the Zealots also confuses the Zerg a bit. If they see Zealots trickling in they know what's up (and in low numbers Zealots are much less effective against a group of lings that can get a better surround). If they don't scout / react wrong to the pooling (assume you're bad or playing very defensive or something) then they just get wrecked.
On December 10 2014 14:52 FabledIntegral wrote:although it is indeed better to have the gates in your main if facing this build specifically (or a 6pool). It may be easier to counter a 7pool at your main ramp
which is exactly why I pool the zealots.. it's considerably easier to get the natural up if they get speed if you hold the zealots back
I also mentioned early pool as part of my reason for making the gates in my main back on page 3
also building the gate at the natural is a bad idea IMO.. if they early pool (with or w/o speed) you could get fucked by losing the pylon etc.. the distance to pull probe to protect it is very far and not worth it.
walling your main ramp is essential and saved me a few times from early pools.
On December 10 2014 14:52 FabledIntegral wrote:although it is indeed better to have the gates in your main if facing this build specifically (or a 6pool). It may be easier to counter a 7pool at your main ramp
which is exactly why I pool the zealots.. it's considerably easier to get the natural up if they get speed if you hold the zealots back
That makes no sense. It takes exactly 1 zealot to hold a 7 pool, you don't need to "pool" more than 1 zealot, which is hardly any pooling at all. Also, if you're probe scouting like you are then you will be able to tell if it's a 7 pool or not a lot earlier than when you have 5 zealots, so there's basically never any reason to pool to 5.
I also mentioned early pool as part of my reason for making the gates in my main back on page 3
7 pool will still probably lose even to gates in the natural, so gates in the natural are probably better on average.
also building the gate at the natural is a bad idea IMO.. if they early pool (with or w/o speed) you could get fucked by losing the pylon etc.. the distance to pull probe to protect it is very far and not worth it.
No you don't, your probe will see their lings, then you pull probes to defend pylon and block the ramp as your first zealot comes out, then you win unless you lost a lot of probes which you probably won't unless you fuck up royally, or the map makes it really difficult to defend the pylon and the ramp simultaneously.
Dude, seriously stop defending the dogmatic errors that you've made in developing this build. You made a topic regarding a build, people are chipping in advice of a better way to do exactly the same thing. It's time to edit the thread, or get someone to lock it so that we can have a real discussion on 2 gate before gas pvz opening.
Pooling the Zealots also confuses the Zerg a bit. If they see Zealots trickling in they know what's up (and in low numbers Zealots are much less effective against a group of lings that can get a better surround). If they don't scout / react wrong to the pooling (assume you're bad or playing very defensive or something) then they just get wrecked.
No it doesn't. The scouting drone or overlord see the 2 gateways and know there's no stalker any time soon, so the overlord gets parked right on top of it and the zerg literally sees everything, including when the gateways are and aren't producing units, so the zerg always knows exactly how many zealots there are total.
I guess I don't see it as an error.. rather a preference
I also don't think you read my response correctly. I pool the zealots not to hold a 6 or 7 pool but to be able to take my natural as I move out. I build my gates at the top of my main ramp to hold the potential 6 or 7 pool easier.
One is a consequence of the other.. if I built my gates at my natural then sure I could get my natural up w/o needing to pool the zealots.. but since I prefer to build my gates at my main ramp vs. my natural to make defending a 6 or 7 pool easier, then it would get considerably harder to take my natural if I sent the zealots 1 by 1. Especially if the zerg gets speed.
I'll exit this thread if the OP can admit the GM replay he posted is nearly identical of what I recommended he could do to significantly improve his build. At the very least we can stop saying "it's been proven in GM."
Beyond that, it's become quite apparent there is no rebuttal beyond "I prefer it my way."
All I have to say is that you are denying advice from players that are better than you. By saying your methods are better you are indirectly stating that you know better. Knowing how hard this game is to get good at, lower level players even saying they have a reason to do something that their superior said isn't good is insulting.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/atb4fHv.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/QR4LVMB.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/tn2YZ7k.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/AMyP6e4.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Pmk5OnS.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dd72MVR.png)
Of course, I could be wrong! I'm guessing you attack right around 6:00 mark with 5 zealots? I don't see how a 2 Hatch/Pool with some form of early gas into a slightly delayed 3rd(soO style) doesn't completely shut this down. Even 3 Hatch into pool seems fine, albeit with a bit of early micro if you push out with your first 2 zealots. From there you can either counter/deny your natrual right? Or power drone and still hit a pre 11:00 min timing with 12+ ranged hydra and 40+ speedling. 
If you're a ladder hero trying to get some ez PvZ wins try it out.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/D13xMYx.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Am8Mwm2.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Seqg5dr.jpg?1)
http://i.imgur.com/Seqg5dr.jpg?1
