| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Mythito
Canada230 Posts
On March 30 2011 16:56 orotoss wrote: Does PDD shoot down broodlings from broodlords? i find it hard to believe you asked that about 30 hours after a thread popped up detailing exactly what PDD does to broodlords. | ||
|
TibblesEvilCat
United Kingdom766 Posts
| ||
|
Hero1
135 Posts
| ||
|
MuffinCookie
China64 Posts
On March 30 2011 18:58 TibblesEvilCat wrote: How do i spot cheese? Vs. Zerg, check for worker count and pool timing, If you send a worker scout and the pool is already done (or close to finishing), prepare for a 6 pool. Of course, you can also tell that by seeing there are only six mining workers. Vs. Protoss, no gas and forge first means cannon rush. Prepare to defend. Vs. Terran, no gas and 2 rax either means 2 rax early aggression (which isn't cheese) or bunker rush (which is pretty cheesy if you ask me). | ||
|
MuffinCookie
China64 Posts
On March 30 2011 18:29 Mythito wrote: i find it hard to believe you asked that about 30 hours after a thread popped up detailing exactly what PDD does to broodlords. To actually answer the question he asked, yes, PDD shoots down broodlings from brood lords. | ||
|
arvegil
Bulgaria2 Posts
| ||
|
Synystyr
United States1446 Posts
On March 30 2011 18:58 TibblesEvilCat wrote: How do i spot cheese? vs Zerg, you want to look out for Pool timings and where Gas is being spent. Also, prolonged 1 base play usually means that they are going for some kind of Baneling or Roach bust. vs Protoss, on your initial scout, if you see only a pylon or nothing, there are proxies somewhere on the map. Keep an eye on how much chrono boost he is saving as well when you scout. Higher energy levels indicate a Warp Gate rush. Fast double gas can mean quick Stargate as well vs Terran, watch for gas timing. Either no gas or fast gas can signify marine all in or fast banshee. Proxy raxes are also possible if you scout no gas for a very long time as well. GOOD SCOUTING WILL HELP! | ||
|
underdawg
United States399 Posts
also behavior that suggests that they REALLY don't want you to scout. like T walling off at the bottom of the ramp, something fishy could be up. and beware the 1 base Z. 1 base T bunker usually means banshee or hellion drop. killing obs and overlords tho is standard. T getting gas before rax usually means superfast banshee. (dunno if some of these are really cheese). hashe is a pretty good T who streams. tho he doesn't really talk lol and on my previous points about tanks, i see that MVP goes for siege mode at the same time as his first tank. he usually fast expands, as do i, and needs it for defense. the siege tank does a ton against rushes. i'm going to go with what he does, hehe | ||
|
Fuzzymonkey
United States28 Posts
| ||
|
Synystyr
United States1446 Posts
On March 31 2011 04:09 Fuzzymonkey wrote: I notice that when pro players do drops, they are able to drop units from their transports before the transport stops moving, essentially saving time. How exactly do they do this? All I can do is go to a point and drop, without moving. Press the hotkey for drop (D is the default) and click the dropship. This will automatically start to drop units right away while the dropship is still moving. You can move the dropship wherever you want in this time. Ding! | ||
|
SchAmToo
United States1141 Posts
On March 30 2011 23:35 arvegil wrote: Here is one simple question - How many rax, facts and ports can I use (constantly producing units) out of 2 bases? And out of 3 bases? I find it's not just a factor of 2base/3base but also workers. It seems like a "well, duh" but this isn't in regards to "omg I just lost all my workers." With muling (not excessive with scans) and constant workers, around 2 base and 32 on mineral, 12 or so on gas, I find you can have 3 raxes (2 tech, one reactor) a starport with reactor. Then when your base is really taking off you can move up to 5rax, 2 engibays and a reactor starport. Come 3rd base I normally add factories (2-3) and make sure all my upgrades are going too. This is based off my TvP build (2rax, TL/Reactor -> expo -> MMM), and thus figuring out the timings of when to throw down new prod facilities really depends on your BO, and your MU...and even the map! So it's better to test these things out and make notes either in your head while playing, or after, or during replays. | ||
|
Aequos
Canada606 Posts
On March 30 2011 07:25 bankai wrote: Would appreciate help on these questions. If its not a 'simple question' let me know so i can post it to the more appropriate thread. Thanks TL 1) I'd expand once more than him, then get blink stalkers + archon/HT, as Void rays stack up to deal DPS against a Protoss army. Alternatively, Phoenixes beat Void rays both cost and population efficiently. 2) Good Forcefields. 3) In PvT, cut off some units with a U shape, then send zealots at the opening. In PvZ, much the same, but block some back so he can't stutter-snipe your colossi. | ||
|
Kinetik_Inferno
United States1431 Posts
| ||
|
Synystyr
United States1446 Posts
On March 31 2011 04:23 exploding.godhand wrote: Does the cellular reactor research affect medics in the campaign? That's the tech lab/reactor combination right? If so, then yes, you can double pump medics out of a barracks with that addon. | ||
|
Kinetik_Inferno
United States1431 Posts
On March 31 2011 04:25 Synystyr wrote: That's the tech lab/reactor combination right? If so, then yes, you can double pump medics out of a barracks with that addon. No, it's the one that gives "Specialist" units extra energy and energy regen. Does "specialist" apply to medics? | ||
|
pRo9aMeR
595 Posts
(i'd check myself but Korea's server is down now) | ||
|
Fuzzymonkey
United States28 Posts
On March 31 2011 04:34 exploding.godhand wrote: No, it's the one that gives "Specialist" units extra energy and energy regen. Does "specialist" apply to medics? Yes, specialist is just anything that has energy. When going mech, specifically vs zerg, but also in general, when is a good time to get second refine? | ||
|
Aequos
Canada606 Posts
On March 31 2011 04:40 pRo9aMeR wrote: Just out of curiousity, can you use graviton beam on protoss units while they are warping in? (i'd check myself but Korea's server is down now) Yes, they count as "units" as they warp in, so can be targetted by abilities (snipe, gravitron) or killed. | ||
|
waffling1
599 Posts
On March 27 2011 22:15 Mythito wrote: what a huge generalisation.. i would bet almost all pros  O* xfer their workers to a gold, and if they don't it's because there is too much action going on at that point of the game and they can't be bothered,no, THAT is a huge generalization. how can you assume they do? andhow can you assume they're doing something more important if they don't? (btw, that's just an admittance that the idea is correct) I in fact see more than 90% of pro games in gsl, streams, etc, where the gold base is NOT immediately xfered to. first person views is best for this, i.e. streams and replays. Vibe is one of the few people that realize this and regularly do it. Even still, this is an important thing. you can't just bet that the'yre doing something more critical. often times, in fact, they're not, as i've seen on streams and replays, and they choose to wait for the next batch of workers instead. or like was mentioned, terran can just throw down 12 mules which is easier and makes up for bad macro, similarily zerg can just make a big batch of drones all at once and direct them all to the gold and 25 seconds later it's fully saturated. mass muling dones't truly make up for bad macro. if u have bad macro that's still a loss. if he had muled on time he would have been doing better. so what about protoss then? also xfering is not just a 'residual habit' from broodwar, you said yourself it mines out the main later, and that's really really important and THAT is why pros do it, not cuz it's a residual habit. it is a residual habit. in BW there were two reasons. in SC2, there's only the one reason now. But most people don't realize the reason for either. the fact that people don't xfer to gold can point to a failure to execute, but seeing how prevalent not xfering even on the high levels, (and even more so at lower levels), it's a pretty big indicator that people aren't understanding the reasons. "i xfer b/c i xfered in BW. i xfer b/c everyone does it. i xfer b/c my natural become saturated earlier". all wrong reasons. (yeah, u can also xfer to mitigate worker harassment damage, but that's not part of this discussion b/c we're trying to isolate an economic principle for efficiency!!!!!!) the whole point of that statement was to contrast and point out that the real underlying reasons for why xfering is good / when you should do it. Once you do understand them, then it's painfully clear that xfering immediately to saturate gold should be done. (YEAH, if it's dangerous, if there's an army, if there's a huge threat going on that requires immediate micro, do that first. but damnit, that's AFTER we establish the economic principle here. none of that thrwarts the idea that you should send 12 workers to the gold asap. ) Taht relates to the idea of priority. boositing your income with a few clicks is pretty high priority. it's as significant as having your main mine out later. if we want a better sustained income later on by having the main mine out later to have higher income later on, then why wouldn't you want to xfer to gold immediately for the higher income? it's "later" in the game from the point in time we xfered to natural. r u saying we want a higher income through one way, but not through another way? nonsense. so you know what? there's actually times where you don't want to xfer to natural. when u dont plan on a game that lasts to the point where ur main mines out. see once we understand the real reasons, then we can apply the more efficient actions. dont bring in outside factors in like not enough apm or heat of battle. you want to apply "heat of battle and not enough apm" for xfering workers, but not to mules? a game is made up of isolated factors blending and interacting together. the purpose here is not that, but to isolate a single factor to prove or disprove its efficacy so we can use it as another tool that we can choose to incorporate into our gameplay and depending on the situation. the simple fact is a worker mines more at a gold than at a blue. if the mining rate is higher, u want to xfer (leave apm, and other stuff out of it, we're trying to isolate a principle here: economic efficiency). once we determine it, THEN we can factor in other stuff into whether to xfer or not. again, with your exmaple, i could start talking about cloaked units to "disprove" your idea that you should mule the gold, b/c you would want scans. bringing up apm and heat of battle and "easier to use mules" to rebuttal this topic is like bringing up cloaked units to rebuttal that you should mule. | ||
|
waffling1
599 Posts
On March 27 2011 17:41 MuffinCookie wrote: Following up on the "mx - b" idea, could you possibly graph this? Or is this not slope-intercept form? EDIT: actually the m would be the difference in mining rates. 2 minerals per X seconds for one cycle. b is the amount of minerals lost due to non-mining time when xfering. that's a function of distance, which is m*time however, if it's proof u want that it's more efficient to xfer to gold, i appeal to math, where the limit as x -> infinity, x > constant. the amount of minerals lost by xfering is a constant value, depending on how much time it took to travel. but the increased mining rate is sustained as time goes on. say u lost 20 minerals by xfering, but you only got to miner enough so that you broke even (by whatever standard). then mx = b and you don't have a net profit compared to if u never xfered your worker to a gold patch. that's where the danger part comes in, if u feel like ur not gonna be able to mine for a long time, or if u feel u might lose your workers b/c your gold is in danger in the short term, then that's when you dont' xfer. but in the absence of imminent, highly probable dangers, the laws of math dictate that you want to xfer to gold ASAP b/c it boosts your income in the long run. basically, in the long run, increased mining rate (mg*t) makes up for the loss of minerals from trasnfering (b). it's really self evident. arguing short term dangers does not refute that xfering gives you long term gain. the threat is dependent on the situation, and we're trying to isolate an economic principle. If a short term threat somehow overturns that xfering to gold does not give you long term gain, then that means we shouldn't ever make workers b/c it's a short term loss.... you see, making a worker reduces our money now, but it increases our long term income. it would be ridiculous to argue that "b/c making a worker loses you 50 minerals, additional workers will not increase your income in the long run". same thing with xfering to gold. Both making workers and xfering to a higher yield patch increase your mining rate, just in different ways. we want to favor a higher m universally, economically speaking (account for apm factors and danger factors in gameplay, not the isolated economic principle). | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
Leta vs YSC
GSL
Rogue vs Percival
Zoun vs Solar
Replay Cast
GSL
Cure vs TriGGeR
ByuN vs Bunny
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Escore
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
