EPTThanks
Terran Wall-Off
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
hl2gamer
United States8 Posts
Thanks | ||
|
HaGuN
United States154 Posts
| ||
|
UisTehSux
United States693 Posts
I don't wall off vs Protoss because they could be rushing for void rays, and having some depots and your barracks away from your command center in that situation becomes a big problem. | ||
|
tetramaster
Canada253 Posts
| ||
|
Lemure
189 Posts
| ||
|
Panoptic
United Kingdom515 Posts
Same against protoss really but with void rays...I think stalker's with their range can pose a bit of a threat to your depots also. This is exacerbated by forcefields. You really don't need to wall off either...just keep good scouting and put down a bunker if you feel unsafe. | ||
|
Battlescore
United States61 Posts
10 - Supply depot on side of ramp that has least visibility over incoming attacks 12 - Barracks (not part of the wall, build it a few units away) 13 - Supply depot next to other depot, leaving a 3x3 unit space for bunker 14 - Bunker on the side of the ramp that has the most visibility over incoming attacks With SCVs ready to repair the bunker, almost nothing gets through this wall. And if you're really worried about sieged tanks firing up your ramp, make one or two of your own. Against Zerg on 1vs1 maps, I might build the barracks into the wall, then float it off when I'm ready to put down a bunker. | ||
|
Tenks
United States3104 Posts
Against Terran there is never a reason to wall. | ||
|
Tenks
United States3104 Posts
On September 29 2010 05:01 Battlescore wrote: Here's how I build my walls: 10 - Supply depot on side of ramp that has least visibility over incoming attacks 12 - Barracks (not part of the wall, build it a few units away) 13 - Supply depot next to other depot, leaving a 3x3 unit space for bunker 14 - Bunker on the side of the ramp that has the most visibility over incoming attacks With SCVs ready to repair the bunker, almost nothing gets through this wall. And if you're really worried about sieged tanks firing up your ramp, make one or two of your own. What do you do when your tanks are 2 squares away from his tanks because they're behind a depot? If you ever see a Terran walling off it is him advertising he wants to be contained and never expand. | ||
|
Battlescore
United States61 Posts
| ||
|
Tenks
United States3104 Posts
On September 29 2010 05:07 Battlescore wrote: Normally I would have a banshee by the time sieged tanks start showing up. If for some reason I didn't, or my banshee was outnumbered by marines, I'd probably let them take down my wall and wait for them to come up into my tank range. When you have sieged tanks outside of your door, the last thing you want to do put your troops out there unless you know you have enough to take a couple hits and still take down the tank. I'm sorry but this is just a bad strategy. You're contained. You're not expanding. He has 2-3 siege tanks right outside your base (with more on the way) with turret support and probably some MM+Viking. Behind all of this he has an expansion up and is probably gearing up for a 6rax Marauder push. It simply does not work. | ||
|
gun.slinger
Canada258 Posts
| ||
|
Battlescore
United States61 Posts
I fully support the notion that terran must avoid being contained. | ||
|
Fork
Russian Federation100 Posts
in a mirror match, marines and marauders will take down the supply depo's without retaliation (assuming you have vision) and if there are tanks, you just get your own tanks and shoot down the wall vs protoss, same can be said about stalkers and collosi, as terran, not counting tanks, you would have 20-30% of your army engaged with the enemy while the rest run around waiting for your front units to die having bunkers instead of depo's/ barracks atleast makes that "space" usable (not to mention the +1 range) vs zerg early game, wall ins make sense because you're up against an army that either has melee range, or range 3.. not to mention banelings either way, wall-ins tend to constrict movement in and out of your base.. if you're an aggressive player this may be more of a hinderance to you than a benefit, esp if you need to get your force back into your base quickly to kill of a drop or something. you COULD lift that barracks and lower your depo's, but that is extra APM that could technically be avoided. | ||
|
Panoptic
United Kingdom515 Posts
On September 29 2010 05:21 Battlescore wrote: I see your point, but a walling terran doesn't mean he's not expanding. Maybe he's going for gold, or taking a different expansion just to throw you off. The wall is an early 300 mineral investment that in many cases will save your ass. Granted, compared to zerg and protoss, terran are the least important race to wall yourself off from. I fully support the notion that terran must avoid being contained. It's not just less important...its downright bad! There's just no reason to wall-off unless you really really really want to make sure you hide your tech, at which point, you're still completely vulnerable all the stuff people have been mentioning. Mainly the siege tanks. | ||
|
Edso
Canada112 Posts
TvT walls are only a benefit against melee units, if a range unit comes to you're wall and starts shooting it chances are if you don't have a bunker you're units can't fire back behind the wall. There really is no reason to wall against Terran. Walls also become a huge liability when you enter the mid game. Void rays charging, immortal sniping the depots, siege tanks, cloaked banshees ect ect. | ||
|
Battlescore
United States61 Posts
| ||
|
terranghost
United States980 Posts
As for toss if you build your first depo at the ramp the scv that has to walk there loses about 3-4 trips. Reason I say this is if you put your depo at the ramp you are already spreading your base out so you might as well put your rax there too. The scv goes to build the depo when you have about 80 minerals so that when the scv arrives you have 100 thats about (1 wasted trip) depo finishes you build another scv your 11th/12th scv starts to build in the meantime the scv that built the depo is not mining because by the time he walks back to the minerals its basically time to send him back as you would want to send him when you had about 135 minerals so you can put it down right on time. (1-2 wasted trips) As soon as the scv finishes building the rax you can immediately start on a bunker or depo to finish the wall off so there really any wasted trips here. Then the scv returns from the ramp to the mineral field (1 wasted trip) IN tvp what I do is my 9th scv that finishes immediately makes a depo. Then keep making workers at 12 (assuming standard play) I make a rax half way between the ramp and the CC (except on maps like metaopolis where the ramp is really close to your starting point) as soon as the rax finishes the scv runs to the ramp and builds a bunker while the rax starts a marine. At this point I have enough for a factory but not quite enough for a marine to immediately so i lift the rax off and fly it to the ramp. The rax (with possibly an addon) plus the bunker complete the wall off ( even if it doesn't stop everything at least big units like stalkers won't be able to sneak by.) Also in the case of early air units your rax can move to be safer and the bunker can salvage. | ||
|
Panoptic
United Kingdom515 Posts
On September 29 2010 05:36 Battlescore wrote: Walling isn't just about hiding tech, the whole point is to keep enemy from rolling straight into your base, terran protoss or zerg. I don't want to have my troops halfway across the map and an open door to my base. The wall gives you response time, which in many cases will save the game for you. Bunker is an important part of the wall. Some larger ramps I will place two bunkers. In early game, you absolutely don't want your SCVs being messed with. As a terran rolling into another terrans base, I'm very happy when I see they didn't wall off - and potentially dead if they did. -.- Sorry dude, but you're wrong. You want to move out so you close your wall so enemy units can't run by. How the hell do you reinforce? Most people here have unanimously agreed that it's better not to wall in vs T. How many TvT's do you see with good players where they wall in? EDIT: another reason which I don't think has been mentioned is worker harass whilst your supply/rax/whatever is building. It takes that much longer to send an scv to go and deal with it, and against a good player that can be hell even when the rax is close by. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43268 Posts
On September 29 2010 05:01 Battlescore wrote: Here's how I build my walls: 10 - Supply depot on side of ramp that has least visibility over incoming attacks 12 - Barracks (not part of the wall, build it a few units away) 13 - Supply depot next to other depot, leaving a 3x3 unit space for bunker 14 - Bunker on the side of the ramp that has the most visibility over incoming attacks With SCVs ready to repair the bunker, almost nothing gets through this wall. And if you're really worried about sieged tanks firing up your ramp, make one or two of your own. Against Zerg on 1vs1 maps, I might build the barracks into the wall, then float it off when I'm ready to put down a bunker. Walling isn't just about hiding tech, the whole point is to keep enemy from rolling straight into your base, terran protoss or zerg. I don't want to have my troops halfway across the map and an open door to my base. The wall gives you response time, which in many cases will save the game for you. Bunker is an important part of the wall. Some larger ramps I will place two bunkers. In early game, you absolutely don't want your SCVs being messed with. As a terran rolling into another terrans base, I'm very happy when I see they didn't wall off - and potentially dead if they did. And if your forces are half across the map and you have walled as you described in first post, or worse, with many bunkers, the enemy just rolls over your forces and contains or kills you.. | ||
|
Touch
Canada475 Posts
On September 29 2010 04:50 UisTehSux wrote: That's pretty much it, you could literally lose games with one of those silly Barracks / Supply Depot walls against Protoss.Most people don't wall off vs Terran because the wall becomes cannon fodder later in the game with Siege tanks. I don't wall off vs Protoss because they could be rushing for void rays, and having some depots and your barracks away from your command center in that situation becomes a big problem. 1550 Diamond, could be 1800+ if it wasn't for school. | ||
|
yups
Denmark116 Posts
| ||
|
terranghost
United States980 Posts
On September 29 2010 05:01 Battlescore wrote: Here's how I build my walls: 10 - Supply depot on side of ramp that has least visibility over incoming attacks 12 - Barracks (not part of the wall, build it a few units away) 13 - Supply depot next to other depot, leaving a 3x3 unit space for bunker 14 - Bunker on the side of the ramp that has the most visibility over incoming attacks With SCVs ready to repair the bunker, almost nothing gets through this wall. And if you're really worried about sieged tanks firing up your ramp, make one or two of your own. Against Zerg on 1vs1 maps, I might build the barracks into the wall, then float it off when I'm ready to put down a bunker. I am soo opposed to the building of the second depo so early if you were sooo intent on walling of use your rax as part of the wall you can throw down a second rax or your factory sooo much sooner if you have that extra 100 in the bank. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
Wall-off is best against races that rely on melee units to run into your base and wreak havoc. Protoss that aren't 2gate zealot pushing generally do not fall into this category. Tanks sieged below your ramp can cause comparable devastation with scans or aerial observers. | ||
|
Battlescore
United States61 Posts
Having bunkers doesn't mean your forces are going to get overrun. | ||
|
Fork
Russian Federation100 Posts
On September 29 2010 06:02 Battlescore wrote: How do you reinforce? Train units, reinforce your army with groups as opposed to streaming them out one by one. If you leave your base defenseless, a.k.a all-in, and DON'T continue to produce troops, yes you are likely a dead terran. If you're halfway across the map and enemy terran shows up at your gate, well then you have quite a quandry don't you? Good thing you walled in and the troops you have in your base can hop in the bunker, SCVs repairing and hopefully seige tank protecting the ramp. Having bunkers doesn't mean your forces are going to get overrun. the term reinforcing assumes you are engaged in battle at the enemies base, and are feeding a constant supply of units to.. well, reinforce your force. The chance of any significant counter attack is generally low, if at all. if you "reinforce in waves" then you are not reinforcing, you are attacking in waves, because if your first wave never dies, well, you just won! | ||
|
claricorp
Canada142 Posts
the main reason people dont wall off is simply because longer ranged units such as collossus and siege tanks can take out all of the buildings at the front without any problem, same with collosi. its also difficult to move out against a similar sized army of range 6 units, such as hydralisks, stalkers or marauders out of a choke. it also makes you easier to harass because the distance between the choke and your command center are farther away, this is particularly the case with void rays or banshees. | ||
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
I dont EARLY wall off against protoss because of void rays. If im teching hard or FE ill wall but with a bunker in the middle not a Rax. And it isnt early. Just around the time a 4 gate push would come. Walling isnt really to much of a benefit in these match ups because it distorts your concave. They have to push up you dont. INSTA CONCAVE | ||
|
GrapeD
Canada679 Posts
| ||
|
ideadude
United States7 Posts
I've lost a few times to Protoss and Terran players who run up my ramp with an early timing attack... especially when I'm going for 1/1/1 or other tech build. I'm going to start walling off against T and P now... especially when doing 1 barracks builds. FWIW, I'll probably do a bunker with two supply depots. I just don't have the APM to properly defend that attack and maintain my macro. Whereas with the wall off, I keep my opponent off my mineral line for a few more seconds and I can catch my breath. I find that a lot of responses to stuff like this is to micro better, which is fine... and this board needs to cater to all levels of play. However, we should sometimes be able to say things like "for lower level play, it's okay to wall off in TvP and TvT so you can use less APM to defend" or "in lower levels, it can be a good trade off to build an extra in-base hatchery as Zerg instead of managing Queen/Larva macro if your APM is low". There are lots of resources in the game. Attention and APM is one of them. It might be better for me to spend my APM building infrastructure and keeping my macro up rather than defending an early timing attack without the help of a wall off. | ||
|
Panoptic
United Kingdom515 Posts
On September 29 2010 08:44 ideadude wrote: I've recently been promoted to Silver League. I have about a 60apm. I'm not a great player. I'm matched up against sub-diamond players. I'm starting to think that for sub-diamond play a wall off in all matchups is good. I've lost a few times to Protoss and Terran players who run up my ramp with an early timing attack... especially when I'm going for 1/1/1 or other tech build. I'm going to start walling off against T and P now... especially when doing 1 barracks builds. FWIW, I'll probably do a bunker with two supply depots. I just don't have the APM to properly defend that attack and maintain my macro. Whereas with the wall off, I keep my opponent off my mineral line for a few more seconds and I can catch my breath. I find that a lot of responses to stuff like this is to micro better, which is fine... and this board needs to cater to all levels of play. However, we should sometimes be able to say things like "for lower level play, it's okay to wall off in TvP and TvT so you can use less APM to defend" or "in lower levels, it can be a good trade off to build an extra in-base hatchery as Zerg instead of managing Queen/Larva macro if your APM is low". There are lots of resources in the game. Attention and APM is one of them. It might be better for me to spend my APM building infrastructure and keeping my macro up rather than defending an early timing attack without the help of a wall off. I completely agree with you...but you should bear in mind that as you get better, and more confident you should probably eventually wean yourself off of the wall-in unless you're against Z. Ultimately though, if people ask about a particular subject, the best answer is the one that caters to the highest level of play...because it's the correct answer. | ||
|
KnightOfNi
United States1508 Posts
Oh and btws I'm a roughly 1000 level diamond player (give or take). | ||
|
Rodregeus
Australia126 Posts
Now I just build my base to create chokes into my mineral line and keep everything tight. Then a few marines/marauders at the chokes can hold off any early push a wall would be any use against anyway. Plus, probably just a personal thing, but I play a lot better without a wall in.  | ||
|
gr8ape
Canada302 Posts
| ||
|
KiLL_ORdeR
United States1518 Posts
TvP I don't wall anymore since the only real threat early is very fast zealot pressure, which I feel I can micro against and would rather chance it for a better economy than wall off for nothing. TvZ I always wall off because every third game is a god damn baneling bust. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
Mizzet
Singapore47 Posts
TvZ - Should be self explanatory, if I scout blings I double up the wall and autowin. TvP - Theoretically your wall is vulnerable to being chipped at by Stalkers, but a bunker behind it solves this problem, and I always have a bunker or two since I opt for 1/1/2 against toss. Granted, a bunker is not as effective on maps where the wall in is on flat ground (kulas) due to them not needing to run in range of the bunker to gain vision, and it's one of the reasons I thumbed down that map, apart from the backdoor rocks. Recently I had a game on Metalopolis where I went 1/1/2 against a toss who 4 gate all in'd and planted pylons at my natural to warp zealots inside my base past my wall. Just barely held it off with 2 bunkers behind my wall + several extra marines and scv repairs while in the meantime my hellion drop fried his probes, so it was gg. I doubt I'd have been able to hold off that push without a wall there at the choke, had he been able to get in and form a concave with those numbers it would have looked very bad for me. TvT - The most debatable one I guess, I'm kind of on the fence but I still opt for a wall off. Reapers: It's a valid point that walling in gives reapers another area to poke at and increases the area you have the defend, but in practice I can't remember the last time I lost to reapers. Just scout the proxy and respond appropriately, it's not like walling in is an autoloss to reapers. Banshees: If my opponent wants to pick at my wall with his first banshee instead of heading to my mineral line, by all means he is welcome to lol. You have a small window of freedom if you caught me offguard before I rustle up a viking or energy for a scan and chances are you'll get chased off before I lose even a single depot. Siege Tanks: I understand the reasoning behind wall ins being indefensible against siege tanks, but personally the way I play TvT I rarely end up in a brute force tank/viking contest with my opponent, so I have not run into this situation yet. He will need viking support to get vision of that bunker as well, and if I don't have equivalent or greater viking numbers to deny this I'm going to lose anyway, there's nothing to stop him keeping on going past that wall to take my base. Also have had several games where the opponent T goes for an early push with marines/marauders and/or a hellion or two, I'm normally just constantly producing marines while I tech up to starport so I absolutely need that wall in and a bunker behind to keep myself safe. Thoughts anyone? Perhaps there is some nuance that I am missing. | ||
|
Slago
Canada726 Posts
| ||
|
Mizzet
Singapore47 Posts
Stalkers are troublesome though, if you don't have a bunker since they can regenerate shields and poke your marines to death, on kulas due to there not being a ramp they can poke your wall and you absolutely have to come out to defend it, for that reason I thumbed down kulas ravine. | ||
|
Riouh
Netherlands60 Posts
On September 29 2010 05:49 yups wrote: This is one of those threads where it would be nice to see ppl's ranking. Not that ranking is the most important thing in the world or advice/arguments from low ranks dont count but I think it would add an extra valuable dimension. NO. it wouldnt. that would be like putting a diamond 1500+ filter on a thread. Me: double clicking on a thread that seems interesting. System: You must be at least Diamond and have 1500+ points to view or comment on this thread. | ||
|
Kryptix
United States138 Posts
(Assuming not a bunker wall off) Once I scout the wall, I pull back my scv to the guy's nat put down a bunker, put down 2 more barracks, then go 2 tech lab 1 naked (eventually reactor). 2 techlab rax pump marauders and stream straight to the guy's nat. the marauders can kill one depot (supply blocking the guy) while going to the bunker in his nat if he lowers it. (he can only shoot back at the one marauder going up the ramp to provide vision, which you rotate, and put that one in the bunker when its red). By this time he is blocked, you are not, either go in for the kill (sniping his tech labs first to prevent banshee/siege) or contain, and put your factory in his nat. If your siege line with turrets is right in his natural, its over sooner or later. The standard response is to fall back and bunker up the inside of his base, which just means he is contained more, just don't lose more guys than he does, and your production should be equal. He can try to sneak some units into your base, but if you do it right, he will never get a chance to get the starport up and running, because unless he drops more rax he is already dead. | ||
|
hmunkey
United Kingdom1973 Posts
Wall versus Z = mandatory Wall versus P = optional. As you get better you may move away from the wall but it's not necessarily bad to wall. Wall versus T = dangerous. Terran only has ranged units so they can target your wall from the outside and there really isn't anything you can do but let them. That, or suicide run down your ramp to stop them. | ||
|
Pfeff
United States270 Posts
On September 29 2010 06:35 Fork wrote: the term reinforcing assumes you are engaged in battle at the enemies base, and are feeding a constant supply of units to.. well, reinforce your force. The chance of any significant counter attack is generally low, if at all. I'm guessing you are like gold/platinum max. No offense here at all, just saying that if I see a force I feel like I can't beat head to head I am running by or flanking their base as instead of trying to defend, new units can defend while I counter attack and make him come defend. It's a good way to win a battle you know you will lose, if you know what I mean. 1.1k diamond and counter attack is fairly common. When I do it, I pray you are sending all your shit to my base to attack so I can get 3 free minutes in your base to chill with your SCV's while my new units slow you down to the point of defending yourself | ||
|
Dragonblood21
United States139 Posts
TvP - I wall off with depot, depot, rax as normal. I find it helps a lot against a proxy 2gate. I can't say I've ever had a problem with stalkers or void rays picking at my wall though. TvT - I place my 2nd depot at my wall. If I scout a 3rax push I lift my rax, plop it at my wall, and build another depot or bunker at my wall. Then I get a sieged tank behind it enough to shoot at anything that comes up, but far enough back that it can't really be hit. I find this to be the most efficient way of holding off a 3rax. | ||
|
Troy47
United States60 Posts
1) I fear cheese 2) I try to get 2 reapers out first to go early game harass and see if i can't get lucky with good micro or a lazy/poor opponent 3) It creates an effective choke point that will rarely hurt you and can only be good for you if your force gets obliterated. 4) deny early scouting 5) It makes players think I'm a turtle when I'm anything but such. | ||
|
Troy47
United States60 Posts
| ||
|
PineappleSage
Canada109 Posts
| ||
|
john0507
164 Posts
TvT I never never never and never wall off , to a certain extent it's suicidal. TvP i don't wall off nowdays anymore ever since the patch increased zealots build time, as 2 gate is much easier to deal with now, and other early timing pushes come slightly later and are quite easy to spot , if/when u spot it just drop 2 bunkers and pull some scvs your as good as walled off anyways. | ||
|
Rodregeus
Australia126 Posts
Even then, with a wall they can eventually get it down and over run me anyway due to having to pull SCVs to repair, and the bigger the ramp, the more SCVs needed to keep that wall up. So either the wall breaks, or my eco drops below theirs and they can just keep slamming lots/stalkers into the wall until my army falls below theirs due to lack of income and they get through anyway. | ||
|
Bonkerz
United States831 Posts
On September 30 2010 10:45 Rodregeus wrote: See I don't get that. I find lings easy to deal with without a wall. ESPECIALLY 6 pool. The only thing that I kinda need a wall to defend any better is some form of early 2 gate zealot push. Even then, with a wall they can eventually get it down and over run me anyway due to having to pull SCVs to repair, and the bigger the ramp, the more SCVs needed to keep that wall up. So either the wall breaks, or my eco drops below theirs and they can just keep slamming lots/stalkers into the wall until my army falls below theirs due to lack of income and they get through anyway. So you don't lose any workers to a 6 pool? WHat you do like a 10 rax build? THen if you dont have a wall when the have speed they can just mass numbers and rush in. 2 lings=50 minerals. and the only way to keep up would to be spamming stim? Yay ur killing ur own units. And about having to repair the wall. Ur eco is already ahead because they chose to 6 pool meaning they dont have any workers. | ||
|
MusiK
United States302 Posts
Something I see a lot of good players do with wall offs is that as soon as they get their core units up enough to defend, they just lift the rax and put it somewhere else, or scout the low grounds to see if any attackers are ahead (for tanks obvi). This gives you a nice opening to go and expand comfortably without a friggin rax in the way. Just thought I'd bring that up | ||
|
Akito
4 Posts
Specialy on silver/gold where cheese is a commen thing a wall realy helps. I lack the quickness to defend properly with the wall on less problem to focus on. ps: putting bunkers behind bunkers is nice | ||
|
yups
Denmark116 Posts
On September 29 2010 16:07 Riouh wrote: NO. it wouldnt. that would be like putting a diamond 1500+ filter on a thread. Me: double clicking on a thread that seems interesting. System: You must be at least Diamond and have 1500+ points to view or comment on this thread. I disagree. See spoiler (trying not to sidetrack the thread). + Show Spoiler + I find that your complete lack of arguments greatly attenuates your input. And why on earth would the "system" prevent you from viewing a thread?Look at ideadude's (brilliant imo) post. On September 29 2010 08:44 ideadude wrote: I've recently been promoted to Silver League. I have about a 60apm. I'm not a great player. I'm matched up against sub-diamond players. I'm starting to think that for sub-diamond play a wall off in all matchups is good. I've lost a few times to Protoss and Terran players who run up my ramp with an early timing attack... especially when I'm going for 1/1/1 or other tech build. I'm going to start walling off against T and P now... especially when doing 1 barracks builds. FWIW, I'll probably do a bunker with two supply depots. I just don't have the APM to properly defend that attack and maintain my macro. Whereas with the wall off, I keep my opponent off my mineral line for a few more seconds and I can catch my breath. I find that a lot of responses to stuff like this is to micro better, which is fine... and this board needs to cater to all levels of play. However, we should sometimes be able to say things like "for lower level play, it's okay to wall off in TvP and TvT so you can use less APM to defend" or "in lower levels, it can be a good trade off to build an extra in-base hatchery as Zerg instead of managing Queen/Larva macro if your APM is low". There are lots of resources in the game. Attention and APM is one of them. It might be better for me to spend my APM building infrastructure and keeping my macro up rather than defending an early timing attack without the help of a wall off. Not only wouldn't he be prevented from posting but the consideration of APM economy allows me to consider what the right approach for me is. If you want to learn to play guitar you dont start off with the worlds best riff. You ease into it until you got the finger movement down. I think the same can be said for SC. Some strategies are very hard to pull off and thats why its nice to know a little bit about ppls skill level | ||
|
Genome852
United States979 Posts
On September 30 2010 12:03 Akito wrote: wall up is great! allows you to stop enemy from going in! LOL. Add a 2 bunkers near the SD and if breach you still have defence. It allows you to defende with less. Add a siege tank and a norma assault will fail. Have you read the thread? The opponent's units can hit your wall while you will be out of range to fire back.... Walling in TvT is bad unless you think you're going to get rushed with mass marines or something cheesy. You're essentially throwing away the buildings/addons you used to wall off with later on in the game. | ||
|
Rodregeus
Australia126 Posts
On September 30 2010 11:47 Bonkerz wrote: So you don't lose any workers to a 6 pool? WHat you do like a 10 rax build? THen if you dont have a wall when the have speed they can just mass numbers and rush in. 2 lings=50 minerals. and the only way to keep up would to be spamming stim? Yay ur killing ur own units. And about having to repair the wall. Ur eco is already ahead because they chose to 6 pool meaning they dont have any workers. Uhhh, no, depot on 10 refinery before rax. I never said I don't lose ANY workers to 6 pools, but 1-3 tops in almost every case. If they don't back off when I pull SCVs then the SCVs surround them and my 1-2 marines, (maybe 3 if the map is big enough or something slowed them) + SCVs wipe them out pretty damn fast. If they run from the SCVs, I just send them back to the minerals, keep going with my standard opening, then chase the lings off with SCVs and my slowly increasing force of marines then back to mining again. Also the comment about the wall and eco was in relation to protoss. Reading comprehension. Learn it. | ||
|
A.J.
United States209 Posts
| ||
|
Fork
Russian Federation100 Posts
On September 30 2010 02:56 Pfeff wrote: I'm guessing you are like gold/platinum max. No offense here at all, just saying that if I see a force I feel like I can't beat head to head I am running by or flanking their base as instead of trying to defend, new units can defend while I counter attack and make him come defend. It's a good way to win a battle you know you will lose, if you know what I mean. 1.1k diamond and counter attack is fairly common. When I do it, I pray you are sending all your shit to my base to attack so I can get 3 free minutes in your base to chill with your SCV's while my new units slow you down to the point of defending yourself thanks, i'm in Tin league many high level diamond players que their production buildings to the front lines your argument invalid? Maybe we should put a high ego filter on threads.. The cool thing about this game is that it can be played many ways and be effective, some are more effective than others, if you feel threatened at all times of a counter attack then by all means keep units in your base. | ||
|
Bonkerz
United States831 Posts
| ||
|
GathFox
United States58 Posts
A possible way *though very counterable by terran currently* to exploit a lack of a wall-in would be hellions. keeps some of the sneaky speedy things out of sight untill you know they are gonna attack you and then run them in to melt their workers once they are farther from their base. This would be taking a play from the zerg hand book since when a wall in isnt perfect they can just preform a runby with lings like what idra did to one of his toss foes in the HDH invitational. So basicly im saying even against the terrans with their abundant range a wall-in can still serve a purpose (albeit extremely limited). If they dont wanna drop a ghost in your base, favoring to walk them in, this also would hinder them a bit *though they may find it worth it to just nuke the wall*. | ||
| ||
