[D][G]Split Theory - Page 2

uobradbury

United States45 Posts

February 24 2012 23:15 GMT

#21

i used to be a big fan of the patrol splitting ( still use it but try not to). Especially doing a 2 racks pressure with about 8 marines sometimes zerg will go blings and if you do the individual splitting as opposed to the the patrol splitting i find that I always have a few marines left which can clean up the remaining lings that he sends in.

phiinix

United States1169 Posts

February 25 2012 00:19 GMT

#22

On February 24 2012 17:46 Hickorynut wrote:

Why You Should Care
Lets work through a quick example. Pro X can split with 240 APM (lower than max apm because of precision required). If Pro X has 10 seconds to split marines because he sees banelings coming and starts running, then he has 40 actions.
2*marineCount = 40
/2 /2
marineCount = 20
That is to say Pro X can perfectly split 20 marines or at least split his marine army into 20 pieces. This doesn't seem like an unreasonable situation to me, and a 20 piece marine army takes at least 40 banelings to kill (if non are shot down by marines at all). To me this seems far more effective than a patrol split.

Excuse me? Is that a reasonable assumption? I'd like to see a game where a pro has 10 seconds of time to just sit and split his marines and just wait for the banelings.

You're essentially using theory crafting to state that perfect marine positioning beats out the computer ai of patrol. I don't see how this is a useful argument at all.

roflcopter420

Sweden168 Posts

February 25 2012 00:44 GMT

#23

+ Show Spoiler +

no manual splitting is better

MysteryMeat1

United States3292 Posts

February 25 2012 01:23 GMT

#24

Excuse me? Is that a reasonable assumption? I'd like to see a game where a pro has 10 seconds of time to just sit and split his marines and just wait for the banelings.

I think their was a game where puma was playing against a zerg, he scans his base sees banelings coming. And then splits every single one of his marines behind his wall at his natural or main. Banelings come in, destroy the wall only to find every marine already perfectly split.

If i remember correctly puma was behind and won the game. so it does happen

ShatterZer0

United States1843 Posts

February 25 2012 01:41 GMT

#25

At the very top levels of play this is only worth it when already multi tasking in multiple places. If you have the APM of Demuslim or MKP you patently SHOULDN'T use this method in main battles. Why? Because it gives you less base control. Players of their caliber don't use this, not because it isn't useful, but because their normal mouse speed is faster and more flexible than this method.

In general, players SHOULD use this method when they don't have the APM to spare, but I don't think it should become a crutch or the vogue for Pros.

Belial88

United States5217 Posts

February 25 2012 02:39 GMT

#26

MKP does not usually patrol split, but sometimes does. Some pros do it. If you have to react quickly, it's good to patrol split real quick, and then fix them. If you are prepared, even by a split second, then you can split 'better', but if it's an OH SHIT moment, patrol can be useful, because it's patrol quick, then fix, whereas otherwise it's intensive at first.

boSeok

Canada177 Posts

February 25 2012 02:41 GMT

#27

patrol is very situational. Pure baneling vs marine will work, but with zerglings or mutas marines will stop fire at the zerglings and mutas so it wont work. and most players use manual split because IF patrol did help you have to do manual split anyways what is the point of wasting apm on 2 clicks and trying to get the click at the optimum spot.

Prev 1 2 All

Please or register to reply.

[D][G]Split Theory - Page 2

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming