|
There have been countless topics about this before, pool first really is economically better.
A short recap:
queens generate larvae at a higher rate then a hatchery.
Pool first build gives a queen earlier and a hatchery later. The starting time of the pool in a hatch first is the same as the starting time of the hatch in a pool first build.
Having the queen earlier earlier equates to more larvae in total then having the hatchery earlier. The queen gives eggs in batches of 4 though while the hatchery gives them 1 at a time and 1 directly, if you seek to create 8 fast zerglings for example hatch first can be easier.
The advantage of a faster 2nd queen with a hatch first build is almost a moot point, given that you can't support dual queens this early anyway. 2 fast queens only results in unspent larvae especially since you need to make zerglings and not drones against a capable opponent.
Conclusion, overall queen(pool) first is better as it's more versatile and can eco-boom better as well, hatch first is only relevant as it's easier to get those early 8 zerglings which are preferred by some players to counter the first 2 zealots.
Just because some 'pro's' do hatch first doesn't mean it's better. There are tons of example's of great players doing suboptimal builds even though it's easy to proof some are just better. Just look at 9 overlord vs 10 overlord for example, 9 is strictly better but some still do 10. Many players don't bother to take a analytical view at build orders including the pro's as lots of times it doesn't really matter much. It can also be argued that the difference between pool and hatch first is too small to really matter and that personal preferences are more important.
|
I just keep doing what I would normally do without having a FE if the opponent is doing their best to block it. You just have to keep going as efficient as possible and not let them frustrate you. I'm not the best by any means but I am pretty high in ladder when I have the time to play.
|
On May 06 2010 01:25 Markwerf wrote:
There have been countless topics about this before, pool first really is economically better.
A short recap:
queens generate larvae at a higher rate then a hatchery.
Pool first build gives a queen earlier and a hatchery later. The starting time of the pool in a hatch first is the same as the starting time of the hatch in a pool first build.
Having the queen earlier earlier equates to more larvae in total then having the hatchery earlier. The queen gives eggs in batches of 4 though while the hatchery gives them 1 at a time and 1 directly, if you seek to create 8 fast zerglings for example hatch first can be easier.
The advantage of a faster 2nd queen with a hatch first build is almost a moot point, given that you can't support dual queens this early anyway. 2 fast queens only results in unspent larvae especially since you need to make zerglings and not drones against a capable opponent.
Conclusion, overall queen(pool) first is better as it's more versatile and can eco-boom better as well, hatch first is only relevant as it's easier to get those early 8 zerglings which are preferred by some players to counter the first 2 zealots.
Just because some 'pro's' do hatch first doesn't mean it's better. There are tons of example's of great players doing suboptimal builds even though it's easy to proof some are just better. Just look at 9 overlord vs 10 overlord for example, 9 is strictly better but some still do 10. Many players don't bother to take a analytical view at build orders including the pro's as lots of times it doesn't really matter much. It can also be argued that the difference between pool and hatch first is too small to really matter and that personal preferences are more important.
Pool first builds are more "hungry", you can't allow yourself to produce anything but drones for a good period of time, while with hatch first, you get more minerals early on, so you can spend some of them on early defenses if needed.
|
Another reason for a hatch first is being able to place a spine crawler or 2 at your natural earlier to deal with a timming push on the natural (as opposed to being pushed while your natural is building).
I highly favor pool first too, but its certainly not stricly better.
|
On May 06 2010 01:42 Thamoo wrote:
Another reason for a hatch first is being able to place a spine crawler or 2 at your natural earlier to deal with a timming push on the natural (as opposed to being pushed while your natural is building).
I highly favor pool first too, but its certainly not stricly better.
I think it's easier to just poop a creep tumor with your Queen instead of the second batch of larvae. On most maps it'll get creep to the expo more than fast enough.
|
@ proom, you're wrong hatch first builds DON'T get more minerals early on.... Don't state something without some proper backup.
@ thamoo, i agree there are some small benefits to hatch first but they are really small and the benefits of the pool first really outweigh these I think. Offcourse when one build has some unique benefit you can never speak of strictly better anymore but it almost is the case really.
@ ema, using creep tumor too early isn't really advisable as you effectively wasted 4 eggs by doing so. If somehow your build has a overproduction of larvae your making some mistakes, perhaps your getting the 2nd queen too early and should make a few extra drones instead first. Remember that it costs minerals to produce these extra larvae but they don't generate anything if you don't use them, ergo builds that can easily miss larvae are flawed.
|
What about the transition to lair. Will hatch -> pool -> 2x queen -> lair be faster or slower than pool -> hatch -> queen -> 2nd queen from main -> lair?
It seems like hatch first would be faster to hit lair, and subsequently better against the risk of void rays or other air units.
Plus how does the larva compare for the mid game, something around an immortal push time. It seems like hatch first would have more available larva at a comparable # of drones since that 2nd queen comes out earlier.
|
On May 06 2010 04:44 Logo wrote:
What about the transition to lair. Will hatch -> pool -> 2x queen -> lair be faster or slower than pool -> hatch -> queen -> 2nd queen from main -> lair?
It seems like hatch first would be faster to hit lair, and subsequently better against the risk of void rays or other air units.
Plus how does the larva compare for the mid game, something around an immortal push time. It seems like hatch first would have more available larva at a comparable # of drones since that 2nd queen comes out earlier.
Depends on the gaz timming actually. Theres a big differance between Pool > extractor > hatch and Pool > hatch > extractor.
|
I used to play pool first extensively and I'm still telling you hands down, hatch first has always given me a MUCH stronger eco. I've found it much better it not only handling 2 gate rushes (unles they are proxied). In actuality, I go 14 hatch because I get gas extremely late. I get my second queen and stay on minerals forever, and build only lings to defend an initial push. I usually get 3 queens early game as well, the extra is for any anti-air/hellions/creep tumors/reapers, etc. With the fast second queen, you pump out an insanely strong number of drones. You literally just can't do that with a pool first build, I've tried it.
EDIT: The reason very well may possibly be mental though from SC1. In a pool first build, the reason you got the pool first was to get lings out as soon as the pool was done to counter cheese and then pressure hte enemy. Most people do the same thing in SC2. How many of you when you 13-14-15 pool build lings as soon as your pool is done? 14 hatch you continue droning much longer before you build lings. If you're not building any lings when your pool is done (at all) I can imagine pool first MIGHT be better. But I've still had far superior results in hatch first than pool first against all nonproxies, and I was around a rank ~1800 plat before hte reset (although I never once peaked, everytime I played my score would go up another 30-40 points, I just didn't play enough to see where I'd cap off).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
