Can you guys do a section on 2-3 gate Immortal versus 4-5 gate? You said it's better in the midgame, but I can never make it that far if I face 4-5 gate. A majority of my opponents always do that and it basically forces to do so as well.

Jimmy Raynor

902 Posts

May 13 2010 09:10 GMT

#62

On May 13 2010 14:13 Chaoz wrote:
Can you guys do a section on 2-3 gate Immortal versus 4-5 gate? You said it's better in the midgame, but I can never make it that far if I face 4-5 gate. A majority of my opponents always do that and it basically forces to do so as well.

Exactly. How am I supposed to get immortals with 2 gates if my opponents has 4 gates. The other player just pressures with mass zealots.

Relik

Hungary6 Posts

May 13 2010 09:55 GMT

#63

The main problem with all tech builds is that to hold off a (potential) 4 gate opponent: you have to give up map control because the only defensible position is your main ramp. Then your opponent can expand with impunity and even catch up to you in tech. Thus in midgame you are not facing a 1 base/4 gate opponent with you 1 base/2-3 gate + robo, but a 2 base/6-8 gate + 1-2 robo. There is of course a small timing window as the expansion goes up, but the production capacity of 4 warpgates makes defending quite easy.

Another big problem is the map pool, which as of now favors early aggression with small distances (at least compared to the high mobility of the armies, also proxy- and warpgates make reinforcements arrive at almost the same time for both sides), hard to defend natural expansions (there are no really small chokes and no ramps for naturals!) and open third expansions. Most BW maps used nowadays favor macro builds because they have been designed on opposite lines than Blizzards current SC2 beta maps.
This, I think however, is a conceptual difference between the Korean and Blizzard's mapmakers. blizz seems to want quick, fast paced and action packed games, while the Korean BW style turned towards longer (20-40 minutes or even longer) matches - I imagine because a big BO5 match that is done in 50 minutes is lackluster compared to the same BO5 played over, lets say 3 hours with lots of show (and advertising).

Anyway, as long as we have to play on these maps, I think the most robust play style is a strong opening to develop map control then take an expansion, while teching comes last. The success of any FE or quick tech depends on the willingness of your opponent to leave you alone and not prepare for your next move.

go4it

Croatia91 Posts

May 13 2010 10:22 GMT

#64

Great work, thanks Whiplash & HuK.

bobcat

United States488 Posts

May 13 2010 21:27 GMT

#65

Great article, I like going 2-3 gate immortal and adapting upon scout into either Colossus or phoenixes.

Ghostcom

Denmark4781 Posts

May 13 2010 21:44 GMT

#66

Gogogogo - do the same for PvT and PvZ

(half-joke) Awesome write-up

CagedMind

United States506 Posts

May 13 2010 22:09 GMT

#67

Relik the "main problem" is that you can't make a nexus. There is a big enough window to roll over the person expanding.

shammythefox

United Kingdom286 Posts

May 13 2010 22:09 GMT

#68

I would question your logic that phoenix rush < DT rush. Phoenix's come out incredibly early when rushing for them and they are of course excellent scout units, one would assume also that you'll be in the opponents base harrasing with your phoenix anyway so it seems quite a challenge to NOT spot the dark shrine going up and respond accordingly (with its HUUUUGE build timesez >.<)

Edit: just read your explanation and okay fair point but assuming your Cboosting the phoenixes I think you would still have by far enough response time when you move out with your 5 phoenix (Remember even if you are late on the detection, if you are still on 1 base you can easily defend against dark templar by using spotter probes to block your pylon and being quick with forcefields.

shammythefox

United Kingdom286 Posts

May 13 2010 22:18 GMT

#69

On May 12 2010 17:50 Teebagger wrote:
Helpful and interesting topic since I'm a protoss player!

But I'm a little curious as to why a colossus build is superior to a 4-5 warpgate all-in. I would think that the all-in build would scout the hard tech and attack accordingly. A heavy zealot/sentry with some good FFs would ripe through the 1-2 colossus of the player wouldn't it?

As the collosi player you will be the defendor (and thus obviously have superior positioning) and whilst defending on one base you only need the one forcefield, theres really no way to get your collosi surrounded unless your half asleep, and with the range upgrade the leeway on positioning is just so much in your favor, if this build encounter had a fight out in the open ~ 2 collosi it could be a different story.

edit: apologies double post =[

-Valor-

United States283 Posts

May 13 2010 22:18 GMT

#70

Haha this graph is awesome. I actually went through the graph and it's correct from my experience as a protoss player.

Ruthless

United States492 Posts

May 13 2010 22:22 GMT

#71

I like how all the analysis is on one base all in builds. This is a nice analysis of which ones do better. Obviously you can try to transition out of these later for an expansion but meh.

Cheerio

Ukraine3178 Posts

May 17 2010 20:02 GMT

#72

This match up is the rarest/funniest IMO

Oh yes. I remember a game when we raised each other bases with rays and darks and the one to raise more quickly won.

OldSkuLL

Turkey34 Posts

May 17 2010 20:16 GMT

#73

4 gate >> colossus i think. just use sentries...

Raneth

England527 Posts

May 17 2010 20:24 GMT

#74

hmm, since the most common way i've seen people try to counter the pheonix build is by massing stalkers, whenever i do it, instead of adding a third gateway, i usually add a robo, gives me obs in time to stop dt's without having to give away my stargate tech too early, and the imortals really do help against the mass stalkers with my zealots, does mean i have a couple less sentries than would be ideal, but i can usually target theirs with my pheonix anyway so i come out ahead in forcefields, i usually do quite well with this build,

DeckOneBell

United States526 Posts

May 17 2010 21:33 GMT

#75

I'd make an argument for Forge FE, at LEAST on Lost Temple. I realize that proper counters aren't that hard to do, and the other player should be ahead in minerals and tech, but if you're confident in your macro, it's possible to pull it off. I manage to win with this fairly often as a rank ~32 plat.

Mostly, if timed correctly, and if it also catches the opposite player off-guard, then it should deal with 4gate, and I've won against 2gate robo as well.

Though, proper gameplay from the opponent will probably able to beat fast forge, because of the extra minerals and tech. I just think it's an option, if done correctly, to catch your opponent off guard, and hopefully take advantage of the confusion. A lot of players (who admittedly, might not be the best) try to do a push in response to fast forge, and end up losing because I'm able to muster up probes at two bases instead of just one, where I usually proceed to a 5gate build with mass blink stalkers.

OTHER THAN THAT, I really like this thread, thanks for the info.

AncienTs

Japan227 Posts

August 06 2010 16:20 GMT

#76

What was the build you and HuK used for the "Dark Templar Rush", I'm extremely curious; or is it just some sort of DT harassment? And if so, then the dt rush really shouldn't be charted! It's kind of misleading~ :3

peace & love

SharkSpider

Canada606 Posts

August 06 2010 16:40 GMT

#77

On May 18 2010 05:16 OldSkuLL wrote:
4 gate >> colossus i think. just use sentries...

For... guardian shield? Hallucination?

Netherlands12045 Posts

August 06 2010 16:41 GMT

#78

wow, good job on digging this thread up!
this really need a HUGE update on new build like forge FE and wrap rush KR style =))

Whiplash

United States2928 Posts

August 06 2010 16:47 GMT

#79

Heh yeah some stuff have changed since may as far as this guide goes. I'll talk to huk and see if we can make an updated version some time in the future.

edit: Huk isnt interested so nope

Netherlands12045 Posts

August 06 2010 16:54 GMT

#80

On August 07 2010 01:47 Whiplash wrote:
Heh yeah some stuff have changed since may as far as this guide goes. I'll talk to huk and see if we can make an updated version some time in the future.

edit: Huk isnt interested so nope

dude, contact plexa and antimage, else me :D... lots of people want to hear pros' opinion on mirror MU atm.
simply bc they are mostly retarded except TvT