|
Hello TL community!
I am following the advice of numerous newby advocates (like Day 9 or Cecil) to just pick ONE build and practice it. You can hear all about attempts to follow this advice in my blog. My question is whenever I am having trouble with something and ask for advice it usually is use a different build. How should I reconcile these comments with the advice that I should only be doing one build. I have a few ideas on the subject.
1. The build I pick should be solid enough that it works in any match up and for almost all situations.
Concern: Are there builds like that out there?
2. When my opponent "hard" counters my build I should consider it a GG as I am playing to practice and not to win.
Concern: If the solution to that game is do a different build what can I learn from that game to improve next time? Obviously my newbness will not allow me to use a different build, yet.
3. Most solid builds should work even if they are "hard" countered at lower skill levels. Implying that with enough practice I should be able to beat my "hard" counter due to skill discrepancy
Concern: At about what skill level will that no longer be the case? Moreover where do I go for advice on those situations because mostly I get use a different build framed advice and not you need to this better and you can beat that counter from some one at your skill level.
Also what are some of the things I should be looking for to signal that it might be a good idea for me to throw in a different build? Just smooth timing, getting into masters and still winning, only losing games where I get hard counters, etc.
Any ways any advice would be welcome. For more details specific to me and what I am doing I will reference you to my blog as not to clog these forms with too much newbness.
http://www.teamliquid.net/blog/BroTalk
|
On April 14 2011 01:09 phone33 wrote:Hello TL community! I am following the advice of numerous newby advocates (like Day 9 or Cecil) to just pick ONE build and practice it. You can hear all about attempts to follow this advice in my blog. My question is whenever I am having trouble with something and ask for advice it usually is use a different build. How should I reconcile these comments with the advice that I should only be doing one build. I have a few ideas on the subject. 1. The build I pick should be solid enough that it works in any match up and for almost all situations. Concern: Are there builds like that out there? 2. When my opponent "hard" counters my build I should consider it a GG as I am playing to practice and not to win. Concern: If the solution to that game is do a different build what can I learn from that game to improve next time? Obviously my newbness will not allow me to use a different build, yet. 3. Most solid builds should work even if they are "hard" countered at lower skill levels. Implying that with enough practice I should be able to beat my "hard" counter due to skill discrepancy Concern: At about what skill level will that no longer be the case? Moreover where do I go for advice on those situations because mostly I get use a different build framed advice and not you need to this better and you can beat that counter from some one at your skill level. Also what are some of the things I should be looking for to signal that it might be a good idea for me to throw in a different build? Just smooth timing, getting into masters and still winning, only losing games where I get hard counters, etc. Any ways any advice would be welcome. For more details specific to me and what I am doing I will reference you to my blog as not to clog these forms with too much newbness. http://www.teamliquid.net/blog/BroTalk
Your 3 questions are essentially the same thing. There are builds for each matchup that don't have hard counters. Assuming you're P based on your icon, do these builds:
PvP: 4 gate
PvT: 2 gate robo
PvZ: 3 gate expand
Keep in mind that build orders are strictly for early game, and there are many transitions from those builds.
|
Out of curiosity, why is PvT 2 gate robo? With the stim pack nerf (+30 seconds), a lot of protoss have started doing 1 gate FE.
|
Italy12246 Posts
|
A lot of protoss were doing 1 gate FE before the stim pack nerf, but I think it's a little unstable and depending on what you scout you'll need to get more buildings before you expo. Personally I find a 1 gate robo FE to be sufficent against a terran.
That said, I think day9's advice on sticking to one build, doesn't apply to Starcraft 2 because the 'standard builds' haven't yet been developed. And it may never, since SC2 sometimes requires extreme reactions depending on what you scout (like 4 gating in PvP). It would just be ideal if you COULD stick to one build.
|
On April 14 2011 01:28 GoldenH wrote:
That said, I think day9's advice on sticking to one build, doesn't apply to Starcraft 2 because the 'standard builds' haven't yet been developed. And it may never, since SC2 sometimes requires extreme reactions depending on what you scout (like 4 gating in PvP). It would just be ideal if you COULD stick to one build.
I think that at a similar point in SC1, less than a year after "real" competition began, we could have said the same thing. I believe that it's possible that the standard builds will become clear, and I would not be surprised if they are similar to the ones stated above.
As to your statement about reacting, this is part of the game of course, but does not mean that standard builds cannot be established. A standard build is simply what you plan to do in the absence of relevant scouting info. If you're planning to do a 4gate in PvP, which is almost certainly the standard, and you see your opponent building a cannon in your base, nobody is advocating that you stick to your build and build your second gate when you are half way done with WG. No, you throw down a forge yourself immediately. SC1 had the same mindset.
As a final note, I'm a protoss player and I would consider the recommendation of 4gate PvP, 2gate robo PvT and 3 gate PvZ to be the safest possible given current knowledge.
|
i don't like the practice one build order approach, well its good for learning how your race works (bit faster i would say). Also its gives better success at first so the motivation is higher, but at some point you will have to switch from it and lose alot, where you first would have easily won, which is a terrible demotivator. Anyway if you don't get demotivated by losses, its probably a good thing ^.^ .
But playing ladder i often encounter people that once thrown off their bo which is pretty easy (especially tosses), don't recover from it. (even if i consider their mechanics way better then my in the replay)
|
So, you want to pick a build that's solid in most matchups, and try to execute it every game?
ok...
How about DT rush --> expand ---> Blink Stalker & Colossus?
From my perspective as a random player, I find it difficult to handle DTs. This is mostly due to my love of tier 1 units with most races. It generally causes me to get slower detection.
Focusing on getting DTs every single game would probably get you a hell of a lot of wins, or at least allow you to expand and transition into that scary stalker colossus ball. You'll have the twilight council for level 2+ upgrades, as well as blink.
This build is generally weak to any kind of forge opener, or very strong, early, aggressive attack.
Also, it counters itself...
Two protoss going DTs against one another can be a pretty funny situation.
EDIT: I don't agree with doing this kind of thing (doing 1 build all the time and praying it works). I prefer the scout and react approach, but that can be useless to newer players who may have no idea what they're scouting.
|
Step 1: pick a build.
It should either be:
very agressive, so that you can make it work almost no matter what the opponent does
very safe, so that you can make it work no matter what the opponent does
very reactive, so that you can make it work no matter what the opponent does
Step 2: do the build.
When you lose, do the build again, but do it better.
Step 3: Ignore random "build counterunit X!" advice
If for example you play a ZvT game, open with speedlings, and lose to hellions, 90% of the advice you will get will probably be something like "build roaches!". Ignore this kind of advice. Instead, see step 2, and do the build better. for example, better scouting, better macro, better micro, less missed injects, less missed tumors. experiment with the same thing you did, but a slight variation. 4 more lings. an earlier tumor. different building or queen placement to block the ramp, and so on. Do your build, stick to your build, dont take counterunit advice.
Step 4: Forget about "Hard" counters.
There is no such thing. Do your build better, and you will be fine. Going mass roaches, having trouble against mutas? instead of randomly deciding to add in hydras or something like that, do your build better. scout better, and push earlier, crush him right before/as his mutas pop. things like that.
Going mass marines against mass tank-hellion? you arent hardcountered, or anything like that, just be more agressive, expand more, drop all over the place, micro better to avoid splash, whatever.
the most important is just to ignore the "build counterunit X!!!!" advice.
Unless your build is absolutely shit, you will be fine. And even if the build you decide to do and stick to is 100% terrible, doing it well enough will get you into mid masters easily, probably a lot higher. Once you are in grandmaster league, you can feel free to ignore my advice, and consider that perhaps a different build would be more appropriate. Until then, stick to your build.
|
It's not so much that you should pick one build for ALL situations with no deviations (though you should pick a single stable, standard, robust build to OPEN with), but you should stick with the same gameplan. Practice one way of playing; learn its good points, its bad points, what you need to be scouting for, and the adjustments you need to make in certain situations. The idea behind it is that it's better to gain experience and become good at one thing, than to constantly change how you play your race and are mediocre at everything.
MY GAMEPLAN:OPENING: As a zerg player I always open hatch first vs terran. I want to play defensively and economicallyIf I suspect hellion I'll skip zergling speed for a bit in favour of getting some roaches first.
If I suspect banshees I'll keep making extra queens.
If I suspect 2-port banshee I'll ALSO make an early evo chamber for spores
If I suspect a big early marine push I'll get my baneling tech faster than usual. MIDGAME: I get fast melee & carapace upgrades, infestors, and mass ling/bling. I want to harass and counterattack as much as possible.If I see that he's making a lot of hellions I'll make less lings and throw in some roaches instead.
If I see big mech play I'll also research neural parasite.
If he's doing a lot of drop harass I'll get a spire and make a few mutalisks to discourage him. LATEGAME: I get a fast hive, ultralisks, and max out on upgrades.
That's what I do. It might not be the "best" (it's a very rough outline, and I'm only a Diamond scrub), but that's how I like to play my zerg. Note that my gameplan is simply the bits in bold! All those deviations seen in the code blocks have been learned because I've practice doing this style a lot and I've found they were necessary, or at least helped quite a bit. If you keep changing the core style you play a matchup that learning is going to be slower. By keeping with the same plan it is easier to make small iterations and adjustments and see how they pan out in subsequent games.
|
When people give that advice they mean 1 build per matchup. So 3 total builds. And yes there is a build for each matchup that can adapt to anything. That means there is no hard counter to the build, since if there were, that would make it a cheese.
The point of following a single build per matchup is to get a good feel for the match, develop game sense of timings, gain an understanding of racial dynamics and how different army compositions work and feel, and, above all, to hone your mechanics.
Once you bring your macro and micro to a decent level (high plat to mid diamond), you can begin playing with other builds to get a feel for how they work. Anything below this level and you should be able to win with just about any crisp build, regardless of "hard counters".
Anihc had a good list of builds for learning a solid macro style. In the interest of being a complete player, once you hit diamond I'd recommend you learn a few early cheeses and also experiment with stargate openers and adelscott style play (focus on upgrades and gateway units). Doing the same build every game will get boring after a while, and the build you choose at first may not match your personal style  .
|
1. Yes, this has already been answered in the thread and since i'm not a P player i don't have good inputs for you here but what you have been told looks pretty solid.
2. It really depends on your mindset and what you are trying to accomplish with this game, even when a game looks lost you can still try to train your micro and make it hard for your oppenent to finish you.
3. Until you are fairly high master/kind of a competitive player
Bear in mind that while training the same build over and over you have to be looking for key stuff.
The #1 for me would be timing, good thing with playing the same over and over is that you can get your timing downs (i.e. when i do THIS my oppenent is probably doing THIS, if he's not then i gotta worry about something else).
Also what you don't seem to process is that builds are for the early game only, you have to choose the right transition to the midgame by scouting.
|
Canada653 Posts
On April 14 2011 01:21 Griffith` wrote:
Out of curiosity, why is PvT 2 gate robo? With the stim pack nerf (+30 seconds), a lot of protoss have started doing 1 gate FE.
OP seems low-level, and 1gate expo takes very good execution and micro to hold early (pre-stim) attacks.
|
On April 14 2011 01:09 phone33 wrote:
My question is whenever I am having trouble with something and ask for advice it usually is use a different build.
This is a good sign that the guy giving you advice has no idea what he's talking about and can ignore his post. If you were working on a PhD and needed advice on finishing your dissertation, would you listen to advice that says "just become a doctor instead, that's what I did and I make tons of money"? Likewise if you're working on 3 gate expo vs mutaling, you ignore the people who say "just go 15 nexus instead and mass phoenixes every game, that's what I did and I beat mutaling every time". Each time you switch your build, you reset your learning process and have to start from scratch. It's no different from switching your race or switching to another RTS game.
As for your questions, here are some answers I can give you.
1: Unfortunately there is no good build that works in every matchup, except maybe 6 pool.
2 and 3: Good builds don't have counters. If they did, people wouldn't use them.
If you want a good set of builds to practice, here are the most standard ones that don't have counters.
PvP: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=177569
PvZ: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=194376
PvT: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=196385
|
On April 14 2011 02:13 FreezerJumps wrote:OP seems low-level, and 1gate expo takes very good execution and micro to hold early (pre-stim) attacks.
Indeed. As a fairly newbie player myself, 1-gate FE (or 1 rax FE or hatch first, for that matter) is really hope-based, and probably a bad idea in general; because I can't defend it, it is basically a huge gamble that will either pay off big (massive economy allowing me to crush my opponent midgame), or fail spectacularly if my opponent goes for some early pressure.
Because I am throwing the dice every game, it is only somewhat of a better idea than cheesing.
As others have said, 3 gate expo into gateway/colossus PvZ, 2 gate robo expand into gateway/colossus PvT and 4 gate PvP are all great "standard" builds to work with.
If the OP is still having trouble, I would also suggest an "economic" 4 gate (i.e. don't cut probes) in every matchup until he is good enough at probes'N'pylons™ to make the other builds work.
|
Your plan for improving should carry you to Master's on 1build for each matchup.
#2: If you're not in Master's league, there is always a ton of little things you can do better that will let you win with almost any strategy because your opponent will make a lot of mistakes. Scout better, make probes better, refine your build order as you get on 2-3 bases so that your buildings are going down at the best times, get your assimilators at the perfect time, build units at the right time so that you have more stuff, harass more, split your army better, build your buildings in better locations. I've been a diamond league player for awhile now and I suck at doing all of these things.
#3: the number of people who play unexploitably (i.e. they don't miss macro when microing, etc) is incredibly small. you will know when you hit the point where you can't get mechanically and tactically better than the people you're playing against and need to use different strategies, but by the time you get there you'll already have become bored with your primary strategy because you will have refined it so well that you want to work on something new. If you don't know your build and why and when you build different tech buildings and how the changing tech trees effect your gas timings and # of gateways and what unit compositions you're shooting for with your different tech options and... (insert everything about your current strategy) then you're probably not at that point. Basically, by the time you reach that point you will understand the game a hell of a lot better and you won't be asking for this advice on TL.
|
Personally as Toss, at Masters level I use one to two openings per matchup.
PvP: off-4 gate or def-gate if the other guy is 4-gating as well.
PvT: 1-gate expand or 3-gate expand if I sense early aggression. If I see 2 gases I'll rush a robo instead of the other 2 gates. 15 nexus in extremely rare situations.
PvZ: usually 3-gate expand, sometimes forge FE. 1-gate expand in very rare situations.
Basically I feel like if there's one build you should learn it's 3-gate expand as it's probably the most versatile. Transitions are really easy into almost all other styles, i.e. you can drop a robo + gates or 2 gates or 3 gates after your expo is up. Once you master 3-gate expand and how to do it safely, you can start learning other builds easily since you'll have a great understanding of warpgate unit dynamics. You can in some sense see the other builds as variations of the 3-gate expand.
PvP is obviously different since the 4-gate is such a staple of the MU.
|
On April 14 2011 01:19 Anihc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2011 01:09 phone33 wrote:Hello TL community! I am following the advice of numerous newby advocates (like Day 9 or Cecil) to just pick ONE build and practice it. You can hear all about attempts to follow this advice in my blog. My question is whenever I am having trouble with something and ask for advice it usually is use a different build. How should I reconcile these comments with the advice that I should only be doing one build. I have a few ideas on the subject. 1. The build I pick should be solid enough that it works in any match up and for almost all situations. Concern: Are there builds like that out there? 2. When my opponent "hard" counters my build I should consider it a GG as I am playing to practice and not to win. Concern: If the solution to that game is do a different build what can I learn from that game to improve next time? Obviously my newbness will not allow me to use a different build, yet. 3. Most solid builds should work even if they are "hard" countered at lower skill levels. Implying that with enough practice I should be able to beat my "hard" counter due to skill discrepancy Concern: At about what skill level will that no longer be the case? Moreover where do I go for advice on those situations because mostly I get use a different build framed advice and not you need to this better and you can beat that counter from some one at your skill level. Also what are some of the things I should be looking for to signal that it might be a good idea for me to throw in a different build? Just smooth timing, getting into masters and still winning, only losing games where I get hard counters, etc. Any ways any advice would be welcome. For more details specific to me and what I am doing I will reference you to my blog as not to clog these forms with too much newbness. http://www.teamliquid.net/blog/BroTalk Your 3 questions are essentially the same thing. There are builds for each matchup that don't have hard counters. Assuming you're P based on your icon, do these builds: PvP: 4 gate PvT: 2 gate robo PvZ: 3 gate expand Keep in mind that build orders are strictly for early game, and there are many transitions from those builds.
This is pretty much it, I believe. Play a well-known build that can deal with anything. If you play any of those builds, there are no hard-counters to them. There may be some soft counters to be build, but you can adapt to them.
On the other-hand, for example, if you decide in PvT to open 3-gate 1-star and try and bust the choke, be prepared to get hard-countered by bunkers + cloaked banshees.
|
On April 14 2011 02:00 morimacil wrote:
Step 1: pick a build.
You should have some understanding of your build's strengths and weaknesses before you choose it.
some builds are:
-very agressive: These are usually built regardless of what your opponent does because you are attempting to put on pressure/kill your opponent before their tech tree develops and has no need to be reactive. Very agression-focused rather than economy focused.
-very safe: These are usually also buiult regardless of what your opponent does but rather than focusing on agression, you are focusing on a strong defense
-very reactive; These builds are based on scouting information and follow several paths based on what you scout. Most often are economic-defensive-style builds but the defenses aren't built until you feel an attack is imminent.
Step 2: do the build.
When you lose, do the build again, but do it better.
-Watch your replay. Focus on where you slipped up. Focus on making that better next time
Step 3: Ignore random "build counterunit X!" advice
If for example you play a ZvT game, open with speedlings, and lose to hellions, 90% of the advice you will get will probably be something like "build roaches!". Ignore this kind of advice. Instead, see step 2, and do the build better. for example, better scouting, better macro, better micro, less missed injects, less missed tumors. experiment with the same thing you did, but a slight variation. 4 more lings. an earlier tumor. different building or queen placement to block the ramp, and so on. Do your build, stick to your build, dont take counterunit advice.
-99% of the time your loss can be attributed to a sloppy build (building placement, supply block, non-continuous unit production), unit control, or poor scouting information. If you get 4gated and lose to a really strong push that no amount of micro/unit warping could have saved you from, it means you didnt scout well enough.
-stick to your build.
Like this post, but disagree with some points. I've changed them above to reflect my opinion.
|
The point of following a single build per matchup is to get a good feel for the match, develop game sense of timings, gain an understanding of racial dynamics and how different army compositions work and feel, and, above all, to hone your mechanics.
Thats kind of true, but also very misleading.
The real point of doing 1 build a lot, is to get good at it.
If you know 1 build inside out super well, with incredibly crisp timings, knowing exactly what to do in every situation and so on, well you can be a pro. Idra spent most of his time until recently doing pretty much 1 build per matchup. He was predictable, but even when ppl knew what he was going to do, he made it work.
On the other hand, if you know how to do 50 different builds/strategies/openers/whatever, but you arent really particularly good at any of them, well that means that you arent really good.
Its the same with everything really. This also applies to most other things in life.
If you are the world's leading brain surgeon, and you dont know anything else but brain surgery, but you are the best brain surgeon out there... well gz, you probably have a great job.
If on the other hand, you know a little about brain surgery, but not really more than the average guy, and youve also tried painting a couple of times, but it didnt work out too well, and you tried to do a little programming one time, and kinda had a little success with it, and you also can cook a little, but not all that well, and ..... Well really, that makes you kinda useless, and you will probably get a shit job
|
Could someone list the standard builds for TvT, TvP, and TvZ if I wanted to try and practice just one build for each race?
Thanks
|
Theres a million builds you can do for any race in any matchup that will easily get you into masters or above.
Pick one that you want to do cose you like it, and do that, and you will be fine.
There is no need to try and play a particular build because it is "standard".
For example in TvT, TvP, and TvZ, if you wanted to open up with something like cloaked banshees, do it! 3rax? you can make it work. blueflamed hellion drops? will get you to master. 1rax expand? if thats your style, go for it.
People need to understand that for the most part, starcraft really isnt a strategy game at all.
For the most part, your strategy just doesnt matter one bit.
SC is mostly a game of mechanics, and whoever has the best execution wins, no matter the strategy.
Once execution becomes nearly perfect, then, strategies start to matter, but since for 99% of people, their execution isnt perfect, or close to perfect, the strategy they choose simply doesnt matter at all.
pick something you like, not something "standard" that way, you can do something you enjoy, which makes it easier when you want to play 500 games with the same build. And the "standard" will change next month anyway.
|
On April 14 2011 02:45 YakiSOBA wrote:Could someone list the standard builds for TvT, TvP, and TvZ if I wanted to try and practice just one build for each race? Thanks
I'd also love to see the community feedback on the "ideal" and "no hard counter" builds for ZvX.
The builds listed for P are great; but the inbreds and insects need some love too
|
On April 14 2011 02:00 morimacil wrote:
Step 1: pick a build.
It should either be:
very agressive, so that you can make it work almost no matter what the opponent does
very safe, so that you can make it work no matter what the opponent does
very reactive, so that you can make it work no matter what the opponent does
Step 2: do the build.
When you lose, do the build again, but do it better.
Step 3: Ignore random "build counterunit X!" advice
If for example you play a ZvT game, open with speedlings, and lose to hellions, 90% of the advice you will get will probably be something like "build roaches!". Ignore this kind of advice. Instead, see step 2, and do the build better. for example, better scouting, better macro, better micro, less missed injects, less missed tumors. experiment with the same thing you did, but a slight variation. 4 more lings. an earlier tumor. different building or queen placement to block the ramp, and so on. Do your build, stick to your build, dont take counterunit advice.
Step 4: Forget about "Hard" counters.
There is no such thing. Do your build better, and you will be fine. Going mass roaches, having trouble against mutas? instead of randomly deciding to add in hydras or something like that, do your build better. scout better, and push earlier, crush him right before/as his mutas pop. things like that.
Going mass marines against mass tank-hellion? you arent hardcountered, or anything like that, just be more agressive, expand more, drop all over the place, micro better to avoid splash, whatever.
the most important is just to ignore the "build counterunit X!!!!" advice.
Unless your build is absolutely shit, you will be fine. And even if the build you decide to do and stick to is 100% terrible, doing it well enough will get you into mid masters easily, probably a lot higher. Once you are in grandmaster league, you can feel free to ignore my advice, and consider that perhaps a different build would be more appropriate. Until then, stick to your build.
This.. Also, just as day9 says, if you encounter some kind of odd thing, after you watch the rep, don't think "what build can i do agains this NeXT time", but instead, "how can i arrange the order of my build to fit better in this situation, but still achieve my mid-game plan"..
Remember that any build îs designed with the mid game in mind first, not the other way around.. A BO îs just the optimum way of achieving that mid-game plan without dying..
And also, NEVER stop to think of that build îs good until you played 1000 games with it.. Just ask yourself what can be adjusted if you find yourself in a tight spot..
Cheers..
|
How do you transition out of using the same build after you are very good? or very good at executing ur build.
I started off with no RTS experience and when I started in bronze as Terran I used MM only every matchup which got me to platnium (beta).
This later transitioned into something similar here, a specific BO for each matchup especially for T/Z - mostly all ins
T you had to play a little more standard since what you go highly depends on opponent whereas T/Z if you do early push it usually doesnt matter what they go.
Now i am 3800 Terran (last season) still using the same all-ins ish against P/Z and find it very hard to stray away since if I do i lack other fundamentals that ive skipped along the way LOL
What would you do in my case?
ps when i mean all ins im not talking about 3rax all in or marine all in, they are more of a 1 or 2 base timing push where I usually still do have an economy that will back me up if the push fails (if i 1base its an all in, 2 base more of a timing push)
|
On April 14 2011 02:45 YakiSOBA wrote:Could someone list the standard builds for TvT, TvP, and TvZ if I wanted to try and practice just one build for each race? Thanks
tvz: 2 rax pressure into expand and tank/marine/medivac jinro style
tvp: 2 rax expand with a reactored starport and mass mmm to follow up.
tvt: i dont really know, but the iEchoic or marine tank is good
|
there is no one build, that works vs every race. you need 3 builds, 1 for each race. just practice them, change what you like, make it better, etc.
|
I would like to second the request for standard, safe Terran builds, 1 for each race.
Having just switched from Z i dont really know which builds are safe.
If people could give their reasoning as well that would be awesome
Especially need help vs Z. Im finding TvZ to be really difficult.
|
in Mirror match, at least for TvT you cannot have a certain build...you can have an opening but since there is always a counter for every build your play should adapt depending on what they are doing
|
On April 14 2011 01:21 Griffith` wrote:
Out of curiosity, why is PvT 2 gate robo? With the stim pack nerf (+30 seconds), a lot of protoss have started doing 1 gate FE.
1 Gate FE definitely gets hard countered by really aggressive 2 rax play on most maps. I doubt that anyone can go 1 Gate FE on a map that is smaller than cross spawns metalopolis and hold against a strong 2 rax.
OTOH, I don't agree with anihc that there aren't hardcounters to each of the builds he mentioned. Of course there are not hardcounters to 3 gate FE in PvZ, but there are hardcounters to particular variations of 3 gate FE. If you always feign pressure at the same number of units, or you always do some really aggressive attack, or you always follow with 1 VR+2 phoenix and get an immediate robotics, etc. etc. There are ways to punish these if you do them every game.
Similarly, there are hardcounters to 2 gate robo PvT if you always do it the same way. There are ways for terran to out-expand you if you always open the same passive way, as we saw Tyler do in the TSL3.
|
Ok, lets rephrase it then:
There are no hardcounters for you, me, the OP, the guy who was talking about hardcounters, and 99.99999% of the SC player base.
Saying that a sloppy 2rax is a hardcounter to a bad 1gate fe, is just silly.
its also not like you can just build 2 rax, and win easily against a perfectly executed 1gate fe with perfect building placement, unit placement, micro, macro, and so on.
Blah, blah blah, yes, yes, at the very top level of play, such things might exist, and when you play a best of 5 in a tournament, being too predictable might be a disadvantage.
But unless you are already consistently doing well in tournaments, and executing your builds perfectly, such things simply dont factor in for you, they simply dont actually exist at lower levels of play.
Perhaps a perfectly executed 2rax does "hardcounter" a perfectly executed 1gate fe.
Who cares?
In the interest of actually learning and improving, all you need to know is that a perfect 1gate FE wins against pretty much any less than perfect build. Once you get to that point, where you execute it 100% perfectly, and then you start meeting other people who can also do their builds 100% perfectly too, at that point, you might want to start to worry about if "hardcounters" exist, and which build gives you the best chance to win overall.
TLDR:
Random perfectly executed build > random "hardcounter" less than perfect build
And the fact that 2 perfectly executed builds might possibly "hardcounter" each other is completely irrelevant to the discussion, since we are talking about practicing a build, and not what happens when builds are perfectly done.
|
Thanks for all the replies!
I have plenty to read and digests it seems. I will definitely strongly consider adding a build for each match up. That seems like it would take care of almost all my problems. Except for the me being a total newb sauce one. Obviously they will be one of the "Standard" as I dont think there is as much to gain from mastering some sort of cheese crazy build. As for that I'll keep gnawing on these posts. Thanks again!
|
As stated earlier, builds are mostly for the early game (up to around 6 - 9 minutes depending.).
After that you transition based upon what the opponent is doing, how successful your opening was, the map, etc. However these transitions are also part of your build.
This is because your opening build will dictate what options are available to you to transition into effectively. If you open 2 gate robo as suggested, you can skew your composition into many forms with these buildings. (Zelot/Immortal, Stalker/ Colossus, etc.) However in terms of anti-air you are limited to stalkers and sentry's. So if you scouted a heavy air build by the opponent, your transition would involve stalker/sentry. Trying to transition cold into stargate -> phoenix from a robo opening would be very slow and costly (bad). However if you opened with stargate/voidray instead of robo, your anti-air transition could involve phoenix. This is a simplified example, but shows how a build also influences transitions.
How easy or difficult a builds transitions are, as well as how many options a build can deal with, are ways of evaluating it's strength. This is the danger with a 6 pool build or other 1 base all ins. It can't transition effectively into anything.
|
Can someone point me to some good solid Terran builds ? Having trouble finding stuff that isn't 1/1/1 or gimmicky.
edit: NVM plenty of info in thread ... sorry
|
On April 14 2011 02:45 morimacil wrote:Show nested quote +
The point of following a single build per matchup is to get a good feel for the match, develop game sense of timings, gain an understanding of racial dynamics and how different army compositions work and feel, and, above all, to hone your mechanics.
Thats kind of true, but also very misleading. The real point of doing 1 build a lot, is to get good at it. If you know 1 build inside out super well, with incredibly crisp timings, knowing exactly what to do in every situation and so on, well you can be a pro. Idra spent most of his time until recently doing pretty much 1 build per matchup. He was predictable, but even when ppl knew what he was going to do, he made it work. On the other hand, if you know how to do 50 different builds/strategies/openers/whatever, but you arent really particularly good at any of them, well that means that you arent really good.
This is correct.. at first the only reason you focus on doing one build is to learn how to masterfully operate the user interface, and to learn to be able to do exactly what you want at certain times. This includes placing the correct buildings perfectly on time, and in the correct order. If you aren't at this level yet, go into a 1-player game (a game with JUST you, no computer even) and just run through the build order until it's perfect.
After your build is perfect, run it even MORE until you are aware of what it fares well against, or fares poorly against. (remember this is only one matchup still, and you've probably run this build 50 times now. This just means that it will take some time, and if you feel like you're getting nowhere, then just remember that your feeling is only natural :D)
I think this is what Day[9] means by running one build in each matchup. Also, when you lose, you need to see how you died, or why. Did the opponent do something you didn't expect? Did you simply get supply blocked? Did you just forget to produce units or maybe a critical upgrade? Was there a micro error and you lost all your units? Maybe you didn't scout something critical.
Sticking with the build is key, otherwise you'll never know why one thing tends to beat another. Good luck :D
|
No non-allin build worth its salt should is an automatic death when faced with its "hard counters". With proper scouting and some spidy sense, you figure out what your opponent intends to do, and you can come up with simple reaction algorithms.
|
On April 14 2011 03:23 CrayonKing wrote:
How do you transition out of using the same build after you are very good? or very good at executing ur build.
[snip]
I am 3800 Terran (last season) still using the same all-ins ish against P/Z and find it very hard to stray away since if I do i lack other fundamentals that ive skipped along the way LOL
What would you do in my case?
The simplest thing to suggest is to simply stop doing the all-ins. Change your game plan to instead aim for an endgame macro game (obviously still taking advantage of any opportunities you spot though), really practice and concentrate on those "missing" fundamentals, and take the rating hit. Your goal when playing should not be to win games, but to learn and get better, and sometimes learning requires losing a bunch of games. Your rating will go down (in the short term), but your skill as a player will go up.
This is comparable to, for example, a Protoss who 4-gated his way to Diamond. He knows he is awful if he does anything else, and he is desperate to keep his Diamond status, so he just keeps doing it without ever really improving as a player. Don't be like him! Go lose a bunch of games and be awesome!
**note that this advice is in no way biased. I am a Zerg who loves getting all-inned by Terrans. I love it very much.
|
I believe there was a request for solid Zerg builds at some point? Well, these seem to be the safe standards:
ZvT: hatch first into ling/baneling/muta or ling/baneling/roach
ZvP: 14 gas 14 pool, 20 hatch into speedlings into roaches with burrow
ZvZ: 14 gas 14 pool into either expand (and pull drones off gas) or banelings. You can speedling expand against a hatch first, or a roach expand, but if he goes speedling/baneling you have to aswell, or you'll die. Also if he's going for a roach timing attack, you need to get roaches yourself.
|
The "stick with one build" is very solid advice. As with everything, the more you practice, the better you are. I'm only Silver, I have a standard build for TvZ, one for TvP (with one deviation, see later), and I struggle in TvT because I still don't have one.
TvZ I always go 2rax expand into 2ebay, 2 additional rax. The main idea is to have 3/3 bio as soon as possible, with heavy emphasis on marines if Z goes muta, and marauders if he stays on banelings. I found this style on Adebisi's channel, and I love it...and because I've been doing it time and time again I know what to expect at what time. It becomes second nature: "I'm at 2base, 4rax, 1/1...okay, turrets, I can expect mutas".
TvP: 2rax with techlabs expand. It's harder because of the protoss early pressure possibilities, but again, because I do the same thing over and over again I know what to expect.
The only variation here is when I'm in close positions on Metal, Slag or Shattered, because then a 3 rax stim push is just so good against toss...
TvT: as I said, this is a struggle. As should be obvious from the previous two, I prefer bio over mech, and running a bioball into a tankline is something that gets frustrating. In a Hashe replay pack I found a 1-1-1 opening where you make a first poke with marines, 3 hellions and a medivac, but I still have to learn to expand/macro behind that. I'm still thinking about possible followups...tank push into BC or heavy banshee play into BC (latter possible makes more sense...)
In any case, the whole point of the above is: even in Silver, the advantage of doing the same build over and over again is to create automatisms. You'll be more at ease during play. You won't have to think conciously about your BO or game plan, freeing more of your concentration for things like scouting and macro during battles. You won't get surprised as easily. Is you scout your opponent, you'll have less trouble reacting.
I think it's absolutely great that pros know dozens of build orders, and taylor their game specifically to their opponents, but that's why they're pro and I'm not. I'll worry about stuff like that if I ever get into Grandmasters League :D
|
On April 14 2011 02:45 YakiSOBA wrote:Could someone list the standard builds for TvT, TvP, and TvZ if I wanted to try and practice just one build for each race? Thanks
TvT-Some kind of 1/1/1 opening into Marine/Tank is the most standard way to play. On large maps you can ninja in a fast expand. TvT has lots of openers but a pretty stable midgame. Day[9] really stresses having an idea of what production structures you want in the midgame, as it will shape your army, and I think it works really well for Terran, and in TvT something like 3 Barracks (1 Techlab/2 Reactor), 2 techlab factories (tanks!), and a reactor starport is pretty reasonable.
TvP-I think 2 Rax expand is probably the most vanilla you could get. Early shells, early reactor, a little bit of pressure potential. Bio/Viking is still the most common midgame (Terrans are messing around with lots of other unit compositions in this match atm, but I think Bio/Viking is still the most 'standard'.) Reasonable 2-base production structures are 5 barracks (mostly techlabs...build marauaders, dood!) and a reactor starport. (A lot of people just scout with the factory.)
TvZ-2 Rax expand, probably, but not the same as the TvP 2 rax expand. You skip your gas, but down a second barracks on 14ish, and pressure with your first couple marines, and then build a command center and double gas. Marine/Tank is a typical midgame, with 3/4 Barracks (mostly marines!), 1 factory for tanks, and a starport.
In all of these, it's pretty much a good idea to get an engineering bay at around 7/8 minutes if you haven't figured out what your opponent is doing, as this is a typical timing for any kind of cloak.
|
As a fellow noob my interpretation is this:
I have a different build per race matchup simply because it makes good sense.
This build started off very simple, but as I have learnt what to look for it has developed branches - in other words my one focussed build diversifies over time into what i would of called many build orders when i started. Now however it is reacting in a hopefully pre-thought out and calculated way.
This means that I have a target template ... initially 2gate robo. However because i am scouting at 9 depending on what i see this can change into 3 gate expand, 4 gate even 1 gate starport (well probably not in pvt  ) ... but all those variations which are technically different builds come from the one build i was working on and slot into it .... because I have a target initially (in pvt its because i want obs for banshee) and change direction based on information I will end up with what i wanted eventually when the time is right. So if i see 1 rax walloff then i am sticking to 2 gate robo, but if i see tech labs I may adapt and expect a bio ball - however i will still want the scout info as the banshee could still come - and so may go 3 gate robo or consider a forge for detection (and +1) and get more gates.
The point is the different directions are a result of doing the origional intended build and doing it well. You also need to balance fun with mechanical ritual. I then get owned by some strat a few times whilst i am reviewing how to beat it and came up with small changes to achieve specific goals .... this means that whilst someone may say 'well you are doing different builds' it means i have not learnt several builds in isolation but rather have a single build tree with decision points, timings and expectations and am constantly twaking them.
The point is you can usually anticipate what will happen and so your main build is generally good - the branches are decisions based on information you get from your opponent.
so pvt - you are countering bioball whilst watching for bansee
in pvz - you are expecting some kind of roach play into hydra whilst watching rate of expansion
Well thats what im thinking anyway - I am sure many will disagree about initial expectations but my builds expect that kind of start and branch from there.
I actually use a program called freemind to map all this stuff out. when you start deliberately doign something like this youd be suprised at how much meshes together (and how easy it is to get timings right). when i started doing this I had no idea that a 6 pool would arrive at around 3:40 (xel naaga) which is when your first zealot comes out - the noobs i played were always late and so my zealot always was out in time. Anyway, problem solved now within the context of my original build - same with 7rr (at my level).
|
The one build approach is a decent way to learn the game but you might want to have a different build for different maps.
For example 2 gate robo is a very solid all around build in PvT but it is horrible at big maps like shakuras. 3 gate sentry FE is also fairly crap at shakuras for PvZ as a forge FE is much better there.
Overall having a preset plan for each matchup + map is pretty good but you do have to know how to deviate from it. The 'standard' game is used much at the toplevel because non-standard strats get punished by pro's. At the ladder for a casual player you'll face alot more different strats then the pro's do actually because you meet strange (and ineffective) strats more often, if you respond with standard play you can sometimes be doing the wrong stuff though.
|
As terran, I do have serveral safe builds I like to use (master terran here).
TvT - 1/1/1 - either banshee into tank or tank into viking... they are pretty safe.. .make sure o bunker up against rax pressure
TvP - here I use both...:
- i'm working on my 1 rax FE into MMM... this build is slightly countered by one base colossi, so if you scout a robo, skimp on rax and tech to vikings asap
- i also like to 2/1/1, being rax - fact (no second gas) - rax - and starport.... that way you can get a good hellion drop and since you're not getting double gas, you have minerals for eng bay + turrets (for DT) or to expand while the hellion drop comes
TvZ - i used to go 2 rax all the way, but on those huge maps 2 rax pressure is next to impossible... now i'm doing standard 13 gas 15 cc into 2 naked factories (transfer gas scvs to mineral after starting the 2nd factory) for a good hellion marine pressure while expanding... this build holds its own against early roach pressure if you scout (just bunker up)
|
I'm still very new to the game too (3 weeks) but I've worked my way into gold purely off of practicing 3 build orders (1 for each race) here they are.
PvP: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/4_Warpgate_Rush
PvT: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=206596
PvZ: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/3_Gate_Sentry_Expand
The main things I've noted doing these builds are that 1) The double forge open doesn't work against heavy mech or 1 base play — just because you hit the 2/2 upgrade window doesn't mean you MUST attack, and often means you're suiciding if you're bunching up at his ramp while he has 10 sieged tanks and thors behind it destroying your army. And 2) none of these builds except PvP are 100% effective all of the time. By this I mean you have to transition or deviate based on what you feel is happening in the game, and that just takes experience (something I'm still working on).
Hope this helped.
|
I too was wondering about these things concerning picking one build and practicing it till you master it. What I eventually discovered was that builds like that give you a great sense of the game in general, it is like an introduction to strategy, so to speak.
I think that once you master a build, it will be easier to learn new builds as well. It is as if you are riding a becycle, and try to learn to ride a motorcycle, your previous experience on becycle will make it easier, right?
If my experience is of any help: as zerg I at first practiced a simple 15 hatchery macro build, as I was tought that macro is the most important part to learn during early stages. Later I chose a build for each match-up, and after trying a few I went with a variety selection: a very fast rush against zerg that requires me to do some micro, an aggressive mid-game plan against protoss which requires me to be precise with my timing in regards to the in-game clock, and a macro build against terran which requires me to at first passively react, and fight it off in the late game.
|
The way I used to practice when I first took the time to learn and really refine builds was to play just one build for several days, no matter what the match-up was.
You'll obviously have more difficulty winning the "wrong" match-ups for the build you practice, but I found that getting a build really refined is much easier when you don't break your learning "flow" by doing something different depending on the match-up you get. I've also found that it's easier to go back to the build I learned this way after I haven't done it in a while and still be able to do it near-perfect. Your mind can't learn 3 or 5 things at the same time as efficiently if you keep switching between them every game or two.
If you can take the extra losses, I'd recommend trying it this way. Alternatively, it would be even better if you had a few practice partners of an adequate level to grind games against, but that seems to be a luxury most players don't have.
|
Stick to 1 build.
The reason you stick to one build is because it really isn't 1 build.
The normal pace of the game has 4 stages, and rarely is the 4rth stage ever reached.
The Opening
The Midgame Transition
The Lategame Transition
Resource Exhaustion
A good opening simply sets you up for a good midgame. The reason something akin to a 2GateRobo is good against Terran is not because you will kill him with it, but it provides you good scouting and a good tech base to transition into something that responds very well against what the Terran opponent is doing.
When you get to the midgame you can switch to whatever tech tree you want.
For example. You open 3GateFE vs Zerg. You see that he's going for an early Lair and you suspect Muta play. So you drop a forge and a Twilight Council and start going BlinkStalkers with +1 to counter what you suspect your opponent is doing. The next game against Zerg you still go 3GateFE--but you notice that he's doing a 7rr. So you cancel your plan to drop a nexus and you plop down a 4rth Gate instead and decide to do a delayed 4gate instead.
In both games you sit down and open with 3gateFE, but in one game you win by going BlinkStalker and the other game you win by way of 4Gate. A good standard build is simply an opening that allows you the ability to transition to a more tailored strategy as your scouting reveals more information.
Builds are generally understood as cheesy or all-in-ish when the opening is so restrictive in the possible transitions it offers that they are predictable and abusive. 6Pool, for example, *has* to attack with 6 lings. You can't scout something and then go "Oh, 6pool won't work better drop a Warren and transition into Roach/Hydra!"
Cruncher is a good example of a protoss player who seems really boring to watch because he plays so standard. Here's his general strategy.
"Expand, Get a third, Max out on Collosus/Voidray/Gateway, push out"
He does that almost every game especially against Zerg. His Zerg opponents know that this is something he will do. He doesn't trick them, or surprise them, he doesn't get cute. He simply focuses on strong mechanics and has a great understanding on the strengths and weaknesses of his build. He knows when he can afford to build cannons, and when to simply keep stalkers at home. He knows that at x minutes into the game, his army is this much weaker or stronger than his opponents and uses those timings to destroy them.
If his zerg opponents became more aggressive, he will adapt his play, but until he has to, the strength of going standard is that the better player will almost always win when it is standard vs standard. Cheesy builds are cheesy because you're essentially hoping that your opponent will mess up more so than you are hoping to win. You don't learn from your opponents making mistakes, you learn by outplaying them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
