EPT[Q/D] Protoss "1/1/1" ? - Page 2
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Floophead_III
United States1832 Posts
| ||
|
Z3kk
4099 Posts
Robo, stargate, gateway won't be enough, because gateway units are the only strong, stable, and feasible units you can get out early enough. By the time you get out your robo and stargate, you probably won't have much gas, and more importantly, you just won't have enough units. You might have a few zealots and stalkers, but the two other production buildings likely drained your resources, and your immortal or air units will be coming out too late to support your staple (and stable) gateway units. A reactionary type of play with 1/1/1 wouldn't be possible, because you wouldn't have the time and resources to get out enough units to react. You'd get steam-rolled by anyone who scouts your build or creates a decently-sized army. | ||
|
Skyro
United States1823 Posts
| ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
In addition, the defensive power of Terran, namely the tank, enables Terran to turtle up to the point where their 1/1/1 is really able to kick in. Protoss doesn't have that same defensive capability that early in the game. EDIT: Another point to bring up is the fact that the Terran tech tree is very linear. Barracks opens factory opens starport. On the other hand, Protoss tech is more branched out and specialized. Gateway opens up cybernetics core which opens up three totally independent tech routes. The resource and time commitment to tech those routes are too heavy for the early game where a true 1/1/1 would exist. Later in the game, it is completely feasible to have multiple tech trees being used, but that's only because the existing production/resource harvesting mechanisms are already in place. | ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
| ||
|
[RB]Black
United States55 Posts
Terran - Barracks -> Factory -> Starport allows you to produce units as each structure gets up. you almost have your entire tech path available to you, so it is super easy to transition by switching reactors/tech. It open so many opportunities. and if you use tanks it's easy to get second cc up with a smaller force. I think it's strong because terran has 2 viable main army production structures. Bio/Mech with one support building being the starport protoss - Gateway -> Core -> robo/star.. It's a bit ugly because as the gate finishes you have to make an entire other building before you can drop the tech buildings to even make units. it limits your unit count too hard to expand confidently. Protoss has 1 main army production building(gateway) with 2 support structures. I feel like the 2 or 3 gate robo is more stable and actually accomplishes a similar goal of being very adaptable. | ||
|
Xanatoss
Germany539 Posts
In my opinion the key to this consideration is to substitute Stalkers with Immortals. By comparing the two units I noticed that: 1. 1 Immo has equal costs as 2 Stalkers 2. 1 Immo has nearly same DPS vs unamored Units as 2 Stalkers and around 75% more DPS vs amored Units than 2 Stalkers 3. 1 Immo has indeed 20 HP (absolute) less than 2 Stalkers but this is imho compensated by the fact that vs High Dmg (>10) Hardened Shield grants more EHP (effective HP) and vs Low Dmg the greater pool of nonshield-HP benefits more from 1 Armor 4. 1 Immo takes just 55 sec to build, while 2 Stalkers take 84 sec to build with Gateways and 64 sec even with Warpgates, in addition chronoboosting an immo gives a percentaged greater reduction of production time than chronoboosting 2 "queued" stalkers Only "major" disadvantages I recognized were: 5. Immos have 1 less range than stalker and 6. Immos can not shoot air 7. Immos can not blink 5th point seems actually more like an advantage to me because there will be just a few Range5 Units which will result in quick establishment of efficient concaves 6th point is also not really a disadvantage because one reason of the 1/1/1 build is to enable building phoenixes on demand easily 7th point seems also irrelevant because I guess if you intend to get blinkstalkers you wount neither build a stargate nor a robo early on According to all these points I consider the Robo as 2 Warpgates building Stalker or, refering to the Terran 1/1/1, a Warpgate with an even better Reactor which also relativize the higher robo costs compared to a single gateway. Next consideration is to afford the gas costs. Afaik the gas provided by two 3probe-Extractors equals around 240/min and the normalized costs of constant immo + phoenix production equals 242/min. From this it follows that the only ugly part is to squeeze 2-3 sentries for guardian shield in. Furthermore Phoenixes offer a solution to the EMP problem by simply lifting the ghost up while your groundforces engaging the enemy, even a single phoenix can bolster your army by lifting one of the few siege tanks involved in early pushes and they are viable scouts which allow you to skip observers until detection is needed. All in all it seems to me, that the idea of 1/1/1 Protoss can not be blank abandoned. Unfortunately EU-Servers are still not online, so i cant test it myself :[ Oh and btw: I wonder why the Robotics Bay is even mentioned in this thread. Collossus from one base is a whole build itself and it is at least to me obvious that this allready thin build cant incorperate a stargate. | ||
|
Skyro
United States1823 Posts
Immortal Pros: -Instant damage (i.e. no projectile) = no overkill Stalker Pros: -Speed (big difference) -Made from a cheap, core building rather than an expensive building that only makes support units -Can be warped-in IMO at the end of the day the Stalker's pros outweight their cons on everything but armored ground units, which is what people already uses Immortals for. | ||
|
ionlyplayPROtoss
Canada573 Posts
| ||
|
gdroxor
United States639 Posts
1/1/1 as Protoss is clunky, takes forever and is not supportable on 1 base. Advancing the tech tree involves building at least one additional building, which is expensive and slow. A mix of gateways, stargates and robos might lead to some new strategies, but they won't play out at least until you expand. tl;dr mixing production buildings as protoss is not a feasible early game strategy in the context of 1/1/1 terran. | ||
|
AncienTs
Japan227 Posts
rofl does anyone still remember those maps? :-p | ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
I don't know about the other matchups. I always preferred to expand earlier than that. (Against Zerg, I doubt you'd want both Phoenix and Immortals, because Hydras and Queens are the natural response to Phoenix and they also work against Immortals. Against Terran, I still doubt you'd want both air and Immortals, because the simplest counters to them (marine, possibly with ghost) are the same.) | ||
|
uberdeluxe
Canada306 Posts
well, think about it this way: the money it costs you to get all the tech would be more than 1000 minerals/gas. That's a tonne of money, and even with sacrificing a huge amount of probe production, your opponant will have a way larger army, and even if one of the tech trees you got countered it, it wouldn't be anywhere near effective enough to work. Maybe a noob shouldn't be posting his "very vivid mushroom dreams about SC2." | ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
On July 09 2010 09:22 Severedevil wrote: 1/1/1 is very effective in PvP, because Phoenix > non-Stalker and Immortal > Stalker. I don't know about the other matchups. I always preferred to expand earlier than that. (Against Zerg, I doubt you'd want both Phoenix and Immortals, because Hydras and Queens are the natural response to Phoenix and they also work against Immortals. Against Terran, I still doubt you'd want both air and Immortals, because the simplest counters to them (marine, possibly with ghost) are the same.) I honestly doubt this. If you 1/1/1 in PvP the other guy can just go 3gate zeal or 4warpgate and just completely overrun you in seconds. If you 1/1/1 and utilize Phoenix, you'll need at least 5+ to really have them be any use. Your opponent can jsut grab stalkers to counter your phoenixes easily and out-mass you. Sure, you can build immortals out of you robo, but your opponent can then just get some zealots. In other words, your opponent can easily counter your composition using purely gateway units. Furthermore, the resources you spent on teching will be used by your opponent to achieve a larger army size and larger army size is almost always the winning factor in PvP. | ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
For comparison, a blinkstalker build will require at least 3 warpgates (500/50) + citadel (150/100) + blink (150/150) for a total of 800/300. A 3 gate Robo build takes 700/150. A four warpgate rush still takes 650/50. On July 09 2010 09:39 Ryuu314 wrote: I honestly doubt this. If you 1/1/1 in PvP the other guy can just go 3gate zeal or 4warpgate and just completely overrun you in seconds. Probe scout --> identify build --> adjust to build. 3 gate zeal obviously can't deny scouting. Can a 4 warpgate rush deny pre-Phoenix scouting and still brank the front before the first Immortal completes? I've lost to it before, but I'm fairly confident it's defensible. If you 1/1/1 and utilize Phoenix, you'll need at least 5+ to really have them be any use. Your opponent can jsut grab stalkers to counter your phoenixes easily and out-mass you. Sure, you can build immortals out of you robo, but your opponent can then just get some zealots. In other words, your opponent can easily counter your composition using purely gateway units. Furthermore, the resources you spent on teching will be used by your opponent to achieve a larger army size and larger army size is almost always the winning factor in PvP. Phoenix murder light units, Immortals murder armored units, Zealots are solid and beefy against anything except Phoenix and Colossi. The plan isn't to lift your Stalkers and run under them or something. Pheonix kill your light shit. (They have to take Stalker fire to kill Sentries, but that's OK because they're beefy and lightly-armored and Sentries die fast. They can kill Zealots from the cover of the Zealot/Immortal line, due to flying and having four range.) Immortal DPS vs. light is the same as two stalkers, so it's hardly a catastrophe if my Immortals are shooting his Zealots and his Stalkers are shooting my Zealots. I'm still doubtful of Protoss 1/1/1 versus Zerg or Terran since the counters to Immortals and Phoenix/Voids seem to be the same. Maybe a joint Immortal Drop + Void Ray harass could have potential, but I'm none too keen. | ||
|
Leeoku
1617 Posts
| ||
|
JaspluR
Australia174 Posts
you wont have enough gateway units to even touch your opponents army with terran they can wall off and bunker and play defensively (with hardly any cost, just making buildings at their ramp and they can salvage bunkers) where toss would have to invest in some cannons and would cost even more | ||
|
mrlie3
Canada350 Posts
I lost quiet alot to this build... Trick is to expand early during the initial contain with Stargate units so Protoss can outmacro with gateway units until Colossus pops up. | ||
|
Acidlineup
123 Posts
On July 09 2010 12:40 Leeoku wrote: also because protoss has to wait for the cyber core before going into the robo/stargate which takes extra time. Same as the other 2 races. Cyber core = Orbital command = Queen = 150 minerals Protos allredy have their macro mechanics built in Nexsus. On topic, i think it could be valid against protoss but u have to remember not to build stalkers at all and save that gas for immos. It could be possible tho for 1/1/1 build against zerg and terran also, just to simply switch stargate with a twilight council. (zelot charge to counter marines and marauders OR to simply build dark shrine for harassment, also zelot charge is a counter to hydras and u can check in game help that zelot IS the counter for both marauder and hydralisk and i suppose they meant if and only IF u get charge). | ||
|
Dao
13 Posts
| ||
| ||
