|
On October 30 2011 08:24 Jagd wrote:
Can you prove that 3rax + stim + 4gates is better than 8 gates? The evidence on the side of 8 gates is that there is a lower tech cost, what is the evidence on the side of 3rax+ stim+4gates?
This post is about a strategy, that relies on in game mechanics, fun is subjective and not relevant to this discussion. Yes whatever it takes to get a (easy) win so long as it's in the game and reliable is my opinion.
What kind of evidence do you need? You don't know that stimmed marines/marauders are WAY better than gates units, especially behind zealots & sentries tanking the damage for them?
and LOL @ fun not revelant... this is a game, you know? No need to take it that serious, especially in 2v2...
|
Its very common that your 2v2 rank is higher than your 1v1 rank, because less players play 2v2.
|
Against a P, especially with no shared choke, a 7pool hits faster than 5:00, and protosses tend to lose to that on the ladder. (Really)
|
United Kingdom20327 Posts
On October 30 2011 19:21 NovAr wrote:
Its very common that your 2v2 rank is higher than your 1v1 rank, because less players play 2v2.
This.
Even when i played in platinum 1v1 a few months ago, almost everyone i faced was masters in team games.
3v3 and 4v4 especially, but often 2v2.
So many more people play team games at a lower skill level because they are scared of or dont like 1v1s, and thus anyone who plays well, at plat/diamond 1v1 is almost guaranteed masters across every other game type.
|
United Kingdom20327 Posts
On October 30 2011 19:30 Ktk wrote:
Against a P, especially with no shared choke, a 7pool hits faster than 5:00, and protosses tend to lose to that on the ladder. (Really)
Lol what? 7pool will only initially hit with 6 lings and with good probe control you can either get a zealot out without losses and deal with lings in your base while getting a second zeal and stopping more from entering, or if you did FFE, you can get a pylon+cannon in your main mineral line and have 20 probes to his ~10 while being entirely safe from any kind of cost effective pressure or death blow
|
Well, frankly this strategy seems rather boring for one player.
It may work well, or even better than normal 2v2 but I am not sold on this idea. I question whether it's better though strictly because it's not done in high level 2v2 games. Aka, 2v2 tourney a few months ago nor in egmc V.
|
I love this :D
Infact, I'm amazed there isn't more research on this, if there were any power in this concept, you'd think more 2vs2 teams would look/test it. I guess there aren't enough pro 2vs2 teams that really take it immensely serious.
I agree with your argument that the terran should be feeding protoss. Toss is simply so baaaaad for the first few minutes.
but blizzard doesnt give a damn about 2v2 balance
i believe that Blizzard said they would balance 2vs2 (I remember hearing it). That's why they cut things like Reaper speed (Reaper ling rush was OP), and one (small) reason for making barracks take 5 seconds longer. Blizzard said they would support 2vs2 because it CAN be balanced, albeit a lot harder/more delicate than 1vs1. They won't be balancing 3vs3 and 4vs4 because that's way too hard/impossible with the amount of strategy combinations there are.
Only weakness I see is when good teams see what you're doing, and counter what the protoss is going.
For example, lets say you go 6 gate+ colossus. A Terran Zerg team could fight it off by going vikings and roaches. Once the colossus falls, you are on the backfoot. Also, you are playing 2vs1 basically: If both opponents counter your army composition, then you should lose. Have you experimented going all three tech paths of Toss for mid game (Gateway, Colossus, High templars)? I think you'd be weak for some time but then pull far ahead.
What kind of evidence do you need? You don't know that stimmed marines/marauders are WAY better than gates units, especially behind zealots & sentries tanking the damage for them?
Not against a zerg opponent. Also, Protoss unit control beats bio- Good forcefields can make Gateway beat stim. Sure, bio IS better when players play with lower skill level (Like me), but this thread is more directed towards Master league TEAMS. You can do lots of things in the other leagues (Me and a friend were owning gold players by going 10 pool voids rays. You can't get away with a dumb strat like that past diamond).
Do you share unit control with your ally/vice versa? This makes multitasking so easy.
|
While I personally feel like resource sharing is cheese, there are definitely benefits if you have a well worked out strategy and timing. However, it still has weaknesses.
Resource sharing strategies are strongest in mid game. The reasons for this are:
A) you can't resource share before 5 min without cutting your team apm in half. This means that if you're trying for say, 6-8 gates at a normal 4 gate timing, the toss will have to cut probes to get his infrastructure in, doing a sub optimal build Econ wise. This also leaves you vulnerable to early rushes, though for shared bass maps PT is in good shape to defend themselves, split bases, not so much.
B) eventually if the game goes long enough you will start to suffer from a supply disadvantage. This is pretty straight forward, sooner or later you'll hit your own teams max of about 250ish with the feeders workers and they will be at 400. Not a good scenario.
C) The other team will more likely than not have specialized themselves (Terran bio Zerg muta/ling corruptors), so your upgrade advantage really won't be as good as advertised, since if you wanted to match their upgs you would spend just as much. The assumption that feeding has an upgrade/tech advantage is based on everyone just going mass gateway or something, which will never happen. The upgrade/tech advantage has to be pretty well tuned to work, and it will be more of a timing window than anything.
D) you will start to suffer army composition wise. Unless they are the same race your opponents will have access to more units and will be able to build more efficient mixed armies. This won't necessarily happen right away but smart team players will find a way to abuse you.
All that being said with the right execution and timing a feeder strategy can be impossible to stop if you didn't expect it or prepare for it.
|
On October 30 2011 19:30 Ktk wrote:
Against a P, especially with no shared choke, a 7pool hits faster than 5:00, and protosses tend to lose to that on the ladder. (Really)
Yes it's common for P to even loose to 10p. That's why we veto the maps that don't have a shared ramp. One bunker, with a scouting unit in front of your base to give time to pull 5-7 scvs, and 1-2 sentries, and you will never die before 6 minutes, guaranteed. Assuming T opens 9depo 11rax, and P opens 10p 10g.
On October 31 2011 02:41 DarkCore wrote:
Only weakness I see is when good teams see what you're doing, and counter what the protoss is going. [...]
Yes this is the problem we're working on now. Most of our losses now happen around the 14-18 minute mark because our opponents simply counter the protoss composition. As a result we've tried to add terran support units earlier. Eg star 2starport 2 reactor viking production at 10-11 minutes if the P is going colossus, or add ghosts/marauders around 12 minutes.
On October 31 2011 02:58 Penatronic wrote:
B) eventually if the game goes long enough you will start to suffer from a supply disadvantage. This is pretty straight forward, sooner or later you'll hit your own teams max of about 250ish with the feeders workers and they will be at 400. Not a good scenario.
C) The other team will more likely than not have specialized themselves (Terran bio Zerg muta/ling corruptors), so your upgrade advantage really won't be as good as advertised, since if you wanted to match their upgs you would spend just as much. The assumption that feeding has an upgrade/tech advantage is based on everyone just going mass gateway or something, which will never happen. The upgrade/tech advantage has to be pretty well tuned to work, and it will be more of a timing window than anything.
D) you will start to suffer army composition wise. Unless they are the same race your opponents will have access to more units and will be able to build more efficient mixed armies. This won't necessarily happen right away but smart team players will find a way to abuse you.
Perhaps it wasn't clear but points B,D are addressed in the late midgame section, where we mention that it's important to transition into feeder production when the receiver has 160-170 supply. The production depends on your and the opponent's composition.
C- the upgrade savings is relevant even outside this scenario since protoss ground is strong against a variety of compositions, and though the multiplier may not always be 2x, it usually is greater than 1.
|
A) you can't resource share before 5 min without cutting your team apm in half. This means that if you're trying for say, 6-8 gates at a normal 4 gate timing, the toss will have to cut probes to get his infrastructure in, doing a sub optimal build Econ wise. This also leaves you vulnerable to early rushes, though for shared bass maps PT is in good shape to defend themselves, split bases, not so much.
I'm going to argue all your points. I think you should fully read the OP, some of the things you address are answered.
When 5 minutes hit, the terran gives the protoss 700 minerals and 100 gas. This is enough to allow a protoss to make 8 gateways while probing at a normal pace. Infact, I think he could chrono probes if he's willing to delay warpgate tech. Or even pump some units before warpgate finishes instead (Like one extra zealot if I read this correctly).
B) eventually if the game goes long enough you will start to suffer from a supply disadvantage. This is pretty straight forward, sooner or later you'll hit your own teams max of about 250ish with the feeders workers and they will be at 400. Not a good scenario.
He explains how once the Protoss is maxed or end game, the terran gets his own production and it turns into a normal 2vs2. Also, the idea of feeding is that one player has an economy equal to or greater than that of lategame. So they will attempt to win the game before that, when the opponents also reach the stage.
C) The other team will more likely than not have specialized themselves (Terran bio Zerg muta/ling corruptors), so your upgrade advantage really won't be as good as advertised, since if you wanted to match their upgs you would spend just as much. The assumption that feeding has an upgrade/tech advantage is based on everyone just going mass gateway or something, which will never happen. The upgrade/tech advantage has to be pretty well tuned to work, and it will be more of a timing window than anything.
Why won't the upgrade advantage be there? A protoss being fed can 7 gate, AND make double forges. The other team can't: 3 gate forge or 4 gate forge sacrifices economy, the units will have worse upgrades. Also, it isn't possible for one opponent to be aggressive while the other goes economy, as a 7 or 8 gateway push would crush them. Feeding means a large army, good upgrades and a space for economy.
All that being said with the right execution and timing a feeder strategy can be impossible to stop if you didn't expect it or prepare for it.
And there i was thinking you were arguing that feeding wouldn't work at all :D Btw, many strategies are hard to beat if you don't scout them. I mean, you lose to a double 4 gate if you don't prepare for it, right? Early aggression beats economic paths and very techy ones.
|
The few games I"ve played, we used zerg as the feeder because they can D up with crawlers and Terran as the receiver.
It worked out pretty well for us...especially when in the later states of the game they can pop out a few infestor/ultra/broodlords when we have more money than I can spend.
|
For 2v2 with protoss as the feeder I would suggest the protoss go gas-gate-gas-core-gate and just pump sentries until you have a dozen or so of them. You don't even need warpgate because of the sentry build time buff. And you should not have to think twice about how incredible M&M + forcefield/guardian shield is.
Protoss can actually do income pretty fast if they're just building probes and nexuses. IMO however this strategy is best for shorter games; after say about 120 probes the protoss should switch to army and the terran should start paying for his own army. This is okay because the terran player is likely maxed so he can spend some time getting 4-5 OCs running (and he needs less bases to warp in mules to use it) and being able to instantly warp in waves of archons is really powerful.
|
truthfully i think that resource sharing should be taxed. Double-so since arranged teams play random teams from time to time.
|
cool post
strongly dispute your OP comment though. I know what you mean but your not seriously wanting money transfer nerfed do you? Personally the wide variety of tactics like this is why id really like to watch some pros playing 2v2 seriously. I think 3v3 and 4v4 get a bit silly ... but odd numbers do make for great team games as you have a pivot and balance imo so maybe 3v3 could be interesting and not too dice roll.
Its a cool tactic ,,, 1 person building shit is always going to be more efficient that 2 people unless they have their shit down simply due to redundancy - assuming you have apm blah blah ... also no communication problems .... (always find it funny when someone pings enemy for info and teh other guy attacks thinking its an attack command and getting wiped out)
The point is you can probably 'scout it' and in time counter it. Probably by forcing lots of multi tasking
|
From the feeder games I've personally played. I can for sure say it's OP, it's boring to be the feeder & you increase your chances of getting carpal tunnel immensly. Scrolling the scroll wheel like a maniac made me wear out in like 5 games or something. Normally I can play all day no problem.
One diamond level 1v1 player & a silver level feeder will make master with a feeder strat I think. However that same diamond player could make master in 2v2 random just as easy.
It's kinda fun because people rage like crazy when they figure out what you're up to =) If there was money on the line I would do it. However in regular ladder play trying to improve or have fun it's just not worth it. Except to maybe experiment a little.
Do watcha feel, if you feel like to watch ;-)
|
sorry but nothing is the "future" of anything if it only gets you to diamond. playing with a protoss partner is such a huge disadvantage that its hard to see any viable top end application for anything that involves it.
on the subject of money feeding, it has its advantages but most games end before its relevant  2v2 is too crappy in terms of balance to be able to take much learning from any games.
|
Yeah the big loop side is having half the supply. It's also smoother to harass, poke and be annoying for the opposing team but the brute force will be on your side. A less but still important thing is you are more fragile when it comes to base trades.
On a bit higher level the extra diversity for your opponents in terms of units can actually be a tough thing to handle. But since 2v2 will never be as figured out as 1v1 any well timed organised and unusual move like this will have great success overall.
A popular move is to buff someones muta count by sending gas.
|
Yes this is the problem we're working on now. Most of our losses now happen around the 14-18 minute mark because our opponents simply counter the protoss composition. As a result we've tried to add terran support units earlier. Eg star 2starport 2 reactor viking production at 10-11 minutes if the P is going colossus, or add ghosts/marauders around 12 minutes.
This is what the other poster mentioned when he gave the 8 gate versus 4 gate +3rax example. They might not have been as efficient as you, but their unit composition as a whole is more efficient and outweighs the costs you saved teching.
It does seem like partial feeding to hit certain timings with a strong composition would be ideal, rather than fully feeding one player since all races have one or two units that are "strongest".
If 2v2 get's super competitive, I wouldn't be surprised to see really well thought out feed times. I.e. feed the terran for a faster than normal 1 or 2 port cloaked banshee rush, then do some gateway unit + marine/banshee poke into feed protoss for mass colossi -- of course adapting to how much damage was done with each harassment tactic.
|
Well, if it becomes imbalanced it won't be too difficult for Blizzard to just change the way money feeding works. I feel like this is only successful because it can be done at the five minute mark where players are still spending the majority of their money on structures and tech, or on economy in the case of a fast expanding zerg.
If it were changed to the eight minute mark or ten minute mark it would ruin the strategy of early resource feeding but wouldn't break the resource trading mechanic.
|
I'm masters 2v2 and it happens sometimes that we use a similar strat.
But the difference is that I (the protoss) go for heavy tech (double forge and blink + charge) then at the 5ish min mark I add gates when my Terran teammate can start feeding me. I usually go attack with 9 gates 1-1 blink + chargelots at 7:30ish
It happens to be pretty efficient, the weakness is the early attack before 6min.
After two or three cycles of warp-in, it is almost unstoppable. But you've got to keep up with pylons (3 pylons per warp-in if you don't lose units) and keep adding gates while your teammate expand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
