|
On July 23 2010 05:34 mecra wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 00:41 gREIFOCs wrote:On July 18 2010 16:48 mecra wrote:
Did he say it was "Brilliant"? Did he say it "can't be scouted"?
People on here just don't like ideas that aren't their own to the point of having to try and prove every hole in someone's strategy. Everyone seems to want to show the superiority of their own builds. This is not a strategy. Is a cheese tactic. I'm really not saying is bad, but people mix the two concepts. A strategy is the long therm span, is the battles that gain something (map control, resources, ect) for a ulterior motive. This depends on no scouting, so is cheese (not that there's something wrong with it). And, is not a part inside a strategic layout. It's self suficcient, it's mass marines, and that's it. So, reallly. This isn't a strategy. It could be a opener of a strategy if it has a realistic follow up, it could be a strong early pressure, ect. But just "build 6 rax and pump rines untill he dies" is by no means, a strategy. ps. I subscribe to Clausewitz definition of Tactic and Strategy. and this doesn't change my view on the matter. Now you're just being anal about definition. So now we have meaning nazis and strat/tactic haters in the thread! Great.  I could rip apart all your inclusions into what you deem a tactic and a strategy definition until we're just arguing on the use of commas. There's no value in nit picking grammer or definition just to try and get across the fact that you don't like the technique or tool or method or plan or any other freaking word I want to use for it. Contribute to the content of the proposed "strategem" if you need to go to that level. Should we now call these Cheese Methods? Cheesy Maneuvers? Chedder-like Contrivances?
I never said that I didn't like the strategy. In the right context of meta-game it could be very devastating. I want to make clear that I don't think in ladder games, but bo3/b05 series.
And I disagree, definitions show what you think about the concepts that rule the game. If you can't distinguish between an opening and a long therm strategy, you will eventually mix-up because when you are playing a real game, you need a strategy. Because you must account to the possibility of the push failing. It's as simple as that.
The strategy is the umbrella that covers the tactic. If you use the tactic as a umbrella, there are lots, and lots of situations where you are just going to loose. Not because you were worst at the game, but because of a misunderstanding of the way you need to think about the game.
The lack of context of this tactic inside a strategy is what concerns me. Not the tactic itself.
Also I want to add, this are not my concepts, I didn't develop them. I stole them from Clausewitz.
|
On July 22 2010 19:41 ChickenLips wrote:I just played both builds (start building Raxes asap, wait for 750 minerals) and results are: insta-rax are about 30 seconds faster in getting 24 marines. Marine production starts way sooner and you are a lot less susceptible to weird early rushes. (waiting for 750 minerals took 6:50 to get 24 marines, insta Raxes took 6:15-6:20. Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 19:21 whatthemate wrote:
At first I was confused as to what Sabresandiego said, but now I understand what he theoretically suggested, but that doesn't change the fact that he is completely WRONG.
Practically speaking you have a much larger window of opportunity of attack if you place down barracks consecutively early asap and get more marines.
If you attempt the float 750 minerals style you will have less marines and timing attack goes out the window because all it takes is just a sentry to force field their ramp or your ramp and its all over while protoss tech so insanely fast to colossi. Also in the mean time protoss could easily get out a second nexus and more gas and mass cannon > marine.
scvs mine what less than say 50 minerals per minute because of diminishing returns. It's better to have less scvs on mineral line and use that scv to make rax because of diminishing returns. There are already dimishing returns as soon as your have more than 8 scvs on mineral line. So its better to make rax earlier and then return to mining. if there are 16 scvs on minerals that have had time to adjust to each others mining cycles i cannot imagine that there are diminishing returns since they never interfere with other scv's mining. Other than that i fully agree, the waiting for 750 minerals is like the (double) extractor trick, feels kinda cool and effective, but is economically worse off.
Good test chicken lips. What this shows is that waiting for 750 minerals to plop down rax is not optimal for the 24 marine rush at 7:00. The all rax at once build will surpass the 1 rax at a time build at a specific marine count.
If you are shooting for 24 marines as your "timing point" then you are better off saving up only 450 minerals and plopping down 3 rax at once. The 5 rax at once build is stronger after about 30-40 marines.
|
On July 23 2010 05:55 Sabresandiego wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 19:41 ChickenLips wrote:I just played both builds (start building Raxes asap, wait for 750 minerals) and results are: insta-rax are about 30 seconds faster in getting 24 marines. Marine production starts way sooner and you are a lot less susceptible to weird early rushes. (waiting for 750 minerals took 6:50 to get 24 marines, insta Raxes took 6:15-6:20. On July 22 2010 19:21 whatthemate wrote:
At first I was confused as to what Sabresandiego said, but now I understand what he theoretically suggested, but that doesn't change the fact that he is completely WRONG.
Practically speaking you have a much larger window of opportunity of attack if you place down barracks consecutively early asap and get more marines.
If you attempt the float 750 minerals style you will have less marines and timing attack goes out the window because all it takes is just a sentry to force field their ramp or your ramp and its all over while protoss tech so insanely fast to colossi. Also in the mean time protoss could easily get out a second nexus and more gas and mass cannon > marine.
scvs mine what less than say 50 minerals per minute because of diminishing returns. It's better to have less scvs on mineral line and use that scv to make rax because of diminishing returns. There are already dimishing returns as soon as your have more than 8 scvs on mineral line. So its better to make rax earlier and then return to mining. if there are 16 scvs on minerals that have had time to adjust to each others mining cycles i cannot imagine that there are diminishing returns since they never interfere with other scv's mining. Other than that i fully agree, the waiting for 750 minerals is like the (double) extractor trick, feels kinda cool and effective, but is economically worse off. Good test chicken lips. What this shows is that waiting for 750 minerals to plop down rax is not optimal for the 24 marine rush at 7:00. The all rax at once build will surpass the 1 rax at a time build at a specific marine count.If you are shooting for 24 marines as your "timing point" then you are better off saving up only 450 minerals and plopping down 3 rax at once. The 5 rax at once build is stronger after about 30-40 marines.
Please explain further the bolded part of your quote. And by explain I mean show me with numbers you've tested. If Chickenlips found he got more marines out faster by building the rax one at a time, why, once all the rax are finished and you've got the same scv saturation, would having built them all at once suddenly make marines come out sooner?
|
If you're talking about 6:00 minutes or so to get your attack underway, you are wrong about tech not being ready yet... At 5:30 I can have a CC mostly done along with 3 sieged tanks and 8 or so marines. It will be shut down easily, especially with a bunker.
If this is scouted it will fail hard.
|
yeah yeah. because so many terran players go straight to 3 sieged tanks so early. C'mon....
You guys are assuming some vast abilities of seeing the future. Any terran walls off in 1v1. What, now that you see a wall off you can assume mass rax? What about mass air? He doesn't need a tech lab on the barrack for that!
Now you lose because you went tanks and he went banshees. What if he went mass hellions? Ghosts and now you're nuked because you spent everything into tanks? What if he fast expanded NOT to his natural, but to the gold or to something else closer? Proxy build?
You guys can theorycraft all you want but when you put your hand on the mouse, you won't truly know what's exactly coming at you. So you can't claim superior cock-blocking techniques just because you assume all terrans will go max rax.
Any build when scouted will "fail hard". Watch the pros and the way they see how things go.
|
On July 22 2010 19:41 ChickenLips wrote:
I just played both builds (start building Raxes asap, wait for 750 minerals) and results are: insta-rax are about 30 seconds faster in getting 24 marines. Marine production starts way sooner and you are a lot less susceptible to weird early rushes. (waiting for 750 minerals took 6:50 to get 24 marines, insta Raxes took 6:15-6:20.
How many barracks did you have at 24 marines tho? Look, you have the same amount of minerals to spend either way you build your barracks, so at any time following the completion of the 6 barracks, you're going to have the same number of marines, but I don't want to argue about this anymore.
You definitely want to push out long before you have 24 marines. I can only speak for TvP, but you want just enough marines to kill 2 stalkers when you push out which is about 8. If you wait till 24, P will have warpgates and sentries and you will lose easily.
Waiting till 750 and plopping down 5 more barracks is probably not the optimal way to do an all-in marine cheese anyway. I'm guessing that cutting scv production when you can just barely support your marine production and using only 4 or 5 barracks would get the attack going sooner and make it stronger.
Either way, it's kind of silly to argue about whether building the barracks all at once or one at a time is better. This is a cheese build that's never going to be a common stable opening. If you want to use it, go with whatever works for you.
|
lol
I'm going to scan you with my second 50 energy.
I'm going to know what you're doing.
And I probably already made one tank.
You will be owned, see you on ladder
|
On July 23 2010 06:37 lu_cid wrote:
lol
I'm going to scan you with my second 50 energy.
I'm going to know what you're doing.
And I probably already made one tank.
You will be owned, see you on ladder
What do you do when someone builds his buildings in extremely awkward locations? Your scan becomes worthless.
|
No no, don't argue with lu_cid! He's thought of everything with his scan! He's psykic and knows exactly where all the buildings are giong to be placed and there's never a chance that his opponent would also know about his scanning tactic.(Terrans would never think to get scanned by another terran right?)
He's also made one tank because he knows his opponent will never go air. Oh wait, he's also assuming that going air, the terran will build everything close by so that a scan will see it and he can transition out of tanks and go AA.
Damnit lu_cid, you've owned my logic with your ability to completely understand your opponent even before playing them!
|
Dude you are looking into this way too much.
If I see you have no buildings in your main and no gas, I'm already suspicious and I'm going to send an scv...
If you seriously think this build is the greatest thing ever, go ahead and use it, don't let me discourage you.
|
On July 23 2010 06:43 lu_cid wrote:
Dude you are looking into this way too much.
If I see you have no buildings in your main and no gas, I'm already suspicious and I'm going to send an scv...
If you seriously think this build is the greatest thing ever, go ahead and use it, don't let me discourage you.
and I care about your scouting SCV why? is it checking the whole map? Maybe I'm proxy building on you!
Yeah, it's hard to deny that SCV a scouting. REALLY hard.
Actually, that's good if you're wasting scans on trying to see my stuff. Mules aren't good at all in this game right? and so if I'm using my scans for mules because I'm not caring about your build, I'm already ahead in economy. Thus faster marines.
|
Look, it doesn't matter if I find your cache of raxes or not.
If there's nothing in your main you're doing something cheesy, obviously
|
On July 23 2010 06:46 lu_cid wrote:
Look, it doesn't matter if I find your cache of raxes or not.
If there's nothing in your main you're doing something cheesy, obviously
Why? Is fast expanding cheesy?
Why is cheesy always somethign not the norm? Sounds like if a terran doesn't exactly play the way you want you call cheese.
|
You seem to be implying that figuring out what your opponent is doing is impossible.
One way or another, a good player will figure you out, whether it be scv scouting or a well placed scan.
Like I said... go ahead and use the build, I couldn't care less. Just letting you know that there are better things out there.
|
On July 23 2010 06:48 mecra wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 06:46 lu_cid wrote:
Look, it doesn't matter if I find your cache of raxes or not.
If there's nothing in your main you're doing something cheesy, obviously Why? Is fast expanding cheesy? Why is cheesy always somethign not the norm? Sounds like if a terran doesn't exactly play the way you want you call cheese.
It's cheese because it completely fails if discovered (vs T)
|
But since you're terran, isn't everything cheese because it could fail if you use a scan? Thus someone sitting in their base making a particular unit is cheese because if you scanned it. You could counter it and thus it failed because you discovered it.
Pretty solid logic to me. 
|
Mecra I don't know why you're so agressive about defending this build. Lu_cid may have been a bit of a dick how he said it but he's right, the first thing I thought when I read this was:
I don't care what OP thinks about his timing, I always have a tank out//siege mode before the timing of this push even if I'm going banshees and all it takes is some scouting/a scan ---> a bunker to shut this down. Mass marine is crap vers terran unless they forget to scout.
And like the above poster said -- if it loses if scouted, that's cheese.
|
On July 23 2010 06:54 DanielD wrote:
Mecra I don't know why you're so agressive about defending this build. Lu_cid may have been a bit of a dick how he said it but he's right, the first thing I thought when I read this was:
I don't care what OP thinks about his timing, I always have a tank out//siege mode before the timing of this push even if I'm going banshees and all it takes is some scouting/a scan ---> a bunker to shut this down. Mass marine is crap vers terran unless they forget to scout.
And like the above poster said -- if it loses if scouted, that's cheese.
And like I said, any build can be defeated if scouted. Why do you suppose the Pros scout all the time? That means that the Pro's only use cheese, and just keep switching between cheeses.
I just don't like people theorycrafting instant counters based on their thoughts that they can immediately know what their opponent is doing.
Don't do, "OMG, ONE BUNKER KILLS THIS!" type of crap. Do you build a bunker against any opponent you can't scout because of a wall off? Do you put a bunker if they are fast expanding?
I don't like claims of instant counter based on immediate understanding. That doesn't exist unless you're cheating or your a Pro. (Which people in this thread are not)
Cheese is being thrown around too lightly without understanding what a cheese tactic really is. I would argue that if something can be shut down easily, it isn't cheese. Cheese is something that can't be easily countered, which people claim this strat is. Thus, IMO, it's not cheese.
|
No, not all builds can be defeated if scouted. 3 hatch muta ZvT in BW is expected a lot of the time, and it comes down to micro, unit placement, and what build the T does. 4warpgate push is still hard to beat if you scout it. 3rax ghost push is still hard to beat if you scout it. 15 hatch 16 pool is counterable but not insta-lose if scouted.
6 rax marines TvT? You beat it if you scout it. It's not theory-craft, it's a fact that bunker+ a tank in mineral line destroys marine all-in.
edit: trying to be nicer
And your definition of cheese is weird... is a cannon rush NOT cheese than? Because it's easily counterable.
Cheese is something that is hard to stop if you don't see it coming.
|
On July 23 2010 07:07 mecra wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 06:54 DanielD wrote:
Mecra I don't know why you're so agressive about defending this build. Lu_cid may have been a bit of a dick how he said it but he's right, the first thing I thought when I read this was:
I don't care what OP thinks about his timing, I always have a tank out//siege mode before the timing of this push even if I'm going banshees and all it takes is some scouting/a scan ---> a bunker to shut this down. Mass marine is crap vers terran unless they forget to scout.
And like the above poster said -- if it loses if scouted, that's cheese. And like I said, any build can be defeated if scouted. Why do you suppose the Pros scout all the time? That means that the Pro's only use cheese, and just keep switching between cheeses. I just don't like people theorycrafting instant counters based on their thoughts that they can immediately know what their opponent is doing. Don't do, "OMG, ONE BUNKER KILLS THIS!" type of crap. Do you build a bunker against any opponent you can't scout because of a wall off? Do you put a bunker if they are fast expanding? I don't like claims of instant counter based on immediate understanding. That doesn't exist unless you're cheating or your a Pro. (Which people in this thread are not) Cheese is being thrown around too lightly without understanding what a cheese tactic really is. I would argue that if something can be shut down easily, it isn't cheese. Cheese is something that can't be easily countered, which people claim this strat is. Thus, IMO, it's not cheese.
Mecra, standard builds are standard because they are robust and flexible. It is the best practice to create builds based on the assumption that your opponent will be aware of what you are doing, which they most likely will be (should be anyway).
This particular build is not good in my opinion, because as has been repeated time and time again, it is a 1-base all in play. If your attack doesn't do tons of damage, you will be significantly behind in tech or economy or both.
Specifically, it will be awkward to transition to teching since you haven't mined any gas, and awkward to transition to econ since you will have like 3 raxes sitting there doing nothing (wasted money)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
