|
Greetings TL!
I'm JTouche, a low ~3200 Master Z aspiring to reach Gmaster league eventually. Today I'm very pleased to share something new with the Zerg community.
Zerg sometimes has difficulty scouting around the ~6 mark. If an opponent has good sight of his base and denies your overlord any information, what could you do?
The worst position a Z player can be in is to try and defend what he is unaware of.
So I propose this tactic. (Only vs. ZvP + ZvT)
With your initial scouting drone, don't gas steal. Instead wait until he field's one ranged unit.
Once he does, throw down a hatchery, and than cancel into an evolution chamber on the creep that forms from the hatchery.
Evolution chambers build quickly, so he'll need a good amount of army to take it down which he probably won't have. Once it completes you'll have vision of some of his base.
Here is the best part.
Edit: Around 4-6 minutes is when your evo chamber dies on it's own (from lack of creep) or gets killed by your opponent, the broodlings are free to scout his ENTIRE base.
Now lets compare / contrasts the pro's and con's.
Cons:
-You lose a total of ~200 minerals as oppose to the 100 mineral scouting overlord sacrifice INITIALLY.
Edit: Ignore the math if not exactly correct, please just focus on the application of this technique
_
*When you build the replacement overlord you are dead even at your mineral loss of 200[/u].*
*If you build the overlord prior to sacrificing it, you've spent the 200 earlier than you would have with he evo technique*
Pros:
-You save an overlord for scouting later in the game.
-You don't lose any supply.
-You get scouting of his entire main.
-If he hasn't thrown down his tech buildings, you've delayed them significantly.
-You may also kill an out of position sentry/marine/workers if you choose to.
I hope my fellow swarm find this helpful and try it out. I would really like to have some top caliber players experiment too and find out if this is a viable tactic.
Here are two replays. Although not the best example, I just wanted to show you the tactic in action.
+ Show Spoiler +http://www.sc2replayed.com/replays/151910-1v1-protoss-zerg-backwater-gulch
+ Show Spoiler +http://www.sc2replayed.com/replays/151911-1v1-protoss-zerg-metalopolis
FOR THE SWARM! :D
Edit: Please at least watch the replay or attempt it yourself before you just knock it down, thanks.
Edit: Here's another replay! Evo goes down at 4:00 on Typhoon Peaks (A map where it's IMPOSSIBLE to overlord scout in time when spawned cross positions) and broodlings spawn ~5:30.
http://www.sc2replayed.com/replays/152631-1v1-protoss-zerg-backwater-gulch
The timing is actually earlier than I stated in my original post. I apologize, but check it out !
|
I like it, I haven't watched the replays yet but I'm guessing you just spread them out over the base? Couldn't you build it where they want their cybercore to go down and just cheese the hell out of them?
Glad to see people thinking outside the box about scouting midgame, it is refreshing.
|
Proxy Evo chamber's aren't new. Players like Catz have done it to prevent ramp blocking and cheese as well as other applications. Using them for "scouting" is quite ludicrous and really you might as well cheese with them. It's not a reliable means of scouting which means you could potentially still have to sac an overlord and lose 200 mins from this little trick. Not to mention you are losing 200 minerals far earlier than you would lose your sacced overlord which further slows down your entire opening. A quick search brings up 2 threads about proxy Evos
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=146838
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=146895
|
Although not very useful from my gold point of view (the ovie sac is better imo, just 100 minerals better...), I like the try. High level Zergs definitely needs new ideas.
|
Damn, looks very appealing, you slow down 3g expo, maybe get a runby (Below masters  ), AND broodlings can get some good info instead of saccin speed ovvie.
|
On March 20 2011 02:19 Demonace34 wrote:
I like it, I haven't watched the replays yet but I'm guessing you just spread them out over the base? Couldn't you build it where they want their cybercore to go down and just cheese the hell out of them?
Glad to see people thinking outside the box about scouting midgame, it is refreshing.
That would certainly be interesting, having an evo chamber next to the gateway.
I really like the idea of using the broodlings to scout, really interesting way to do things
Could broodlings also be used to kill the mineral line? I don't know any numbers offhand but I'm sure the broodlings spawning from an evo chamber should be enough to kill 3-4ish workers, or at least force them to kill workers away from the broodlings, temporarily stopping the player from mining.
|
Well I could see some potential in placing an evo chamber near a location that might be hard for an overlord to get vision of and in doing so forcing your opponent to place tech buildings in places where denying overlords might be harder.
|
If you're willing to lose 200 minerals, scouting with two overlords at once would be more efficient.
|
1: its more expensive than scouting with an overlord
2: you need a higher upfront investment, and you need to make it faster (plus you need 300 in the bank for the hatch)
3: it relies on your opponent helping you out by killing it. (if he doesnt, then you will be able to scout 3 minutes and 30 seconds later, which in your replay example, would be at the 8:20 mark, a bit too late to scout for a 4gate.
|
On March 20 2011 02:22 Numy wrote:
Proxy Evo chamber's aren't new. Players like Catz have done it to prevent ramp blocking and cheese as well as other applications. Using them for "scouting" is quite ludicrous and really you might as well cheese with them. It's not a reliable means of scouting which means you could potentially still have to sac an overlord and lose 200 mins from this little trick. Not to mention you are losing 200 minerals far earlier than you would lose your sacced overlord which further slows down your entire opening.
No, I'm not attempting to find a new cheese but an alternative to sac'ing overlords that sometimes never find out anything. It is reliable since you can literally scout the entire main as oppose to an overlord scouting only most of it.
Could broodlings also be used to kill the mineral line? I don't know any numbers offhand but I'm sure the broodlings spawning from an evo chamber should be enough to kill 3-4ish workers, or at least force them to kill workers away from the broodlings, temporarily stopping the player from mining.
Broodlings could kill 2-3 workers if they don't micro them away.
If you're willing to lose 200 minerals, scouting with two overlords at once would be more efficient.
Really? Losing 16 supply and 200+ more minerals to build those overlords again IS more efficient? Can you explain the logic to me?
1: its more expensive than scouting with an overlord
2: you need a higher upfront investment, and you need to make it faster (plus you need 300 in the bank for the hatch)
3: it relies on your opponent helping you out by killing it. (if he doesnt, then you will be able to scout 3 minutes and 30 seconds later, which in your replay example, would be at the 8:20 mark, a bit too late to scout for a 4gate.
1 - Initially it is more expensive than scouting an overlord but when you build the replacement overlord you are dead even /w this technique.
2 - You can delay your expo 15-20 seconds to utilize this technique. It's a slight detriment but not gamebreaking in any way.
3 - You can anticipate a 4gate from poking and scouting army composition. At 8:20 you will be able to scout the entire base of what tech he chose guaranteed.
PROBLEM? :D
|
The real problem is that you are giving up 200 minerals at a time where 200 minerals means the world versus giving up 100 (or 200) minerals when it starts to approach trivial.
If you had to pay the 200 minerals at the time you would be OL scouting it'd be kind of worth it.
|
This is a clever idea, however I don't think its viable in practice. First, as you said, you can anticipate what the protoss is doing by other means, and 8 minutes is too late to scout anything you would want to scout for. What I and I think most others have much more trouble with is scouting terrans, but their first marine is out pretty early and you can't afford to bank up to 300 mins (and dump 200 of them) that early.
|
On March 20 2011 04:39 JTouche wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 02:22 Numy wrote:
Proxy Evo chamber's aren't new. Players like Catz have done it to prevent ramp blocking and cheese as well as other applications. Using them for "scouting" is quite ludicrous and really you might as well cheese with them. It's not a reliable means of scouting which means you could potentially still have to sac an overlord and lose 200 mins from this little trick. Not to mention you are losing 200 minerals far earlier than you would lose your sacced overlord which further slows down your entire opening. No, I'm not attempting to find a new cheese but an alternative to sac'ing overlords that sometimes never find out anything. It is reliable since you can literally scout the entire main as oppose to an overlord scouting only most of it. Show nested quote +Could broodlings also be used to kill the mineral line? I don't know any numbers offhand but I'm sure the broodlings spawning from an evo chamber should be enough to kill 3-4ish workers, or at least force them to kill workers away from the broodlings, temporarily stopping the player from mining. Broodlings could kill 2-3 workers if they don't micro them away. Show nested quote +If you're willing to lose 200 minerals, scouting with two overlords at once would be more efficient. Really? Losing 16 supply and 200+ more minerals to build those overlords again IS more efficient? Can you explain the logic to me? Show nested quote +1: its more expensive than scouting with an overlord
2: you need a higher upfront investment, and you need to make it faster (plus you need 300 in the bank for the hatch)
3: it relies on your opponent helping you out by killing it. (if he doesnt, then you will be able to scout 3 minutes and 30 seconds later, which in your replay example, would be at the 8:20 mark, a bit too late to scout for a 4gate. 1 - Initially it is more expensive than scouting an overlord but when you build the replacement overlord you are dead even /w this technique.
that's not how that works. the replacement overlord is why it costs you 100 minerals to scout. you always need overload, so you can't include the initial cost of an overlord to say scouting costs 200 minerals.
|
that's not how that works. the replacement overlord is why it costs you 100 minerals to scout. you always need overload, so you can't include the initial cost of an overlord to say scouting costs 200 minerals.
Yes, you can. The reason being that with this alternative you DONT lose the overlord. And with the standard Ov Sac you MUST REPLACE it.
|
On March 20 2011 05:01 JTouche wrote:Show nested quote +that's not how that works. the replacement overlord is why it costs you 100 minerals to scout. you always need overload, so you can't include the initial cost of an overlord to say scouting costs 200 minerals.
Yes, you can. The reason being that with this alternative you DONT lose the overlord. And with the standard Ov Sac you MUST REPLACE it.
Bringing you up to 100 minerals for replacing your OL...
Let's put it this way. You are at 26/28, and if you sac an overlord, you will need to spend 200 minerals to get up to 26/35. If you don't sac an overlord, it will cost you 100 minerals. 200-100=100 extra minerals lost.
Since you already have the OL, the OL sacced is actually "free" until you replace it, then it costs 100 minerals.
|
Lol. Might as well go for the workers though
|
Well, here's the thing. Why would you want to expend 200 minerals in lump sum, at a very early part of the game?
Maybe I don't understand what you're saying, but I'm guessing you're going to want to put down a hatch before the stalker pops, right? Well, if that's true, then you have 300 minerals to throw away at that point. Aren't you delaying an expansion to do this?
Could work very well vs. protoss, though.
|
On March 20 2011 05:01 JTouche wrote:Show nested quote +that's not how that works. the replacement overlord is why it costs you 100 minerals to scout. you always need overload, so you can't include the initial cost of an overlord to say scouting costs 200 minerals.
Yes, you can. The reason being that with this alternative you DONT lose the overlord. And with the standard Ov Sac you MUST REPLACE it.
And the replacement ovie cost 100minerals. No more, no less. 100 Minerals.
|
On March 20 2011 05:01 JTouche wrote:Show nested quote +that's not how that works. the replacement overlord is why it costs you 100 minerals to scout. you always need overload, so you can't include the initial cost of an overlord to say scouting costs 200 minerals.
Yes, you can. The reason being that with this alternative you DONT lose the overlord. And with the standard Ov Sac you MUST REPLACE it.
Losing one overlord does not cost 200 minerals. Ever.
|
You say it dies at around 6-8 minutes? If they spawned at 6 minutes it would be fine but 8 minutes is far too late. The normal overlord sac time is 4;45 - 5 minutes, around the time toss will have put down 2 or 3 gates depending on whether they 3 gate FE or 4 gate. For terran, it is about the time when they have factory finished and starport building or a CC building in-base.
If the evo dies at 6 minutes, it could be possible for the P/T to have an army standing at the evo that is able to kill all the broodlings instantly before they are able to run around. Since both P and T wall off vs Z, they don't need any units at the ramp (save from 1 zealot) so the rest is able to kill the broodlings. Assuming 3 out of 6 survive, they are quite fast but as mentioned before, anything later than 6 minutes it will be too late to scout for cheeses and the broodlings do die quite quickly.
Also, waiting for 300 minerals off a 15hatch or 14p-21expand that early will be quite damaging to your economy. If i'm not mistaken, you recieve 210 back from the hatchery cancel, then spend 75 on an evo. Thats 90+75=165 minerals plus the waiting time for the initial 300 minerals.
As much as it is a great idea, I just don't think it will be effective to scout with.
|
Why would they attack the evo chamber? If I saw a random evo chamber in my base I wouldn't attack it because of the broodlings.
|
Even if you don't attack it the hp will slowly bleed as it is off creep.
|
Your logic for making the cost of the two to be equivalent is false. In your way, the cost is 1 drone (50) = 1/4 of a hatch (75) + 1 evo (75) = 100 mins. With an overlord scout, you lose 1 overlord and have to rebuild it - but the cost of the first overlord is one you pay either way (need overlords no matter what), so the only real cost of the overlord scout is the 100 mins to replace it.
|
On March 20 2011 04:39 JTouche wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 02:22 Numy wrote:
Proxy Evo chamber's aren't new. Players like Catz have done it to prevent ramp blocking and cheese as well as other applications. Using them for "scouting" is quite ludicrous and really you might as well cheese with them. It's not a reliable means of scouting which means you could potentially still have to sac an overlord and lose 200 mins from this little trick. Not to mention you are losing 200 minerals far earlier than you would lose your sacced overlord which further slows down your entire opening. No, I'm not attempting to find a new cheese but an alternative to sac'ing overlords that sometimes never find out anything. It is reliable since you can literally scout the entire main as oppose to an overlord scouting only most of it.
It's unreliable because you can only scout when the broodlings pop and no other time. You can't dictate the time you want to scout so you could scout after you needed the information or before there was information to be seen.
|
On March 20 2011 04:39 JTouche wrote:Show nested quote +If you're willing to lose 200 minerals, scouting with two overlords at once would be more efficient. Really? Losing 16 supply and 200+ more minerals to build those overlords again IS more efficient? Can you explain the logic to me? Show nested quote +1: its more expensive than scouting with an overlord
2: you need a higher upfront investment, and you need to make it faster (plus you need 300 in the bank for the hatch)
3: it relies on your opponent helping you out by killing it. (if he doesnt, then you will be able to scout 3 minutes and 30 seconds later, which in your replay example, would be at the 8:20 mark, a bit too late to scout for a 4gate. 1 - Initially it is more expensive than scouting an overlord but when you build the replacement overlord you are dead even /w this technique. 2 - You can delay your expo 15-20 seconds to utilize this technique. It's a slight detriment but not gamebreaking in any way.
Making the evo chamber in their base costs:
90 minerals (from hatch cancel) + 75 minerals (from building an evo chamber) + 50 minerals and a larva (from sacrificing your initial scouting drone)
Total cost:1 larva, 215 minerals
This cost is money that you need to pay upfront, at the 4:50 mark. So that can as you mention, delay your expo, or delay whatever else you were going to build.
Compare that with scouting with 2 overlords:
You build 2 replacement overlords, and sac 2 existing ones.
Cost: 2 larva, and 200 minerals.
This is money that you pay when you scout, so around the 5-5:30 minute mark. Thus any delay in your build arrives significantly later, and since at that point, you have a higher income, the delay is smaller.
3 - You can anticipate a 4gate from poking and scouting army composition. At 8:20 you will be able to scout the entire base of what tech he chose guaranteed.
PROBLEM? :D
Yes, you can anticipate a 4gate in other ways. But you really want to scout his base at around the time a 4gate would arrive. That way, you get to know if its a 4gate, if its a 3gate expand, or if hes going for tech.
Scouting all of his base at the 8:20 mark sounds great, in theory. But at that point, you will have to already have dealt with his 4gate, he will already have 3gate expanded, or you will have DTs/phoenixes in your base. Thus scouting at that point is fairly useless.
Even against something like a forge FE, by the 8:20 mark, a void ray will already be in your base.
Its great to be able to scout, and see everything. But the thing is, usually, you want to scout for a specific reason. For example, suiciding an overlord, seeing the stargate almost done, and making a hydra den, or more queens, thats nice.
Having void rays in your base, and then having the evo chamber die, and seeing that oh! he made a stargate!, is much less useful. Sure, you get to see the fact that he made a stargate. I guess now you know that he didnt proxy the stargate, its actually in his base. Its information, its nice. But its not the critical information you want from early scouting, its useless information.
|
One time zerg player used his scout drone to make hatch on my ramp (i play tos) and when he canceled, my probe was right next to him. I think he couldn't make evo due to me blocking him. He left the game right after that.
|
very creative idea, however i think you'd come out further ahead if you work on keeping that scouting drone alive in the enemy base whether through building and canceling extractors or trying to hide it in the corner. gas stealing protoss will force him to attack your extractor and you'll be able to see the first few units.
|
Hmmm...I never thought of that. Kudos to you sir, for being a creative and outside of the box player
|
Kill 2-3 workers if they don't micro them? I highly doubt this.
In ZvZ, I used to do this and drop the evo chamber IN their mineral line (which you can't do in ZvP or ZvT due to being unable to build a hatch near minerals) and if I boxed half the broodlings onto one drone and half onto another, I could kill two of his drones. and slightly injure a third, if I recall correctly.
Keep in mind this is from INSIDE his mineral line. In ZvP or ZvT you'd be much further away. I'd be surprised if you consistently got more than one probe/scv.
|
This is a great idea, but as others have said already, the 6-8 minute mark is too late. The tech choice for protoss is decided between 4-5 minutes. I'd say you are better off always stealing a gas, because as a toss player it is extremely annoying and limits my options severely.
Zerg players that I have started facing are doing really tricky scouting techniques such as sacking the overlord at about 4:30. When my 1 sentry or stalker walks over to kill it, he sends a couple lings to attack my zealot and mineral-clicks into my base with a drone. Unless I am VERY lucky with my structure placement, my tech building gets scouted more than 75% of the time.
|
The problem i have with the strat is that if they're doing any kind of agressive strategy they'll probably leave the evo chamber in the base for a bit. I would just ignore it and attack with my 3 rax expo.
|
Also i'm not worried about an evo chamber in my base. The only scenario where this worries me is if its preventing me from walling in.
|
On March 20 2011 05:01 JTouche wrote:Show nested quote +that's not how that works. the replacement overlord is why it costs you 100 minerals to scout. you always need overload, so you can't include the initial cost of an overlord to say scouting costs 200 minerals.
Yes, you can. The reason being that with this alternative you DONT lose the overlord. And with the standard Ov Sac you MUST REPLACE it.
Dude... just... don't yell at people because you're not understanding extremely basic math.
If you make an overlord and send it to scout and don't intend or plan on using it for supply, it costs 100 minerals.
If you make an overlord and position it to scout later and use the supply until you're ready to sac it, it only costs 100 minerals *and it useful for the duration you use it for supply*
I'm not sure where you come up with this magical 200 number because you need to "replace" it. You don't replace it, you willingly sacrifice the supply it gives. The fact you make more later doesn't somehow magically increase the cost of the one unit you made.
|
the only time i see proxy evo chambers is in weird cheese builds.
Once i've seen it used in combination with a fast baneling nest and pool for a bust. He built it in a position which blocked my usual wall in so i had to wall around it (which was obviously fragile) that almost won him the game.
Frankly if you want to waste 200 minerals to scout sac 2 ovis at the same time. That way you are guaranteed to see almost his entire main and you can delay the cost until the 5min mark.
Spending 200 on a proxy evo chamber at the time where you should either be fast expanding or building a pool and saving for a FE really is a gamebreaker, you'll be so far behind all that scouting is worthless.
|
Edit: Im redoing this post just so its deadly clear and isn't disputed.
The Maths
+ Show Spoiler +The minerals spent due to scouting for each option:
Overlord saccing
One overlord = 100 minerals.
Overlords required to be made in order to overlord sac:
One overlord to scout + one to replace.
Two overlords = 200 minerals.
Therefore, 200 minerals have been spent due to scouting.
Evo chamber scouting
Drone = 50 minerals
Evo chamber = 75 minerals
Minerals lost from making then cancelling a hatchery = 300/4 = 75
50 + 75 + 75 = 200 minerals in total
Cost to replace the drone = 50 minerals
200 + 50 = 250 minerals
Therefore, 250 minerals have been spent due to scouting.
Conclusion
The evo chamber scout only costs 50 minerals more in total compared to the overlord scouting. We have to look at the differences between the methods of scouting to determine which is the better way, instead of how much each costs. 50 minerals is a very small difference for what can be argued is a better way to scout.
The Differences
+ Show Spoiler +
Advantages of saccing overlords: - You choose when to scout
- You can go over buildings
- You can come from any angle into the base that you want
Disadvantages of saccing overlords: - You can get supply blocked
- You might be denied scouting completely if your opponent predicts the angle of approach
- Overlords are slow
- You don't get the chance to see everything in their base, if they have units that can attack air.
Advantages of evo chamber scouting: - Broodlings are fast
- The evo chamber itself shows an area, before broodlings even spawn
- Broodlings can kill units, if they do 50 minerals damage to your opponent, it is equal cost to overlord scouting.
- Broodlings if micro'd correctly can scout a larger distance of a base than an overlord
- No chance of being supply blocked by using this method
- Has almost no chance of giving 0% scouting of your opponents base, due to evo chamber giving sight.
Disadvantages of evo chamber scouting - The evo chamber cannot scout whenever you want it to, it is either a set time or when your opponent kills it.
- Broodlings are weak, can be killed easily after evo chamber dies.
- If your opponent leaves it, they can still do rushes before it even dies and gives scouting (e.g. 4gate), and leave you with no scouting at all achieved (apart from the evo chamber's sight)
- Once the opponent walls off and you have no drones or evo chambers placed behind the walloff, this method becomes impossible for scouting in their base (So, its only viable earlygame)
Conclusion
If you can set the evo chamber to die at a certain time that you wish, by timing it properly, then you can achieve some very effective scouting, with the chance for damage. Unfortunately, this scouting method has a fair few variables that can cause it to be denied or ineffective. But if you compare it to the overlord saccing, that also has variables that can cause it to be completely denied.
Overall Conclusion
+ Show Spoiler +It really just depends what you prefer to do. But you DO have to ensure that you can time the evo chamber correctly so that it doesn't effect your build massively and also will scout at an effective time. The differences are almost negliable in my opinion. If you think evo chamber scouting is more effective, gives you results more often than overlord scouting or is just more fun, then why not do it? One thing that can be discussed is the small differences in placement, such as placing it on top of a ramp to disrupt a walloff or in the middle of a base to give a better view of what your opponent is doing. Personally, I dont like the fact that you dont get complete control over when the broodling scouting occurs. But if timed correctly, it doesn't make a huge difference either way. But Im proved wrong by a clever post. On March 20 2011 11:41 moxie wrote:
If you guys are worried about getting a scout a little too late, then you could place the evo chamber at the choke where your lings could help kill it. This gets you the benefit of killing a marine or zealot with broodlings + lings, and having at least one ling leftover to do the scouting. Well, replace the word "choke" with ramp and also keep in mind you dont know how many lings will be leftover to do the scouting, if you attack the evo chamber with all of them. Sorry if this conclusion doesn't seem well rounded, but this is a kinda disputable issue even after looking at all of the obvious variables.
The best way to test both of these would probably be from actual practical testing, in-game. Dont make my post make up your mind instantly, work it out for yourself.
|
On March 20 2011 11:02 Zergtastic wrote:
I dont get how everyone doesn't get the maths behind this.
1 overlord = 100 minerals.
One overlord dies, you lose 100 minerals worth of units from the initial cost of it. As a result, you need to make another overlord, which is 100 minerals. That makes 200 minerals.
If you are pointing out how the second overlord is still in use so its 100 minerals lost only, JTouche is talking about the minerals lost due to scouting. The second overlord you make because of your scouting, and it is a loss of 200 minerals because of that. On top of that, the second overlord will not get you further ahead than in the evo chamber scout, it'll just get you to the exact same scenario.
If both methods don't affect your supply changing when comparing the start to the end and they both require you spend the same amount, then ITS THE SAME.
For those of you who are saying 200 minerals is 2 sacced ovies, no, thats 400 minerals. You will have to rebuild 2 more overlords in order to get the supply back to where you want it to, so thats 400 minerals spent due to scouting.
You don't get it because you're wrong. It's of course 100 minerals for one lost scouting ovie. If you don't understand then look at your "ovie budget" in 2 scenarios, one where you sacrifice an overlord and one where you don't. The difference will be 100.
|
Zergtastic, are you trolling, or bad at math?
One overlord dies, you lose 100 minerals worth of units from the initial cost of it. As a result, you need to make another overlord, which is 100 minerals. That makes 200 minerals.
You pay 200 minerals, yes.
For that cost, you get: 1 dead overlord (sacrificed) and 1 alive overlord (worth 100 minerals). Thus you lose 100 minerals only. The rest, is 100 minerals that is spent on an overlord, that you need for supply, and would have needed anyway.
Think about it differently if you want: if you sacrifice an overlord, how much extra money do you need to have in order to be in exactly the same spot as before? 100 minerals (to rebuild it).
If you lose something, and replace it, you havent lost more because you replace it.
If you have 10 dollars in your wallet, and you lose them, it doesnt cost you 20 dollars, because you lost 10, and had to get another 10 to replace them. If you lose 10 dollars, you lost 10 dollars, no more, no less.
|
On March 20 2011 11:15 morimacil wrote:
Think about it differently if you want: if you sacrifice an overlord, how much extra money do you need to have in order to be in exactly the same spot as before? 100 minerals (to rebuild it).
If you lose something, and replace it, you havent lost more because you replace it.
If you have 10 dollars in your wallet, and you lose them, it doesnt cost you 20 dollars, because you lost 10, and had to get another 10 to replace them. If you lose 10 dollars, you lost 10 dollars, no more, no less.
Regarding the dollars, yes, you havent lost another 10 dollars. But you have been forced to earn another 10 dollars. So the total you have been forced to earn due to losing the initial 10 dollars is 20 dollars.
Its almost as if you want to say making an additional overlord doesn't cost you anything, because you have it.
Hell, I make a hatchery, I lose it, so I make another one. Because i made another hatchery, I dont need to consider it is 300 minerals?
Im not trying to say that what you have spent the minerals on is useless, Im trying to acknowledge the fact that you HAVE spent that money.
On March 20 2011 11:15 morimacil wrote:
For that cost, you get: 1 dead overlord (sacrificed) and 1 alive overlord (worth 100 minerals). Thus you lose 100 minerals only. The rest, is 100 minerals that is spent on an overlord, that you need for supply, and would have needed anyway.
Wrong. It takes you back to the exact same spot. You need it for supply, but it doesn't raise you above the supply that the first overlord gave you. You wouldn't have needed it anyway if you didnt sac the overlord in the first place.
|
If you guys are worried about getting a scout a little too late, then you could place the evo chamber at the choke where your lings could help kill it. This gets you the benefit of killing a marine or zealot with broodlings + lings, and having at least one ling leftover to do the scouting.
|
If I would need 5 overlords for supply by the time i want to overlord scout, i can make 6 overlords and sac one, costing me 600. Once the scouting overlord dies, I'm back at 5 where I needed to be. You'd better be a dedicated troll, because otherwise you should have been held back around the first grade until you mastered basic arithmetic.
|
OL (100) + cancelled Hatchery (75) + evo chamber (75) = 250
OL (100) + scouting OL (100) = 200
|
Cons:
-You lose a total of ~200 minerals as oppose to the 100 mineral scouting overlord sacrifice INITIALLY.
_
*When you build the replacement overlord you are dead even at your mineral loss of 200.*
[/u][/u][/b]
Please edit OP as this incorrect math.
After the hatch/evo trick, you have spent 200 minerals and gained nothing except scouting info. Net supply change = 0. Note that you did NOT build overlords with this.
After sac'ing an overlord, you lose 100 minerals, and the 8 supply that it had GIVEN you, so your net supply change if you had not made overlords to begin with is 0. The drop in supply is ONLY a factor if you had underbuilt overlords, instead of using the 200 minerals you set aside for scouting to build the two extra scouting overlords instead of a hatch/evo.
Thus, if you sac 2 overlords, we can all agree you are guaranteed full scouting, and your net supply change compared to hatch/evo is ZERO, because the 2 sacc'ed overlords were EXTRA. You built them to scout. Just like you shouldn't count a hatch/cancel as a "loss" of supply, since you built the hatch just to scout/get the evo up, the fact you "lose" the supply you would "gain" from building the hatch is irrelevent.
Thus the real pros are:
You get broodlings in their base and might kill something with them.
You don't ahve to get overlords crossmap.
You don't have to plan in the 2 extra OL worth of supply.
Cons:
You need to spend the hatch/evo money way earlier in the game than you do to build 2 new OL right before you sac the two by his base (to maintain constant supply)
YOu don't control precisely when the scouting occurs, as you can't determine exactly when the combo of offcreep+ attacks will kill yoru evo.
On balance, I think you lose doing hatch/evo vs double OL scout if you really want to guarantee full scouting of opponents base. This is b/c moeny is worth more earlier when it is more scarce, and because you lose control of your scouting. The possibility you will do damage does not pay for that, in my opinion.
|
I guess you don't need to have passed 3rd grade Maths to be in the Masters League and make a post on TL...
|
Wrong. It takes you back to the exact same spot. You need it for supply, but it doesn't raise you above the supply that the first overlord gave you. You wouldn't have needed it anyway if you didnt sac the overlord in the first place.
yeah, it takes you back to the exact same spot.
The cost of having 1 overlord is 100 minerals. If you actually build units, you will need to build overlords.
So making 1 overlord that you need for units isnt an investment in scouting. its an investment in getting units, that you would have to make anyway.
if you have one overlord, that you would need for supply anyway, and have it sit around, there is no extra cost to it.
If you have one overlord that you would need for supply anyway, get a second overlord, and sacrifice the first one, then you had to pay 100 minerals more, because you got 1 more overlord. And you end up in the exact same spot.
if you have 1 overlord, and exactly 100 minerals, you can kill that overlord, make a new one, and you are in the exact same spot, except you no longer have 100 minerals. By having 1 overlord die and replacing it, you have exactly 100 minerals less than you would have had if it hadnt died.
Regarding the dollars, yes, you havent lost another 10 dollars. But you have been forced to earn another 10 dollars. So the total you have been forced to earn due to losing the initial 10 dollars is 20 dollars.
You already had 10 dollars. If you lose 10 dollars, and replace it, yes, you had to earn 20 total, and before that, you had to earn 10 total. So you had to earn 10 more.
If you lose 10 dollars, you have to earn 10 more dollars to be in the exact same spot.
Losing 10 dollars and replacing the 10 dollars doesnt cost you 20 dollars to end up in the same spot as before.
You can go to http://www.basic-mathematics.com/subtraction-word-problems.html
Brush up a bit on your math skills
And then come back here, and solve this simple problem:
Bobby has 2 overlords worth 100 minerals each. Bobby loses an overlord. How many overlords has bobby lost?
+ Show Spoiler +Answer: 1 (worth 100 minerals)
|
I can tell you tha proxy pylons only cost 100 minerals to replace.
Does zerg lose 200 minerals when an overlord dies? Maybe that's why they're UP.
|
Money lost early is worse than money lost later. By a lot.
|
I may be mistaken, being a master zerg and all, but do people really sacc overlords before overlord speed often? I mean, the odds of seeing anything remotely of use w/o speed is below 10% unless the opponent doesnt check and doesnt build in a good position...
You pretty much just have to make an educated guess and gamble a little bit.
Also, not to mention that you cant always get an overlord into position all all maps anyway... except for close pos by air shattered/meta, there's no way to get an ovie in position safely against terran before at least 40 supply. And maps where you cant always get it there against protoss either.
|
I think it makes the most sense just to block building placement with an evo chamber so it's impossible for your enemy to wall off easily and then just push with 6-10 Zerglings at the appropriate time. It might not be game-ending cheese, but it'll easily put you ahead and give you scouting information. It's also nearly impossible to prevent without a BO that involves 2 gates or 2 rax going up super quickly to prevent the building placement..
|
On March 20 2011 12:47 asmo.0 wrote:
I may be mistaken, being a master zerg and all, but do people really sacc overlords before overlord speed often? I mean, the odds of seeing anything remotely of use w/o speed is below 10% unless the opponent doesnt check and doesnt build in a good position...
You pretty much just have to make an educated guess and gamble a little bit.
Also, not to mention that you cant always get an overlord into position all all maps anyway... except for close pos by air shattered/meta, there's no way to get an ovie in position safely against terran before at least 40 supply. And maps where you cant always get it there against protoss either.
Are you kidding? A slow overlord coming in from the right angle can often spot key things. IdrA beat Minigun's 3gate blink stalker build by sending in a slow-verlord.
The overlord is more vulnerable to being sniped pre-speed, but your opponent also has less units. Its less easy to spot Terran buildings as they can put them anywhere in their base (although most players don't spread their tech out like they should), but against Protoss you can usually make an educated guess at what their base layout is going to be like based on their first 3-4 pylons that your drone sees.
|
Well a slow overlord relies on your opponent being bad at building/unit placement, or just not caring enough to try and deny scouting information.
It works most of the time, and when it doesnt, well you probably still gained a little more information anyway.
You can also gamble a little, and make an educated guess, or poke at the front.
Poking at the front is the same, it relies on your opponent having his units/buildings where you can see them, either by mistake, or because he doesnt care enough to make an effort.
And its also not guaranteed to work, its also a bit of a gamble.
All zerg scouting in the early game is terrible, and a gamble.
Seeing 2 early gas followed by a stalker, you can know that its going to be either a stargate, a robo, DTs, a disguised 3gate expand, or a 4gate with a weird gas timing to throw you off.
Saccing an overlord, hoping he doesnt move the stalker to kill it, and built his buildings close to the edge might seem silly.... But when the alternative to that is picking one of the above builds, crossing your fingers, and hoping you were right or you die.... Suddenly it seems a lot less silly
|
On March 20 2011 11:39 Zergtastic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 11:15 morimacil wrote:
Think about it differently if you want: if you sacrifice an overlord, how much extra money do you need to have in order to be in exactly the same spot as before? 100 minerals (to rebuild it).
If you lose something, and replace it, you havent lost more because you replace it.
If you have 10 dollars in your wallet, and you lose them, it doesnt cost you 20 dollars, because you lost 10, and had to get another 10 to replace them. If you lose 10 dollars, you lost 10 dollars, no more, no less.
Regarding the dollars, yes, you havent lost another 10 dollars. But you have been forced to earn another 10 dollars. So the total you have been forced to earn due to losing the initial 10 dollars is 20 dollars. Its almost as if you want to say making an additional overlord doesn't cost you anything, because you have it. Hell, I make a hatchery, I lose it, so I make another one. Because i made another hatchery, I dont need to consider it is 300 minerals? Im not trying to say that what you have spent the minerals on is useless, Im trying to acknowledge the fact that you HAVE spent that money. Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 11:15 morimacil wrote:
For that cost, you get: 1 dead overlord (sacrificed) and 1 alive overlord (worth 100 minerals). Thus you lose 100 minerals only. The rest, is 100 minerals that is spent on an overlord, that you need for supply, and would have needed anyway. Wrong. It takes you back to the exact same spot. You need it for supply, but it doesn't raise you above the supply that the first overlord gave you. You wouldn't have needed it anyway if you didnt sac the overlord in the first place.
Are...Are you kidding? Is this serious?
I don't even... I don't even...
Replacing something doesn't double the cost. I mean, I can't even fathom... my god...
I built five overlords.
One overlord was killed.
I build one more overlord, going back up to five overlords.
How much money did I spend on the initial five overlords.
How much did I spend after one died and I built one more?
Well, since you're trolling or...suffering from extremely poor ability to use mathematics/logic, to say the least, I'll do it for you.
Five overlords: 500 minerals
Five overlords, one dies, make another = 600 minerals.
There you go. 100 more minerals if an overlord dies and you make another. Period. The fact that an overlord gives supply somehow confuses you so badly you think a unit costs twice as much means... look, I understand blatant insults isn't something TL tends to accept, but I will say this:
If you get so confused over something so simple, perhaps it is better if you refrain from attempting to discuss strategies surrounding a complex game like SC2. Making such absurd posts by you (and the OP I believe, but that just reinforces my point) just completely derailed what was potentially a viable idea, albeit, one I don't think is worthwhile.
|
I think that the big problem is that you need to save 300 minerals? you could have expanded or spent that money at home to better use, depending on the situations sometimes you dont HAVE to sack the ovie to see what is going on... So i mean, yes this has merit (have you seen CatZ Steps ZvP Proxy evo strat?) but i think it is a bit cheesy and will lack high level application.
|
On March 20 2011 13:52 Lochat wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 11:39 Zergtastic wrote:On March 20 2011 11:15 morimacil wrote:
Think about it differently if you want: if you sacrifice an overlord, how much extra money do you need to have in order to be in exactly the same spot as before? 100 minerals (to rebuild it).
If you lose something, and replace it, you havent lost more because you replace it.
If you have 10 dollars in your wallet, and you lose them, it doesnt cost you 20 dollars, because you lost 10, and had to get another 10 to replace them. If you lose 10 dollars, you lost 10 dollars, no more, no less.
Regarding the dollars, yes, you havent lost another 10 dollars. But you have been forced to earn another 10 dollars. So the total you have been forced to earn due to losing the initial 10 dollars is 20 dollars. Its almost as if you want to say making an additional overlord doesn't cost you anything, because you have it. Hell, I make a hatchery, I lose it, so I make another one. Because i made another hatchery, I dont need to consider it is 300 minerals? Im not trying to say that what you have spent the minerals on is useless, Im trying to acknowledge the fact that you HAVE spent that money. On March 20 2011 11:15 morimacil wrote:
For that cost, you get: 1 dead overlord (sacrificed) and 1 alive overlord (worth 100 minerals). Thus you lose 100 minerals only. The rest, is 100 minerals that is spent on an overlord, that you need for supply, and would have needed anyway. Wrong. It takes you back to the exact same spot. You need it for supply, but it doesn't raise you above the supply that the first overlord gave you. You wouldn't have needed it anyway if you didnt sac the overlord in the first place. Are...Are you kidding? Is this serious? I don't even... I don't even... Replacing something doesn't double the cost. I mean, I can't even fathom... my god... I built five overlords. One overlord was killed. I build one more overlord, going back up to five overlords. How much money did I spend on the initial five overlords. How much did I spend after one died and I built one more? Well, since you're trolling or...suffering from extremely poor ability to use mathematics/logic, to say the least, I'll do it for you. Five overlords: 500 minerals Five overlords, one dies, make another = 600 minerals. There you go. 100 more minerals if an overlord dies and you make another. Period. The fact that an overlord gives supply somehow confuses you so badly you think a unit costs twice as much means... look, I understand blatant insults isn't something TL tends to accept, but I will say this: If you get so confused over something so simple, perhaps it is better if you refrain from attempting to discuss strategies surrounding a complex game like SC2. Making such absurd posts by you (and the OP I believe, but that just reinforces my point) just completely derailed what was potentially a viable idea, albeit, one I don't think is worthwhile.
Allow me to copy and paste the maths.
One Overlord = 100 minerals.
Overlords required to be made in order to overlord sac:
One overlord to scout + one to replace.
Two overlords = 200 minerals.
Therefore, 200 minerals have been spent due to scouting.
If you wish to say that two overlords cost 100 minerals, please, do go ahead.
Edit: Actually, you pretty much agree with me anyway after saying that if an overlord dies you need to replace it, which makes it another 100 minerals spent. I find it funny how you argue that Im wrong by proving my point to be correct.
|
lol @ people claiming 1 overlord = 200 minerals. Seriously guys? Apparently if you get the evo chamber you just stop building overlords, lol.
As for the OP, I think it's an interesting idea. 6-8 minutes is a little late to scout protoss tech if they're one-basing though.
|
That's an interesting prospect that has crossed my mind once or twice, but I was unsure of implementation. This would be most fun if you could do it RIGHT behind mineral lines or at least very close to them, to do some minor damage, or near a pylon or something of that sort...something critical. This could be a nice little early damage. And even possible trolling can occur by producing the occasional drone as the hatch stays up, and just using it to merely create more buildings to make more broodlings. It's a money waster, but I find I end up with a lot of money mid to late game and nothing to do with it except re-inforce or make more hatcheries.....but a 70+ food of drones is a stupid amount...
|
Yeah, this would be a good idea except one glaring problem. If you ever expand then your hatchery will cost 600 minerals because the first one was sac'd.
|
One Overlord = 100 minerals.
Overlords required to be made in order to overlord sac:
One overlord to scout + one to replace.
Two overlords = 200 minerals.
Well it seems that you cant use basic logic.
Therefore, lets use your own logic to analyze the cost of scouting with an evo chamber.
one hatchery (300 minerals) canceled, 225 minerals gotten back from cancel, plus the cost to replace the hatchery (making the new one at your natural) (costs another 300 minerals). Then the cost of the drone lost for making the evo chamber (50 minerals) plus the cost to replace that drone (50 minerals) and the cost of the evo chamber (75 minerals) plus the cost to replace it (75 minerals)
Total cost when counting everything twice: 625 minerals for the scouting evo chamber, and 200 minerals for sacrificing an overlord.
So as you can see, even with your terribly flawed logic of counting everything twice, the evo chamber is still more expensive than the overlord sacrifice.
|
I just had to see what kind of threads were burying mine under their weight.
When BW TLers bashed on the starcraft 2 and the strategy forums, I always used to get defensive and criticize their elitism. I... I'm sorry. I had no idea...
I promise, I will never commit that sin again.
|
On March 20 2011 14:10 Zergtastic wrote:
If you wish to say that two overlords cost 100 minerals, please, do go ahead.
At this point I'm quite sure you're just trolling but I'll try explain it like the others in case you arn't.
You sac an overlord which causes you to lose 8 supply.
You pay the cost of one replacement overlord providing 8 more supply hence the extra 100 minerals.
You already had the overlord that was originally sacced and it had already been paid for.
Therefore the supply you lose from the original overlord is fully replaced by the building for the replacement overlord costing 100 minerals.
There is no place where you need to pay for the original overlord again, and no place where you lose two overlords.
This reminds me of the hatch = 350 minerals vs hatch = 400 minerals threads.
|
On March 20 2011 14:10 Zergtastic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 13:52 Lochat wrote:On March 20 2011 11:39 Zergtastic wrote:On March 20 2011 11:15 morimacil wrote:
Think about it differently if you want: if you sacrifice an overlord, how much extra money do you need to have in order to be in exactly the same spot as before? 100 minerals (to rebuild it).
If you lose something, and replace it, you havent lost more because you replace it.
If you have 10 dollars in your wallet, and you lose them, it doesnt cost you 20 dollars, because you lost 10, and had to get another 10 to replace them. If you lose 10 dollars, you lost 10 dollars, no more, no less.
Regarding the dollars, yes, you havent lost another 10 dollars. But you have been forced to earn another 10 dollars. So the total you have been forced to earn due to losing the initial 10 dollars is 20 dollars. Its almost as if you want to say making an additional overlord doesn't cost you anything, because you have it. Hell, I make a hatchery, I lose it, so I make another one. Because i made another hatchery, I dont need to consider it is 300 minerals? Im not trying to say that what you have spent the minerals on is useless, Im trying to acknowledge the fact that you HAVE spent that money. On March 20 2011 11:15 morimacil wrote:
For that cost, you get: 1 dead overlord (sacrificed) and 1 alive overlord (worth 100 minerals). Thus you lose 100 minerals only. The rest, is 100 minerals that is spent on an overlord, that you need for supply, and would have needed anyway. Wrong. It takes you back to the exact same spot. You need it for supply, but it doesn't raise you above the supply that the first overlord gave you. You wouldn't have needed it anyway if you didnt sac the overlord in the first place. Are...Are you kidding? Is this serious? I don't even... I don't even... Replacing something doesn't double the cost. I mean, I can't even fathom... my god... I built five overlords. One overlord was killed. I build one more overlord, going back up to five overlords. How much money did I spend on the initial five overlords. How much did I spend after one died and I built one more? Well, since you're trolling or...suffering from extremely poor ability to use mathematics/logic, to say the least, I'll do it for you. Five overlords: 500 minerals Five overlords, one dies, make another = 600 minerals. There you go. 100 more minerals if an overlord dies and you make another. Period. The fact that an overlord gives supply somehow confuses you so badly you think a unit costs twice as much means... look, I understand blatant insults isn't something TL tends to accept, but I will say this: If you get so confused over something so simple, perhaps it is better if you refrain from attempting to discuss strategies surrounding a complex game like SC2. Making such absurd posts by you (and the OP I believe, but that just reinforces my point) just completely derailed what was potentially a viable idea, albeit, one I don't think is worthwhile. Allow me to copy and paste the maths. One Overlord = 100 minerals. Overlords required to be made in order to overlord sac: One overlord to scout + one to replace. Two overlords = 200 minerals. Therefore, 200 minerals have been spent due to scouting. If you wish to say that two overlords cost 100 minerals, please, do go ahead. Edit: Actually, you pretty much agree with me anyway after saying that if an overlord dies you need to replace it, which makes it another 100 minerals spent. I find it funny how you argue that Im wrong by proving my point to be correct.
You are incorrect. Only one overlord dies, thus a loss of 100 minerals.
Say you are at 32/34 supply. You send in your overlord to scout and it dies.
You are now at 32/26 supply. You spend 100 minerals for a replacement overlord.
You are now at 32/34 supply.
You have spent a total of 100 minerals and are now in the same place you were before sacking the overlord (albeit the overlord is in your base instead of next to the opponent's)
Overall cost: 100 minerals
The original overlord cost does not count. This can be shown by the process above, or by the simple knowledge that you would have spent minerals on that overlord even had you not sacked it, since you need supply to build units in this game.
|
lol op stole this from me..., but anyway it is a must vs t/p. The scouting and information/time it gives you will win you almost every game just from this. Not only do you see the worker count/how many gases he has. But the protoss isn't able to 4gate, stargate, or dt and the terran can't 4 rax, or double starport without it being scouted right away.
|
man im going to start building a viking to hunt these mythical 200 mineral overlords in TvZ
|
Haha, oh this thread.
Cost of hatch cancel to evo chamber:
75 minerals (cancel hatch) + 75 minerals (evo chamber) + 50 minerals (drone) : 200 minerals
Net income of hatch cancel to evo chamber:
Scouting.
Cost of Overlord scouting:
100 minerals (sacrificed overlord) + 100 minerals (replacing overlord) : 200 minerals
Net income of Overlord scouting:
8 supply, scouting.
DOES ANYONE STILL NOT SEE THE DIFFERENCE?
|
On March 20 2011 14:10 Zergtastic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 13:52 Lochat wrote:On March 20 2011 11:39 Zergtastic wrote:On March 20 2011 11:15 morimacil wrote:
Think about it differently if you want: if you sacrifice an overlord, how much extra money do you need to have in order to be in exactly the same spot as before? 100 minerals (to rebuild it).
If you lose something, and replace it, you havent lost more because you replace it.
If you have 10 dollars in your wallet, and you lose them, it doesnt cost you 20 dollars, because you lost 10, and had to get another 10 to replace them. If you lose 10 dollars, you lost 10 dollars, no more, no less.
Regarding the dollars, yes, you havent lost another 10 dollars. But you have been forced to earn another 10 dollars. So the total you have been forced to earn due to losing the initial 10 dollars is 20 dollars. Its almost as if you want to say making an additional overlord doesn't cost you anything, because you have it. Hell, I make a hatchery, I lose it, so I make another one. Because i made another hatchery, I dont need to consider it is 300 minerals? Im not trying to say that what you have spent the minerals on is useless, Im trying to acknowledge the fact that you HAVE spent that money. On March 20 2011 11:15 morimacil wrote:
For that cost, you get: 1 dead overlord (sacrificed) and 1 alive overlord (worth 100 minerals). Thus you lose 100 minerals only. The rest, is 100 minerals that is spent on an overlord, that you need for supply, and would have needed anyway. Wrong. It takes you back to the exact same spot. You need it for supply, but it doesn't raise you above the supply that the first overlord gave you. You wouldn't have needed it anyway if you didnt sac the overlord in the first place. Are...Are you kidding? Is this serious? I don't even... I don't even... Replacing something doesn't double the cost. I mean, I can't even fathom... my god... I built five overlords. One overlord was killed. I build one more overlord, going back up to five overlords. How much money did I spend on the initial five overlords. How much did I spend after one died and I built one more? Well, since you're trolling or...suffering from extremely poor ability to use mathematics/logic, to say the least, I'll do it for you. Five overlords: 500 minerals Five overlords, one dies, make another = 600 minerals. There you go. 100 more minerals if an overlord dies and you make another. Period. The fact that an overlord gives supply somehow confuses you so badly you think a unit costs twice as much means... look, I understand blatant insults isn't something TL tends to accept, but I will say this: If you get so confused over something so simple, perhaps it is better if you refrain from attempting to discuss strategies surrounding a complex game like SC2. Making such absurd posts by you (and the OP I believe, but that just reinforces my point) just completely derailed what was potentially a viable idea, albeit, one I don't think is worthwhile. Allow me to copy and paste the maths. One Overlord = 100 minerals. Overlords required to be made in order to overlord sac: One overlord to scout + one to replace. Two overlords = 200 minerals. Therefore, 200 minerals have been spent due to scouting. If you wish to say that two overlords cost 100 minerals, please, do go ahead. Edit: Actually, you pretty much agree with me anyway after saying that if an overlord dies you need to replace it, which makes it another 100 minerals spent. I find it funny how you argue that Im wrong by proving my point to be correct.
I...I...for the love of athe, tell me you're trolling. You're trolling, right?
Do you... I just...I don't... I literally cannot fathom this... are you honestly...
If you're trolling, 10/10.
If you're not, holy my god shit fuck.
One overlord costs 100 minerals.
There is no magical fucking replace cost.
Ever.
Ever.
If a unit costs 100 minerals, and it dies, you lost 100 minerals. I have a degree in logic and I cannot even think off the top of my head what sort of fallacy you're committing. This thought process may be so absurdly incoherent it may not even have a name.
I think you're trolling, because I cannot comprehend that someone could possibly have this sort of thought process, but I will nonetheless explain what has been explained to you in very simple terms many time.
If you take an overlord and you willingly sacrifice it, you lost 100 minerals. That is it. There is no magical replace cost, this "replace" cost is literally logically incoherent. I don't understand what you think "replacing" does.
If you make two overlords, it costs 200 minerals. Yes. Very good, that seems to be, for some painfully poor happenstance of evolution, to be what you somehow think is important. But, nonetheless, I'll make this simple and even use 200 minerals since you seem to like that number despite the fact you make the laws of logic cry.
I have 0/0 supply.
I make two overlords for 200 minerals. I now have 0/16 supply.
I scout and sac an overlord. An overlord dies, I now have 0/8 supply.
For 200 minerals, I WENT UP 8 SUPPLY AND LOST AN OVERLORD.Do you know what this means? It means, and I hope so very much you understand this... That losing that one overlord only cost me 100 minerals. When I spend another 100 minerals I GAIN 100 MINERALS OF OVERLORD AND THUS 8 SUPPLY.
Now, let us just use one overlord. Oh athe, please let me drilling this into the Earth be enough to also get it through someones skull.
You are at 0/0 supply. You make an overlord. You are now at 0/8 supply. You send that overlord to scout and die. You are now at 0/0 supply. You spent 100 minerals, you did not go up nor down in supply. Do you know, (and please, please, start nodding your head now) what this means? You lost 100 minerals. Yes. You are now have the exact same supply as if you never made that overlord. You know what would happen if you never made that overlord? You would have... 100 more minerals. Because that is what you spent to make that overlord.
It means if you make a scouting overlord and "replace" it, you GAIN EIGHT SUPPLY. YOU GAIN AN OVERLORD. MY GOD, WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU? You make two overlords, one dies, you STILL GO UP IN SUPPLY. YOU CANNOT SAY THAT LOSING ONE OVERLORD COST YOU 200 MINERALS. YOU GAINED 8 SUPPLY. THAT IS NOT ZERO-SUM, THAT IS A GAIN.
I hope you understand, I really do. If you spend 200 minerals YOU GAIN 16 SUPPLY AND IF YOU LOSE ONE OF THOSE OVERLORDS YOU HAVE 8 SUPPLY LEFT. THAT MEANS YOU HAVE 100 MINERALS OF SUPPLY LEFT. THAT MEANS YOU LOST 100 MINERALS.
I cannot... I do not want to be banned from TL but I'll be frank, given the restraint I have shown with minimal rants, I think I and everyone else in this thread that hasn't spouted non-stop profanities should be at least nominated for a Nobel peace prize.
Seriously.
What the hell.
This is either the best troll, or the worst of humanity ever.
|
On March 20 2011 04:39 JTouche wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 02:22 Numy wrote:
Proxy Evo chamber's aren't new. Players like Catz have done it to prevent ramp blocking and cheese as well as other applications. Using them for "scouting" is quite ludicrous and really you might as well cheese with them. It's not a reliable means of scouting which means you could potentially still have to sac an overlord and lose 200 mins from this little trick. Not to mention you are losing 200 minerals far earlier than you would lose your sacced overlord which further slows down your entire opening. No, I'm not attempting to find a new cheese but an alternative to sac'ing overlords that sometimes never find out anything. It is reliable since you can literally scout the entire main as oppose to an overlord scouting only most of it. Show nested quote +Could broodlings also be used to kill the mineral line? I don't know any numbers offhand but I'm sure the broodlings spawning from an evo chamber should be enough to kill 3-4ish workers, or at least force them to kill workers away from the broodlings, temporarily stopping the player from mining. Broodlings could kill 2-3 workers if they don't micro them away. Show nested quote +If you're willing to lose 200 minerals, scouting with two overlords at once would be more efficient. Really? Losing 16 supply and 200+ more minerals to build those overlords again IS more efficient? Can you explain the logic to me? Show nested quote +1: its more expensive than scouting with an overlord
2: you need a higher upfront investment, and you need to make it faster (plus you need 300 in the bank for the hatch)
3: it relies on your opponent helping you out by killing it. (if he doesnt, then you will be able to scout 3 minutes and 30 seconds later, which in your replay example, would be at the 8:20 mark, a bit too late to scout for a 4gate. 1 - Initially it is more expensive than scouting an overlord but when you build the replacement overlord you are dead even /w this technique. 2 - You can delay your expo 15-20 seconds to utilize this technique. It's a slight detriment but not gamebreaking in any way. 3 - You can anticipate a 4gate from poking and scouting army composition. At 8:20 you will be able to scout the entire base of what tech he chose guaranteed. PROBLEM? :D
I hate when OPs comes with this kind of "No, I´m totally right, but yeah, this thread is for giving advice, so go ahead! just remember that your opinion will be wrong if it differs mine"
Playes have different perspectives of the game, if you want to prove ppl wrong THE LEAST you could do is coming with some cute graphs about how banking 300 early game is better that sacking 2 OLs or vise versa.
Its an interesting idea nonetheless, but my BOs with Zerg really don´t have those 300 minerals banked, I rather go with my feeling of what he is doing cause of timming before trying to do this work, maybe to freak him out a lil bit.
|
On March 20 2011 15:19 Lochat wrote:
If you're not, holy my god shit fuck.
One overlord costs 100 minerals.
There is no magical fucking replace cost.
Ever.
Ever.
Well there is our problem. You don't ever make overlords, it seems. Thats the only way possible that it doesn't cost minerals to make another overlord. Sure, if you dont actually make another overlord, then its 100 minerals to scout.
I dont get how you dont get the maths. I didnt say minerals lost, I said minerals spent due to scouting. You lose 100 minerals but you spent 200 minerals due to scouting.
But you refrain from even attempting to understand and instead stutter, swear and insult me. This isn't about your opinion of me, this is the strategy section of the SC2 forums on this site.
Edit: On March 20 2011 15:19 Lochat wrote:
You are at 0/0 supply. You make an overlord. You are now at 0/8 supply. You send that overlord to scout and die. You are now at 0/0 supply. You spent 100 minerals, you did not go up nor down in supply. Do you know, (and please, please, start nodding your head now) what this means? You lost 100 minerals. Yes. You are now have the exact same supply as if you never made that overlord. You know what would happen if you never made that overlord? You would have... 100 more minerals. Because that is what you spent to make that overlord.
Here is the same thing as what I said above, but in more words. So I finally get what you're doing, just saying you lost 100 minerals from losing an overlord. Cool. Then you need to make another one, because otherwise you will be supply blocked and die from a timing attack. So, since you have spent 100 minerals on the first overlord, and you need to spend 100 minerals more for one more overlord, how much is that? That is hmm... 200 minerals? "(and please, please, start nodding your head now)"
|
On March 20 2011 16:01 Zergtastic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 15:19 Lochat wrote:
If you're not, holy my god shit fuck.
One overlord costs 100 minerals.
There is no magical fucking replace cost.
Ever.
Ever. Well there is our problem. You don't ever make overlords, it seems. Thats the only way possible that it doesn't cost minerals to make another overlord. Sure, if you dont actually make another overlord, then its 100 minerals to scout. I dont get how you dont get the maths. I didnt say minerals lost, I said minerals spent due to scouting. You lose 100 minerals but you spent 200 minerals due to scouting. But you refrain from even attempting to understand and instead stutter, swear and insult me. This isn't about your opinion of me, this is the strategy section of the SC2 forums on this site.
Read the bolded section. He is right. You are not. 100 minerals was spent for scouting. The other 100 minerals was spent to deal with supply, which you do regardless of sacking an overlord.
|
On March 20 2011 16:09 Clog wrote:
Read the bolded section. He is right. You are not. 100 minerals was spent for scouting. The other 100 minerals was spent to deal with supply, which you do regardless of sacking an overlord.
Yes, thats kinda the point. You must spend the extra 100 minerals. So cost due to scouting is 200 minerals. Yes, they serve different purposes. No, that doesn't mean that one should be forgotten.
|
The Math:
Building an Overlord: 100 minerals
Building two Overlords: 200 minerals
Now, the argument that you're putting forward, Zergtastic, is that when you scout with Overlords, you have to make two: one for scouting, and one for replacing the scouting overlord when it's sacced.
But put it this way. I want to scout with an overlord. So, I spend 100 minerals for an overlord. Cost: 100 minerals.
I then send this overlord to a position from where it can scout. No further cost.
At whatever timing I decide, I send the overlord into the base. It dies. Sad occasion, much crying, scouting accomplished.
At this point, I have spent 100 minerals. That was the cost of the overlord. That overlord was not built for supply - it was built for scouting. Since I have scouted, I do not need another scouting overlord for saccing purposes at this moment. Any further overlords produced are strictly for supply, and cannot be including in the cost of the scouting as that is not their purpose.
Total cost; 100 minerals.
Your confusion is coming from purpose. When an overlord dies, yes, you replace it. You spend a total of 200 minerals on those overlords, and one is dead. But the second one is built for supply, and won't die unless somebody comes along and destroys it. It did not scout. It was not a part of the scouting process. In fact, it's irrelevant to this discussion, because we're talking about how much it costs to scout with an overlord.
So to conclude:
I make overlord, costing 100 minerals
I send overlord to base
Overlord dies
Scouting accomplished?
Cost: 100 minerals
Don't think of the overlord being replaced, because we're not replacing it. We're extending supply.
We done?
|
On March 20 2011 16:01 Zergtastic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 15:19 Lochat wrote:
If you're not, holy my god shit fuck.
One overlord costs 100 minerals.
There is no magical fucking replace cost.
Ever.
Ever. Well there is our problem. You don't ever make overlords, it seems. Thats the only way possible that it doesn't cost minerals to make another overlord. Sure, if you dont actually make another overlord, then its 100 minerals to scout. I dont get how you dont get the maths. I didnt say minerals lost, I said minerals spent due to scouting. You lose 100 minerals but you spent 200 minerals due to scouting. But you refrain from even attempting to understand and instead stutter, swear and insult me. This isn't about your opinion of me, this is the strategy section of the SC2 forums on this site.
Wow. I explained everything and you post this.
Sorry, you are beyond redemption. There is no magic replace cost for an item. The items' value is the item's value regardless how many or how few you buy in the future.
I have an overlord that cost 100 minerals. I lost an overlord that cost 100 minerals. It doesn't matter if I never buy another overlord the rest of the game. It doesn't matter if I buy ten thousand more. This is one of the most basic fundamentals of logic.
It doesn't matter what you spend for on other objects, for the same or other purposes. Holy crap. I don't even... I weep. I honestly (metaphorically, at least) weep.
I spent 100 dollars on an ipod. I throw away the ipod. I spent 100 dollars on new pair of shoes. Throwing away the ipod cost me 200 dollars. This is, literally, what you're doing if you break down what you're saying to logical form. The fact that the two items do or do not share a name isirrelevant. Not only did you only lose 100 dollars from the ipod, you gained the benefit of having it before you threw it away. Somehow, for some reason only a neurologist would know, being able to use something before throwing it away confuses you utterly.
And yes, thanks for pointing out it's the strategy forum. That's for pointing out you literally ignore the laws of logic and you don't understand elementary math and thus nothing you can post can ever be removed from that taint. I don't want to commit the fallacy of poisoning the well, but when the guy next to me is yelling it's not poisoned the entire duration that it is, regardless of the evidence brought to light that makes it's obvious it's poisoned, it's not going to look good later on when you proclaim you've found the fountain of youth.
I'm honestly done responding to you in this thread though, because you are single handily making me a misanthrope.
|
I gotta disagree on your "losing 200 minerals for a scouting ovie" logic here. That just simply isn't true. If the ovie dies, its a 100 mineral loss. Period. You don't "lose" another 100 minerals by building the next one because you would have had to build it anyways. Thats like saying each time a supply depot gets killed, it's worth 200 minerals because its an extra 100 minerals to replace it. Simply not true.
Total spent = 200 minerals
Total ovies produced = 2
It is a 100mineral sacrifice, period. I have to also agree with what many posters have said about the cost of 200 minerals early-game, or "opportunity cost" as my econ prof would say. It is far more expensive to "Lose" 200 minerals at an early stage of the game than it is to lose 100 minerals several minutes later, or worse, 200 minerals (2 ovies) several minutes later.
Just not viable unless cheesing imo
|
hahaha this thread has become epic.
*ahem*...
Let me explain what's going on in a way that might make more sense to everybody. Let us compare the scenario of sacrificing an overlord vs. the baseline of doing nothing.
1. The dead overlord was worth 100 minerals.
Cost thus far: 100 minerals
2. You have to replace that overlord. 100 minerals.
Cost thus far: 200 minerals
3. Don't forget that it took about 15 seconds for that overlord to travel and die. You've probably become supply blocked in that time, so you need to build a THIRD overlord. 100 minerals.
Cost thus far: 300 minerals, 15 seconds
4. But in those 10 seconds, you've probably mined about 200 minerals.
Cost thus far: 100 minerals, 15 seconds
5. But the scouting information you gained will allow you to optimize your build order by 15 seconds! SO the total cost is exactly 100 minerals and 0 seconds.
/sarcasm
More seriously; @Staboteur, that zvz mineral-line evo trick sounds interesting, particularly if you're going to be scouting anyway without going for an aggressive build. Seems like a lot of interesting variables like disrupting worker mining paths, long-lasting scouting information, the chance of killing drones (or hurting their mining time if they micro away), maybe keeping some of their zerglings occupied, etc. What made you stop doing this, just too expensive?
|
Can this be closed please?
The OP is trying to find merit in spending 200 minerals at a time where 200 minerals is very pivotal on scouting where the exact thing is accomplished with 100 minerals at a time where it's completely acceptable to lose 100 minerals AND 8 SUPPLY worth.
It just doesn't exist. I'm sorry. I'm sure you were being cute in a game 1 day and built a hatchery in his base, decided to cancel it because you realized that was stupid, then thought: "hey!" and built an evo chamber there, and because it wasn't completely useless you felt like god who just came up with the most awesome scouting strategy ever which you needed to tell the whole world about.
Please, just realize that this isn't a very smart way to handle ZvP or ZvT scouting whatsoever?
|
so what about the replacement evolution chamber? i mean you're eventually gonna build one and it's another 75 minerals + 50 for the drone
/sarcasm
|
Agreeing with Jeffbelittle. This thread's only going to confuse or mislead people. There's no actual discussion here.
It needs to be closed.
Edit: Readability.
|
I feel now as if I should apologize for my previous posts. I didnt show enough evidence. I'll rework my maths a bit.
Overlord saccing
One overlord = 100 minerals.
Overlords required to be made in order to overlord sac:
One overlord to scout + one to replace.
Two overlords = 200 minerals.
Therefore, 200 minerals have been spent due to scouting.
Sacrificed overlord supply = -8
Remade overlord supply = +8
Total overlord supply change = 0
Evo chamber scouting
Drone = 50 minerals
Evo chamber = 75 minerals
Minerals lost from making then cancelling a hatchery = 300/4 = 75
50 + 75 + 75 = 200 minerals in total
Cost to replace the drone = 50 minerals
200 + 50 = 250 minerals
Therefore, 250 minerals have been spent due to scouting.
Supply from losing drone = -1
Supply from remaking drone = +1
Total supply change = 0
If you want to look at only the cost to do the scouting, then it'd be 100 minerals to 200 minerals. But thats considering that leaves you at -8 supply for the overlord sac and at -1 supply for the evo chamber scout. So thats not an even and fair comparison, because you're not controlling the variable of supply.
|
On March 20 2011 16:48 Zergtastic wrote:
I feel now as if I should apologize for my previous posts. I didnt show enough evidence. I'll rework my maths a bit.
Overlord saccing
One overlord = 100 minerals.
Overlords required to be made in order to overlord sac:
One overlord to scout + one to replace.
Two overlords = 200 minerals.
Therefore, 200 minerals have been spent due to scouting.
Sacrificed overlord supply = -8
Remade overlord supply = +8
Total overlord supply change = 0
I lied I need to post.
Oh my god.
Oh. My. God.
SUPPLY START: 0
SCOUTING OVERLORD +8 -- 100 minerals
Now at + 8 supply.
SCOUTING OVERLORD DIES -8
Now at +0 supply.
REMADE SUPPLY OVERLORD + 8 - 100
Now at +8 supply.
0 + 8 - 8 + 8 = 8.
0 + 100 + 100 cost
0 + 8 + 8 supply.
200 minerals = 16 supply.
-8 supply = 100 minerals left.
200 minerals - 100 minerals = 100 minerals.
You. Are. Beyond. Help.
Jesus.
Christ.
Edit: Just incase it's not apparent, I'm not being a jackass without cause if you suddenly spot this post. Read all my previous posts trying to explain the same, simple thing and somehow he doesn't understand and has the audacity to try to be condescending while failing first grade math.
|
On March 20 2011 16:48 Zergtastic wrote:
Overlord saccing
One overlord = 100 minerals.
Overlords required to be made in order to overlord sac:
One overlord to scout + one to replace.
Two overlords = 200 minerals.
Therefore, 200 minerals have been spent due to scouting.
Sacrificed overlord supply = -8
Remade overlord supply = +8
Total overlord supply change = 0
No. No, no, no, no, no.
I appreciate that you're being civil about this. But your logic is wrong.
Guide: ['Cost','Supply Change','Difference between initial and final supply']
I make an overlord: [100, +8, +8]
I sac that overlord: [100, -8, 0]
I rebuild the lost overlord: [200. +8, 0]
In the end, I've spent 200 minerals and gained 8 supply. Since 100 minerals was spent to gain that 8 supply, I've spent 100 minerals on the lost overlord. Hence, 100 minerals lost to scouting.
Sacrificing the overlord does reduce your supply by 8, yes, but building it in the first place gave you 8 supply. So when you lose it, your gain/loss of supply is 0. You've spent 100 minerals?
I hope that this is clear. If you need clarification,say so.
Edit: Just beat me to it, Lochat.
|
Edit: Double post. Sorry.
|
On March 20 2011 16:55 _Halcyon_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 16:48 Zergtastic wrote:
Overlord saccing
One overlord = 100 minerals.
Overlords required to be made in order to overlord sac:
One overlord to scout + one to replace.
Two overlords = 200 minerals.
Therefore, 200 minerals have been spent due to scouting.
Sacrificed overlord supply = -8
Remade overlord supply = +8
Total overlord supply change = 0
No. No, no, no, no, no. I appreciate that you're being civil about this. But your logic is wrong. Guide: ['Cost','Supply Change','Difference between initial and final supply'] I make an overlord: [100, +8, +8] I sac that overlord: [100, -8, 0] I rebuild the lost overlord: [200. +8, 0] In the end, I've spent 200 minerals and gained 8 supply. Since 100 minerals was spent to gain that 8 supply, I've spent 100 minerals on the lost overlord. Hence, 100 minerals lost to scouting. Sacrificing the overlord does reduce your supply by 8, yes, but building it in the first place gave you 8 supply. So when you lose it, your gain/loss of supply is 0. You've spent 100 minerals? I hope that this is clear. If you need clarification,say so. Edit: Just beat me to it, Lochat.
I've spelled it out in like, seven different ways before as well many other people being kind enough to help.
It's just absurd at this point. I hope I'm being trolled, because this is to math what creationism is to biology.
|
Okay, you know what, I'll put it to you this way, because you can't escape this math this time:
You spend 75 on the cancelled hatcher + 75 on the evo chamber + 50 on the killer drone = 200 minerals.
Now. Let's spend 200 minerals the OTHER WAY! Let's make 2 overlords. Now let's sacrifice one of them. You now have 1 overlord more than you started, rather than 2, and you lost 100 minerals.
The difference? In the first example, after your evo chamber is destroyed, you have literally nothing. In the second example, you come out on top with 1 extra overlord, and that means 8 more supply!
So that's if those things were done at the same time.
But as we all know: each mineral is worth less in the impact of the game as the game continues. If I had an extra 400 minerals at the start of the game, I'd win every game. But 400 extra minerals 20 minutes into the game means nothing to me.
Reason I said that? Your 200 minerals are spent waay earlier than mine. So it "costs" more than mine.
So let's go back to the scoreboard:
-Your idea: Nothing left after the evo dies, made your investment much earlier in the game.
-Every freaking decent players idea: 1 Extra Overlord! 8 supply! Made investment at good time!
That's finite mathematics. Discrete math. There is one answer. This is the correct answer. Your answer is incorrect. Stop it.
And seriously, this needs closing before some hopeless gold league player reads this and starts poor habits.
|
I think at this point, zergtastic has no choice but to keep going on with the charade. Going back now would look terrible.
|
On March 20 2011 16:48 Zergtastic wrote:
Overlord saccing
One overlord = 100 minerals.
Overlords required to be made in order to overlord sac:
One overlord to scout + one to replace.
Two overlords = 200 minerals.
Therefore, 200 minerals have been spent due to scouting.
Sacrificed overlord supply = +8 - 8
Remade overlord supply = +8
Total overlord supply change = +8
bold-italic correction mine
You have to pick a starting point. In your logic, you start out assuming a starting point at which you have made neither of the two overlords. That's fine, but then you have to be consistent. From that starting point, you spend 200 on two overlords. You sac one. You now have one overlord, so you have spent 200 minerals are +8 in supply from your starting point.
edit: So, you have spent 200 minerals for scouting information AND +8 supply. The +8 supply costs 100 minerals, for the scouting info alone you have spent 100 minerals.
|
On March 20 2011 08:35 whoBmyrice wrote:
One time zerg player used his scout drone to make hatch on my ramp (i play tos) and when he canceled, my probe was right next to him. I think he couldn't make evo due to me blocking him. He left the game right after that.
I lol'ed.
That reminds me of a game I obs'ed a while ago, some guy in chat channel was annoying, so another guy challenged him to a 1v1. The annoying guy (terran) wanted to do a planetray fortress rush in the protoss base. The protoss had a probe under the flying command center the whole time and decided to mothership rush him.
Lots of laugh occured.
|
On March 20 2011 16:35 Polemarch wrote:More seriously; @Staboteur, that zvz mineral-line evo trick sounds interesting, particularly if you're going to be scouting anyway without going for an aggressive build. Seems like a lot of interesting variables like disrupting worker mining paths, long-lasting scouting information, the chance of killing drones (or hurting their mining time if they micro away), maybe keeping some of their zerglings occupied, etc. What made you stop doing this, just too expensive?
Not to hijack the thread, but people got less stupid.
I did it when I was silver league, and the standard response ZvZ to buildings in your base is to pull like 6 drones to try kill it, whatever it is. This made it hilariously cost-effective, because the time it takes for 6 drones to kill an evo chamber is a comical amount of mining time lost.
Then I got to gold league, and people there were less inclined to attack it with anything until their zerglings popped, meaning that for my early game 75 mineral + drone investment, I was getting to see how many zerglings they initially made, and taking one or maaaaaaybe two drones with me. Some people would explicitly try to NOT kill it, even going so far as to move their queen quite far from their hatchery (she'll try engage it if its in range) which had a disruptive effect. People that did this seemed to miss more injects, plus it provided me vision as long as it was alive.
Then I got to platinum, and for my early game 75 mineral + drone investment, I was getting to see how many zerglings they made and maaybe hurting one drone.
Basically, it comes down to being a fairly heavy investment at a time where you need minerals for more important things. If you 14 pool and do it after your pool, for one good luck getting it actually in his mineral line (in front of a building extractor works, though, too!), and for two you're delaying your queen or delaying a drone to do it.
I'm sure you could work it into an early pool build where you hit him with zerglings to accompany the broodlings, but I'm honestly not that big into straight cheese, so I never pursued it much.
(Though the most fun I had doing that was bringing three drones to his base, building three spine crawlers behind his base, then cancelling when he pulled all his drones to kill them, mineral walking two drones past his drones and building two evos side-by-side in his now-vacant mineral line. It probably wasn't anywhere near cost-efficient, but it sure as hell looked like it would suck to deal with!)
If you're looking for fun, stupid shit to do though, and are sub-diamond (like me! :D) try sending two drones out on a 1v1 map against protoss, and stealing both his gas. You shut down virtually everything he can do. and despite the early cost of two drones and 50 minerals, you remove virtually all early game threat, meaning you can drone like a beast afterwards. I suggest making sure he's not going to try kill you with zealots, though... and if he is, kill him with banelings.
You also destroy his ability to make sentries early game, meaning that you can hit a ling/baneling timing where he's got mostly zealots, virtually no sentries and only a few stalkers (or just a shitload of cannons), and crush him.
Or you could just play it straight, and laugh as all his tech is super late.
|
You should also consider/include the lost mining minerals of the drone used to create the evo chamber since it could have been mining the whole time.
|
Relax guys... You didn't even note the timings... The evo chamber loses you money earlier than the overlord scout. 250 minerals that early is a huge loss compared to 100 OR 200 later into the game.
|
I am going to try to explain what logic failure broke down for Zergtastic and 400 mineral hatchery people. Is this a zerg thing? I suspect so as zergs think a lot of what things cost due to larvae and drones. However, this is a bit or a different problem.
There are 2 ways of examining value:
Assets:
1 Overlord
-1 Overlord (dies from scouting)
Net change: 0 minerals, -1 Overlord
Value of 1 Overlord: 100 minerals
Therefore, scouting costs 100 minerals.
OR
Replacement Cost Analysis:
1 Overlord dies (from scouting)
1 Overlord replaced: 100 minerals
Therefore, scouting costs 100 minerals.
Zergtastic is combining both asset and replacement cost.
You cannot combine these two analysis. Doing so will double count the value of overlords.
|
|
|
On March 20 2011 18:14 35spike1 wrote:
Relax guys... You didn't even note the timings... The evo chamber loses you money earlier than the overlord scout. 250 minerals that early is a huge loss compared to 100 OR 200 later into the game.
250 minerals?
I'm pretty sure you use one of the 6 drones you spawn with to do this
and hatch cancel costs 75 minerals, and evo chamber costs 75 minerals
and since youre using one of the drones you spawn with
it only costs 150 minerals.
k?
|
Seeing as this zergtastic guy and the OP have different names i suppose this is some ridiculous trollbait. I find it hard to believe you could actually find two people who would support this "saccing an ovie is 200 minerals" idea.
If you have an overlord and then lose it, you lose 100 minerals, right? Since the overlord is dead it obviously doesn't do any good.
You then replace that overlord. As long as the replacement overlord is alive, you have NOT lost these 100 minerals, they are still in use, flying around healthily and increasing your supply by 8. Makes sense, right?
It costs 2400 minerals to get to 200 supply. Say you have all your 24 ovies in a nice little bunch, and your opponents phoenix kill every single one of them. How much do you have to spend to get back to 200? That's right, 2400 minerals. NOT FUCKING 4800. Since there is mathematically no difference in a scouting ovie dying and one just getting killed this should make perfect sense.
|
Zergtastic... let's say there is another unit called Scouting_Overlord, that costs 100 and is simply an Overlord unit that does not give supply.
I build one Scouting_Overlord for 100 minerals.
I send it on a mission to scout the enemy base.
It dies.
That cost me 100 minerals.
There's really not a lot of "maths" involved.
Now just think of the Overlord you choose to scout with as the pretend-unit.
When the Overlord that "drew the short stick" (as Tasteless might say) dies while scouting, I lose my 100 mineral investment. I did not rely on this overlord to provide me with supply, so the loss of 8 supply is completely irrelevant to the argument. I continued to make overlords in anticipation of my scouting overlord's death, playing as if it did not provide me with supply and therefore always keeping a +8 supply over my current food count.
|
It's just absurd at this point. I hope I'm being trolled, because this is to math what creationism is to biology.
Hehe I laughed. I think it's quite a good analogy, both are psychological problems. At this point he doesn't want to admit he was wrong after defending his idea so much.
Zergtastic, it's alright, just admit you were wrong and everybody will respect you more. We'll still love you 
|
Zergtastic is probably just a really good troll, cause I cant imagine he really doesn't get this. Im going to try to make this far less complicated than some others have....
(pretending OL's give 1 supply for people....not good with numbers)
I have 1000 minerals and and have 0 supply
I buy and overlord - 900 min 1 supply
Overlord dies - 900 min 0 supply
I build Overlord - 800 min 1 supply
-200 min & +1 supply from starting point
+1 supply is worth 100 minerals, but it cost us 200 thanks to the OL death.
Most of the time -200 + 100 = -100 therefore the net loss was 100 min.
If this is unclear only god can help you
In conclusion, OL scouting is half as expensive at a time when it is even more affordable.
|
On March 20 2011 17:21 Staboteur wrote:
I did it when I was silver league, and the standard response ZvZ to buildings in your base is to pull like 6 drones to try kill it, whatever it is. This made it hilariously cost-effective, because the time it takes for 6 drones to kill an evo chamber is a comical amount of mining time lost.
Then I got to gold league, and people there were less inclined to attack it with anything until their zerglings popped, meaning that for my early game 75 mineral + drone investment, I was getting to see how many zerglings they initially made, and taking one or maaaaaaybe two drones with me. Some people would explicitly try to NOT kill it, even going so far as to move their queen quite far from their hatchery (she'll try engage it if its in range) which had a disruptive effect. People that did this seemed to miss more injects, plus it provided me vision as long as it was alive.
Then I got to platinum, and for my early game 75 mineral + drone investment, I was getting to see how many zerglings they made and maaybe hurting one drone.
Basically, it comes down to being a fairly heavy investment at a time where you need minerals for more important things. If you 14 pool and do it after your pool, for one good luck getting it actually in his mineral line (in front of a building extractor works, though, too!), and for two you're delaying your queen or delaying a drone to do it.
I'm sure you could work it into an early pool build where you hit him with zerglings to accompany the broodlings, but I'm honestly not that big into straight cheese, so I never pursued it much.
Awesome, thanks for the detailed answer! The patterns of peoples' responses are funny.
I considered working it into a rush build but I can't see it being a more effective use of minerals & drone than just building a spine crawler. Unless there's a map where you can fully wall off a spine crawler with 1-2 evos.
|
Okay I didn't want this to exactly be a discussion of the math 
Whatever the verdict is , (majority say the sac ov is only -100) please lets not move away from the actual strategy discussion.
|
I think it's fun and creative
But in that first replay: Why didnt you just keep killing off his base?!? 0_o I actually thought that you would lose for a second there.
|
On March 21 2011 00:13 JTouche wrote:Okay I didn't want this to exactly be a discussion of the math Whatever the verdict is , (majority say the sac ov is only -100) please lets not move away from the actual strategy discussion.
J: The reason we have to rehearse basic math is the same reason there ISN'T actual strategy discussion worthy material in this thread.
Bottom line: His method costs a lot more, his cost comes earlier than the standard and therefore takes a harder hit on your own economy, and accomplishes everything the standard way does.
There is 100%, NO REASON, to do what he is suggesting. That's it. That's the end of discussion. That's why I and others want this thread closed. We all got drawn in by a flashy title thinking "Oh man, is there some cool way to use broodlings effectively that we haven't thought about?", only to see a guy trying to convince the world saccing an overlord costs 200 minerals.
Just use your head if you think there is. Would you rather spend 200 minerals on a "scout" really freaking early in the game that can only MAYBE make it to the back of the base to actually scout hidden Tech if the protoss is an idiot enough to kill the chamber? Or would you rather invest 100 minerals 5:45 into the game, which requires 0 stupidity on the side of the toss and effectively does the same thing? That's it. That's the entire argument. There's no more wiggle room. Every freaking person here that shows that they know basic starcraft (diamond+) has agreed that this idea is 100% horrible.
Anyone who decides to blindly accept the horrible logic of the OP and starts evo chambering protoss bases for "scouting" best of luck to you. I hope you get incredibly great at this game to make up for how big of an investment you're making early on in the game for "scouting".
|
On March 20 2011 05:45 TNine wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2011 05:01 JTouche wrote:that's not how that works. the replacement overlord is why it costs you 100 minerals to scout. you always need overload, so you can't include the initial cost of an overlord to say scouting costs 200 minerals.
Yes, you can. The reason being that with this alternative you DONT lose the overlord. And with the standard Ov Sac you MUST REPLACE it. Bringing you up to 100 minerals for replacing your OL... Let's put it this way. You are at 26/28, and if you sac an overlord, you will need to spend 200 minerals to get up to 26/35. If you don't sac an overlord, it will cost you 100 minerals. 200-100=100 extra minerals lost. Since you already have the OL, the OL sacced is actually "free" until you replace it, then it costs 100 minerals.
This is true. This seems to be the same syndrome zergs get when talking about cost of buildings. Buildings cost only 50 minerals more due to replacing the drone, NOT 100. It's VERY simple logic if you just stop and think about it.
Lemme try to explain it a different way (not that anyone will listen anyways).
Say you decide to not scout whatsoever, thus you spend 0 minerals from units lost in scouting. Note you have overlords already since they are necessary for supply. You do not need to replace any because your supply cap did not drop.
Now you DO decide to sac an ovie. This ovie was already in your base, you did not specifically make it to scout, you made it for supply cap. Thus, when it dies, you spend only 100 to get back to EXACTLY WHERE YOU WHERE BEFORE YOU SCOUTED.
Well now if you say "oh I made that ovie specifically to scout, so now it costs 200!", it still costs 100 because you have no need to replace that ovie since it was not necessary for your supply cap.
Think about, there's no need to "replace" a unit if you didn't need it in the first place, and if you do need to "replace" it, that means you needed it beforehand, meaning it's cost is necessary regardless of you scouting or not (which is the case here, you NEED to build it in the first place).
Sigh, I don't understand why this is so complicated.
EDIT: In retrospect, I'm 95% sure this is just a troll.
|
as many have described how the 200 cost for saccing one overlord math just isn't correct much better than me I tried to delete this message but I'm seemingly to stupid to find any such button .
|
yah if you sac a OL without preparing, you lost that supply. dang!
if you prepared for this and have an extra OL, you didn't really lose supply. you built an extra OL (+supply), then you lost it (-supply).
it's like saying building a scouting depot at an expo is sacrificing supply (though i still think building a bunker there is better for max salvage)
|
I like how everybody is arguing over how much each scenario cost.
You lose less money if you sac an overlord, but you don't gain any information... since most people aren't bad and won't let you fly through their base. You're lucky if he doesn't have marines patrolling all around the base preventing you from gaining any information whatsoever.
With his strategy, the idea is that you gain information... I'd rather lose 250 minerals and know I can drone up or stop an all in than know nothing with means death in all close position or 1v1 scenarios. I don't want to have to rush to Lair just because he might making banshees. I don't want to get roaches just because he might be making hellions. I don't get an extra evo for spores...You get the idea? The mineral cost enables you to put your money in the right place in order to stop whatever they are doing. In my opinion you'll probably end up saving a ton of money and be generally safer. I'll have to try it though, to see if it really effectively scouts. I don't think I would use this in 4p cross-position scenarios, just because that doesn't favor 1 base play and I usually have time to react. For Close position on Shattered Temple aka Steppes of War v2, this could be pretty useful.
I think it's a good idea depending on the timings. Steer away from the whole math behind it and factor in the fact that you actually know what he's doing. SACKING AN OV GETS YOU NO INFO BEYOND PLATINUM LEAGUE so forget it. It's a case of Information, vs no information. With that in mind, do you think it's worth it?
Oh yeah also, I think this applies mainly vs T because they have such of wide variety of 1 base play, that are all easy to stop if you know they are coming (ie hellion drop, 2 port banshee, cloak banshee, blue flame expand, maurauder hellion, marine tank ect ect ect). I don't think you can really know what playing vs a 1 basing terran feels like as Zerg unless you play zerg. Basically, I'd give almost anything to know whats up because if I prepare for every possible scenario and he just expands, I lost. If i don't rush to lair and he goes cloak banshee, I lost. There's so many ways you can lose and knowing what he is doing lets you be as cost effective as zerg can be so I think it's worth it.
|
On March 20 2011 04:39 JTouche wrote:
PROBLEM? :D
Yeah. You say that he's not going to have enough to kill the evo. That's true, when the first marine or whatever comes out. But what stops him from killing it before he starts his tech? I just don't see the terran player letting that thing sit in his base until the 8 minute mark.
|
On March 21 2011 01:46 Steel wrote:
I like how everybody is arguing over how much each scenario cost.
You lose less money if you sac an overlord, but you don't gain any information... since most people aren't bad and won't let you fly through their base. You're lucky if he doesn't have marines patrolling all around the base preventing you from gaining any information whatsoever.
With his strategy, the idea is that you gain information... I'd rather lose 250 minerals and know I can drone up or stop an all in than know nothing with means death in all close position or 1v1 scenarios. I don't want to have to rush to Lair just because he might making banshees. I don't want to get roaches just because he might be making hellions. I don't get an extra evo for spores...You get the idea? The mineral cost enables you to put your money in the right place in order to stop whatever they are doing. In my opinion you'll probably end up saving a ton of money and be generally safer. I'll have to try it though, to see if it really effectively scouts. I don't think I would use this in 4p cross-position scenarios, just because that doesn't favor 1 base play and I usually have time to react. For Close position on Shattered Temple aka Steppes of War v2, this could be pretty useful.
I think it's a good idea depending on the timings. Steer away from the whole math behind it and factor in the fact that you actually know what he's doing. SACKING AN OV GETS YOU NO INFO BEYOND PLATINUM LEAGUE so forget it. It's a case of Information, vs no information. With that in mind, do you think it's worth it?
Oh yeah also, I think this applies mainly vs T because they have such of wide variety of 1 base play, that are all easy to stop if you know they are coming (ie hellion drop, 2 port banshee, cloak banshee, blue flame expand, maurauder hellion, marine tank ect ect ect). I don't think you can really know what playing vs a 1 basing terran feels like as Zerg unless you play zerg. Basically, I'd give almost anything to know whats up because if I prepare for every possible scenario and he just expands, I lost. If i don't rush to lair and he goes cloak banshee, I lost. There's so many ways you can lose and knowing what he is doing lets you be as cost effective as zerg can be so I think it's worth it.
people focused on the cost aspect mostly because a troll was blatantly wrong, and bein adament about his standpoint.
Discussing the strategy itself died out before that.
I believe it was when people realized that this would net you scouting information at the 8:20 mark only, which is pretty much useless.
Also, if your opponent follows your drone with a worker, its impossible to do.
|
200 gold early on is way more costly than 100 gold minutes later.
|
1) if the person attacks it whats quickest time it can die?
2) if he doesn't attack it can you get an upgrade out of the evo chamber b4 it dies? getting super fast +1 if the person is playing passive
|
Really interesting idea...I'll try it sometime. But I do think that an overlord scout is still more reliable.
|
On March 21 2011 06:48 monkh wrote:
1) if the person attacks it whats quickest time it can die?
2) if he doesn't attack it can you get an upgrade out of the evo chamber b4 it dies? getting super fast +1 if the person is playing passive
1 is an issue same with evo blocking the gas in zerg vs zerg, sure you gain some info and slightly hassle them but they choose when to kill it.
2) is bad, they can see the animation of upgrades being researched and having to cancel an upgrade because they start attacking it near the end hurts your econ and costs you APM.
It is bad to use this to scout as you give the control of when you scout and how much you see to the opponent, it would be like a zerg being able to decide exactly when a scan goes off. Zerg just have to scout the front, wait for overseers or OL speed, or go for some semi all in rush to work out the army composition. The only big changes to how zerg get to scout will happen in the expansion as the huge issue is the wall in which no T or P will give up through meta game changes.
Maybe a use would be placing the evo up the ramp next to the cliff, then rushing some roaches to attack it from the bottom and then using the bloodlings attacking from inside the base and roaches attacking form the bottom to bust in, but this could only work later in the game when you can afford the roaches.
Also the OP should remove anything in his post about overlord scouts costing more than 100 mins. Anything about the first drones not having a value of 50 mins, or lost overlords costing the unit and the cost or replacing it is pure trolling and should be shut down and then ignored.
|
On March 20 2011 04:53 dementrio wrote:
This is a clever idea, however I don't think its viable in practice. First, as you said, you can anticipate what the protoss is doing by other means, and 8 minutes is too late to scout anything you would want to scout for. What I and I think most others have much more trouble with is scouting terrans, but their first marine is out pretty early and you can't afford to bank up to 300 mins (and dump 200 of them) that early.
Yes. They can also just build away from it, and at 6-8 minutes they can flat out kill it.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 21 2011 01:10 Jeffbelittle wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 00:13 JTouche wrote:Okay I didn't want this to exactly be a discussion of the math Whatever the verdict is , (majority say the sac ov is only -100) please lets not move away from the actual strategy discussion. J: The reason we have to rehearse basic math is the same reason there ISN'T actual strategy discussion worthy material in this thread. Bottom line: His method costs a lot more, his cost comes earlier than the standard and therefore takes a harder hit on your own economy, and accomplishes everything the standard way does.There is 100%, NO REASON, to do what he is suggesting. That's it. That's the end of discussion. That's why I and others want this thread closed. We all got drawn in by a flashy title thinking "Oh man, is there some cool way to use broodlings effectively that we haven't thought about?", only to see a guy trying to convince the world saccing an overlord costs 200 minerals. Just use your head if you think there is. Would you rather spend 200 minerals on a "scout" really freaking early in the game that can only MAYBE make it to the back of the base to actually scout hidden Tech if the protoss is an idiot enough to kill the chamber? Or would you rather invest 100 minerals 5:45 into the game, which requires 0 stupidity on the side of the toss and effectively does the same thing? That's it. That's the entire argument. There's no more wiggle room. Every freaking person here that shows that they know basic starcraft (diamond+) has agreed that this idea is 100% horrible. Anyone who decides to blindly accept the horrible logic of the OP and starts evo chambering protoss bases for "scouting" best of luck to you. I hope you get incredibly great at this game to make up for how big of an investment you're making early on in the game for "scouting".
Jeff may I ask what level player you are since you are apparently gosu.
And one thing to consider about this evo trick is that as long as you micro it well, you will always scout the entire main. I have not encountered one time yet where he had enough units to deny my broodlings scouting.
|
I think you guys are missing the point. The problem with this is not the cost, but the fact that you rely on your opponent to kill the evo chamber. A smart person would just keep his units away from the evo chamber until he either is moving out to kill you or it's late enough in the game when you know what his army composition is anyways.
|
On March 21 2011 12:41 JTouche wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 21 2011 01:10 Jeffbelittle wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 00:13 JTouche wrote:Okay I didn't want this to exactly be a discussion of the math Whatever the verdict is , (majority say the sac ov is only -100) please lets not move away from the actual strategy discussion. J: The reason we have to rehearse basic math is the same reason there ISN'T actual strategy discussion worthy material in this thread. Bottom line: His method costs a lot more, his cost comes earlier than the standard and therefore takes a harder hit on your own economy, and accomplishes everything the standard way does.There is 100%, NO REASON, to do what he is suggesting. That's it. That's the end of discussion. That's why I and others want this thread closed. We all got drawn in by a flashy title thinking "Oh man, is there some cool way to use broodlings effectively that we haven't thought about?", only to see a guy trying to convince the world saccing an overlord costs 200 minerals. Just use your head if you think there is. Would you rather spend 200 minerals on a "scout" really freaking early in the game that can only MAYBE make it to the back of the base to actually scout hidden Tech if the protoss is an idiot enough to kill the chamber? Or would you rather invest 100 minerals 5:45 into the game, which requires 0 stupidity on the side of the toss and effectively does the same thing? That's it. That's the entire argument. There's no more wiggle room. Every freaking person here that shows that they know basic starcraft (diamond+) has agreed that this idea is 100% horrible. Anyone who decides to blindly accept the horrible logic of the OP and starts evo chambering protoss bases for "scouting" best of luck to you. I hope you get incredibly great at this game to make up for how big of an investment you're making early on in the game for "scouting". Jeff may I ask what level player you are since you are apparently gosu. And one thing to consider about this evo trick is that as long as you micro it well, you will always scout the entire main. I have not encountered one time yet where he had enough units to deny my broodlings scouting.
Cons:
-You lose a total of ~200 minerals as oppose to the 100 mineral scouting overlord sacrifice INITIALLY.
Edit: Ignore the math if not exactly correct, please just focus on the application of this technique
_
*When you build the replacement overlord you are dead even at your mineral loss of 200[/u].*
*If you build the overlord prior to sacrificing it, you've spent the 200 earlier than you would have with he evo technique*
Should read:
Cons
You lose a total of ~200 minerals early, as opposed to 100 minerals when the scouting overlord is taken out.
You need to trust fund 300 minerals early.
The hatch placement can be denied by your scouting drone being followed.
The opponent can force the scouting to occur earlier by attacking the chamber.
|
On March 21 2011 13:41 azn_dude1 wrote:
I think you guys are missing the point. The problem with this is not the cost, but the fact that you rely on your opponent to kill the evo chamber. A smart person would just keep his units away from the evo chamber until he either is moving out to kill you or it's late enough in the game when you know what his army composition is anyways.
The evo dies on its own without creep, the problem is the opponent can speed it up and then choose his tech once the broods are dead. And that it costs more than saccing an OL.
|
I think I'm going to stop reading this forum.
There is so much shit here like this thread that talks about a tactic that has been around since beta, provides no insight whatsoever, and clutters up the few decent threads in this forum, burying some of them.
It's not new or original, and isn't even a good tactic except if your opponent freaks out.
It's a shame, too, because there are some great posters here with solid insight and a knack for creative thinking. But seeing 30 of these threads for every 1 of those makes it difficult to ever sift through the bullshit.
|
I don't understand how this tactic is not legitimate. It win's me games over and over again. Please check out the most recent replay I posted and tell me it's not viable.
I scouted a 4gate prior to completion. (which was the most common build mentioned that needed to be scouted!)
|
On March 21 2011 14:10 JTouche wrote:
I don't understand how this tactic is not legitimate. It win's me games over and over again. Please check out the most recent replay I posted and tell me it's not viable.
I scouted a 4gate prior to completion. (which was the most common build mentioned that needed to be scouted!)
Ling scout the ramp, count the number and type of units, and also the number of chronos spent and where.
Sac an OL just after 5 minutes, or if you're really smart, send one from each direction, and pull one back earlier so that you get full sight of his base with only 1 overlord sac.
Find his probe and don't let another probe out of his base. If he's trying to send a probe, he's probably 4-gating you. If he has a stalker at all, he's probably 4-gating you. If he doesn't have more than 1-2 sentries, he's probably 4-gating you. When you send in the 2nd OL (briefly) make sure it's by his probe count. If there are only 18-20 probes, he's 4-gating you (even if you can't find the gates). If he's constantly chronoing the warpgate, he's 4-gating you.
You get all this information more quickly and more decisively than your piss-awful idea. And if you're going to spend that much on a hatch, why even cancel it to build an evo chamber? A hatch will also produce broodlings, and you can even make lings from the hatch. The creep will give you more vision and mess up his building placement.
Oh wait, did I just stumble on an amazing strategy that you could use against low master players???? I think I need my own thread!
And vs. Terran, all he needs to do is pull a couple SCVs and use 2 marines and he'll have the DPS to kill it while building ( and kill your drone once it cancels). Not to mention he can just tech out of sight of the evo chamber, and then by not letting it finish, you have lost 175 minerals, a drone and still gotten no information.
If he has marines around his base, scout with 2 OLs at the same time, and pull one back while saccing the other. Hooray, full vision of his base for 1 OL cost.
edit: and stop trying to bump your shit thread.
|
On March 21 2011 14:15 michaelhasanalias wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 14:10 JTouche wrote:
I don't understand how this tactic is not legitimate. It win's me games over and over again. Please check out the most recent replay I posted and tell me it's not viable.
I scouted a 4gate prior to completion. (which was the most common build mentioned that needed to be scouted!) Ling scout the ramp, count the number and type of units, and also the number of chronos spent and where. Sac an OL just after 5 minutes, or if you're really smart, send one from each direction, and pull one back earlier so that you get full sight of his base with only 1 overlord sac. Find his probe and don't let another probe out of his base. If he's trying to send a probe, he's probably 4-gating you. If he has a stalker at all, he's probably 4-gating you. If he doesn't have more than 1-2 sentries, he's probably 4-gating you. When you send in the 2nd OL (briefly) make sure it's by his probe count. If there are only 18-20 probes, he's 4-gating you (even if you can't find the gates). If he's constantly chronoing the warpgate, he's 4-gating you. You get all this information more quickly and more decisively than your piss-awful idea. And if you're going to spend that much on a hatch, why even cancel it to build an evo chamber? A hatch will also produce broodlings, and you can even make lings from the hatch. The creep will give you more vision and mess up his building placement. Oh wait, did I just stumble on an amazing strategy that you could use against low master players???? I think I need my own thread!
What about a map like typhoon peaks where you won't get 1 scouting overlord anywhere near his base before ~5:00? Please answer me that. (cross position for example)
Edit: michaelhasanalias please answer this post.
|
Wow this is baller man, thanks for sharing! Didn't know the Hatch left that big of a patch of creep xD.
|
On March 21 2011 14:18 JTouche wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2011 14:15 michaelhasanalias wrote:On March 21 2011 14:10 JTouche wrote:
I don't understand how this tactic is not legitimate. It win's me games over and over again. Please check out the most recent replay I posted and tell me it's not viable.
I scouted a 4gate prior to completion. (which was the most common build mentioned that needed to be scouted!) Ling scout the ramp, count the number and type of units, and also the number of chronos spent and where. Sac an OL just after 5 minutes, or if you're really smart, send one from each direction, and pull one back earlier so that you get full sight of his base with only 1 overlord sac. Find his probe and don't let another probe out of his base. If he's trying to send a probe, he's probably 4-gating you. If he has a stalker at all, he's probably 4-gating you. If he doesn't have more than 1-2 sentries, he's probably 4-gating you. When you send in the 2nd OL (briefly) make sure it's by his probe count. If there are only 18-20 probes, he's 4-gating you (even if you can't find the gates). If he's constantly chronoing the warpgate, he's 4-gating you. You get all this information more quickly and more decisively than your piss-awful idea. And if you're going to spend that much on a hatch, why even cancel it to build an evo chamber? A hatch will also produce broodlings, and you can even make lings from the hatch. The creep will give you more vision and mess up his building placement. Oh wait, did I just stumble on an amazing strategy that you could use against low master players???? I think I need my own thread! What about a map like typhoon peaks where you won't get 1 scouting overlord anywhere near his base before ~5:00? Please answer me that. (cross position for example) Edit: michaelhasanalias please answer this post.
You edited your OP and still didn't fix up your pros and cons...
as it is:
Cons:
-You lose a total of ~200 minerals as oppose to the 100 mineral scouting overlord sacrifice INITIALLY.
Edit: Ignore the math if not exactly correct, please just focus on the application of this technique
_
*When you build the replacement overlord you are dead even at your mineral loss of 200[/u].*
*If you build the overlord prior to sacrificing it, you've spent the 200 earlier than you would have with he evo technique*
This is still totally inaccurate. With an OL scout you lose 100 minerals when the OL is shot down, until that time it is providing a usable resource of supply. If your OL is shot down and you are supply blocked at 18/10, that OL still was doing its job right up until it was killed.
You might have some good points but they are totally lost with all the trolling and what ever.
Maybe a hatch or evo in the enemy base is a good idea for maps where you can't use the traditional scouting methods. I think most players just don't agree that its worth the cost. If once you have forked out your 200 mins you don't have the econ to defend what you scout, you are better off playing blind.
|
I watched the backwater gulch and saw that you could scout the entire main (you didn't quite cover all the ground as there was a spot behind the minerals where he could hide tech, but you spotted the 3 gates coming up so you knew everything already). I think you got lucky when his probe stopped following your drone, I tried vs AI and got shut down by probes and zealots getting in the way when I was hatch canceling. So it seams it can only work if the opponent is bad.
|
I know this kind of off topic, but since this thread is about broodlings, here is the thing: You can attack broodlings with broodlings. so if you have a broodling, you can target with your broodlord and keep up the broodling count. Why is that not a viable thing to do before engaging? Like attacking one Zergling with your broodlords and then bolstering you broodling count up as high as possible and then engage?
Sorry for any mistakes for english is a foreign language to me.
|
read this entire thread for the lulz, and then realized any time ppl talked about the benefits, they didn't factor in HAVING A HOLE IN YOUR OPPONENTS WALL AS ZERG. When I watched catz do this, he didn't do it for scouting and follow up with normal play behind it, he did it to time a big attack that was almost guaranteed to get through the wall (maybe not against toss with FF on a narrow ramp). If he walls in around the evo, that's still a_TON_more surface area to hit with lings. catz talks about how to use this build on mr. bitter's 12 weeks i think, and says its only viable against a couple things, but every time he did it he followed it up with a semi all-in. If I was more comfortable with early aggression I would trade an early 200 minerals or whatever it comes out to be for a hole in the wall at 5-8 minutes. you just have to build enough units to capitalize on that investment. the way i see it he has 3 options:
1. if he kills it off early, he most likely won't have enough units to kill off all the lings+broodlings that i've been pumping since he started to attack it without taking some damage, you just need good enough game sense to know how to do max damage.
2. he hides everything and ignores it until it dies on its own - I have time to get some more macro up and push in when it dies, leaving a sort of rock/paper/scissor matchup as most likely neither will know the others tech, probably giving him a slight advantage, although he will be fighting in the open where zerg units are way more powerful
3. he walls in behind the evo and doesn't attack it - this reveals his tech AND/OR leaves a super weak wall that a couple banes will rip through with help from the broodlings, putting you in a similar situation to #2
In any situation, when it goes down his choke will be a lot weaker making all your units that much more effective. To me, this seems most like a proxy gate/bunker rush that is a big sink early game and HAS to do damage to not come out behind. All that said, it's a big risk that can pay off if you use it in the right situation and react the right way.
|
On July 23 2011 07:24 Drencrom wrote:
I know this kind of off topic, but since this thread is about broodlings, here is the thing: You can attack broodlings with broodlings. so if you have a broodling, you can target with your broodlord and keep up the broodling count. Why is that not a viable thing to do before engaging? Like attacking one Zergling with your broodlords and then bolstering you broodling count up as high as possible and then engage?
Sorry for any mistakes for english is a foreign language to me.
I don't think that is particularly useful because Brood Lords have a special attack mechanic:
they can shoot 2 broodlings at once (yet they produce broodlings 1 at a time, at the same speed as their attack). That said, I think they can have 3 broodlings alive at a time (per BL), so overall I think you're only saving on less than one broodling by doing that when you factor everything in, and it's only for a short time (like 5 game seconds)
|
Interesting idea on maps that prohibit decent ovie scouting. But on most maps, I'd just build my tech out of vision and be maybe 5 or 10 seconds delayed...
|
Keep in mind that the majority of the people will never use or think about a strategy/tactic unless they've seen it happen on GSL or some other tourney. It's as if the entire world is playing against GMs.
|
Hmmm if your evo dies of creeplessness, does the game alert you in any way? I can picture myself doing this and totally forgetting about the evo
|
You're losing 75 minerals from the hatchery cancel (cancelled buildings return 75% of their cost, not 100%), the drone (50) AND the cost of the evo chamber (75) which comes to a grand total of 200 minerals - twice as expensive as a scout overlord. Not to mention to be able to place the hatchery in the first place you've got to have saved up 300 minerals, at a time in the game where 300 minerals is kind of a big deal.
Definitely a cool idea though, but as others have already suggested it's more useful to use this technique to block a wall from being constructed with the intention of doing big aggression as it pops - something I'd like to do more, as it seems fun!
|
Just use a few lings to poke up the ramp and draw the first few his from his range units while mineral walking a drone through, if they want to hide their tech they have to blow a force field and its almost guaranteed if they went zealot stalker.
|
On July 24 2011 05:05 BinxyBrown wrote:
Just use a few lings to poke up the ramp and draw the first few his from his range units while mineral walking a drone through, if they want to hide their tech they have to blow a force field and its almost guaranteed if they went zealot stalker.
Now THAT is a nice, simple idea that I hadn't considered! Though my ZvP is terrible anyway, I could easily lose with a maphack on
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
