|
Make sure you read the OP before asking a question. Asking a question already addressed in the OP will result in moderation action. Also, please put some effort into your questions. |
On February 08 2013 05:31 llIH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 05:26 govie wrote:On February 08 2013 05:02 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:56 govie wrote:On February 08 2013 04:32 kollin wrote:
And I'm not saying concussive openers are bad, they are just inferior to 1 rax fe's assuming you can execute it well.
I like 2rax MKP opener (@17 u get a reactor on 1st rax), against protoss on ladder, u will allways pressure him with this build, see everything he is doing and u force him to build gateway units, which in turn delays tech alot. When your medivacs are out, u will have such an advantage against the lowtech protoss that will mostly win u the game there. Ofc. u will also expand, but far later then with a 1raxFe. As i have experienced, a 2rax MKP style puts me more in front then a 1raxFE against toss, because it delays everything the protoss was planning and i dont have to scan to know what his plan is. The execution of harras must be costeffective ofcourse, but with even my bad microskills, it mostly works out. I am not saying your wrong about the comparison between a conc. opener and a 1raxFe, im just saying for me, it feels like the MKP 2rax gets me more ahead then when i execute a 1raxFe.. or thats how i feel about it on ladder anyway. I understand what you mean. I agree. I do the 1 Rax marauder concussive into expand because I like the more economical opening. It does less damage but I feel it fits my play style better. I never tried it. When i build a marauder with conc. shells early i would want to attack, else the gasusage and resources missed would be waste. I would rather build a bunker or two and stay gasless longer to get a bigger eco advantage then researching something i dont need. It doesnt sound logical to research something u don't want to use. But if it works for u...  Don't get me wrong. The marauder is to pressure the oponent. Not just camp in base.  The rax rallys to oponent natural. Put on A move and catch the first potential scout or stalker etc. As I said before: For map control and scouting.
I see. Im guessing kollin has the same paradigm as i do though about your build. It's a bit wierd u try to pressure your opponents on 1rax-techlab alone early. Because u get an early expo, u have too few productionfacilities up early to do serious damage. U should look at your replays and see how much damage your marauders actually do. Im guessing it wont be much or even a negative outcome.
When u do a 2rax MKP style, the big difference with your build is that it has 3 marines to 1 marauder (approximate). Technically speaking, this does damage for sure, just because ive chosen clearly for early aggression and i have the production facilities to do so and spend gas to research what i need to be aggresive and succeed.
Your early opening doesn't seem to have a clear goal, why would i try to pressure a protoss of 1rax with a techlab and research concussive so early, it just doesn't sound logical. It also doesn't seem to be costeffective and because u need the early gas for this u will be trailing in productionfacilities and delayed medivacs for example.
It is the lack of a clear goal within your opening, that i dont understand how this opening could give me an advantage, rather a disadvantage. Just because it lacks a clear goal.
|
On February 08 2013 05:40 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 05:30 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:55 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:50 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:46 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:32 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:27 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 01:22 kollin wrote:On February 07 2013 23:53 llIH wrote:
[quote]
This is exactly what I mean. The superiority of the marauder with concussive early has a very strong scare factor. And also a kill factor. You can kill of a lot of single units with marauder concussive.
I love to get a CC to orbital on natural and get a PF asap on the 3rd. Force him to all in the 3rd is a good situation to be in. You can even PF the natural too. Why in god's name would you make a PF on any of your first 3 command centres? Let me run you through how the modern marauder based opening is in TvP at the moment. What you can do now, is go marauder with concussive shells into 3 orbital commands and get upgrades and army and medivacs and all that good stuff. However, unless the protoss is dumb you usually can't do much damage and you tend to straight up die to a lot of pressure, which is a standard 1 rax fe is...well standard. I don't believe in god. PF is really good against pressure. I know it is totally not what basically all the pros do. But it actually works. I don't care what the metagame nor what the pros do. I want to learn my strategies based on logic and my own personal experience of the game. I am not a pro player. But I am at master mid level. Not that the league is an argument. I base my arguments on logic, purely. I have a lot of success with concussive marauder openers. And even if I don't get PF. I can hold pressures back. The pressure of my marauder gives me a lot of information as well as scouting of the enemy. Macro with this opener is most important. My goal is to get scout and map control - not kill. Killing him is just a bonus. The reason making a PF at your natural and third is not standard is because it is bad and you sacrifice huge amounts of economy for very little gain, which is why you clearly don't base your arguments on logic. And I'm not saying concussive openers are bad, they are just inferior to 1 rax fe's assuming you can execute it well. EDIT:Going into banshee's and siege tank's from a marauder opener is really not a good idea, at this point you NEED to get your bio infrastructure up, or you will be too far behind in the rest of the game. It is logical to me. Most opponents tend to be aggressive and attack me when I have 3CC early. I am aware of that OC is way better economical - it is obvious. Please don't tell me that I haven't based my arguments on logic. Because I have. Just because it is not logical for you - doesn't mean it is not logical for me. It is logical to say that OC is more economical therefore go OC instead of PF. PF safer against agression therefore go PF instead of OC. I don't care. For me it is a logical reason for my choice of CC upgrade. And I really like the style. Banshee opening and siege tank opening after 3CC is actually one of the strongest builds to hold early pressure. And I can use banshees further. I bet you can see that I am focusing on defensive play. Which is what my plan is. I actually get early 4th base too. With the PF too. "They are just inferior to 1RaxFE". I find this quite vague. Depends on the purpose. By the way. You realize that my marauder opening is almost the same as 1RaxFE just with one gas added before the CC? Are you going OC on all expansions just because the pros and majority are doing it or because you honestly feel it is better? (I keep hearing argumentum ad populum ringing in my head) Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all. You know what happens if you turtle on 4 bases with a single orbital command? Your opponent gets up an insane amount of AoE and wins. I don't go OC on all expansions, I do it on the first 3 because I can defend them with my army, and don't need a PF. On my 4th base I will usually get a PF, and more macro orbitals. And marauder 3CC is not 'almost the same as 1 rax fe'. It leaves you ridiculously weak to a lot of pressure and isn't as good economically unless by some miracle your opponent misreads what you're doing entirely. You are missing my point. I never said it is good nor bad. I said it works for me. And I like it. You neither do need to teach me how the game goes. I know what I am doing. I am not asking for your advice regarding my opening. I am just throwing my idea out there for people to know that it can be done. By the way. I disagree that marauder opening leaves me (i will put it how you wrote it) "rediculously weak to a lot of pressure". I think the opposite. NB: This is not a proxy marauder push. The barracks is placed inside my base. It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build. Your opinion on whether or not it protects you against pressure is also irrelevant, because you are weak against builds such as 4 gate when you do this. Also, the two rax build is actually pretty good, especially if you all in off the back of it with a 2/1/1. I don't get 3CC if I scout a 4gate developing. How is it irrelevant when it is a stonger defense than an OC on my natural vs PF on natural? A PF on natural works way better vs baneling busts. Also vs zealot stalker agression. Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist. And against zealot stalker pressure, build bunkers. You don't lose much money and still have a nice amount of mules. I dread to think what you do on entombed valley and akilon, where your opponent can literally walk past your PF taking no damage.
You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around.
Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base.
This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me.
It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist")
If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works.
|
On February 08 2013 05:49 govie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 05:31 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:26 govie wrote:On February 08 2013 05:02 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:56 govie wrote:On February 08 2013 04:32 kollin wrote:
And I'm not saying concussive openers are bad, they are just inferior to 1 rax fe's assuming you can execute it well.
I like 2rax MKP opener (@17 u get a reactor on 1st rax), against protoss on ladder, u will allways pressure him with this build, see everything he is doing and u force him to build gateway units, which in turn delays tech alot. When your medivacs are out, u will have such an advantage against the lowtech protoss that will mostly win u the game there. Ofc. u will also expand, but far later then with a 1raxFe. As i have experienced, a 2rax MKP style puts me more in front then a 1raxFE against toss, because it delays everything the protoss was planning and i dont have to scan to know what his plan is. The execution of harras must be costeffective ofcourse, but with even my bad microskills, it mostly works out. I am not saying your wrong about the comparison between a conc. opener and a 1raxFe, im just saying for me, it feels like the MKP 2rax gets me more ahead then when i execute a 1raxFe.. or thats how i feel about it on ladder anyway. I understand what you mean. I agree. I do the 1 Rax marauder concussive into expand because I like the more economical opening. It does less damage but I feel it fits my play style better. I never tried it. When i build a marauder with conc. shells early i would want to attack, else the gasusage and resources missed would be waste. I would rather build a bunker or two and stay gasless longer to get a bigger eco advantage then researching something i dont need. It doesnt sound logical to research something u don't want to use. But if it works for u... Don't get me wrong. The marauder is to pressure the oponent. Not just camp in base. The rax rallys to oponent natural. Put on A move and catch the first potential scout or stalker etc. As I said before: For map control and scouting. I see. Im guessing kollin has the same paradigm as i do though about your build. It's a bit wierd u try to pressure your opponents on 1rax-techlab alone early. Because u get an early expo, u have too few productionfacilities up early to do serious damage. U should look at your replays and see how much damage your marauders actually do. Im guessing it wont be much or even a negative outcome. When u do a 2rax MKP style, the big difference with your build is that it has 3 marines to 1 marauder (approximate). Technically speaking, this does damage for sure, just because ive chosen clearly for early aggression and i have the production facilities to do so and spend gas to research what i need to be aggresive and succeed. Your early opening doesn't seem to have a clear goal, why would i try to pressure a protoss of 1rax with a techlab and research concussive so early, it just doesn't sound logical. It also doesn't seem to be costeffective and because u need the early gas for this u will be trailing in productionfacilities and delayed medivacs for example. It is the lack of a clear goal within your opening, that i dont understand how this opening could give me an advantage, rather a disadvantage. Just because it lacks a clear goal.
You should read above when the comment I replied to was how to get map control against a protoss that puts a stalker in front of your base early in the game. "Any way to get map control during the early game (vs p)? Usually the toss keeps a stalker near my nat or at the towers, leaving me with zero map control. im not very comfortable moving out before the 10min push so what should i do? or is scanning their main enough before the 10min mark?" This is essentially where this whole discussion started. This is not a standard opening. It is an answer to a question. A marauder concussive push. 1Rax Tech lab. (2 scv on gas, not 3)
It makes the protoss retreat into base. I repeated this several times. The purpose is not killing. Map control and scout. A marine can not do this vs a stalker. Nor can a reaper. A marauder can kill the stalker.
If the purpose was surviving or defending whatever. Of course a bunker would be a good idea.
|
On February 08 2013 05:52 llIH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 05:40 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:30 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:55 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:50 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:46 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:32 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:27 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 01:22 kollin wrote:
[quote]
Why in god's name would you make a PF on any of your first 3 command centres? Let me run you through how the modern marauder based opening is in TvP at the moment. What you can do now, is go marauder with concussive shells into 3 orbital commands and get upgrades and army and medivacs and all that good stuff. However, unless the protoss is dumb you usually can't do much damage and you tend to straight up die to a lot of pressure, which is a standard 1 rax fe is...well standard. I don't believe in god. PF is really good against pressure. I know it is totally not what basically all the pros do. But it actually works. I don't care what the metagame nor what the pros do. I want to learn my strategies based on logic and my own personal experience of the game. I am not a pro player. But I am at master mid level. Not that the league is an argument. I base my arguments on logic, purely. I have a lot of success with concussive marauder openers. And even if I don't get PF. I can hold pressures back. The pressure of my marauder gives me a lot of information as well as scouting of the enemy. Macro with this opener is most important. My goal is to get scout and map control - not kill. Killing him is just a bonus. The reason making a PF at your natural and third is not standard is because it is bad and you sacrifice huge amounts of economy for very little gain, which is why you clearly don't base your arguments on logic. And I'm not saying concussive openers are bad, they are just inferior to 1 rax fe's assuming you can execute it well. EDIT:Going into banshee's and siege tank's from a marauder opener is really not a good idea, at this point you NEED to get your bio infrastructure up, or you will be too far behind in the rest of the game. It is logical to me. Most opponents tend to be aggressive and attack me when I have 3CC early. I am aware of that OC is way better economical - it is obvious. Please don't tell me that I haven't based my arguments on logic. Because I have. Just because it is not logical for you - doesn't mean it is not logical for me. It is logical to say that OC is more economical therefore go OC instead of PF. PF safer against agression therefore go PF instead of OC. I don't care. For me it is a logical reason for my choice of CC upgrade. And I really like the style. Banshee opening and siege tank opening after 3CC is actually one of the strongest builds to hold early pressure. And I can use banshees further. I bet you can see that I am focusing on defensive play. Which is what my plan is. I actually get early 4th base too. With the PF too. "They are just inferior to 1RaxFE". I find this quite vague. Depends on the purpose. By the way. You realize that my marauder opening is almost the same as 1RaxFE just with one gas added before the CC? Are you going OC on all expansions just because the pros and majority are doing it or because you honestly feel it is better? (I keep hearing argumentum ad populum ringing in my head) Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all. You know what happens if you turtle on 4 bases with a single orbital command? Your opponent gets up an insane amount of AoE and wins. I don't go OC on all expansions, I do it on the first 3 because I can defend them with my army, and don't need a PF. On my 4th base I will usually get a PF, and more macro orbitals. And marauder 3CC is not 'almost the same as 1 rax fe'. It leaves you ridiculously weak to a lot of pressure and isn't as good economically unless by some miracle your opponent misreads what you're doing entirely. You are missing my point. I never said it is good nor bad. I said it works for me. And I like it. You neither do need to teach me how the game goes. I know what I am doing. I am not asking for your advice regarding my opening. I am just throwing my idea out there for people to know that it can be done. By the way. I disagree that marauder opening leaves me (i will put it how you wrote it) "rediculously weak to a lot of pressure". I think the opposite. NB: This is not a proxy marauder push. The barracks is placed inside my base. It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build. Your opinion on whether or not it protects you against pressure is also irrelevant, because you are weak against builds such as 4 gate when you do this. Also, the two rax build is actually pretty good, especially if you all in off the back of it with a 2/1/1. I don't get 3CC if I scout a 4gate developing. How is it irrelevant when it is a stonger defense than an OC on my natural vs PF on natural? A PF on natural works way better vs baneling busts. Also vs zealot stalker agression. Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist. And against zealot stalker pressure, build bunkers. You don't lose much money and still have a nice amount of mules. I dread to think what you do on entombed valley and akilon, where your opponent can literally walk past your PF taking no damage. You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around. Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base. This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me. It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist") If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works.
But it doesn't work. It isn't logically plausible. I'm not exaggerating how bad the idea of building PF's at your natural and third is. If we do use logic, which you keep claiming you use, we find that bio is mineral heavy. How do we get these minerals? Mules, and not building expensive PF's which don't give us anything, but sacrifice a lot. And if we should decide to build a PF, we certainly don't have money for a wall of bunkers to stop our opponent from walking past us. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all.
|
On February 08 2013 05:55 llIH wrote:You should read above when the comment I replied to was how to get map control against a protoss that puts a stalker in front of your base early in the game. Show nested quote +"Any way to get map control during the early game (vs p)? Usually the toss keeps a stalker near my nat or at the towers, leaving me with zero map control. im not very comfortable moving out before the 10min push so what should i do? or is scanning their main enough before the 10min mark?" This is essentially where this whole discussion started. This is not a standard opening. It is an answer to a question. A marauder concussive push. 1Rax Tech lab. (2 scv on gas, not 3) It makes the protoss retreat into base. I repeated this several times. The purpose is not killing. Map control and scout. A marine can not do this vs a stalker. Nor can a reaper. A marauder can kill the stalker. If the purpose was surviving or defending whatever. Of course a bunker would be a good idea.
The point is that u alter a buildorder, which will economically put u behind for just scaring a stalker away. The player would be better of playing a 1raxFE into 3 rax with 1techlab. And push out with the marines and 1 marauder to the watchtower. Thats still early enough to be safe and i didnt alter his buildorder in any way.
|
On February 08 2013 06:10 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 05:52 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:40 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:30 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:55 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:50 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:46 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:32 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:27 llIH wrote:
[quote]
I don't believe in god.
PF is really good against pressure. I know it is totally not what basically all the pros do. But it actually works. I don't care what the metagame nor what the pros do. I want to learn my strategies based on logic and my own personal experience of the game. I am not a pro player. But I am at master mid level. Not that the league is an argument. I base my arguments on logic, purely.
I have a lot of success with concussive marauder openers. And even if I don't get PF. I can hold pressures back. The pressure of my marauder gives me a lot of information as well as scouting of the enemy. Macro with this opener is most important. My goal is to get scout and map control - not kill. Killing him is just a bonus.
The reason making a PF at your natural and third is not standard is because it is bad and you sacrifice huge amounts of economy for very little gain, which is why you clearly don't base your arguments on logic. And I'm not saying concussive openers are bad, they are just inferior to 1 rax fe's assuming you can execute it well. EDIT:Going into banshee's and siege tank's from a marauder opener is really not a good idea, at this point you NEED to get your bio infrastructure up, or you will be too far behind in the rest of the game. It is logical to me. Most opponents tend to be aggressive and attack me when I have 3CC early. I am aware of that OC is way better economical - it is obvious. Please don't tell me that I haven't based my arguments on logic. Because I have. Just because it is not logical for you - doesn't mean it is not logical for me. It is logical to say that OC is more economical therefore go OC instead of PF. PF safer against agression therefore go PF instead of OC. I don't care. For me it is a logical reason for my choice of CC upgrade. And I really like the style. Banshee opening and siege tank opening after 3CC is actually one of the strongest builds to hold early pressure. And I can use banshees further. I bet you can see that I am focusing on defensive play. Which is what my plan is. I actually get early 4th base too. With the PF too. "They are just inferior to 1RaxFE". I find this quite vague. Depends on the purpose. By the way. You realize that my marauder opening is almost the same as 1RaxFE just with one gas added before the CC? Are you going OC on all expansions just because the pros and majority are doing it or because you honestly feel it is better? (I keep hearing argumentum ad populum ringing in my head) Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all. You know what happens if you turtle on 4 bases with a single orbital command? Your opponent gets up an insane amount of AoE and wins. I don't go OC on all expansions, I do it on the first 3 because I can defend them with my army, and don't need a PF. On my 4th base I will usually get a PF, and more macro orbitals. And marauder 3CC is not 'almost the same as 1 rax fe'. It leaves you ridiculously weak to a lot of pressure and isn't as good economically unless by some miracle your opponent misreads what you're doing entirely. You are missing my point. I never said it is good nor bad. I said it works for me. And I like it. You neither do need to teach me how the game goes. I know what I am doing. I am not asking for your advice regarding my opening. I am just throwing my idea out there for people to know that it can be done. By the way. I disagree that marauder opening leaves me (i will put it how you wrote it) "rediculously weak to a lot of pressure". I think the opposite. NB: This is not a proxy marauder push. The barracks is placed inside my base. It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build. Your opinion on whether or not it protects you against pressure is also irrelevant, because you are weak against builds such as 4 gate when you do this. Also, the two rax build is actually pretty good, especially if you all in off the back of it with a 2/1/1. I don't get 3CC if I scout a 4gate developing. How is it irrelevant when it is a stonger defense than an OC on my natural vs PF on natural? A PF on natural works way better vs baneling busts. Also vs zealot stalker agression. Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist. And against zealot stalker pressure, build bunkers. You don't lose much money and still have a nice amount of mules. I dread to think what you do on entombed valley and akilon, where your opponent can literally walk past your PF taking no damage. You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around. Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base. This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me. It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist") If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works. But it doesn't work. It isn't logically plausible. I'm not exaggerating how bad the idea of building PF's at your natural and third is. If we do use logic, which you keep claiming you use, we find that bio is mineral heavy. How do we get these minerals? Mules, and not building expensive PF's which don't give us anything, but sacrifice a lot. And if we should decide to build a PF, we certainly don't have money for a wall of bunkers to stop our opponent from walking past us. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all.
I never said I go into Bio.
You can get enough minerals from scv + 1OC mules. Your not handicapped with only 1 OC compared to 2 OC. All you need is 2 bunkers.
"PF's which don't give us anything"
PF give you good defense at ur natural.
So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all
Do you think my approach is not based on logic? Then what would it be based on? I explained thoroughly why I prioritize getting a PF on my natural.
|
On February 08 2013 06:14 govie wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 05:55 llIH wrote:You should read above when the comment I replied to was how to get map control against a protoss that puts a stalker in front of your base early in the game. "Any way to get map control during the early game (vs p)? Usually the toss keeps a stalker near my nat or at the towers, leaving me with zero map control. im not very comfortable moving out before the 10min push so what should i do? or is scanning their main enough before the 10min mark?" This is essentially where this whole discussion started. This is not a standard opening. It is an answer to a question. A marauder concussive push. 1Rax Tech lab. (2 scv on gas, not 3) It makes the protoss retreat into base. I repeated this several times. The purpose is not killing. Map control and scout. A marine can not do this vs a stalker. Nor can a reaper. A marauder can kill the stalker. If the purpose was surviving or defending whatever. Of course a bunker would be a good idea. The point is that u alter a buildorder, which will economically put u behind for just scaring a stalker away. The player would be better of playing a 1raxFE into 3 rax with 1techlab. And push out with the marines and 1 marauder to the watchtower. Thats still early enough to be safe and i didnt alter his buildorder in any way.
I don't understand what you mean. Your saying a 1RaxFE concussive puts you behind economically. You are saying 1RaxFE into 3 rax(1 tech lab) puts you less behind in means of economy? I don't agree.
|
On February 08 2013 06:19 llIH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 06:10 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:52 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:40 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:30 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:55 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:50 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:46 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:32 kollin wrote:
[quote]
The reason making a PF at your natural and third is not standard is because it is bad and you sacrifice huge amounts of economy for very little gain, which is why you clearly don't base your arguments on logic. And I'm not saying concussive openers are bad, they are just inferior to 1 rax fe's assuming you can execute it well.
EDIT:Going into banshee's and siege tank's from a marauder opener is really not a good idea, at this point you NEED to get your bio infrastructure up, or you will be too far behind in the rest of the game. It is logical to me. Most opponents tend to be aggressive and attack me when I have 3CC early. I am aware of that OC is way better economical - it is obvious. Please don't tell me that I haven't based my arguments on logic. Because I have. Just because it is not logical for you - doesn't mean it is not logical for me. It is logical to say that OC is more economical therefore go OC instead of PF. PF safer against agression therefore go PF instead of OC. I don't care. For me it is a logical reason for my choice of CC upgrade. And I really like the style. Banshee opening and siege tank opening after 3CC is actually one of the strongest builds to hold early pressure. And I can use banshees further. I bet you can see that I am focusing on defensive play. Which is what my plan is. I actually get early 4th base too. With the PF too. "They are just inferior to 1RaxFE". I find this quite vague. Depends on the purpose. By the way. You realize that my marauder opening is almost the same as 1RaxFE just with one gas added before the CC? Are you going OC on all expansions just because the pros and majority are doing it or because you honestly feel it is better? (I keep hearing argumentum ad populum ringing in my head) Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all. You know what happens if you turtle on 4 bases with a single orbital command? Your opponent gets up an insane amount of AoE and wins. I don't go OC on all expansions, I do it on the first 3 because I can defend them with my army, and don't need a PF. On my 4th base I will usually get a PF, and more macro orbitals. And marauder 3CC is not 'almost the same as 1 rax fe'. It leaves you ridiculously weak to a lot of pressure and isn't as good economically unless by some miracle your opponent misreads what you're doing entirely. You are missing my point. I never said it is good nor bad. I said it works for me. And I like it. You neither do need to teach me how the game goes. I know what I am doing. I am not asking for your advice regarding my opening. I am just throwing my idea out there for people to know that it can be done. By the way. I disagree that marauder opening leaves me (i will put it how you wrote it) "rediculously weak to a lot of pressure". I think the opposite. NB: This is not a proxy marauder push. The barracks is placed inside my base. It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build. Your opinion on whether or not it protects you against pressure is also irrelevant, because you are weak against builds such as 4 gate when you do this. Also, the two rax build is actually pretty good, especially if you all in off the back of it with a 2/1/1. I don't get 3CC if I scout a 4gate developing. How is it irrelevant when it is a stonger defense than an OC on my natural vs PF on natural? A PF on natural works way better vs baneling busts. Also vs zealot stalker agression. Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist. And against zealot stalker pressure, build bunkers. You don't lose much money and still have a nice amount of mules. I dread to think what you do on entombed valley and akilon, where your opponent can literally walk past your PF taking no damage. You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around. Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base. This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me. It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist") If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works. But it doesn't work. It isn't logically plausible. I'm not exaggerating how bad the idea of building PF's at your natural and third is. If we do use logic, which you keep claiming you use, we find that bio is mineral heavy. How do we get these minerals? Mules, and not building expensive PF's which don't give us anything, but sacrifice a lot. And if we should decide to build a PF, we certainly don't have money for a wall of bunkers to stop our opponent from walking past us. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all. I never said I go into Bio. You can get enough minerals from scv + 1OC mules. Your not handicapped with only 1 OC compared to 2 OC. All you need is 2 bunkers. PF give you good defense at ur natural. Show nested quote +So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all Do you think my approach is not based on logic? Then what would it be based on? I explained thoroughly why I prioritize getting a PF on my natural.
If you don't go into bio why are you making bunkers to help your PF defend? And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't. What you're saying may well be based on logic, but it seems like the logic it is based on is in fact flawed logic.
|
On February 08 2013 06:22 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 06:19 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:10 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:52 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:40 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:30 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:55 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:50 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:46 llIH wrote:
[quote]
It is logical to me. Most opponents tend to be aggressive and attack me when I have 3CC early. I am aware of that OC is way better economical - it is obvious. Please don't tell me that I haven't based my arguments on logic. Because I have. Just because it is not logical for you - doesn't mean it is not logical for me. It is logical to say that OC is more economical therefore go OC instead of PF. PF safer against agression therefore go PF instead of OC. I don't care. For me it is a logical reason for my choice of CC upgrade. And I really like the style.
Banshee opening and siege tank opening after 3CC is actually one of the strongest builds to hold early pressure. And I can use banshees further. I bet you can see that I am focusing on defensive play. Which is what my plan is. I actually get early 4th base too. With the PF too.
"They are just inferior to 1RaxFE". I find this quite vague. Depends on the purpose. By the way. You realize that my marauder opening is almost the same as 1RaxFE just with one gas added before the CC?
Are you going OC on all expansions just because the pros and majority are doing it or because you honestly feel it is better? (I keep hearing argumentum ad populum ringing in my head)
Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all. You know what happens if you turtle on 4 bases with a single orbital command? Your opponent gets up an insane amount of AoE and wins. I don't go OC on all expansions, I do it on the first 3 because I can defend them with my army, and don't need a PF. On my 4th base I will usually get a PF, and more macro orbitals. And marauder 3CC is not 'almost the same as 1 rax fe'. It leaves you ridiculously weak to a lot of pressure and isn't as good economically unless by some miracle your opponent misreads what you're doing entirely. You are missing my point. I never said it is good nor bad. I said it works for me. And I like it. You neither do need to teach me how the game goes. I know what I am doing. I am not asking for your advice regarding my opening. I am just throwing my idea out there for people to know that it can be done. By the way. I disagree that marauder opening leaves me (i will put it how you wrote it) "rediculously weak to a lot of pressure". I think the opposite. NB: This is not a proxy marauder push. The barracks is placed inside my base. It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build. Your opinion on whether or not it protects you against pressure is also irrelevant, because you are weak against builds such as 4 gate when you do this. Also, the two rax build is actually pretty good, especially if you all in off the back of it with a 2/1/1. I don't get 3CC if I scout a 4gate developing. How is it irrelevant when it is a stonger defense than an OC on my natural vs PF on natural? A PF on natural works way better vs baneling busts. Also vs zealot stalker agression. Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist. And against zealot stalker pressure, build bunkers. You don't lose much money and still have a nice amount of mules. I dread to think what you do on entombed valley and akilon, where your opponent can literally walk past your PF taking no damage. You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around. Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base. This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me. It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist") If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works. But it doesn't work. It isn't logically plausible. I'm not exaggerating how bad the idea of building PF's at your natural and third is. If we do use logic, which you keep claiming you use, we find that bio is mineral heavy. How do we get these minerals? Mules, and not building expensive PF's which don't give us anything, but sacrifice a lot. And if we should decide to build a PF, we certainly don't have money for a wall of bunkers to stop our opponent from walking past us. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all. I never said I go into Bio. You can get enough minerals from scv + 1OC mules. Your not handicapped with only 1 OC compared to 2 OC. All you need is 2 bunkers. "PF's which don't give us anything" PF give you good defense at ur natural. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all Do you think my approach is not based on logic? Then what would it be based on? I explained thoroughly why I prioritize getting a PF on my natural. If you don't go into bio why are you making bunkers to help your PF defend? And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't. What you're saying may well be based on logic, but it seems like the logic it is based on is in fact flawed logic.
Either it is me or you that don't understand or believe what Bio play means. But 1 barracks can fill 2 bunkers.
And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't
It's not to match anyone. I didn't say that. Once again you put words in my mouth. It is for defense - as I said about 4-5 times already.
And I believe I have the right to believe something. I can't? It almost sounds like a threat.
And I am not blindly believing either. As you also confirmed; I do base what I am saying on logic.
You can also not just say my logic is flawed just because you believe it is. You need to back your claims up by some content. I can't take you seriously anymore. You keep saying more and more how bad everything is. But no evidence have been given.
|
On February 08 2013 06:28 llIH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 06:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:19 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:10 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:52 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:40 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:30 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:55 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 04:50 kollin wrote:
[quote]
Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all. You know what happens if you turtle on 4 bases with a single orbital command? Your opponent gets up an insane amount of AoE and wins. I don't go OC on all expansions, I do it on the first 3 because I can defend them with my army, and don't need a PF. On my 4th base I will usually get a PF, and more macro orbitals. And marauder 3CC is not 'almost the same as 1 rax fe'. It leaves you ridiculously weak to a lot of pressure and isn't as good economically unless by some miracle your opponent misreads what you're doing entirely. You are missing my point. I never said it is good nor bad. I said it works for me. And I like it. You neither do need to teach me how the game goes. I know what I am doing. I am not asking for your advice regarding my opening. I am just throwing my idea out there for people to know that it can be done. By the way. I disagree that marauder opening leaves me (i will put it how you wrote it) "rediculously weak to a lot of pressure". I think the opposite. NB: This is not a proxy marauder push. The barracks is placed inside my base. It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build. Your opinion on whether or not it protects you against pressure is also irrelevant, because you are weak against builds such as 4 gate when you do this. Also, the two rax build is actually pretty good, especially if you all in off the back of it with a 2/1/1. I don't get 3CC if I scout a 4gate developing. How is it irrelevant when it is a stonger defense than an OC on my natural vs PF on natural? A PF on natural works way better vs baneling busts. Also vs zealot stalker agression. Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist. And against zealot stalker pressure, build bunkers. You don't lose much money and still have a nice amount of mules. I dread to think what you do on entombed valley and akilon, where your opponent can literally walk past your PF taking no damage. You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around. Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base. This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me. It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist") If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works. But it doesn't work. It isn't logically plausible. I'm not exaggerating how bad the idea of building PF's at your natural and third is. If we do use logic, which you keep claiming you use, we find that bio is mineral heavy. How do we get these minerals? Mules, and not building expensive PF's which don't give us anything, but sacrifice a lot. And if we should decide to build a PF, we certainly don't have money for a wall of bunkers to stop our opponent from walking past us. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all. I never said I go into Bio. You can get enough minerals from scv + 1OC mules. Your not handicapped with only 1 OC compared to 2 OC. All you need is 2 bunkers. "PF's which don't give us anything" PF give you good defense at ur natural. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all Do you think my approach is not based on logic? Then what would it be based on? I explained thoroughly why I prioritize getting a PF on my natural. If you don't go into bio why are you making bunkers to help your PF defend? And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't. What you're saying may well be based on logic, but it seems like the logic it is based on is in fact flawed logic. Either it is me or you that don't understand or believe what Bio play means. But 1 barracks can fill 2 bunkers. Show nested quote +And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't It's not to match anyone. I didn't say that. Once again you put words in my mouth. It is for defense - as I said about 4-5 times already. And I believe I have the right to believe something. I can't? It almost sounds like a threat. And I am not blindly believing either. As you also confirmed; I do base what I am saying on logic.
One barracks can fill two bunkers yes. But assuming you're building marauders out of them, that's 400 minerals and 100 gas (+ the cost of the PF), so you can transition into mech. All for the sake of early map control. And if you think you don't need to match a Protoss in economy, you are sorely mistaken. And when I said 'don't even think you can, you can't, that was me referring to you trying to come up with some argument as to how economically you'd be stable. From the basis of this discussion, I'm beginning to highly doubt you are masters league...
EDIT: I have given PLENTY of evidence as to why what you say is bad. You lose out on economy, you lose out in army, you lose out on tech. You know this because you don't have mules, shrinking your army and henceforth your economy. You are investing in an early engineering bay so you can spend gas on a PF, delaying your tech. You are wasting money on bunkers, while not going bio. You are the one with the burden of proof. I'd like you to provide replays of you doing this build, and then state the league of you and the opponent you won against.
|
On February 08 2013 06:32 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 06:28 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:19 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:10 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:52 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:40 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:30 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 04:55 llIH wrote:
[quote]
You are missing my point. I never said it is good nor bad. I said it works for me. And I like it.
You neither do need to teach me how the game goes. I know what I am doing. I am not asking for your advice regarding my opening. I am just throwing my idea out there for people to know that it can be done.
By the way. I disagree that marauder opening leaves me (i will put it how you wrote it) "rediculously weak to a lot of pressure". I think the opposite. NB: This is not a proxy marauder push. The barracks is placed inside my base. It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build. Your opinion on whether or not it protects you against pressure is also irrelevant, because you are weak against builds such as 4 gate when you do this. Also, the two rax build is actually pretty good, especially if you all in off the back of it with a 2/1/1. I don't get 3CC if I scout a 4gate developing. How is it irrelevant when it is a stonger defense than an OC on my natural vs PF on natural? A PF on natural works way better vs baneling busts. Also vs zealot stalker agression. Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist. And against zealot stalker pressure, build bunkers. You don't lose much money and still have a nice amount of mules. I dread to think what you do on entombed valley and akilon, where your opponent can literally walk past your PF taking no damage. You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around. Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base. This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me. It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist") If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works. But it doesn't work. It isn't logically plausible. I'm not exaggerating how bad the idea of building PF's at your natural and third is. If we do use logic, which you keep claiming you use, we find that bio is mineral heavy. How do we get these minerals? Mules, and not building expensive PF's which don't give us anything, but sacrifice a lot. And if we should decide to build a PF, we certainly don't have money for a wall of bunkers to stop our opponent from walking past us. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all. I never said I go into Bio. You can get enough minerals from scv + 1OC mules. Your not handicapped with only 1 OC compared to 2 OC. All you need is 2 bunkers. "PF's which don't give us anything" PF give you good defense at ur natural. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all Do you think my approach is not based on logic? Then what would it be based on? I explained thoroughly why I prioritize getting a PF on my natural. If you don't go into bio why are you making bunkers to help your PF defend? And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't. What you're saying may well be based on logic, but it seems like the logic it is based on is in fact flawed logic. Either it is me or you that don't understand or believe what Bio play means. But 1 barracks can fill 2 bunkers. And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't It's not to match anyone. I didn't say that. Once again you put words in my mouth. It is for defense - as I said about 4-5 times already. And I believe I have the right to believe something. I can't? It almost sounds like a threat. And I am not blindly believing either. As you also confirmed; I do base what I am saying on logic. One barracks can fill two bunkers yes. But assuming you're building marauders out of them, that's 400 minerals and 100 gas (+ the cost of the PF), so you can transition into mech. All for the sake of early map control. And if you think you don't need to match a Protoss in economy, you are sorely mistaken. And when I said 'don't even think you can, you can't, that was me referring to you trying to come up with some argument as to how economically you'd be stable. From the basis of this discussion, I'm beginning to highly doubt you are masters league... EDIT: You do know what flawed logic is right?
Your arguments don't provide me much backed up evidence unfortunately. You can make marines after your first 2-3 marauders.
Extremely important for you to understand - that I am not saying I do not need to match a protoss' economy. All I said, was that the PF is good for defense. I am not mistaken at all. You once again put words in my mouth.
1RaxFE 1gas into CC + CC is a very economical opener. I can't believe you disagree on this? Or did I misunderstand what you meant?
The amounts of insults you are throwing at me. Does not make your arguments any stronger at all. They are all "argumentum ad hominem". All of them. Who cares what you think of what league I am in. That doesn't matter at all. We are not discussing your opinion on if I am master or not.
Keep the insults coming please. It is very mature and professional to keep doing this. After all I started to help someone who asked for help in this thread.
|
On February 08 2013 06:39 llIH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 06:32 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:28 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:19 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:10 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:52 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:40 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:30 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:22 kollin wrote:
[quote]
It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build. Your opinion on whether or not it protects you against pressure is also irrelevant, because you are weak against builds such as 4 gate when you do this. Also, the two rax build is actually pretty good, especially if you all in off the back of it with a 2/1/1.
I don't get 3CC if I scout a 4gate developing. How is it irrelevant when it is a stonger defense than an OC on my natural vs PF on natural? A PF on natural works way better vs baneling busts. Also vs zealot stalker agression. Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist. And against zealot stalker pressure, build bunkers. You don't lose much money and still have a nice amount of mules. I dread to think what you do on entombed valley and akilon, where your opponent can literally walk past your PF taking no damage. You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around. Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base. This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me. It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist") If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works. But it doesn't work. It isn't logically plausible. I'm not exaggerating how bad the idea of building PF's at your natural and third is. If we do use logic, which you keep claiming you use, we find that bio is mineral heavy. How do we get these minerals? Mules, and not building expensive PF's which don't give us anything, but sacrifice a lot. And if we should decide to build a PF, we certainly don't have money for a wall of bunkers to stop our opponent from walking past us. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all. I never said I go into Bio. You can get enough minerals from scv + 1OC mules. Your not handicapped with only 1 OC compared to 2 OC. All you need is 2 bunkers. "PF's which don't give us anything" PF give you good defense at ur natural. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all Do you think my approach is not based on logic? Then what would it be based on? I explained thoroughly why I prioritize getting a PF on my natural. If you don't go into bio why are you making bunkers to help your PF defend? And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't. What you're saying may well be based on logic, but it seems like the logic it is based on is in fact flawed logic. Either it is me or you that don't understand or believe what Bio play means. But 1 barracks can fill 2 bunkers. And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't It's not to match anyone. I didn't say that. Once again you put words in my mouth. It is for defense - as I said about 4-5 times already. And I believe I have the right to believe something. I can't? It almost sounds like a threat. And I am not blindly believing either. As you also confirmed; I do base what I am saying on logic. One barracks can fill two bunkers yes. But assuming you're building marauders out of them, that's 400 minerals and 100 gas (+ the cost of the PF), so you can transition into mech. All for the sake of early map control. And if you think you don't need to match a Protoss in economy, you are sorely mistaken. And when I said 'don't even think you can, you can't, that was me referring to you trying to come up with some argument as to how economically you'd be stable. From the basis of this discussion, I'm beginning to highly doubt you are masters league... EDIT: You do know what flawed logic is right? Your arguments don't provide me much backed up evidence unfortunately. You can make marines after your first 2-3 marauders. Extremely important for you to understand - that I am not saying I do not need to match a protoss' economy. All I said, was that the PF is good for defense. I am not mistaken at all. You once again put words in my mouth. 1RaxFE 1gas into CC + CC is a very economical opener. I can't believe you disagree on this? Or did I misunderstand what you meant? The amounts of insults you are throwing at me. Does not make your arguments any stronger at all. They are all "argumentum ad hominem". All of them. Who cares what you think of what league I am in. That doesn't matter at all. We are not discussing your opinion on if I am master or not. Keep the insults coming please. It is very mature and professional to keep doing this. After all I started to help someone who asked for help in this thread.
1RaxFE 1 gas into CC + CC is not an opener. I have not insulted you once, I have asked you to provide a replay showing this strategy and the transition. And if you look at my edited post, there is a fair amount of 'backed up evidence'. If you actually read, I have already posted my help, the advice which is widely accepted to be correct.
|
On February 08 2013 06:43 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 06:39 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:32 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:28 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:19 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:10 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:52 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:40 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:30 llIH wrote:
[quote]
I don't get 3CC if I scout a 4gate developing.
How is it irrelevant when it is a stonger defense than an OC on my natural vs PF on natural? A PF on natural works way better vs baneling busts. Also vs zealot stalker agression. Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist. And against zealot stalker pressure, build bunkers. You don't lose much money and still have a nice amount of mules. I dread to think what you do on entombed valley and akilon, where your opponent can literally walk past your PF taking no damage. You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around. Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base. This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me. It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist") If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works. But it doesn't work. It isn't logically plausible. I'm not exaggerating how bad the idea of building PF's at your natural and third is. If we do use logic, which you keep claiming you use, we find that bio is mineral heavy. How do we get these minerals? Mules, and not building expensive PF's which don't give us anything, but sacrifice a lot. And if we should decide to build a PF, we certainly don't have money for a wall of bunkers to stop our opponent from walking past us. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all. I never said I go into Bio. You can get enough minerals from scv + 1OC mules. Your not handicapped with only 1 OC compared to 2 OC. All you need is 2 bunkers. "PF's which don't give us anything" PF give you good defense at ur natural. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all Do you think my approach is not based on logic? Then what would it be based on? I explained thoroughly why I prioritize getting a PF on my natural. If you don't go into bio why are you making bunkers to help your PF defend? And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't. What you're saying may well be based on logic, but it seems like the logic it is based on is in fact flawed logic. Either it is me or you that don't understand or believe what Bio play means. But 1 barracks can fill 2 bunkers. And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't It's not to match anyone. I didn't say that. Once again you put words in my mouth. It is for defense - as I said about 4-5 times already. And I believe I have the right to believe something. I can't? It almost sounds like a threat. And I am not blindly believing either. As you also confirmed; I do base what I am saying on logic. One barracks can fill two bunkers yes. But assuming you're building marauders out of them, that's 400 minerals and 100 gas (+ the cost of the PF), so you can transition into mech. All for the sake of early map control. And if you think you don't need to match a Protoss in economy, you are sorely mistaken. And when I said 'don't even think you can, you can't, that was me referring to you trying to come up with some argument as to how economically you'd be stable. From the basis of this discussion, I'm beginning to highly doubt you are masters league... EDIT: You do know what flawed logic is right? Your arguments don't provide me much backed up evidence unfortunately. You can make marines after your first 2-3 marauders. Extremely important for you to understand - that I am not saying I do not need to match a protoss' economy. All I said, was that the PF is good for defense. I am not mistaken at all. You once again put words in my mouth. 1RaxFE 1gas into CC + CC is a very economical opener. I can't believe you disagree on this? Or did I misunderstand what you meant? The amounts of insults you are throwing at me. Does not make your arguments any stronger at all. They are all "argumentum ad hominem". All of them. Who cares what you think of what league I am in. That doesn't matter at all. We are not discussing your opinion on if I am master or not. Keep the insults coming please. It is very mature and professional to keep doing this. After all I started to help someone who asked for help in this thread. 1RaxFE 1 gas into CC is not an opener. I have not insulted you once, I have asked you to provide a replay showing this strategy and the transition. And if you look at my edited post, there is a fair amount of 'backed up evidence'. If you actually read, I have already posted my help, the advice which is widely accepted to be correct.
It is an opener. No doubt about that. We disagree. No point in discussing whether it is or not.
You have insulted me several times - saying my logic is flawed. Putting words in my mouth several times. Saying my builds are bad without explaining. Saying "don't even think is also an insult. Doubting my league has no relevance to your argument. It is one of the most obvious "argumentum ad hominem" you can use. Up to you if you want to continue this.
I am not going to waste my time giving you a replay nor having to prove to you that I am masters. You can believe I am bronze for all I care. You can reply if you want. I am not going to reply again. I put my answer out there to help the guy. I don't care anymore of our discussion about a PF at natural. I leave this discussion knowing we disagree. But believe it or not. I actually am master terran. If you got good macro it is not as hard to get to masters as you think. (Are you master league?)
|
On February 08 2013 06:51 llIH wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 06:43 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:39 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:32 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:28 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:19 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:10 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:52 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 05:40 kollin wrote:
[quote]
Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist. And against zealot stalker pressure, build bunkers. You don't lose much money and still have a nice amount of mules. I dread to think what you do on entombed valley and akilon, where your opponent can literally walk past your PF taking no damage. You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around. Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base. This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me. It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist") If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works. But it doesn't work. It isn't logically plausible. I'm not exaggerating how bad the idea of building PF's at your natural and third is. If we do use logic, which you keep claiming you use, we find that bio is mineral heavy. How do we get these minerals? Mules, and not building expensive PF's which don't give us anything, but sacrifice a lot. And if we should decide to build a PF, we certainly don't have money for a wall of bunkers to stop our opponent from walking past us. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all. I never said I go into Bio. You can get enough minerals from scv + 1OC mules. Your not handicapped with only 1 OC compared to 2 OC. All you need is 2 bunkers. "PF's which don't give us anything" PF give you good defense at ur natural. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all Do you think my approach is not based on logic? Then what would it be based on? I explained thoroughly why I prioritize getting a PF on my natural. If you don't go into bio why are you making bunkers to help your PF defend? And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't. What you're saying may well be based on logic, but it seems like the logic it is based on is in fact flawed logic. Either it is me or you that don't understand or believe what Bio play means. But 1 barracks can fill 2 bunkers. And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't It's not to match anyone. I didn't say that. Once again you put words in my mouth. It is for defense - as I said about 4-5 times already. And I believe I have the right to believe something. I can't? It almost sounds like a threat. And I am not blindly believing either. As you also confirmed; I do base what I am saying on logic. One barracks can fill two bunkers yes. But assuming you're building marauders out of them, that's 400 minerals and 100 gas (+ the cost of the PF), so you can transition into mech. All for the sake of early map control. And if you think you don't need to match a Protoss in economy, you are sorely mistaken. And when I said 'don't even think you can, you can't, that was me referring to you trying to come up with some argument as to how economically you'd be stable. From the basis of this discussion, I'm beginning to highly doubt you are masters league... EDIT: You do know what flawed logic is right? Your arguments don't provide me much backed up evidence unfortunately. You can make marines after your first 2-3 marauders. Extremely important for you to understand - that I am not saying I do not need to match a protoss' economy. All I said, was that the PF is good for defense. I am not mistaken at all. You once again put words in my mouth. 1RaxFE 1gas into CC + CC is a very economical opener. I can't believe you disagree on this? Or did I misunderstand what you meant? The amounts of insults you are throwing at me. Does not make your arguments any stronger at all. They are all "argumentum ad hominem". All of them. Who cares what you think of what league I am in. That doesn't matter at all. We are not discussing your opinion on if I am master or not. Keep the insults coming please. It is very mature and professional to keep doing this. After all I started to help someone who asked for help in this thread. 1RaxFE 1 gas into CC + CC is not an opener. I have not insulted you once, I have asked you to provide a replay showing this strategy and the transition. And if you look at my edited post, there is a fair amount of 'backed up evidence'. If you actually read, I have already posted my help, the advice which is widely accepted to be correct. It is an opener. No doubt about that. We disagree. No point in discussing whether it is or not. You have insulted me several times - saying my logic is flawed. Putting words in my mouth several times. Saying my builds are bad without explaining. Saying "don't even think is also an insult. Doubting my league has no relevance to your argument. It is one of the most obvious "argumentum ad hominem" you can use. Up to you if you want to continue this. I am not going to waste my time giving you a replay nor having to prove to you that I am masters. You can believe I am bronze for all I care. You can reply if you want. I am not going to reply again. I put my answer out there to help the guy. I don't care anymore of our discussion about a PF at natural. I leave this discussion knowing we disagree. But believe it or not. I actually am master terran. If you got good macro it is not as hard to get to masters as you think. (Are you master league?)
You actually can't go 1 rax 4CC and get a gas. It is not a viable opener. I have explained why your builds are bad. I have not put words in your mouth, once. I have said 'don't even think so' to emphasise you are wrong. You still have not posted a replay. The burden of proof lies on your shoulders and you refuse to take it up.
|
On February 08 2013 06:55 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 08 2013 06:51 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:43 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:39 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:32 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:28 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:22 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 06:19 llIH wrote:On February 08 2013 06:10 kollin wrote:On February 08 2013 05:52 llIH wrote:
[quote]
You create a bunker wrap so they can't just run around.
Mules are good for minerals. But I don't need more minerals when they are pushing me. By the way. Late game I build a lot of OC in my base.
This is my last post about the PF. You obviously have a grudge against them. But that is not a problem for me.
It is my opinion. Which I find logically plausible. If you disagree. Fine. But I think you can stop exaggerating how bad my builds are. Your negative tone through all your comments don't make them better. It makes you look less serious. Hell I start to feel it is a personal hunt after me rather than a mature argument. (eg. "It is irrevelant whether or not it works for you, because it is not a good build" - "Just because it's logical to you does not mean it is good. At all" - "Thank god we're talking about TvP, where luckily banelings busts don't exist")
If you want to back your arguments up - as you are saying my builds are bad, rather than listening and using arguments that are backed up by facts rather than "are good" "are bad". Remember what I said earlier. I didn't write my strategy to counter anyone nor say something else was "bad". All I want was to let people know that it works. But it doesn't work. It isn't logically plausible. I'm not exaggerating how bad the idea of building PF's at your natural and third is. If we do use logic, which you keep claiming you use, we find that bio is mineral heavy. How do we get these minerals? Mules, and not building expensive PF's which don't give us anything, but sacrifice a lot. And if we should decide to build a PF, we certainly don't have money for a wall of bunkers to stop our opponent from walking past us. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all. I never said I go into Bio. You can get enough minerals from scv + 1OC mules. Your not handicapped with only 1 OC compared to 2 OC. All you need is 2 bunkers. "PF's which don't give us anything" PF give you good defense at ur natural. So now, using logic, we have deduced that you are giving bad advice, and because it works for you does not mean it makes sense at all Do you think my approach is not based on logic? Then what would it be based on? I explained thoroughly why I prioritize getting a PF on my natural. If you don't go into bio why are you making bunkers to help your PF defend? And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't. What you're saying may well be based on logic, but it seems like the logic it is based on is in fact flawed logic. Either it is me or you that don't understand or believe what Bio play means. But 1 barracks can fill 2 bunkers. And no, you can't get enough minerals to match the Protoss economy from 1 OC. Don't even think you can, you can't It's not to match anyone. I didn't say that. Once again you put words in my mouth. It is for defense - as I said about 4-5 times already. And I believe I have the right to believe something. I can't? It almost sounds like a threat. And I am not blindly believing either. As you also confirmed; I do base what I am saying on logic. One barracks can fill two bunkers yes. But assuming you're building marauders out of them, that's 400 minerals and 100 gas (+ the cost of the PF), so you can transition into mech. All for the sake of early map control. And if you think you don't need to match a Protoss in economy, you are sorely mistaken. And when I said 'don't even think you can, you can't, that was me referring to you trying to come up with some argument as to how economically you'd be stable. From the basis of this discussion, I'm beginning to highly doubt you are masters league... EDIT: You do know what flawed logic is right? Your arguments don't provide me much backed up evidence unfortunately. You can make marines after your first 2-3 marauders. Extremely important for you to understand - that I am not saying I do not need to match a protoss' economy. All I said, was that the PF is good for defense. I am not mistaken at all. You once again put words in my mouth. 1RaxFE 1gas into CC + CC is a very economical opener. I can't believe you disagree on this? Or did I misunderstand what you meant? The amounts of insults you are throwing at me. Does not make your arguments any stronger at all. They are all "argumentum ad hominem". All of them. Who cares what you think of what league I am in. That doesn't matter at all. We are not discussing your opinion on if I am master or not. Keep the insults coming please. It is very mature and professional to keep doing this. After all I started to help someone who asked for help in this thread. 1RaxFE 1 gas into CC + CC is not an opener. I have not insulted you once, I have asked you to provide a replay showing this strategy and the transition. And if you look at my edited post, there is a fair amount of 'backed up evidence'. If you actually read, I have already posted my help, the advice which is widely accepted to be correct. It is an opener. No doubt about that. We disagree. No point in discussing whether it is or not. You have insulted me several times - saying my logic is flawed. Putting words in my mouth several times. Saying my builds are bad without explaining. Saying "don't even think is also an insult. Doubting my league has no relevance to your argument. It is one of the most obvious "argumentum ad hominem" you can use. Up to you if you want to continue this. I am not going to waste my time giving you a replay nor having to prove to you that I am masters. You can believe I am bronze for all I care. You can reply if you want. I am not going to reply again. I put my answer out there to help the guy. I don't care anymore of our discussion about a PF at natural. I leave this discussion knowing we disagree. But believe it or not. I actually am master terran. If you got good macro it is not as hard to get to masters as you think. (Are you master league?) You actually can't go 1 rax 4CC and get a gas. It is not a viable opener. I have explained why your builds are bad. I have not put words in your mouth, once. I have said 'don't even think so' to emphasise you are wrong. You still have not posted a replay. The burden of proof lies on your shoulders and you refuse to take it up.
Ok I swear this is my last reply. :D
I edited about the 1RaxFE into CC + CC (obviously I was talking all along only 3CC total - as you can see from my previous posts)
Your emphasis only results in looking more negative and stubborn rather than convincing - I feel so. If you didn't emphasize that way I would have taken you more seriously. (I mean that)
And you have put several words in my mouth. 1) You said that I am going Bio (remember 1 rax isn't considered bio). 2) That I am not economically viable. 3) You started saying I was mistaken that I wasn't matching the protoss economy. I never said that was the purpose. If you remember what I said was that the purpose was to pressure the enemy with 1 marauder concussive.
Finally. I like the way you immediately attack my mistype on 4CC. You have been following my posts through this thread. And you end up using that as an argument. I feel a need to disprove me or purposely trying to "win" the argument from your side. This is (as I said about 4 times now) a reply to a person that asked for help to get map control early vs protoss. There are of course several other ideas out there. You do not necessarily need to only disprove me. You can also come with ideas. That would be fun to talk about as well.
Argumentum ad ignorantiam. You are saying my idea is bad or false logic just beause it hasn't been proven true.
I don't care if you don't think I am at Master league.
|
I assumed you are going bio because mech is not possible unless you all in. And why you'd go mech off a marauder opening is nonsensical. You are not economically viable because you are on 1OC for far, far too long. That's not me putting words in your mouth, that's me stating a fact. And what I said about matching the Protoss economy was based at the PF thing, because as I said before mules are absolutely vital. And I say your idea is bad not because you haven't proved it true, but because you refuse to. You haven't posted a replay, despite repeated requests. Do this and your argument automatically has a better basis for discussion.
If you want a suggestion, here's me my suggestion. 1 rax fe into 3 rax with one tech lab, 4 marines should repel the stalker if you micro, if you don't 5 marines. There we go, safer, with a better economy and better late game.
|
Canada2228 Posts
On February 08 2013 06:43 kollin wrote:
1RaxFE 1 gas into CC + CC is not an opener. I have not insulted you once, I have asked you to provide a replay showing this strategy and the transition. And if you look at my edited post, there is a fair amount of 'backed up evidence'. If you actually read, I have already posted my help, the advice which is widely accepted to be correct.
I'm certainly not trying to defend or attack anyone here, but there are some replays of this strategy (at least the 1-rax Concussive FE). Flash did it a few months back in the OSL, and rolled San with it. Here's the thread (with some replays/VoDs): http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=365229
The consensus in discussion afterwards seemed to be that this is a build you throw into a Best-of-X, because a well-executed Immortal all-in off one or two bases is very hard to stop, as is a Voidray all-in. 4-gate and 3-gate is defendable, and 2-base gateway all-ins are not too bad either. Either way, getting 3OC is the primary strength, though I can see how in a lower level where players are not as adept at punishing immobility a PF would seem strong. Just in the long run, the OCs will pay off. I've run this build on and off in tournament and ladder competition, and it has moderate success, depending on how aggressive your opponent is and how accurately you fake the 2-rax. I've never tried it with PFs, but given that I haven't dipped below 50% with it yet when I run it, I see no need to. I'm not Ketroc.
|
Yeah I mentioned Flash's build near the beginning of the argument, and I think it's a cool build but not something you should regularly do on ladder.
|
No you didn't. You never mentioned Flash once.
I was actually basing my suggestion on what I saw from Flash.
By the way thanks for providing us with the replay. I was looking for that one specifically.
|
Oh whoops, I didn't but when I mentioned the marauder into 3 OC that's what I was referring to. That's why I called it modern. I would still like a replay of your marauder PF mech build please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
