|
On August 08 2012 21:43 XenoX101 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2012 20:30 iamcaustic wrote:On August 08 2012 20:23 XenoX101 wrote:
It would need to be done by Blizzard otherwise people will create their own non-standard unpathable terrain patterns around ramps, and it would be a disaster for competitive gaming. Blizzard are the only ones who can force all ramps to have a particular set of unpathable terrain. The reason the neutral supply depot sort of works is because it is idiot-proof, there are only 3 places you can put it and they all work well enough to prevent the wall. For maps made by random amateur mapmakers, yes this could be an issue. However, for premier tournaments and mapmaking teams I'm not sure why a de-facto standard can't be agreed upon; everyone seems to have agreed upon the neutral lowered supply depot pretty easily. Frankly, I don't see it as too difficult to figure out and agree upon a specific pathing setup. In this regard it'd only be 1 pattern to be had, rather than the 3 possible placements for the neutral depot. The trick is just coming up with what pathing pattern is the best solution. We still don't even have a universal map pool that all tournaments agree on, so the chances of every single tournament adopting the standard are slim to none. It will only cause further complications about map versions if one version has un-pathable terrain and another has a neutral supply depot, hardly worth the slight visual improvement of not having the depot. And you can always tell when a map has been modded with a neutral supply depot, not so with unpathable terrain. It's a nice idea, but it's far too ambitious for the map framework or lack-thereof that we have now.
I don't think every tournament should have the exact same map pool. It's perfectly reasonable for some tournaments to introduce new maps before others (e.g. GSL), and for some tournaments to take their time before updating their pool (e.g. MLG, though they are a bit too slow). This kind of solution isn't dependent on which maps are being used at the time, just like how the neutral supply depot wasn't dependent on it.
I'd also like to note the concept of disabling spawn locations on certain maps. We've seen different tournaments have different versions of this kind of non-visual change for certain maps, and the answer to let people know was for the tournament to announce the changes. If GSL were to make an announcement that they've updated their map pool to use this kind of solution, that's enough to let pros know that ramp blocking still won't work despite there being no neutral depot.
|
To your credit, the OP is fairly exhaustive (if slanted) in its treatment of the subject. However, you don't really make a powerful case against the neutral depot. Clearly it does the job just fine. What are the objections to it? I gather your two objections are: 1) its cosmetic effect (more of an allusion), and 2) it may confuse newbs / non-competitive players.
I don't think anyone disputes the fact that the neutral depot has the appearance of function over form, but by the same token its purpose is very clear to anyone with a passing familiarity with competitive sc2. If this is really a problem, you can duplicate the unit, name it "destructible wall obstruction", and shade it a special colour or what have you, even give it a new appearance entirely. A tooltip can help new players understand the purpose of it if a new name doesn't make it immediately clear.
Fancier solutions will only confuse the issue, and anything besides a 1x1 square of destructible unbuildable is overkill. The idea is to change the playing field as little as possible while preventing a wall at the bottom of the ramp. This is as much to prevent the rax depot anti-scout wall as much as the PvZ wall-in.
If you have an object that makes intuitive sense that fits the environment, is named clearly, and has an explanatory tooltip, that would serve, but I don't think you can really make a perfectly apparent, coherent solution for something which is by its nature a "workaround" to a game balance problem.
|
Eh, is the pylon wall-in really that big of a problem anymore? I mean, with the queen range buff it is a lot easier to break down walls. I used to play as zerg on ladder and although I've had the pylon wall in used against me, I've never lost to it - you can just use a queen to break down the wall and runby with maybe 20 lings and win outright since the toss is really far behind. I never understood why that one cheesy strat is disallowed, when cannon rushing, etc is totally fine. I actually found the pylon wall to be easier to deal with than a cannon rush.
Also, i feel like painted no-building is just going to confuse players even more than the neutral dept.
|
I'm going to apply the third road here:
3 pylon blocks / 2 bunker blocks are not imbalanced any more:
The neutral depot dates from a time that you could use 2 pylons to block, bunkers built quicker, rax built quicker, the drone drill wasn't discovered, queens had less range, overlords were slower. Furthermore, even then, it was never proven that it was imbalanced. If it was so truly imbalanced this strat would be far more popular on the ladder than it actually is. I see 2 bunker blocks attempted at me if they 11/11 proxy me, or if I don't have an ovie at my expo, I don't see them otherwise attempted, and they surely shouldn't attempt it, because I will hold it, I will most likely stop it from going up if I know it's coming. I see pylon blocks only attempted if there is no ovie at the expo, if you react in time you can drone drill to salvation quite easily. (though my results are a bit skewed since I go 11overpool standard ZvP)
Yes, if it gets up you're in a bad spot. But there are so many ways to stop it from getting up. Yeah, if you don't have a zealot blocking your wall and lings get in, you're in a bad spot, put a zealot there to stop that, put a drone on patrol to stop this if you feel like it (I personally never put a drone on patrol since I'm confident in holding it off without a drone on patrol, but I'm completely sure it would be child's play with a drone on patrol)
The only reason in the current metagame that these things can still get up is if you make a mistake and let them go up. They are quite easy to prevent from getting up.
Also, it's not like Zerg in the current metagame can't use the ever so slight nerf of missing one worker in the early game for 20 seconds to be put on patrol there.
|
On August 09 2012 04:44 SiskosGoatee wrote:
I'm going to apply the third road here:
3 pylon blocks / 2 bunker blocks are not imbalanced any more:
The neutral depot dates from a time that you could use 2 pylons to block, bunkers built quicker, rax built quicker, the drone drill wasn't discovered, queens had less range, overlords were slower. Furthermore, even then, it was never proven that it was imbalanced. If it was so truly imbalanced this strat would be far more popular on the ladder than it actually is. I see 2 bunker blocks attempted at me if they 11/11 proxy me, or if I don't have an ovie at my expo, I don't see them otherwise attempted, and they surely shouldn't attempt it, because I will hold it, I will most likely stop it from going up if I know it's coming. I see pylon blocks only attempted if there is no ovie at the expo, if you react in time you can drone drill to salvation quite easily. (though my results are a bit skewed since I go 11overpool standard ZvP)
Yes, if it gets up you're in a bad spot. But there are so many ways to stop it from getting up. Yeah, if you don't have a zealot blocking your wall and lings get in, you're in a bad spot, put a zealot there to stop that, put a drone on patrol to stop this if you feel like it (I personally never put a drone on patrol since I'm confident in holding it off without a drone on patrol, but I'm completely sure it would be child's play with a drone on patrol)
The only reason in the current metagame that these things can still get up is if you make a mistake and let them go up. They are quite easy to prevent from getting up.
Also, it's not like Zerg in the current metagame can't use the ever so slight nerf of missing one worker in the early game for 20 seconds to be put on patrol there.
I'm not convinced that balance was the reason the depot was implemented. Blocking off a ramp and getting a quick win is boring to watch. Nothing's exciting's happened, yet the game is over. It might not have been imbalanced, but eliminating the strategy makes it more likely to see either a straight up game, or a more skillful cheese, both of which are a lot more fun to watch.
|
On August 09 2012 02:57 EatThePath wrote:
To your credit, the OP is fairly exhaustive (if slanted) in its treatment of the subject. However, you don't really make a powerful case against the neutral depot. Clearly it does the job just fine. What are the objections to it? I gather your two objections are: 1) its cosmetic effect (more of an allusion), and 2) it may confuse newbs / non-competitive players.
I don't think anyone disputes the fact that the neutral depot has the appearance of function over form, but by the same token its purpose is very clear to anyone with a passing familiarity with competitive sc2. If this is really a problem, you can duplicate the unit, name it "destructible wall obstruction", and shade it a special colour or what have you, even give it a new appearance entirely. A tooltip can help new players understand the purpose of it if a new name doesn't make it immediately clear.
Fancier solutions will only confuse the issue, and anything besides a 1x1 square of destructible unbuildable is overkill. The idea is to change the playing field as little as possible while preventing a wall at the bottom of the ramp. This is as much to prevent the rax depot anti-scout wall as much as the PvZ wall-in.
If you have an object that makes intuitive sense that fits the environment, is named clearly, and has an explanatory tooltip, that would serve, but I don't think you can really make a perfectly apparent, coherent solution for something which is by its nature a "workaround" to a game balance problem.
In terms of just having a solution for the ramp block issue in tournament play, the neutral depot works just fine. Like I state in the OP, it's a practical solution that serves its purpose, even if slightly inelegant.
The point of this thread isn't to claim that the neutral depot is somehow broken or antiquated, but rather to introduce an alternative solution that works just as well and/or slightly better (or so is the hope) than the neutral depot, while eliminating some of the perceived drawbacks that keeps the neutral depot from being implemented outside of premier tournaments, such as in the Blizzard ladder.
Any other solutions -- such as what you suggest with a unique structural object -- creates the need for a custom solution rather than utilizing something from the standard melee mod, and thus is plagued by a similar drawback to the neutral depot: Blizzard would never implement it on the ladder. In this regard, it's more reasonable to stick with the neutral depot, as it's just as effective and requires far less work to implement.
Overall, that's why I call this an alternative, rather than necessarily a replacement.
|
On August 09 2012 04:44 SiskosGoatee wrote:
I'm going to apply the third road here:
3 pylon blocks / 2 bunker blocks are not imbalanced any more:
The neutral depot dates from a time that you could use 2 pylons to block, bunkers built quicker, rax built quicker, the drone drill wasn't discovered, queens had less range, overlords were slower. Furthermore, even then, it was never proven that it was imbalanced. If it was so truly imbalanced this strat would be far more popular on the ladder than it actually is. I see 2 bunker blocks attempted at me if they 11/11 proxy me, or if I don't have an ovie at my expo, I don't see them otherwise attempted, and they surely shouldn't attempt it, because I will hold it, I will most likely stop it from going up if I know it's coming. I see pylon blocks only attempted if there is no ovie at the expo, if you react in time you can drone drill to salvation quite easily. (though my results are a bit skewed since I go 11overpool standard ZvP)
Yes, if it gets up you're in a bad spot. But there are so many ways to stop it from getting up. Yeah, if you don't have a zealot blocking your wall and lings get in, you're in a bad spot, put a zealot there to stop that, put a drone on patrol to stop this if you feel like it (I personally never put a drone on patrol since I'm confident in holding it off without a drone on patrol, but I'm completely sure it would be child's play with a drone on patrol)
The only reason in the current metagame that these things can still get up is if you make a mistake and let them go up. They are quite easy to prevent from getting up.
Also, it's not like Zerg in the current metagame can't use the ever so slight nerf of missing one worker in the early game for 20 seconds to be put on patrol there.
We just recently seen Byun defeat NesTea on Metropolis due to the ramp block, thanks to a mistake which caused the neutral depots to not be present on the map during their match. There was quite a controversy about it. I also take a few quick free wins on the ladder now and again when facing Zergs.  To say that the issue doesn't exist anymore is a faulty premise, in my opinion.
Edit: I do get what you're saying, how Zergs can implement certain tactics to avoid the issue from occurring in most cases, but I do feel like this is one of those things that simply shouldn't be viable to begin with.
|
If we are going to use a 1x1 object, I worked out some placings that require 4 buildings to wall off (everything else could be done with 3 building combinations of bunkers and depots.
I used a LOS blocker for demonstration purposes, though it might be one way to go.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/JXA1Z.jpg)
|
On August 09 2012 06:47 iamcaustic wrote:
Edit: I do get what you're saying, how Zergs can implement certain tactics to avoid the issue from occurring in most cases, but I do feel like this is one of those things that simply shouldn't be viable to begin with. Should 6pools or early bunkers in general be? A bunker at a ramp attempt really is not that much more scary than just two early bunkers behind minerals in hard to reach places honestly.
I also feel more 'Oh great, now I'm behind' when a Terran decides to send a 10 scv and I find a half completed engineering bay at the place my 16 hatch was supposed to go. I absolutely don't feel confident in taking my third versus Terran and I'm not sure what to do after that.
What about the tactic where they make a hatch and a queen and try to get a creep tumour ZvP? I feel this is about as hard to stop from going up as a pylon block, it's a similar investment, and it puts the P about as much behind if it gets up as Z is put behind if the 3 pylon wall with a cannon behind it gets up.
|
I just don't understand the urgency to "fix" what isn't a problem in the first place. The supply depot works great - why not devote your resources to something more useful?
|
On August 09 2012 09:34 SiskosGoatee wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 06:47 iamcaustic wrote:
Edit: I do get what you're saying, how Zergs can implement certain tactics to avoid the issue from occurring in most cases, but I do feel like this is one of those things that simply shouldn't be viable to begin with. Should 6pools or early bunkers in general be? A bunker at a ramp attempt really is not that much more scary than just two early bunkers behind minerals in hard to reach places honestly. I also feel more 'Oh great, now I'm behind' when a Terran decides to send a 10 scv and I find a half completed engineering bay at the place my 16 hatch was supposed to go. I absolutely don't feel confident in taking my third versus Terran and I'm not sure what to do after that. What about the tactic where they make a hatch and a queen and try to get a creep tumour ZvP? I feel this is about as hard to stop from going up as a pylon block, it's a similar investment, and it puts the P about as much behind if it gets up as Z is put behind if the 3 pylon wall with a cannon behind it gets up.
Bunker ramp block is actually a lot more damaging than bunkers behind minerals. Sure, both will put a Zerg behind, but the ramp block is of a greater scale. At least with bunkers behind minerals, Zergs have opportunities to set up spine crawlers at the natural, make a bunch of lings, and basically overpower the bunkers before they're able to kill the hatchery. With a proper ramp block, that hatchery is going down no matter what the Zerg does. I can say this with confidence as a Terran player who does this tactic on the ladder.
6-pool is easily stoppable with a simple wall, and an engineering bay is only a minor delay for a 16 hatch (which means you went pool first and thus have access to lings to take down the ebay fairly quickly). Again, definitely a different scale of damage. Also, how do you "find" a half-complete ebay? There should be an overlord spotting the area, or else you're doing something wrong.
|
On August 09 2012 09:34 Fatam wrote:
I just don't understand the urgency to "fix" what isn't a problem in the first place. The supply depot works great - why not devote your resources to something more useful?
As an upcoming mapmaker that's wanting to make quality maps, these sorts of things cross my mind. Essentially, "is there a better solution?" is a question that's always in the back of my mind when doing things. In this case, while working on a map and doing the main base ramp, this thought crossed my mind and I made some quick conceptual screenshots to present in a thread. That's about all there is to it.  No urgency or over-devotion of resources.
|
On August 09 2012 04:44 SiskosGoatee wrote:
I'm going to apply the third road here:
3 pylon blocks / 2 bunker blocks are not imbalanced any more:
The neutral depot dates from a time that you could use 2 pylons to block, bunkers built quicker, rax built quicker, the drone drill wasn't discovered, queens had less range, overlords were slower. Furthermore, even then, it was never proven that it was imbalanced. If it was so truly imbalanced this strat would be far more popular on the ladder than it actually is. I see 2 bunker blocks attempted at me if they 11/11 proxy me, or if I don't have an ovie at my expo, I don't see them otherwise attempted, and they surely shouldn't attempt it, because I will hold it, I will most likely stop it from going up if I know it's coming. I see pylon blocks only attempted if there is no ovie at the expo, if you react in time you can drone drill to salvation quite easily. (though my results are a bit skewed since I go 11overpool standard ZvP)
Yes, if it gets up you're in a bad spot. But there are so many ways to stop it from getting up. Yeah, if you don't have a zealot blocking your wall and lings get in, you're in a bad spot, put a zealot there to stop that, put a drone on patrol to stop this if you feel like it (I personally never put a drone on patrol since I'm confident in holding it off without a drone on patrol, but I'm completely sure it would be child's play with a drone on patrol)
The only reason in the current metagame that these things can still get up is if you make a mistake and let them go up. They are quite easy to prevent from getting up.
Also, it's not like Zerg in the current metagame can't use the ever so slight nerf of missing one worker in the early game for 20 seconds to be put on patrol there.
I agree. This discussion really need to really be taken up when we start getting into the HOTS beta. It really seems like the right time to start this discussion.
On August 09 2012 05:29 NewSunshine wrote:
I'm not convinced that balance was the reason the depot was implemented. Blocking off a ramp and getting a quick win is boring to watch. Nothing's exciting's happened, yet the game is over. It might not have been imbalanced, but eliminating the strategy makes it more likely to see either a straight up game, or a more skillful cheese, both of which are a lot more fun to watch.
It is not our decision to decide which cheeses are "too boring to watch". Leave that decision to blizzard. The thing about this cheese is that is that it was possible to eliminate it. Tournement would have done this a hundred times over if other cheeses could be stopped with simple map features. Imagen if something could have been done to block the 1-1-1.
On August 09 2012 06:47 iamcaustic wrote:We just recently seen Byun defeat NesTea on Metropolis due to the ramp block, thanks to a mistake which caused the neutral depots to not be present on the map during their match. There was quite a controversy about it. I also take a few quick free wins on the ladder now and again when facing Zergs. To say that the issue doesn't exist anymore is a faulty premise, in my opinion. Edit: I do get what you're saying, how Zergs can implement certain tactics to avoid the issue from occurring in most cases, but I do feel like this is one of those things that simply shouldn't be viable to begin with.
Can't be compared really. Nestea may be one of the best zerg but in that game it wasn't an option he considered. He was taken by surprise. I am sure he would have reacted better if he knew the depots was missing.
In either case we need to see what happens between pros when they do it, and know from start it is possible.
|
On August 09 2012 09:52 iamcaustic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 09:34 SiskosGoatee wrote:On August 09 2012 06:47 iamcaustic wrote:
Edit: I do get what you're saying, how Zergs can implement certain tactics to avoid the issue from occurring in most cases, but I do feel like this is one of those things that simply shouldn't be viable to begin with. Should 6pools or early bunkers in general be? A bunker at a ramp attempt really is not that much more scary than just two early bunkers behind minerals in hard to reach places honestly. I also feel more 'Oh great, now I'm behind' when a Terran decides to send a 10 scv and I find a half completed engineering bay at the place my 16 hatch was supposed to go. I absolutely don't feel confident in taking my third versus Terran and I'm not sure what to do after that. What about the tactic where they make a hatch and a queen and try to get a creep tumour ZvP? I feel this is about as hard to stop from going up as a pylon block, it's a similar investment, and it puts the P about as much behind if it gets up as Z is put behind if the 3 pylon wall with a cannon behind it gets up. Bunker ramp block is actually a lot more damaging than bunkers behind minerals. Sure, both will put a Zerg behind, but the ramp block is of a greater scale. At least with bunkers behind minerals, Zergs have opportunities to set up spine crawlers at the natural, make a bunch of lings, and basically overpower the bunkers before they're able to kill the hatchery. With a proper ramp block, that hatchery is going down no matter what the Zerg does. I can say this with confidence as a Terran player who does this tactic on the ladder. If the bunkers get up yeah, but it's so much easier to stop them from going up if they do a ramp block than if they use certain mineral spots on certrain maps where you can't use drone drilling. Ramp bunkers are amongst the easiest bunkers to stop if you know they are making them because they're the closet to your main so the least travel distance. Surface area used to be a problem but just isn't any more with the drone drill, if you just bring 8 drones down in time before they even start they have a really tough time getting them up, much tougher than certain mineral line spots.
6-pool is easily stoppable with a simple wall Tell that to the many Protoss players who stopped 6pools without losing a single probe only to get a 'normal macro game' out of it almost. The risk/reward ratio of 7pools in ZvP is really skewed in my opinion. It is not nearly all in enough for something that can kill a protoss player easily who doesn't scout as early as 9 (the only matchup where scouting that early is still common, just because of the thread of this tactic).
and an engineering bay is only a minor delay for a 16 hatch (which means you went pool first and thus have access to lings to take down the ebay fairly quickly) Nope, I go 16 hatch first, if you constantly make drones and don't save larvae at any point you will only get enough minerals for a hatch at 16. My preferred opener in ZvT is 16 hatch 18 pool, 18 gas. Which is actually completely safe against gasless expand or reactored hellions, but if they 2rax you you're pretty dead so you have to drone scout in order to verify their opening or gamble on the fact that 2rax has fallen out of fashion.
Again, definitely a different scale of damage. Also, how do you "find" a half-complete ebay? There should be an overlord spotting the area, or else you're doing something wrong. No there shouldn't, overlord simply isn't there yet when you are about to start your hatch, and when you're about to start it the ebay is already half way done if they send a 9/10 scv on a lot of maps (I know this, because I am that jerk that sends a 10 scv just to block hatch firsts).
The only way to know that is going on is to just send a drone early to check for ebay blocks or to have that early scv pass an ovie and be like 'that's a really early scv'. And even then, even if you have 1 drone waiting there, he can probablty get it up to 25% construction before he can halt construction.
I find that stuff to be far more annoying myself than 2rax with bunker block, which is pretty all innish and can be dealt with, I'm not sure how to deal with this tactic myself. You just save up 300 minerals for your 16 hatch, rally your 15th drone to your natural to make it, and bam, an engie bay there when it arrives there at 280 mins and you're like 'Well, 16 pool it is then'
|
have something like "Uneven Floor" or something, design it to look like a standing platform that you'd see at the bottom of stairs or a ramp, and have it act like a pathable/unconstructable force-field. Once a massive unit goes over it, it is 'flattened' and buildable area.
|
On August 08 2012 16:08 Euronyme wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2012 13:22 Ktk wrote:
400HP 2x2 Destructible rocks on a 3minute timer.
Edit: they'd have to be burrowed.
Now they're neutral, not from a race, and timed. You could even eliminate the timer. This seems like the best idea so far. Just make it destructible rocks instead of a supply depot. Problem solved.
Or it could be called like a "underground destructible rock" or maybe something indicating that you can walk over it but that it's unfit for building on.
|
Why is this thread even here? The lowered supply depot works perfectly. You can destroy it pretty fast, stops all the nonsense. what's the point of coming up with something new? It's not a new metagame, map design, or anything.
EDIT: I read the thread a bit more, and You could change the texture of the depot or something so it's not just some random terran building for once, and it's just part of the game now. noone is complaining about it :/
Also, there are people who deliberately wall of below the ramp, with supply depots for example, so you have like a double entrance vs baneling busts.
By the way, you can do the mineral trick to kill the pylons really quick as well. See catz's video i think.
|
On August 09 2012 13:24 SiskosGoatee wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 09:52 iamcaustic wrote:On August 09 2012 09:34 SiskosGoatee wrote:On August 09 2012 06:47 iamcaustic wrote:
Edit: I do get what you're saying, how Zergs can implement certain tactics to avoid the issue from occurring in most cases, but I do feel like this is one of those things that simply shouldn't be viable to begin with. Should 6pools or early bunkers in general be? A bunker at a ramp attempt really is not that much more scary than just two early bunkers behind minerals in hard to reach places honestly. I also feel more 'Oh great, now I'm behind' when a Terran decides to send a 10 scv and I find a half completed engineering bay at the place my 16 hatch was supposed to go. I absolutely don't feel confident in taking my third versus Terran and I'm not sure what to do after that. What about the tactic where they make a hatch and a queen and try to get a creep tumour ZvP? I feel this is about as hard to stop from going up as a pylon block, it's a similar investment, and it puts the P about as much behind if it gets up as Z is put behind if the 3 pylon wall with a cannon behind it gets up. Bunker ramp block is actually a lot more damaging than bunkers behind minerals. Sure, both will put a Zerg behind, but the ramp block is of a greater scale. At least with bunkers behind minerals, Zergs have opportunities to set up spine crawlers at the natural, make a bunch of lings, and basically overpower the bunkers before they're able to kill the hatchery. With a proper ramp block, that hatchery is going down no matter what the Zerg does. I can say this with confidence as a Terran player who does this tactic on the ladder. If the bunkers get up yeah, but it's so much easier to stop them from going up if they do a ramp block than if they use certain mineral spots on certrain maps where you can't use drone drilling. Ramp bunkers are amongst the easiest bunkers to stop if you know they are making them because they're the closet to your main so the least travel distance. Surface area used to be a problem but just isn't any more with the drone drill, if you just bring 8 drones down in time before they even start they have a really tough time getting them up, much tougher than certain mineral line spots. Tell that to the many Protoss players who stopped 6pools without losing a single probe only to get a 'normal macro game' out of it almost. The risk/reward ratio of 7pools in ZvP is really skewed in my opinion. It is not nearly all in enough for something that can kill a protoss player easily who doesn't scout as early as 9 (the only matchup where scouting that early is still common, just because of the thread of this tactic). Show nested quote +and an engineering bay is only a minor delay for a 16 hatch (which means you went pool first and thus have access to lings to take down the ebay fairly quickly) Nope, I go 16 hatch first, if you constantly make drones and don't save larvae at any point you will only get enough minerals for a hatch at 16. My preferred opener in ZvT is 16 hatch 18 pool, 18 gas. Which is actually completely safe against gasless expand or reactored hellions, but if they 2rax you you're pretty dead so you have to drone scout in order to verify their opening or gamble on the fact that 2rax has fallen out of fashion. Show nested quote +Again, definitely a different scale of damage. Also, how do you "find" a half-complete ebay? There should be an overlord spotting the area, or else you're doing something wrong. No there shouldn't, overlord simply isn't there yet when you are about to start your hatch, and when you're about to start it the ebay is already half way done if they send a 9/10 scv on a lot of maps (I know this, because I am that jerk that sends a 10 scv just to block hatch firsts). The only way to know that is going on is to just send a drone early to check for ebay blocks or to have that early scv pass an ovie and be like 'that's a really early scv'. And even then, even if you have 1 drone waiting there, he can probablty get it up to 25% construction before he can halt construction. I find that stuff to be far more annoying myself than 2rax with bunker block, which is pretty all innish and can be dealt with, I'm not sure how to deal with this tactic myself. You just save up 300 minerals for your 16 hatch, rally your 15th drone to your natural to make it, and bam, an engie bay there when it arrives there at 280 mins and you're like 'Well, 16 pool it is then'
Standard ZvT hatch-first is the  14 hatch (ZvT). If you want to argue what is more potentially damaging, don't do it based on your personal, non-standard opening. Ok, cool, ebay block sucks big time for you, but in the average ZvT it's not nearly as big a deal as you claim it to be.
As for bunker ramp block vs. bunkers behind the mineral lines, there's a reason why we don't see TvZ bunker rushes all the time in competitive play, while mapmakers and tournaments have gone out of their way to remove the ability to ramp block (and when the opportunity happens to present itself, it's exploited in favour of previously prepared strategies -- see Byun vs. NesTea). You can try to downplay it as much as you want, but it doesn't help me take you seriously.
|
On August 09 2012 14:15 Semmo wrote:
Why is this thread even here? The lowered supply depot works perfectly. You can destroy it pretty fast, stops all the nonsense. what's the point of coming up with something new? It's not a new metagame, map design, or anything.
EDIT: I read the thread a bit more, and You could change the texture of the depot or something so it's not just some random terran building for once, and it's just part of the game now. noone is complaining about it :/
Also, there are people who deliberately wall of below the ramp, with supply depots for example, so you have like a double entrance vs baneling busts.
By the way, you can do the mineral trick to kill the pylons really quick as well. See catz's video i think.
I direct you to this post: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=358984¤tpage=2#26
Edit: Also this post: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=358984¤tpage=2#32
|
On August 09 2012 14:25 iamcaustic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2012 13:24 SiskosGoatee wrote:On August 09 2012 09:52 iamcaustic wrote:On August 09 2012 09:34 SiskosGoatee wrote:On August 09 2012 06:47 iamcaustic wrote:
Edit: I do get what you're saying, how Zergs can implement certain tactics to avoid the issue from occurring in most cases, but I do feel like this is one of those things that simply shouldn't be viable to begin with. Should 6pools or early bunkers in general be? A bunker at a ramp attempt really is not that much more scary than just two early bunkers behind minerals in hard to reach places honestly. I also feel more 'Oh great, now I'm behind' when a Terran decides to send a 10 scv and I find a half completed engineering bay at the place my 16 hatch was supposed to go. I absolutely don't feel confident in taking my third versus Terran and I'm not sure what to do after that. What about the tactic where they make a hatch and a queen and try to get a creep tumour ZvP? I feel this is about as hard to stop from going up as a pylon block, it's a similar investment, and it puts the P about as much behind if it gets up as Z is put behind if the 3 pylon wall with a cannon behind it gets up. Bunker ramp block is actually a lot more damaging than bunkers behind minerals. Sure, both will put a Zerg behind, but the ramp block is of a greater scale. At least with bunkers behind minerals, Zergs have opportunities to set up spine crawlers at the natural, make a bunch of lings, and basically overpower the bunkers before they're able to kill the hatchery. With a proper ramp block, that hatchery is going down no matter what the Zerg does. I can say this with confidence as a Terran player who does this tactic on the ladder. If the bunkers get up yeah, but it's so much easier to stop them from going up if they do a ramp block than if they use certain mineral spots on certrain maps where you can't use drone drilling. Ramp bunkers are amongst the easiest bunkers to stop if you know they are making them because they're the closet to your main so the least travel distance. Surface area used to be a problem but just isn't any more with the drone drill, if you just bring 8 drones down in time before they even start they have a really tough time getting them up, much tougher than certain mineral line spots. 6-pool is easily stoppable with a simple wall Tell that to the many Protoss players who stopped 6pools without losing a single probe only to get a 'normal macro game' out of it almost. The risk/reward ratio of 7pools in ZvP is really skewed in my opinion. It is not nearly all in enough for something that can kill a protoss player easily who doesn't scout as early as 9 (the only matchup where scouting that early is still common, just because of the thread of this tactic). and an engineering bay is only a minor delay for a 16 hatch (which means you went pool first and thus have access to lings to take down the ebay fairly quickly) Nope, I go 16 hatch first, if you constantly make drones and don't save larvae at any point you will only get enough minerals for a hatch at 16. My preferred opener in ZvT is 16 hatch 18 pool, 18 gas. Which is actually completely safe against gasless expand or reactored hellions, but if they 2rax you you're pretty dead so you have to drone scout in order to verify their opening or gamble on the fact that 2rax has fallen out of fashion. Again, definitely a different scale of damage. Also, how do you "find" a half-complete ebay? There should be an overlord spotting the area, or else you're doing something wrong. No there shouldn't, overlord simply isn't there yet when you are about to start your hatch, and when you're about to start it the ebay is already half way done if they send a 9/10 scv on a lot of maps (I know this, because I am that jerk that sends a 10 scv just to block hatch firsts). The only way to know that is going on is to just send a drone early to check for ebay blocks or to have that early scv pass an ovie and be like 'that's a really early scv'. And even then, even if you have 1 drone waiting there, he can probablty get it up to 25% construction before he can halt construction. I find that stuff to be far more annoying myself than 2rax with bunker block, which is pretty all innish and can be dealt with, I'm not sure how to deal with this tactic myself. You just save up 300 minerals for your 16 hatch, rally your 15th drone to your natural to make it, and bam, an engie bay there when it arrives there at 280 mins and you're like 'Well, 16 pool it is then' Standard ZvT hatch-first is the 14 hatch (ZvT). 14 hatch has not been standard for a loooooong time. 15 hatch has been standard for a while though 16 hatch is definitely not uncommon at all.
If you want to argue what is more potentially damaging, don't do it based on your personal, non-standard opening. Ok, cool, ebay block sucks big time for you, but in the average ZvT it's not nearly as big a deal as you claim it to be. With all due respect, you don't seem to know what is standard, no one goes 14 hatch any more, I'd reckon it's about 70% 15 and 30% 16 hatch.
You'd be hard pressed to find a single tournament game in the last year where a Zerg went 14 hatch against a Terran. There's just no use in going 14 hatch 14 pool because both 15 hatch 15 pool and 16 hatch 15 pool in fact give you a slightly earlier pool and a better drone count, even though your pool is one drone earlier, with 14 hatch 14 pool, the fact that you had those 2 extra drones mining for that time means a 15 hatch 15 pool gives you an earlier pool. 16 hatch 15 pool again gives you an earlier pool because one more drone mining for a longer time, but a later hatch.
As for bunker ramp block vs. bunkers behind the mineral lines, there's a reason why we don't see TvZ bunker rushes all the time in competitive play Because they can be dealt with, you also didn't see them all the time before neutral depots, because even then, when they were far more powerful, they could be dealt with.
while mapmakers and tournaments have gone out of their way to remove the ability to ramp block Mapmakers and tournaments have done a lot more bizarre things like keeping the ridiculously imbalanced map crossfire in circulation for very long. Blizzard has all the stats and they don't consider it imbalanced or they would've changed it, they have the power to make any change they want including modifying ramp footprints to require 4 pylons and 3 bunkers if they want, yet they choose not to, no doubt because Dustid, Kimder, the balancing archon, doesn't consider it imbalanced with the vast array of stats to their disposal.
You can try to downplay it as much as you want, but it doesn't help me take you seriously. Hmmhmm, so how about you give me a single replay of the last 10 months in tournament play where a Zerg went 14 hatch in ZvT?
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Hatchery_First
As the hatch first article says, 15 hatch is the standard. (though Liquipedia at various places will claim that extremely outdated strategies are "the current standard" because no one updates those articles. It also claims that one base colossus is "currently the standard PvT opener".)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
