|
On December 16 2010 05:02 Shigy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 15 2010 17:38 acidfreak wrote:
Queing gives you the ilusion that you are spending your money when in fact you are not.
/thread
User was warned for this post pretty much cosign with this. but i'll agree that at lower level, it doesn't hurt to queue up 2 or 3 infantry because they do build relatively quickly. however, queuing stuff like carriers, thors, expensive and slow-building units can really bite you in the ass and delay big things like expos or another unit producing structure
Yep, I agree. Double queuing isn't a bad thing either, especially if you're going to be required to intensively micro for an extended period of time. Queue like a boss when you fight like a boss.
And if you're in the lead just throw down a command center if you're Terran because they're better than supply depots in the mid-late game.
|
Queue robotics and stargate if the production unit is 80-90% done.
Queue nexii up to 2 full probes.
That's as high as I queue. All other money goes into extra buildings.
|
I guess I should summarize the whole discussion. Because I went on a lot about that queuing can be an acceptable thing under certain circumstances (and filling in the next unit/research before the previous finishes is not queuing), it should be made clear when it is not acceptable:
- When you are Zerg or Protoss (with the exception of chrono boosted probes).
- When you have less than 3 bases.
- When the unit in question takes longer than 30s to produce or costs more than 100 minerals.
- When you have APM to spare.
- When you have the ambition and time to be a top player.
- When you are trying to figure out timings/builds.
|
You should only que when ur unit is like 90-95% done so that it can immidiately start producing the unit. Queing 2 or more units is always bad. If ur in the middle of a fight, look at ur money, then retreat, place down a cc and more production buildings. Queing is money wasted. I understand that lower level players dont have the nessesary apm to not que like multiple units on each production facility but they should learn the right way.
|
If queuing allows you to win a game you would have lost, you probably would have been better off losing that game. The results of games don't matter, getting better matters.
I don't know about queueing in the super lategame, though. I've seen pros do it, I know it would be better if you could keep up the same production without queueing, but there may come a point where drops are happening everywhere and it's just not feasible to remake all of your marines one at a time. Seems like it should always be doable with MBS, though...
|
I'm starting to think I'm not as idealistic (or perhaps ambitious) as some.
Winning makes me feel good. Feeling good makes me want to play more. Winning also advances my ladder rating so I play harder opponents. Playing harder opponents makes me want to improve because I don't win as much. It's a messed up cycle. My ambition to improve at starcraft does not stem from it being the 'right' thing to do, it stems from the fact that I like to win.
I'm not going to be a pro. I will never play more than 4 hours at a time and likely less than two hours on any given day. Part of the reason I like starcraft compared to other games is the depth of the strategy and understanding of the game which entertains my curious brain.
The reason I like the forums is to win arguements. Winning arguements make me feel good. Your parents were probably nazis.
|
Queueing two is acceptable. Don't fill up your fucking queue though. That's just bad.
|
IMHO if you are that worried about winning instead of improving your game skill, you should just cheese and get on with the next game.
I am a low skilled player but one of my main focuses has always been to keep money down, dont queue, but at the same time make sure im constantly making probes/scvs/drones.
Ive lost alot of games because ive been outmacro'd thanks to my low worker count or something of the like, but i re-examine the replay, see what went wrong and go into my next game trying to improve on it. Its that mind set that has made me alot better, although i still have plenty of ground to cover.
I just feel that the money could be reinvested in something else that will help you sooner, rather than later. If i ever find myself sitting on a large stockpile in minerals for some reason, i normally just made more production facilities, or in rare occasions dump it on an expo or 2, hoping for late game harvester advantage/map control. I personally see this as a better way of spending my excess.
|
I agree with the OP, with the following clarification to make it more palatable:
- Don't fill up your queue. But having 1-2 units queued (2-4 in the case of a reactor) is sort of OK.
- Don't queue expensive stuff. Do queue SCVs and marines.
- Queue stuff when you're about to go battle / micro a lot, or when you're in a battle. Don't queue stuff when you're focusing just on macro.
And agreed with the guys who say, don't start to worry about queuing stuff less until you are losing to bigger armies and your production can't keep up.
But what do I know? I'm terrible at this game!
|
..... not queueing is just asking a ridiculous amount out of every player who's in gold and under.
When you have a rax with a reactor and you're pumping marines, chances are, that you'll end up failing by forgetting to constantly produce. By queueing up, sure you lose minerals at that moment, but technically after that period of time is over, you have the minerals again. At least you're constantly producing units. When I'm playing protoss, I queue up probes. I'm too busy trying to determine tech paths, building units out of warp gates (well no queue there duh). I don't want to be like "oh shit i forgot to build probes, and now my economy is totally screwed". Sure I lose 100 minerals because I queued up 2 extra probes, but if I don't have the apm to support it, I shouldn't.
It's like microing. Some beginners put way too much value on that. Sure, you can squeeze out a few units here and there, and maybe it'll help you win battles. But if you're microing and your apm doesn't allow you to continue unit production, avoid supply caps, and continue teching, then you're better off a-moving and having a solid macro.
Actually, it's practically almost exactly like micro. Sure, everyone who gets good HAS to learn to micro, but in the end, if you just concentrate on micro in the beginning, you will be lacking in the other more fundamental and important areas. And in the end it's usually never the reason you lose.
The reason you lose is because you forgot to expand, didn't scout properly, didn't create any defense in time, made bad strategy decisions. You didn't lose because you built a gateway 10 seconds after, because you queued up 2 probes.
|
There are instances where queuing before you go into a battle can help to rally reinforcements because you don't have the APM to go back to your base and do it while in a battle, in this limited instance Queuing can be very helpful.
Yes. It's a bad habit. But what are we supposed to do when we don't have the APM to go back to the base and make more units? Just lose to a counter attack? While losing may be beneficial in the long term, practice-wise, it's still frustrating and not fun.
Let's be honest here, some of us are playing to win, not playing to get better at the game. While doing the latter will almost unequivocally lead to the former, most people don't find practice to be fun. They find playing the game fun. Yes, we can focus 100% on practicing to be better players. Or we can slip up and fall back on crutches like queuing because in that instance this, it gets us the win, which is more fun and entertaining than the alternative.
We're not all trying to go pro, after all.
|
My favorite is when players dont queue up, but instead drop 3 extra production buildings because they dont efficiently produce out of what they have. Not queueing is a part of perfect macro, but to get there you need some infrastructure/framework and convincing yourself that you can afford more units than you can early on in your career is probably worse. Instead rather, you're better off to queue everyone once in a while, and just plain lose because you didnt have enough units. Thats the only way to really tell how much production you need unless you've really crunched the numbers.
|
Queuing only makes you think you are spending money, so yeah all it does is build a bad habit. Making another nexus/cc/hatch or more unit production buildings would be a better way to keep money low.
|
On December 15 2010 17:03 imbecile wrote:
For the lower league players, I often think obeying the "queuing is bad" rule bites them more than does them good. Because not using your minerals is worse than having a full queue.
The first two sentences demonstrate OP's lack of understanding.
When units are in the queue, that's money that isn't being used. By queuing units, you're immediately putting aside money that can't be used. The faster money is used, the better. That's why high-yield minerals are better than normal minerals.
Regardless of how much money you have, a barracks can only support so much production through the game. If you have a barracks with 4 extra marines always queued during the course of the game, that's 200 minerals missing during every second that barracks has been in play until the end of the game.
|
On December 15 2010 17:05 beef42 wrote:
the thing is though, all the marines you got queued could be made into more barracks instead.
/thread.
BUT: one thing i learned that is very valuable, mainly for protoss:
when you are building colossi, say in a pvp, then it's all about CONSTANT colossus prodution, simply put. it often happened to me, that i would normally macro out of my gateways and then a colossus would pop and i wouldn't have enough money to produce the new one and had to wait for the next 200 gas for example.
that can be avoided, if you queue up the next colossus close to the point where the first one is done. that "deposits" your resources and you insure that you will have the constant production. of course you can also do that "in your head" but it's easier if you queue up short-termed in that case. it also makes your chronoboost more effective, because the second colossus already profits from it, even if you boost when the first one is almost done.
this applies to all high-cost units that you want to priorize over the gateway-"meat" (immortals, phoenix, pretty much everything out of stargate and robo).
using that improved my macro a lot. as for the terran barracks macro, see quote above. no reason to have 2 rax fully queued with marines if you could go ahead, cancel 6 of those and make 2 rax. of course it's sometimes harder in the heat of the game but 100% necessary for success.
|
I dunno, i think queuing is worse than have low money. Because when you queue units, thats just money that is waiting for a FUTURE event, not a current one. Double queuing is okay, since its a good safety net in case you slip up on your macro, but if you have something around 3 or higher, you could be spending that money to make another unit producing structure to make more at the same time. That, or you could just expand, get more minerals, and build more structures. Even in pro matches, they refuse to queue, even allowing their minerals to get high.
TL;DR : Queuing is just wasted money, spend it on something more useful at the current time.
|
On December 15 2010 17:10 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote:
I agree, queuing is good. for most players, because it yields you a faster army than not queuing,
Ok I disagree entirely. Queuing won't get a faster army at all. If anything it do the exact opposite. Not this is a fairly extreme example but here is the build order of someone i got matched against last night.
This is 100% what they did. Though, to be fair, it was their placements, and they had clearly never played an RTS before, and had 0 wins in 1's through to 4's :/
Built 2 probes
Assimilator on 8
1 probe in gas
Pylon on 8
Gateway on 8
Queued 5 zealots immediately.
You can't honestly tell me that queueing those zealots was in any way good for this guy. Yeah his build was terrible and he stopped making probes at....8 but if he didn't queue he could have made another gateway and 5 probs. :/
|
I think you should keep both in mind all the time, It's not good to not practice something because you think it's above your skill level. I bet you're much closer then you think, keep working on both not queuing and keeping money low, and work on the timings of your production buildings and it will get easy. =)
|
Sorry to disturb as a new poster (wanna jump to a point but tbh i am a scrub ok i make these mistakes all of them listed here) I got reccomended here for learning. What i see on tl.net is some great post about ghost mech all detailed and stuff and why and bla bla. That moment i thought i dunno if i will ever be good enough to do that, But.. i want to :O.
So i buy the game dont get to play alot so i still suck at it QQ.. Then i got some time to play i look back here at the strategy section and this is on here LOL.. I mean this is the shit i get a tumor from how the fuck will actual gamers feel man.. i mean jonny bronze will puke if he reads this and it's on fucking TL.it's bullshit u should not que and not get your minarals stockpile, and if i loose ten times in a row makign that mistake i know. i know period. i mean Are u a troll and go to every porn site and tell em to eat around the bush NO! u just shave the bitch urself and spiit on it OK! u might beat me with ur que and then i'll see ur profile and LOL cause u played 1000 games and i played a 100 And ill still gg sorry for the rant and glhf...
|
So: "Keep your Money Low" is more important than "Queuing is Bad". There, I said it.
The issue i have with your post is really simple : Of course your oppinion is valued as is everyone elses but your last sentence alone is so fucking stupid(no offence meant). Im not even talking about whether it is right or wrong but just the entitlement to talk in abolutes is really annoying at least to me.
The only statement in your whole post that is woth discussing is this
It is easier to learn slowing down on the queuing later than to not having a big enough army.`?
Okay that is your point of view that could make an interesting discussion : Is it okay do do something wrong while working on something different of your game or do you always need to try playing perfectly because in the long run that may get you better results.
All the rest of your post can be answered like this ( at least i think it can please correct me if im wrong )
The only time you should be banking any money is when you are maxed , and in that case build more structures to assure a quick reinforcement when a part of your army dies.
In any other situation queuing is an indicator that you dont have enough structures to keep your money low .
Okay that is the theory part of it . While playing , of course you will miss some cycles , even idras queens have more than 70 energy at the end of a game . Then of course you might have the right amount of structures and a lot of money but that is only because your macro is not perfect and that is something you need to work on. In those cases , will making a similar mistake again (queuing- actually keeping your money high) be okay or should you try to spend the money differently , upgrades for example, or another expansion, because queuing wont get you an army any quicker, unless you forget to produce units again and again
But consider this : if you queue all the time how the fuck will you ever learn to tab into your production structures and eventually have good macro?
you wont ever train that mechanic that is so vital for any good player
And honestly if you argue like that , dont you think it might be better to ask: what is more important : keeping your money low or is it in some circucumstances okay to queue ?
/rant
God that felt good =)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
