|
Intro
So there I was, sitting in the bathroom, also known as the throne of knowledge and wisdom, thinking about Protoss base design. Why you ask? Hell if I know, I just was.
Essentially my thoughts were:
-Protoss players, pro and bronze often build their gateways and tech, as well as pylons in random areas, which can be inefficient when drops and air harass occur
-What can we as Protoss do to make an effective base design?
Some of you may ask "why does it care? If you expand base design is irrelevant."
Not entirely true my cute bronze (or higher) friend, when on two or more bases is when drops typically occur, this is due to the fact that there is more map to control and one's army is divided thinner the further his bases are from each other.
Drops and muta harass aren't the only reasons for a good base design, if one scouts an early all-in or heavy pressure, good design is game saving. Also, how many times have you tried to place a building down where you want to, but your previous buildings were way too randomly placed and there isn't a nice 3x3 space, and you have to look all around your base, wasting time? All the time right? Some people are better than other at not doing it, but it happens to all of this. This is why I am making this guide, and why I think this is effective. Why? Well let me show you cutie.
The Design
First of all, this is a good design (IMO) due to the fact that to wall off with a zealot, you only need the 2 starting buildings and 2 pylons for it as you normally would (the wall off with a side entrance blocked by zealot). All you need to do is rearrange the building and voila! Good to go. (Note, I messed up and didn't put the pylon opposite the other one on the inside of the wall till later, my bad. It does however leave a 1 grid opening.)
+ Show Spoiler +
What this design allows you to do is make a parallel walls with gates, tech, and production facilities as long as you have the room. This is also effective because of the fact that the pylons (3+) are always behind the 3x3 buildings, providing overlapping power, should the get sniped (1 pylon powers 2 buildings, 2 per 1 building.)
This looks stupid, why is this even needed?
Don't be so mean! I spent a lot of thinking on this. This is good for many reasons against zerg.
1. Lings cannot unpower buildings
+ Show Spoiler +
2. If zerg comes up the ramp, zealots can be the only units even in range of him, any ranged unit can be outside roach range as long as buildings live, or keeping FFs up where buildings are missing.
+ Show Spoiler +
3. 1 FF is enough to completely block the middle of this golden hallway. If lings run in, FF in front and behind, and get free kills. They won't be able to kill gates in time as they have only 2 grids of attack space, 4 lings per building.
+ Show Spoiler +
4. This allows the Robo Facility to produce units, and not have to go around other buildings, it is travel time efficient.
5. If there is muta harass, the path leads straight to the nexus, and you are able to blink on either side if needed due to only 5 grids max of buildings to blink over, most of which you can just blink over 3
6. SPACE! This allows you to make other buildings VERY VERY easily later on in the game. Run out of hallway space? Well just put them down on the other side of the pylon, and put pylons next to those as well. This is meant for a nice compact base that is easy to navigate, defend, and being able to place anything anywhere late game when you need to add additional gates or stargates.
But will it blend work? That is the question.
I have not yet had a game where I could apply this yet, but I did try it with a friend. This was not an actual game, but it did show the power of the wall. (This is why I put [D] and not [G].) I will however start to do this more than not vZ on ladder, and hopefully this will catch on.
Other thoughts
This might not work on some maps where you can't have a diagonal wall going on, some maps may allow longer walls than others.
I am a Mid-High Masters Protoss if you are wondering and are biased towards lower leagues.
EDIT: This can also work with just placing a single pylon and a single gateway, allowing for zealot block. Sot his is safe vs 14/14 and 11 overpool
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
Replay
http://drop.sc/89371
again, not a real game, this was for testing it's viability in attacks. x8 through most of it until around 7.
Thanks for reading and please comment, discuss, and have fun making more zerg tears flow into the rivers of victory.
|
i like it... the only issue i have is the fact that i ffe 100% of pvz... and the last few ive 1 based i failed horribly... so this is cool and all but how could i incorporate it into my ffe style? take shakuras especially for example... the ramp at the bottom is bigger and there isnt as much hallway room. i guess i could do this when taking a 6th in the other main... but thats ridiculously late in the game
|
Well the point of this wasn't just for 1 base, I should've clarified. It's just base design. Say you lose your natural and have to retreat, this offers and amazing choke in which you can position yourself vs ling/roach to win no matter what, if you have the FFs for it and they are spot on. Such as with the stalker walking along the edge shooting roaches that cannot shoot back, or the FF to trap them in with zealots etc.
This can be used to open with 1 base, I usually FFE, but not on certain maps like XNC, Shattered (bad bad luck on that map  ), and the new desert one. The only reason I chose shakuras was for the build room.
Edit: another reason is space management. If you throw a bunch of cubes in a box, all jumbled, they will not all fit. But if you fit them like a puzzle, they will allow room for more.
|
im going to take a look at the replay to get a better idea of how exactly you set it up... but definitely upload more. im interested as to how you incorporate this into your personal play.
|
I def. will upload replays when I do incorporate this.
|
Wow, this is actually pretty cool. I don't play protoss, but I would be utterly confused if I saw this building set-up. It actually makes a lot of sense now that I think about it.
The only concern that I have is placing your core so close to the cliff of the base. It seems to me that in the third screenshot, the zerg is dangerously close to sniping your core... and no one wants that, right?
|
On January 11 2012 14:51 Homework wrote:
Wow, this is actually pretty cool. I don't play protoss, but I would be utterly confused if I saw this building set-up. It actually makes a lot of sense now that I think about it.
The only concern that I have is placing your core so close to the cliff of the base. It seems to me that in the third screenshot, the zerg is dangerously close to sniping your core... and no one wants that, right?
well a normal walloff would have the core as part of the wall so nothing new really here. I guess if you scout a hatch first and you're doing a 1 base build you can but it further back and put a second gate in that place.
but if you FFE you can put it w/e you want.
|
True, that is the problem with a standard wall-off in the first place. Nevermind then! ^^
|
I can see this working out well in the midgame. However you need 2 pylons to get a zealot wall off (you do right?), rendering this pretty useless imo.
|
Why do I feel like everyone in this thread knows each other?
|
On January 11 2012 14:59 Crypdos wrote:
I can see this working out well in the midgame. However you need 2 pylons to get a zealot wall off (you do right?), rendering this pretty useless imo.
Yes, this whole guide is useless now. Got em.
|
On January 11 2012 15:00 Nightshade_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 14:59 Crypdos wrote:
I can see this working out well in the midgame. However you need 2 pylons to get a zealot wall off (you do right?), rendering this pretty useless imo. Yes, this whole guide is useless now. Got em.
I see, so what do you do against 14/14 or 11overpool openings?
|
it may be different per map, I will look at different maps that won't be shakuras, as shakuras is auto-FFE.
|
|
|
unlike you or that thread OP, I actually try to contribute.
EDIT: updated guide under Other thoughts
|
float an overlord
snipe your cyber
run in through the gaping hole
profit
would be better if the screenshots werent from arranged games
|
Hahahaha I know this isn't exactly relevant to your question. But your analogy of the toilet being a throne of knowledge and wisdom killed me. I'm going to use that phrase from now on, hopefully you never see it. 
|
I will watch the replay and get back with a more intelligent and useful feedback sometimes this week. But I must say, walling isn't mandatory. It is good situationally. The downside to it is if you are being rushed early with ranged units like marines/marauders. Blink stalked can be fatal since your cyber can be easily targeted. Now as far as Pvz goes, I often wait for a 2nd gate and wall with that instead. Since its more robust and isn't much of a setback in a rare case of an attack.
|
United Kingdom20297 Posts
The first pylon is more vunerable to early pools (that would arrive before zealot finish) which is a really big deal i think
|
Great intro. =D As a zerg looking at this, you might be in trouble if early mutas hit your base. Chokes can be a problem before you get blink if Z can bounce between main and natural, and adding a hallway might make it even more of a headache as you're really stretching the distance stalkers must move between various points in your territory. Mutas could probably harass pretty effectively just flying back and forth across that wall. I do agree that it looks like a bitch to assault with ground units though.
|
I like the thought you've put into this, but my personal thoughts on it are there is nothing that cant be held with the conventional walloff, and although mistakes can get you to a point where this is beneficial, I feel like the downside would be you'd be much more restricted in ground movement vs mutas (sometimes I kill off my ramp gateway vs mutas just because of this) and personally I dont think the pros outweigh the cons. However I could see a lot of people potentially adding this into their play if they're not concerned about that
|
On January 11 2012 16:25 COLDbear wrote:
I will watch the replay and get back with a more intelligent and useful feedback sometimes this week. But I must say, walling isn't mandatory. It is good situationally. The downside to it is if you are being rushed early with ranged units like marines/marauders. Blink stalked can be fatal since your cyber can be easily targeted. Now as far as Pvz goes, I often wait for a 2nd gate and wall with that instead. Since its more robust and isn't much of a setback in a rare case of an attack. when did zerg get those two units
Edit: was in a game, thanks for all the feedback guys. Making me think a lot about this. But perhaps maybe we could make something out of it? :o
|
How long were you sitting on that toilet? O_o
Seriously though, you didn't mention anything about nydus. How do you deal with having no vision on the edge of your base?
|
On January 11 2012 16:54 memcpy wrote:
How long were you sitting on that toilet? O_o
Seriously though, you didn't mention anything about nydus. How do you deal with having no vision on the edge of your base?
ah good point. I typically have 3 stalkers on patrol for each side of my base to snipe overlords, so that didn't cross my mind.
|
Why does seemingly every masters player say that they are mid-high masters? You have 160 points after bonus pool is subtracted. That is not anywhere close to high masters.
|
On January 11 2012 18:07 blah_blah wrote:
Why does seemingly every masters player say that they are mid-high masters? You have 160 points after bonus pool is subtracted. That is not anywhere close to high masters.
Why does everybody that thinks they're a critic seemingly believe rank and points determine the MMR of a player? I have played and beaten top 8 masters, which in the common term is "high masters." Enough ad hominems and post something mildly intelligent.
Also how does "rank" and even "MMR" determine the quality of an idea or a post? Please go troll somewhere else.
|
On January 11 2012 18:57 Nightshade_ wrote:
Why does everybody that thinks they're a critic seemingly believe rank and points determine the MMR of a player?
Rank is meaningless, (points) - (bonus pool) is basically MMR. It doesn't matter if you beat a top 8 masters player in a shitty division who only has about 400 points (there are divisions like this); this player is not high masters either.
I am looking at your profile right now and in your last 10 games you have been exclusively playing players with between 100 to 200 points after bonus pool is subtracted. This makes you low masters; maybe you could stretch the truth a tiny bit and call yourself low-mid masters, but you are nowhere near mid-high masters.
|
Seems nice and well planned at first glance, but I'm wondering: what if your buildings are attacked from the low ground with roaches / hydra? Maybe with some overlord giving upground vision? It seems like all those buildings really prevent you from gaining a good concave against a low ground army.
On top of that, until you get blink, isn't it too hard to move stalkers around and defend against mutalisk? And even with blink, blinking is better used to run after escaping mutalisk, not to get to the point where they are attacking, which would probably be needed here just to quickly get to the other side of this wall sometime.
|
|
|
![[image loading]](http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/277160_183120605091736_1822159_n.jpg)
>2012
>Still walling off against Zerg.
>ISHYGDDT
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Hey OP, tried using cyber core and gate as an initial wall instead of a pylon and a gate? Cuz if zergies rush roaches it's a pretty bad power down and supply block...
|
Seen some of these formations before on EU server, couple of protoss like elbegast for example love these crazy gateway - zealot - pylon diagonal blocks.
They work great in theory but if you misplace the zealot by a millimeter you die, obviously thats a human problem not the actual placement but if your going to play like 30 games a day or whatever you will screw this up and randomly lose occasionally.
|
Nice idea. The main problem i see however is simply the number of buildings required to create that choke. The thing is - you want early buildings spread around your base to check for nydus and later on in the game - if it gets to the point where the zerg is trying to get in your main, it would probably mean that the game is already lost.
|
I regret to say this, but I think the building placement advice as seen in the screenshots, while well intended, is not a good way to approach walling off. The building placement makes it so scouting your entire build is very easy, and leaves nearly no room to maneuver near the top of the ramp. This also gives zerg far too much space to maneuver, while restricting your own movement.
Assuming no FFE, our wall off should create a 1-hex opening as close to the top of the ramp as is possible. Other buildings/tech should be tucked away so they are not seen by units no the ramp. Furthermore, they should be spread about so that a single overlord (or a scan for that matter) will not reveal your entire tech/production.
My conclusion is that sentries remain very important in ramp defense, and without scouting a baneling bust, Protoss users should stick to using 2 buildings to wall-off (pylon+gate or gate+core) and add more walling if needed. Gate+core with a pylon in the back will be much more effective, and allow you to properly position your own units.
|
If you FFE there is not enough space to do this at the natural. Cool idea though!
Keep them coming dude
|
PvZ is FFE in 99% of the cases. Thus I will not defend at my Main Base Ramp but rather at my Natural
"But what if you lose your natural and have to defend in main?"
I can only see this happening in 2 scenarios:
1- Pretty late in the game your natural dies because your army is far away.
Well, if he gets into my main this building placement will only slow me down and he gets my main nexus+tech more easily.
2- Pretty early in the game, he faked an economic opening but went for early agression.
So, this is more interesting? It is not. Zerg killed my Nat and forge+cannons, this happens in the middle of WG research when I am on one Gateway. Will this one Gateway+CC placement help me stay alive? No. Either I get Sentries in time and FF the ramp so that Z can not attack me or I lose because my 1 Sentry + 1 Stalker (propably minus the Stalker) will not defend against his 5 Roaches. Not matter the building placement.
Reasons why I have not included other scenarios:
I think that if I lose my Natural in the "midgame", when I am on 2 Bases, I am dead.
Run-Bys
If I have to defend against a Ling run-by the usual Building placement that allows me to block with a Zealot is just as good.
If I have to defend a couple of Roaches, I will either get FF on my ramp or They will get in my Base because I have no Units there.
HOWEVER:
I love that you made this effort, only this way Protoss can evolve!
I think this particular strategy does not influence PvZ. Still, nice effort+very innovative thinking.
Oh, also it can potentially slow down your Stalkers that want to defend against Mutas, say:
he comes from the right to your main base with his first attack. You position your Stalkers there after you have scared the Mutas away. Now he hits your Natural from the top left (Spawn location as in the Screenshots). You will either have to walk around the buildings to be able to blink to your Natural (if you even have Blink) or you will have to blink over your buildings in order to walk down, you can not blink right under him and kill a few Mutas by surprise (at least not before all your little Probies have been brutally murdered )
|
|
|
Why would I constrict my unit movement like this? It's bad enough that I have to send units up through a choke at my ramp to defend a drop, so why would I extend that choke all the way to my nexus. Ranged units could just drop outside the little tunnel and they'd have an eternity before any units could get there. Blink stalkers could make it, but in that case, all this layout has accomplished is forcing your stalkers to fight alone having already burned their blink. There's a reason nobody does this.
|
Doesn't seem worth constricting movement in your main. You're much better off defending/holding the ramp rather than a corridor in your main that can be destroyed. Even if it was worth it in what scenarios could you even implement this? 1-base PvZ is pretty rare nowadays, and even if you are 1-basing you're not going to have so many buildings to make such a long corridor.
|
Canada13389 Posts
On January 11 2012 19:53 blah_blah wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2012 18:57 Nightshade_ wrote:
Why does everybody that thinks they're a critic seemingly believe rank and points determine the MMR of a player?
Rank is meaningless, (points) - (bonus pool) is basically MMR. It doesn't matter if you beat a top 8 masters player in a shitty division who only has about 400 points (there are divisions like this); this player is not high masters either. I am looking at your profile right now and in your last 10 games you have been exclusively playing players with between 100 to 200 points after bonus pool is subtracted. This makes you low masters; maybe you could stretch the truth a tiny bit and call yourself low-mid masters, but you are nowhere near mid-high masters.
Im going to let you know something Teamliquid and many of its users feel is important: Rank is not the key to giving good advice or having ideas.
While a higher ranked player might be able to give better advice in say something like a [G] thread, any rank player can start a [D] thread.
The OP actually has some good concepts and he clearly believes that as Protoss players, we should be thinking about our base layout more than we have been in the past.
Ideas in this [D] thread worth noting:
Pylons aren't easily accessible by melee units, buildings are double or triple powered, and robo units can't get blocked in.
Is this kind of building placement optimal in every situation? No. Are the concepts with regards to having pylons hard to kill with ling runbys in PvZ good? Heck yes.
This kind of idea, the buildings blocking pylons is super smart and while I might not make the alleyways, I might start surrounding small clusters of pylons with gateways so that ling run bys can't unpower them, and to make it harder for Mutas to unpower a lot of gateways at once. 4 pylons are harder to kill than one pylon giving me more time to defend my stuff.
I see some useful information here but the funnel idea while good for one base openers, is really not very good at all if you plan to FFE.
On January 11 2012 23:56 kcdc wrote:
Why would I constrict my unit movement like this? It's bad enough that I have to send units up through a choke at my ramp to defend a drop, so why would I extend that choke all the way to my nexus. Ranged units could just drop outside the little tunnel and they'd have an eternity before any units could get there. Blink stalkers could make it, but in that case, all this layout has accomplished is forcing your stalkers to fight alone having already burned their blink. There's a reason nobody does this.
Yeah, see that's my biggest issue with this as well. It funnels more than the enemy units and your own as well. However, as I pointed out above there is some merit to the inital idea that we should be thinking of good ways to sim city to prevent runbys in PvZ.
Though I really like the concept/idea of having no exposed pylons and primarily having large HP buildings defending the pylons making it harder to unpower your stuff.
|
Will be very very easy for zerg to scout what you are doing at least, hmm lol.
|
As a Zerg I would be pretty stoked to see a setup like this, I get to see all of your tech by just scouting the front, although after that disadvantage I do see the advantages of defending vs counters and drops and such.
|
On January 12 2012 03:42 BinxyBrown wrote:
As a Zerg I would be pretty stoked to see a setup like this, I get to see all of your tech by just scouting the front, although after that disadvantage I do see the advantages of defending vs counters and drops and such.
Actually it's pretty bad against drop sonce you don't have any sim city to help you (against zergs).
|
Very interesting post. I can see you put much time into this idea and thanks for sharing. Now my thoughts on it:
I don't really see much merit to using this that isn't gained through the use of the regular cyber-gateway wall. The choke created in your building placement stops zerglings (as does the regular walloff) but all the buildings around the ramp restrict your own unit movement and concave such that I feel the other way is better. I am also iffy about having a pylon as a main part of a wall, such that you will not be able to walloff completely against 6 pools or less.
The main part that I see is good about this setup is the pylon overlapping placement which prevents Artosis pylons from shutting down everything. That being said, I feel this can be achieved by just building pylons and buildings right next to each other next to your nexus or somewhere else in your base.
|
the 1 pylon + 1 gate + 1 zealot is not a wall off.
I used to do it a long time ago, after trying to run lings past it in Unit Tester.
When zerglings are attacking your lone zealot, he turns slightly, and if the zergling user issues enough move commands, they zerglings can slide by.
|
On January 12 2012 05:59 Trusty wrote:
the 1 pylon + 1 gate + 1 zealot is not a wall off.
I used to do it a long time ago, after trying to run lings past it in Unit Tester.
When zerglings are attacking your lone zealot, he turns slightly, and if the zergling user issues enough move commands, they zerglings can slide by.
didn't know that. I've had times with a regular wall off with a zealot where lings would run by because I was off a MM and my zealot turned to the side.
Again guys, it's a [D], not a [G]. Thanks for all the input.
|
i like the idea, but as a zerg i see more advantages to the zerg with this sim city.
-you lose your natural
-your 3rd and 4th will be vulnerable
-i see many nydus oppurtunities, but that can be fixed with a few pylon spreads.
-based on the screen shots, it looks like you will be sitting on 1 base for a long time while zerg can expand more freely.
-the forcefields are nice to prevent damage to your buildings, but i can also see it as you are stuck in 1 base. fake harrass and mass expand/upgrades is probably something that zerg shouldve done.
|
On January 12 2012 06:06 Nightshade_ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2012 05:59 Trusty wrote:
the 1 pylon + 1 gate + 1 zealot is not a wall off.
I used to do it a long time ago, after trying to run lings past it in Unit Tester.
When zerglings are attacking your lone zealot, he turns slightly, and if the zergling user issues enough move commands, they zerglings can slide by.
didn't know that. I've had times with a regular wall off with a zealot where lings would run by because I was off a MM and my zealot turned to the side. Again guys, it's a [D], not a [G]. Thanks for all the input.
maybe it's this, but not sure on reliability.
Original reason for me wanting to do 1g 1z 1p wall, was so I could hide my cyber core.
If you can get 1g1z1p wall to work all the time, then it will be a huge break-through for gateway openings. Seriously, would be so great being able to hide CyCore.
|
On January 12 2012 05:59 Trusty wrote:
the 1 pylon + 1 gate + 1 zealot is not a wall off.
I used to do it a long time ago, after trying to run lings past it in Unit Tester.
When zerglings are attacking your lone zealot, he turns slightly, and if the zergling user issues enough move commands, they zerglings can slide by.
I think that bug might have been patched. I remember there beeing a way for Z to get the Zealot out of position about a year ago but I think Blizzard patched that. I'm not sure though, you may still be right.
|
On January 12 2012 06:50 Trusty wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2012 06:06 Nightshade_ wrote:On January 12 2012 05:59 Trusty wrote:
the 1 pylon + 1 gate + 1 zealot is not a wall off.
I used to do it a long time ago, after trying to run lings past it in Unit Tester.
When zerglings are attacking your lone zealot, he turns slightly, and if the zergling user issues enough move commands, they zerglings can slide by.
didn't know that. I've had times with a regular wall off with a zealot where lings would run by because I was off a MM and my zealot turned to the side. Again guys, it's a [D], not a [G]. Thanks for all the input. maybe it's this, but not sure on reliability. Original reason for me wanting to do 1g 1z 1p wall, was so I could hide my cyber core. If you can get 1g1z1p wall to work all the time, then it will be a huge break-through for gateway openings. Seriously, would be so great being able to hide CyCore.
YOu could make a 1Z 2P 1G wall, you'll need 2nd Pylon anyways, at about the same time. It's just very weak to banelings, but so is 1 pylon 1zealot.
|
i love this thread not because of the building placement but seeing people still trying out new stuff.
Yes i have tried something similar to this since season 1. The problem is that the mobily of the army is fairly limited plus if you have enough FF to held off such a rush you should be ahead already. Trading building damage for army damage at that point is no longer needed, not even counting the fact that building take much longer to replace. Another problem is the higher ground concave.building placement like this simply minimize your fire power of range units in your army.
|
On January 12 2012 06:52 ToastieNL wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2012 06:50 Trusty wrote:On January 12 2012 06:06 Nightshade_ wrote:On January 12 2012 05:59 Trusty wrote:
the 1 pylon + 1 gate + 1 zealot is not a wall off.
I used to do it a long time ago, after trying to run lings past it in Unit Tester.
When zerglings are attacking your lone zealot, he turns slightly, and if the zergling user issues enough move commands, they zerglings can slide by.
didn't know that. I've had times with a regular wall off with a zealot where lings would run by because I was off a MM and my zealot turned to the side. Again guys, it's a [D], not a [G]. Thanks for all the input. maybe it's this, but not sure on reliability. Original reason for me wanting to do 1g 1z 1p wall, was so I could hide my cyber core. If you can get 1g1z1p wall to work all the time, then it will be a huge break-through for gateway openings. Seriously, would be so great being able to hide CyCore. YOu could make a 1Z 2P 1G wall, you'll need 2nd Pylon anyways, at about the same time. It's just very weak to banelings, but so is 1 pylon 1zealot.
yes 2P is good too, but.... the core is not hidden then because 2nd pylon is at ramp, and after 2nd pylon you want to place core
|
For all of those confused. THIS IS NOT AN OPENING, THIS IS A DESIGN FOR THE WAY OF PLACING BUILDINGS DOWN. YOU CAN FFE INTO 7 BASE AND DO THIS AT EACH OF YOUR BASES FOR ALL I CARE, THIS IS NOT A STRATEGY. It's meant to be a wall for defense should you need it.
|
it is technically an opening on how to defend early harass... since your initial building placements are important
|
I guess it can be based off of interpretation, wasn't meant to sound that way.
|
Good Idea
Proper building placement solves problems, without you investing any resources. 
Terrans should see this too. I heard they have space problems in the lategame xD ...
|
I really wouldn't mind this for something like a 4th base or something but that design in your main or natural really constricts your unit movement. It would really be hard to get around if Mutas and drops start happening. And generally if they get into your main and you can't stop it with your army, I think you lost anyway. ><"
|
The main reason I thought of this design was for early all ins, very common recently the roach ling all in. It seems that when zerg busts down your wall, they have control of YOUR base opposed to you controlling them in your base.
|
Im doing this for PvP now yo
|
Watch MC replays, he always uses optimal building placement for every matchup on every map.
|
This is cool, I like this idea.
Sorry so many people are clueless and don't understand what the purpose of your thread was.
|
On January 13 2012 12:42 Oreo7 wrote:
This is cool, I like this idea.
Sorry so many people are clueless and don't understand what the purpose of your thread was.
Hah thanks, hope it works out well for you, tell me how it does!
|
Interesting idea, but I would strongly disagree with this design. It is very important to deny scouting. With this design you give your opponent as much information as you possibly could by having all of your buildings at the very top of the ramp. One ling that runs up the ramp can see all of your buildings. Even if you are hiding one crucial tech building, you have still let him confirm the number of gateways and pylons that you have built, so he can already estimate supply.
The reason that you see pros walling off with as few buildings as possible is to deny as much scouting information as possible early game.
|
On January 11 2012 14:42 stomp2anewbeat wrote:
i like it... the only issue i have is the fact that i ffe 100% of pvz... and the last few ive 1 based i failed horribly... so this is cool and all but how could i incorporate it into my ffe style? take shakuras especially for example... the ramp at the bottom is bigger and there isnt as much hallway room. i guess i could do this when taking a 6th in the other main... but thats ridiculously late in the game
This. EVERYONE FFE's every PvZ regardless of map.
|
Bling bust = GG also he coulda sniped core roaches were just a moved. Zerg was bad.
|
On January 13 2012 14:41 samthesaluki wrote:
Bling bust = GG also he coulda sniped core roaches were just a moved. Zerg was bad.
LOL, you didn't even read the post, and that makes me laugh
|
Building placement is important in every matchup and if you place ANY of your buildings randomly you're not doing it correctly.
BTW. if you're doing it like this guy in op suggests, you're also doing it wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/9qj6u.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VYYTt.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lNUI9.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/zX2t6.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/aAIxS.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fobmb.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/wtmNB.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ezzK6.jpg)
