EPTWeird though, I think this is going to be big news for the pvp metagame. The days of 4-gate are over!
[G] IMYongHwa Korean 3 Stalker Robo - Page 9
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Drowsy
United States4876 Posts
Weird though, I think this is going to be big news for the pvp metagame. The days of 4-gate are over! | ||
|
GhostLink
United States450 Posts
| ||
|
CecilSunkure
United States2829 Posts
On February 19 2011 14:43 GhostLink wrote: question, what if ur opponent does the same thing, do u get expo, colossus or voidrays? Micro super well! I honestly am not sure. Like the OP says the build is super new so the best reactions aren't very well known. Knowing that the opening is a mirror (literally) it will come down to execution speed and micro. Once the stalkers clash you can go for quick colossus or deviate from robotics. I suggest sticking with constant chrono on colossus, expanding whenever you think you can get away with it. Hope that helps, but I honestly can't tell you much more without playing more games. | ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
On February 18 2011 03:50 CecilSunkure wrote: IIRC YongHwa chronoboosted the same way I did in my replays. Also Day9 said in one of his dailies that he thinks (i.e. doesn't know) that 12 Gateway with this chronoboost scheme is superior to other schemes. The probe cut is particularly tiny, and no chronoboost is wasted. I'm assuming that getting the probe out slightly earlier with a tiny cut allows your earlier probes to return minerals for a greater amount of time, thus out-paying the tiny cut. I don't have time to actually test this out right now, but I would appreciate it if someone did test out openings and minerals mined -perhaps create a new thread once results are created? A long time ago I tried to quantitatively evaluate the various pylon/gate timings that I considered "common" openings at the time, here. kcdc's idea, which if I understand it correctly is just a 9pylon/12gate without a chrono at 10, generates the following result (modified the test a bit, so I'll re-test "normal" 9/12 too): Gateway @ 1:39 Gas @ 2:03 Pylon @ 2:26 Core @ 2:44 19 Probes + 12/17 Probe @ 100% Core 305 Minerals, 112 Gas @ 100% Core Normal 9/12: Gateway @ 1:38 Gas @ 2:00 Pylon @ 2:23 Core @ 2:43 19 Probes + 12/17 Probe @ 100% Core 300 Minerals, 116 Gas @ 100% Core Precise Methodology: + Show Spoiler + Both tests were undertaken on Steppes of War, with the top spawn. No split micro was attempted beyond sending probes to a patch that wouldn't result in one of them going behind the mineral line. Insofar as it was within my power, I tried to avoid creating minor differences with probe rallies and when I pulled them off the line to build. The precise order executed was: 9 Pylon 12 Gate 14 Gas 16 Pylon 16 Core Probes were transferred to gas nearly perfectly, and scouting was done at 9 for both. The results, as far as I can tell, suggest that either I am so terrible that I can't cleanly execute a build at slowest game speed or that the 10-chrono variant might give you 4 extra gas. Beyond that, every difference is so small as to be explained by variance in probe AI decisions, my build timing, and whatnot. | ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
I was watching my friend play protoss earlier and i couldn't handle how you just couldn't scout in some situations, i felt he had no "control" of the game. he admits losing to horrible players consistently as well, which i feel stems from the lack of ability to scout effectively. | ||
|
Acridice
United States298 Posts
On February 20 2011 01:02 HeavOnEarth wrote: i dont play protoss but i love this scout heavy, somewhat aggressive playstyle, it's why i play zerg. I was watching my friend play protoss earlier and i couldn't handle how you just couldn't scout in some situations, i felt he had no "control" of the game. he admits losing to horrible players consistently as well, which i feel stems from the lack of ability to scout effectively. Ehh... scouting as protoss really isn't that hard. But, you also just have to use the information you have and make inferences like against a zerg. Do his lings have speed? They don't? He must be going quick roach if it's early game. You have to remember what you saw with your initial scout and such, and also try and make probe run by's as much as possible against zerg. Vs terran you can poke the front and bring his units up to his ramp to see what he's got and once again make inferences until you get the observer out. This is all just pre observer. Anyways, that's kind of off topic. I've noticed a lot of people using this build on the ladder recently at the 2800 master level. Ever since the 4 gate has been put on the back burner, this matchup has felt strange to me. No longer is there a very strict build order that I adhere to because you have to feel your opponent out a lot more than you normally had to now that not everyone is 4gating. This matchup was tricky with the 4gate in play but now with the 4gate dieing off, it's even more tricky. It's such a mind game. I think this kind of build is really how PvP is going to be played for the most part. It doesn't necessarily have to be this exact 3 stalker pressure build, but I think an early 2nd gate + early map control and pressure is the way to do it. You can pretty much go into whatever tech you want from there, and that's what I've found myself doing recently. I put on the early pressure with an early 2nd gate as my warp gate researches and throw down 2nd gas while I have map control. Then, I either go robo or strargate from there. I've been leanin more towards stargate because its more fun, and it can also really punish the robo tech. So yeah, I think people get caught up in executing some exact build too often rather than getting the general idea of the build (early pressure) and going from there. It's not like you need exactly 3 stalkers to prevent the proxy. 2z1s works as well. Try and get yourself out of the mindset of following exact builds. Makes the game more interesting and open. | ||
|
TomTomTom.965
Germany62 Posts
some questions i had at least: - I am not sure, weither to search for proxy or push with that stalkers. cant u deal a big amount of dmg to a 4 gater on maps like sow? - when to scout on bigger maps? 9 or 12 | ||
|
CecilSunkure
United States2829 Posts
On February 20 2011 03:58 TomTomTom.965 wrote: really nice and great work! some questions i had at least: - I am not sure, weither to search for proxy or push with that stalkers. cant u deal a big amount of dmg to a 4 gater on maps like sow? - when to scout on bigger maps? 9 or 12 Your main goal is definitely going to be to prevent a proxy from being placed near you. If you see no sign of movement around the map by a certain time you need to press up the ramp and see what he's doing. Just a small poke with one stalker is good in case he has sentries. I do this every time I play this matchup now and I don't sense a 4 Gate coming my way. Scouting on 9 or 12 is a matter of preference. I recommend scouting on 9, as I favor playing a very safe style, and feel that the 9 scout caters to my preferred play. Also if you're interested in improving quickly the best builds to use are ones that get you as much information as possible (i.e. obs builds or aggressive builds) like this one! | ||
|
Zefa
United States297 Posts
| ||
|
pluvos
39 Posts
On February 20 2011 10:55 Zefa wrote: I love when protoss open 3 stalker build vs my 4 gate open. Its so exploitable. I always enter mid game ahead and haven't lost vs this build yet. instead of bragging about your 4gate (lmao), maybie you should be a part of the discussion and actually tell us why you enter midgame ahead and how you exploit this build? a replay or two that show how you exploit a decent player who executes this build well would also help. | ||
|
Zefa
United States297 Posts
The 3 stalker build is great for stopping 4 gates or forcing builds away from 4 gate but its one weakness is that it exposes itself for this build really early to the opponent and a smart reaction from the opponent will let them enter the midgame ahead in scouting info and possibly econ/tech. Here's one I just played. I dunno how optimal my response to 3 stalker open is, maybe going stargate is better. My opponent scouts me and prepares for a 4 gate that will never come. Zefa vs nYqGemini on Metalopolis EDIT: Ok maybe my opponent didn't play that great and my response to seeing a 3 stalker open wasn't optimal but I think you get the jist of what I'm trying to say. Scouting 3 stalker open leaves you a lot of various options while the 3 stalker build is pretty much playing blind til 6-7 min mark and is left with a tough choice of getting the immortal or not. Opening 4 gate and seeing a 3 stalker open just gives you a huge information advantage and no disadvatage at the time of scouting so this seems really exploitable to me. | ||
|
Jayrod
1820 Posts
On February 19 2011 14:43 GhostLink wrote: question, what if ur opponent does the same thing, do u get expo, colossus or voidrays? Both players go 3 gate stalker and transition to colossus with an expansion http://rapidshare.com/files/448981970/PvP_vs_Kumi.SC2Replay 3 gate stalker into void ray vs. Blink http://rapidshare.com/files/448981868/PvP_vs_Kumi_3_stalker_star_v_blink.SC2Replay Kumi's 3500 masters. I lose both games basically because of ill-advised attacks for the most part. Blink rush kind of blind countered me, but I think the example where we both went robo might look very common to protoss players in the near future. We didnt really talk about the builds before our game so it was funny that we both did this opener in our first game. | ||
|
Jayrod
1820 Posts
On February 20 2011 18:58 Zefa wrote: U open with a what seems to be 4 gate build and once their probe is gone, instead of 4 gating u just take ur 2nd gas and tech up. U can get a robo immediately or get 2 more gates or w/e u want. Meanwhile the 3 stalker build player will waste investment on an immortal anticipating on whats coming. I usually move around the map with my 3 stalkers as well to keep up the illusion that I may still be 4 gating and they generally do always go robo immortal. The 3 stalker build is great for stopping 4 gates or forcing builds away from 4 gate but its one weakness is that it exposes itself for this build really early to the opponent and a smart reaction from the opponent will let them enter the midgame ahead in scouting info and possibly econ/tech. Here's one I just played. I dunno how optimal my response to 3 stalker open is, maybe going stargate is better. My opponent scouts me and prepares for a 4 gate that will never come. Zefa vs nYqGemini on Metalopolis EDIT: Ok maybe my opponent didn't play that great and my response to seeing a 3 stalker open wasn't optimal but I think you get the jist of what I'm trying to say. Scouting 3 stalker open leaves you a lot of various options while the 3 stalker build is pretty much playing blind til 6-7 min mark and is left with a tough choice of getting the immortal or not. Opening 4 gate and seeing a 3 stalker open just gives you a huge information advantage and no disadvatage at the time of scouting so this seems really exploitable to me. Thanks for the replay. The game looked really even to me. He shouldn't have attacked and im not sure why he completely stopped probe production so early. Also his immortal was completely unmicro'd and shooting only zealots, which didnt help his cause. His Bay was only a few seconds behind yours though. If anything your replay is a good example of how you wont be far behind, if at all, if you open this way and go straight for robo. I think if he hadn't attacked it was so even it could have been anyones game. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
| ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
| ||
|
CecilSunkure
United States2829 Posts
On February 22 2011 02:10 Treehead wrote: I've read the whole thread, and I didn't see this suggested yet... but why couldn't one simply open with a 3-stalker build and then transition into a 4-warpgate as to counteract the early map control of this build? The build isn't optimized for that. Surely you can, but if you follow up your early map control with a 2 colossus push you'll kill almost anything. I've killed fast carriers, fast expands, blink stalkers -a good 2 colossus push kills just about everything except other colossus! | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On February 22 2011 02:38 CecilSunkure wrote: The build isn't optimized for that. Surely you can, but if you follow up your early map control with a 2 colossus push you'll kill almost anything. I've killed fast carriers, fast expands, blink stalkers -a good 2 colossus push kills just about everything except other colossus! If you watch the Artosis video, you'll see that he has enough for 2 additional warpgates when he tosses down the robo (and also that by tossing down the pylon before queueing the 2nd or building the 3rd stalker, you avoid being supply blocked). By building these instead of the robo, your gateways will come up right as the robo would finish. If you toss up the pylon he puts at the front of the base at the front of the opponents base instead, you've got three stalkers out and 4 gateways coming up. If you save the second CB he uses on probes for the cyber core instead in addition to the first CB he uses on the 1st stalker, you can spend a bunch of CB on warpgate research and still have 3 stalkers out at the same time. The big problem with 4-warpgates in general is that you can adapt just about any opening into a strong 4 warpgate without too much effort. I understand that this build is strong against the 4-warpgates currently being used, and that this is probably the reason this build is safe atm, but given this build, can't a 4-warpgate be designed in this way to hit earlier? Also, I am likely the worst player posting in this thread, and this is purely theorycraft (albeit with a very concrete adjustment to the build in a vod - which isn't too hard to do), but can anyone see a reason why this adjustment wouldn't function the same as the current 4-warpgate vs. early robo does? | ||
|
CecilSunkure
United States2829 Posts
On February 22 2011 03:13 Treehead wrote:Also, I am likely the worst player posting in this thread, and this is purely theorycraft (albeit with a very concrete adjustment to the build in a vod - which isn't too hard to do), but can anyone see a reason why this adjustment wouldn't function the same as the current 4-warpgate vs. early robo does? You spend three chronoboosts on stalkers in order for the Stalkers to fulfill their purpose. If you spend this on warpgate instead, the Stalkers cannot fulfill their purpose very well and you can't get out early tech and be safe. Why would you want to do a delayed 4 Gate with this opening, rather than an extremely safe, fast and efficient teching to robo? | ||
|
Jaeger
United States1150 Posts
On February 19 2011 16:06 kzn wrote: A long time ago I tried to quantitatively evaluate the various pylon/gate timings that I considered "common" openings at the time, here. kcdc's idea, which if I understand it correctly is just a 9pylon/12gate without a chrono at 10, generates the following result (modified the test a bit, so I'll re-test "normal" 9/12 too): Gateway @ 1:39 Gas @ 2:03 Pylon @ 2:26 Core @ 2:44 19 Probes + 12/17 Probe @ 100% Core 305 Minerals, 112 Gas @ 100% Core Normal 9/12: Gateway @ 1:38 Gas @ 2:00 Pylon @ 2:23 Core @ 2:43 19 Probes + 12/17 Probe @ 100% Core 300 Minerals, 116 Gas @ 100% Core Precise Methodology: + Show Spoiler + Both tests were undertaken on Steppes of War, with the top spawn. No split micro was attempted beyond sending probes to a patch that wouldn't result in one of them going behind the mineral line. Insofar as it was within my power, I tried to avoid creating minor differences with probe rallies and when I pulled them off the line to build. The precise order executed was: 9 Pylon 12 Gate 14 Gas 16 Pylon 16 Core Probes were transferred to gas nearly perfectly, and scouting was done at 9 for both. The results, as far as I can tell, suggest that either I am so terrible that I can't cleanly execute a build at slowest game speed or that the 10-chrono variant might give you 4 extra gas. Beyond that, every difference is so small as to be explained by variance in probe AI decisions, my build timing, and whatnot. From my testing - 9pylon 12gate scout with chrono after pylon finishes and after gateway starts puts your core finishing @ 3:29 and leaves you about 20 minerals behind - 9pylon 12gate scout with 2 consecutive chronos after gateway puts your core finishing @ 3:30 puts you about 35 minerals behind (when gateway finishes and you don't have not enough money for your core) - 9pylon 13gate scout with chrono @39 energy and again @25 energy finishes your core @ 3:32 with 365 minerals and 128 gas (with14gas 15pylon and nothing but probes made) All of these done on xelnaga lower position probes stacked on closest patches pylon down exactly on time smart use of nexus rally points etc. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On February 22 2011 03:20 CecilSunkure wrote: You spend three chronoboosts on stalkers in order for the Stalkers to fulfill their purpose. If you spend this on warpgate instead, the Stalkers cannot fulfill their purpose very well and you can't get out early tech and be safe. Why would you want to do a delayed 4 Gate with this opening, rather than an extremely safe, fast and efficient teching to robo? My point was that if a 4-gating player does this very slightly delayed rush, I don't know if the tech to robo is still "safe". Feel free to disregard this if you feel I'm wrong from your testing, I'm just throwing out suggestions for testing how "safe" this is, and this came to mind. It's a new build so I thought we'd all want to be critical of it before we immediately accepted it as the "counter to all things 4-warpgate". Also, the chrono boosts on the 2nd and 3rd stalkers are still included in what I mentioned - it's just the first one you skip. It doesn't actually delay the time it takes to get 3 stalkers, just delays the first one a few seconds. Apologies if what I said earlier wasn't terribly clear. | ||
| ||
