|
On October 31 2012 21:02 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2012 09:50 Ver wrote:On October 31 2012 03:41 Thezzy wrote:
In all my matchups I prefer to put on some pressure early on and expand behind that rather than a 1rax expand.
The pressure doesn't need to kill my opponent but I feel uncomfortable leaving my opponent alone for any length of time.
For TvT I'm currently thinking about using the 3 fast reapers build (12 rax, 13 gas, 16rax, 18 orbital, gets 3 reapers at 5:00) but I was wondering if you know of any other TvT builds that put on some pressure (preferably before or at 7:00) without delaying an expansion horribly much.
I can think of a Cloakshee Expand and maybe a Hellion drop, but do you know which early TvT aggression builds are currently the most stable? I don't think reapers have been good for a long time; they are predictable on non taldarim maps and everyone knows how to defend it now. Probably the most stable and one of the safest TvT builds is gas rax banshee expand. However, you can't always be aggressive as generally you need to keep the banshee at home to hold off elevators. A slightly older variant is thestc's build where you make 3 hellions before cc if they rax expo, then when you send the banshee into their main you run. There should be a replay of him vs drewbie on Daybreak from the first MLG Arena. A newer version is Fantasy's build which I outlined above (utillized against major and kawaiirice in MvP, maybe in one of his proleague tvt's not sure). Thanks, I use a Banshee opening in my TvP and I'm quite comfortable with it so I'll try that out in TvT. One quick question though, why gas first? It would seem to make it obvious for my opponent that I am going Banshee whereas 12rax, 13 gas would leave some ambiguity.
Gas first could mean reactor hellion drop, marine/hellion pressure, banshee expand, cloaked banshee, or 1-1-1. If anything, gas first leaves more ambiguity because you'll have your factory/port faster than 13 gas, leaving him less time to scout.
|
United States2186 Posts
On November 06 2012 05:39 Wicek wrote:In TvT matchup I use Thorzains build (Day9 daily #394). Question is, what is the correct/proper response to scouting CC first into bio/tank play. When it is 10 minutes, opponent is on more SCVs, similar amount of marines, medivacs popping out at same time. Difference is that he is on +1 +1 upgrades for bio, while my +1 attack is not finished. Then the game goes into expanding, but I can not approach my opponent when he has better upgrades and defenders advantage. Losing marines vs marines fight can really turn into snowball effect. Is going for fast third an option here? Delay medivacs to catch up on upgrades? I know it is a bit detailed situation, but would like to know what to do next time I face it on ladder.
Triple cc is the strongest build if they rax expand, and on larger maps its usually worth it to place it at the third itself and float it back if they do a 2 base timing (which is almost an auto loss for the 2 baser, as the 3 baser has more units, superior econ, and better upgrades after maybe a 30-60 second window if they cut scvs).
If you are both doing rax expo 3 rax medivac, except you are getting single upgrades and he is getting double upgrades, you need to leverage the asymmetry to take advantage of your strengths. This means that you avoid fighting when he is 1-1 to your 0-1, but instead wait for when you hit 1-1, as his 2-2 will not be done yet. At this point he will have sunk a lot of money into upgrades that have you not, which means you will have at least 2 more tanks than him (very important at this stage), and thus you must use that timing window to either force a fight or use the threat of a fight to gain a strong position or hurt his econ. The tank advantage generally compensates for upgrades, which means its crucial you fight sieged and don't ever engage piecemeal.
Also in even scenarios you are never supposed to be aggressive with marine/medivac only. Not only does it make you vulnerable to counter drops, but you also are almost guaranteed to lose if you attack him on his side of the map (he can prepare a better position most likely and he will have more units due to rally distance). And like you said, if you lose at all, it spirals out of control very quickly.
|
Hi ver, this is an amazing thread and I want to say I really appreciate what your doing here. I had two questions both relating to TvZ.
First I was hoping for some thoughts on ghost usage vs infestors. Lately I have been experimenting with adding a ghost academy as soon as i scout infestor tech. treating them alot like high Templar in tvp. I've been having pretty good results with it at a decently high masters level. However as far as I know, if ghosts are incorporated into the matchup at the pro level it is usually only in the late-late game. I have not seen a game where they are incorporated earlier on off of your third base. I was wondering what your stance on this as a pro player is.
Secondly I was also wondering how you deal with players who decide to simply go mass baneling in the mid game, investing nothing or very little into lair tech. I have been finding it frustrating because a zerg who is saving gas for banelings feels alot like a zerg who is saving gas for infestor tech, then all of a sudden if i don't have alot of tanks i just die. I don't really want to be restricted to making alot of tanks every game just in case they happen to go for this style. How should i be scouting/feeling this style out early enough to respond to it? Instead of having to blindly prepare for it just in case.
|
United States2186 Posts
On November 07 2012 16:18 Micromancer wrote:
Hi ver, this is an amazing thread and I want to say I really appreciate what your doing here. I had two questions both relating to TvZ.
First I was hoping for some thoughts on ghost usage vs infestors. Lately I have been experimenting with adding a ghost academy as soon as i scout infestor tech. treating them alot like high Templar in tvp. I've been having pretty good results with it at a decently high masters level. However as far as I know, if ghosts are incorporated into the matchup at the pro level it is usually only in the late-late game. I have not seen a game where they are incorporated earlier on off of your third base. I was wondering what your stance on this as a pro player is.
Secondly I was also wondering how you deal with players who decide to simply go mass baneling in the mid game, investing nothing or very little into lair tech. I have been finding it frustrating because a zerg who is saving gas for banelings feels alot like a zerg who is saving gas for infestor tech, then all of a sudden if i don't have alot of tanks i just die. I don't really want to be restricted to making alot of tanks every game just in case they happen to go for this style. How should i be scouting/feeling this style out early enough to respond to it? Instead of having to blindly prepare for it just in case.
Thanks 
For a long time after snipe nerf I kept trying to rely on ghosts instead of vikings to beat hive tech because vikings obviously are a terrible unit against it. However, it was more of a gimmick than anything else due to the prohibitive cost. 3-4 base ghosts means you can't get viking raven. The only way you can beat bl/infestor without viking/raven is by sniping or emping every infestor then getting a big envelopment with marines. Unfortunately, this can be prevented simply by making 1-2 overseers or even just fungaling your ghosts if they are paying attention. Nuke harass is absolutely amazing and is so worth incorporating in, it's just, how do you avoid automatically dying to the 10-12 brood + infestor push that is almost impossible to survive against with viking/initial ravens anyway. I think if you have a really strong midgame initiative it might be possible to go ghosts first because theoretically you can keep him from attacking by nonstop nuking, giving you room to outmaneuver him and try to nail his infestors, but it feels too easy for Zerg to just spam overseers/spores to stop it once you get your initial few nukes off. But if you are behind, ghosts are impossible (then again if you're behind you're usually dead anyway).
However, ghosts are probably the optimal choice against ling/infestor/ultra armies. Gumiho's game vs b4 on daybreak from this season's code A is a good example of this. When they go ultras they have nothing to keep your ghosts out of infestor range, or even stop you from dropping ghosts on top like he did. And ultra/ling is pretty bad if it has no fungal/IT support. This also lets you reduce the number of tanks, which are actually very poor versus ultras, and focus more on thor/bio.
I experimented a lot with tankless styles (in particular bio/blue flame) and found every time after much frustration and trial/error that tanks are just better. Bio/blue flame is good vs infestor/ling but you cannot beat muta/ling/bling without tank/thor. Of course this does not mean you have to focus on tank production at the expense of initiative and bio/mediavcs early on, just that you need to incorporate them into your army for a 2-2 timing.
The answer to this depends on which kind of baneling timing. Are we talking about the 10-11 minute slight drone cut 3 base super aggressive ling/bane? This one is basically an allin because if you hold it you can keep pressuring the Zerg, stop his 4th, and keep forcing him to make banelings which suck. Banelings are absolutely abysmal at trying to fight in the confines of a Terran base, so the wisest move is to rally your marines to the confines of your nat, make any kind of wall needed, stagger marines out, and pull scvs to the main if necessary. Meanwhile your hellion/banshee should be kiting and whacking as much as they can. If you can manage to keep your hellions alive he can never go up your ramp, so if you pull everything into the main he can't actually do damage and wasted tons of gas for nothing. I think the best example of holding this is Taeja vs Lucky on Entombed Valley, from a code s group awhile back. Lucky makes probably 40 banelings on 3 base econ very early and does almost nothing with them despite facing only bio units.
If you are referring to something that occurs a minute or two later, it shouldn't be much of a problem. You should have some idea of what he's going from suiciding a marine to find his unit comp or just general initiative so all that's needed is to have your units pre spread off creep. Even if he kills your army, so long as he loses most of his, you come out ahead.
In general I think you should be overjoyed that your opponent is making any banelings at all: it means his broodlords will come later. I generally evaluate my position in TvZ based on the number of lair gas units I've forced to him to spend. To give an example, against optimal Zerg play if you don't force/kill any lair gas units he will have broods 1545-16 mins. Each army of banelings that he makes (10-20 generally) + infestors that you kill sets the initial 6-8 broods back another minute or so, which makes it harder for him to get out of this spiral so long as you keep pressuring. You can win games vs muta/ling/bling players despite losing every battle simply because you just drain all their gas and they can never transition out.
|
This is just something I've found on ladder recently versus protoss: I had just came back after a 4 month hiatus, and was immediately shocked at how well my outdated build worked versus protoss; I believe that I had used MKP's 2 rax marine marauder push with early concussive. This build was meant to be a poking push, but could also be used to outright kill 1 gate expands while establishing your own natural, as they were considered "greedy" builds back then. I have also noticed from watching pros that 1 gate expands are now fairly standard in PvT, and I'm wondering why terrans don't use the old timing to punish it?
Link to the build:
http://www.gosubuilds.com/terran-build-orders-2/terran-vs-protoss/2-rax/
|
Hi,
I am diamond trying to make masters. I focus on stable, standard play as I believe that at my level macro and micro outweigh novel strategies. Against Z I do MVP's IEM mech build, bomber build against P, and I've been doing Thorzain's bio TvT. I was wondering if there is a better build that itsn't gimmicky to use in all of my TvT games. Thanks!
|
hi,
i want to change and adjust my opening depending on the opening of the Zerg in TvZ. I always mech.
My build orders are so far CC first into Reactor Hellion+Cloak Banshee+2 Armory and a 2 Fac BF Hellion Push.
What build should I prefer against gasless and gas opening of the Zerg? Maybe if the zerg gets gas i should use a banshee opening to be "more" safe and if the zerg uses a gasless opening a 2 Fac BF Push?
|
|
|
On November 08 2012 15:21 ThatAintFalco wrote:This is just something I've found on ladder recently versus protoss: I had just came back after a 4 month hiatus, and was immediately shocked at how well my outdated build worked versus protoss; I believe that I had used MKP's 2 rax marine marauder push with early concussive. This build was meant to be a poking push, but could also be used to outright kill 1 gate expands while establishing your own natural, as they were considered "greedy" builds back then. I have also noticed from watching pros that 1 gate expands are now fairly standard in PvT, and I'm wondering why terrans don't use the old timing to punish it? Link to the build: http://www.gosubuilds.com/terran-build-orders-2/terran-vs-protoss/2-rax/
2 rax does not “punish” 1 gate expand, at least not with the average current distance between bases. You can force one or several rounds or Warp depending on how well the initial fight went, but you can only get the Nexus if the Protoss player makes a mistake and/or reacts incorrectly.
I use this build from time to time on Entombed Valley on ladder, taking advantage of the 4 spawns and the 4 close patches (which means I can get a second Barracks before OC without being scouted if he went the wrong way with his scouting Probe), but you don't get much out of it. Even when you kill the Nexus, you are in danger because Protoss can just outproduce you with 5 gates or 4 gates Immortal pushes. I had several games in which I killed the Nexus but still lost to the various all-ins Protoss did as a follow-up despite having 4-5 Bunkers and SCVs ready. Most of the time I don't kill the Nexus and ends up roughly even because of some Probe kills (when Protoss pulls some to prevent your Bunker from being completed) and/or delayed Robotics, but I believe with ideal Protoss reaction you're definitely at a disadvantage and you're in an awful position if he goes something like Immortal + 6g pushes because your economy does not allow you to run several Barracks and Medivacs and upgrades and Bunkers the way a 1 rax expand does.
On November 08 2012 18:24 saaaa wrote:
hi,
i want to change and adjust my opening depending on the opening of the Zerg in TvZ. I always mech.
My build orders are so far CC first into Reactor Hellion+Cloak Banshee+2 Armory and a 2 Fac BF Hellion Push.
What build should I prefer against gasless and gas opening of the Zerg? Maybe if the zerg gets gas i should use a banshee opening to be "more" safe and if the zerg uses a gasless opening a 2 Fac BF Push?
Thing is, you can't know. Both gas and gasless openings can mean anything—well, not anything because you can rule out certain things depending on the absence or the timing of the gas, but upon scouting gas or no gas you definitely cannot know if he intends to be agressive or not. If Zerg starts gasless it can still mean a Roach attack (with 2 gases taken when Zerglings are out) or a Roach Baneling bust later, and you can only deduce certain things when your two first Hellions poke his natural, by which time you should have already committed to your second Factory or Starport anyway.
The main advantage with Cloak Banshees is that you can fly over the Zerg bases (avoiding Spore areas of course) and see what tech he's heading for instead of blindly scanning and then cursing because he happened to make his tech in another area. Besides, BFs pushes are simply stopped dead by proper building placement: one Queen + one Spine + two Evolution Chambers (or additional buildings if the entrance is wide) means you can't get through. I only use BFH openings against Zergs who mainly use Speedlings for defence, and even then I feel like I'm just gambling... You know, that awful feeling when you see the Queen/Spine/Evolution Chamber wall with the other Queens behind having enough energy to chain Transfuse the Queen at the wall.
|
Great thread Ver, we need more of these
As for my question, I see a lot of CC first and 1rax expand builds in TvZ, but not much else.
I generally prefer to be aggressive early on and expand behind that aggression than to let Zerg build up to that magical drone count uncontested.
Instead of going straight for the expansion first, could going Hellion first (standard Hellion expand), then CC and then Banshees still apply enough pressure on Zerg early on to force some non-drones or Spines or would it just delay the CC?
12/14 rax would be the other opening I'm considering but Zerg seems to be able to hold that off easily using just a Queen and a few lings.
The only other option I see besides those would be a Reaper opening but I'm unsure if they are still good with range 5 Queens or a Cloak Banshee CC but I think the CC is delayed too much then.
Do you feel it is required for Terran to go CC first/1rax in TvZ or are there more aggressive openings possible?
|
On November 09 2012 20:23 Thezzy wrote:Great thread Ver, we need more of these As for my question, I see a lot of CC first and 1rax expand builds in TvZ, but not much else. I generally prefer to be aggressive early on and expand behind that aggression than to let Zerg build up to that magical drone count uncontested. Instead of going straight for the expansion first, could going Hellion first (standard Hellion expand), then CC and then Banshees still apply enough pressure on Zerg early on to force some non-drones or Spines or would it just delay the CC?
Sadly Queen range 5 made Reactor Hellion expands obsolete. You can no longer physically prevent the Drone from reaching the third to expand, you can no longer prevent creep spread and Queens can defend on their own without Spines or Zerglings, so you're just left with a later expand for nothing.
On November 09 2012 20:23 Thezzy wrote:
12/14 rax would be the other opening I'm considering but Zerg seems to be able to hold that off easily using just a Queen and a few lings.
And, worst of all, they can defend 12/14 while still going on with their gas opening, which leaves you in a very awful spot afterwards. Whenever I play 2 rax, I only play 11/11 (forward or proxy) as it forces no gas (or they have to sacrifice their natural if they wish to mine), one or two Spines, only one Queen for a while and several pairs of Zerglings. Obviously you have to play your 11/11 differently if you wish to follow with a macro game or if you want to all-in (this ambiguity precisely being one of the strengths of this opening).
|
My 11/11 is probably one of the worst on the planet, any general advice? I usually do a proxy and then get surrounded, and I'm never ever sure if I'm ahead or not.
And how different is an 11/11 in TvZ vs TvP in terms of execution (other than fighting at the nat vs fighting at the main)
|
deleted, see earlier post from me
|
Is it viable to go sky + mech on two bases? I'm a diamond Terran and I've been trying different mixtures of unit combinations against Zerg.
|
Glad to see this thread still alive.
A few new questions (im high master terran):
When playing TvP, what is the logic in doing a 1rax FE and making a second depot before expanding to trap a scouting probe in your base? Is it because it prevents the same probe from planting pylons or some cheesy building near your base, or does it get you economically ahead/even?
When 2raxing either protoss or zerg, what is the proper micro really? People have been talking bout hold position micro of the workers and I just attack the drones with scvs -> retreat -> repeat while the marines shoot in the back.
|
On November 10 2012 22:49 herMan wrote:
Glad to see this thread still alive.
A few new questions (im high master terran):
When playing TvP, what is the logic in doing a 1rax FE and making a second depot before expanding to trap a scouting probe in your base? Is it because it prevents the same probe from planting pylons or some cheesy building near your base, or does it get you economically ahead/even?
When 2raxing either protoss or zerg, what is the proper micro really? People have been talking bout hold position micro of the workers and I just attack the drones with scvs -> retreat -> repeat while the marines shoot in the back.
Depot before expand would allow you to continue marine production, which means you can delay your bunker in favor of earlier additional rax and gasses.
I would imagine that trapping the probe is an added perk since Toss can't be sure whether you're expanding or marine scv all-inning him.
|
United States2186 Posts
On November 10 2012 22:49 herMan wrote:
Glad to see this thread still alive.
A few new questions (im high master terran):
When playing TvP, what is the logic in doing a 1rax FE and making a second depot before expanding to trap a scouting probe in your base? Is it because it prevents the same probe from planting pylons or some cheesy building near your base, or does it get you economically ahead/even?
When 2raxing either protoss or zerg, what is the proper micro really? People have been talking bout hold position micro of the workers and I just attack the drones with scvs -> retreat -> repeat while the marines shoot in the back.
Thanks Keep asking away!
The main reason to do this is to make the protoss afraid of a 2nd proxied rax so they aren't so greedy with their nexus, build, and chronos. The logic is that if the Terran would do something so inefficient (1 probe is definitely not worth it) then they might be hiding a cheese because now his probe can't scout your expo.
I'm hardly an expert on 11/11, which is a big deficit in my play, but in general you want to keep your scvs as close to your marines as possible so they form a shield. Ideally you want your scvs to take all the damage, so in the end he loses his critical mass while you can keep building up your marine count. In these engagements marine power increases exponentially from 3->5 so if you can trade off workers and reach that point, you're in a strong position.
On November 10 2012 13:33 sicueft wrote:
Is it viable to go sky + mech on two bases? I'm a diamond Terran and I've been trying different mixtures of unit combinations against Zerg.
Nope  If you mean banshees + mech, then just do the normal triple cc build that Flash does all the time. You can see it a lot in MvP. You should never be doing 2 base builds TvZ in general. You can't actually add ravens/BCs to your army until you have at minimum 4 if not 5 base income because they are so slow and expensive.
Yup for good reason, it's really strong and safe. The best way to get advantages for it is with triple cc, as that's the coinflip (this is how Mvp beat Rain on Antiga) and play as greedy as possible. It's a build that is designed to neutralize pressure and make sure the Protoss can enter the lategame. So make sure you plant your 3rd cc at your 3rd, rush that armory and 2nd ebay, and grab a fast 4th. You should be able to pressure a lot later as you'll max first and it will be awkward for him to take a 4th.
edit: Monk informed me that Rain's build is slightly different as he rushes charge, but if you are going triple cc it should end up roughly the same either way.
Also look at Parting vs Mvp (gsl semis) on Metro, where Parting fails to hold a simple 4 medivac drop. Even this build is a little bit fragile if you can knock out observers as he relies 100% on intercepting drops; once they land in that brief window before charge finishes you can really hurt if not win outright.
On November 08 2012 15:45 bmoneyAK wrote:
Hi,
I am diamond trying to make masters. I focus on stable, standard play as I believe that at my level macro and micro outweigh novel strategies. Against Z I do MVP's IEM mech build, bomber build against P, and I've been doing Thorzain's bio TvT. I was wondering if there is a better build that itsn't gimmicky to use in all of my TvT games. Thanks!
Thorzain's build is not gimmicky, it's just very razor's edge. Mess up a bit and you die. Gas first banshee expo or rax cc double gas fact port are considered the 'safe' macro builds.
On November 08 2012 15:21 ThatAintFalco wrote:This is just something I've found on ladder recently versus protoss: I had just came back after a 4 month hiatus, and was immediately shocked at how well my outdated build worked versus protoss; I believe that I had used MKP's 2 rax marine marauder push with early concussive. This build was meant to be a poking push, but could also be used to outright kill 1 gate expands while establishing your own natural, as they were considered "greedy" builds back then. I have also noticed from watching pros that 1 gate expands are now fairly standard in PvT, and I'm wondering why terrans don't use the old timing to punish it? Link to the build: http://www.gosubuilds.com/terran-build-orders-2/terran-vs-protoss/2-rax/
This is one of those instances where you'll be able to beat baddies with an inferior build as they rarely ever see it and it's easy to punish sloppy mistakes with, but once you get higher the only time it will ever work is as a coinflip where the Protoss rushes robo or chronos probes too much.
|
On November 11 2012 10:18 Ver wrote:Show nested quote +On November 10 2012 22:49 herMan wrote:
Glad to see this thread still alive.
A few new questions (im high master terran):
When playing TvP, what is the logic in doing a 1rax FE and making a second depot before expanding to trap a scouting probe in your base? Is it because it prevents the same probe from planting pylons or some cheesy building near your base, or does it get you economically ahead/even?
When 2raxing either protoss or zerg, what is the proper micro really? People have been talking bout hold position micro of the workers and I just attack the drones with scvs -> retreat -> repeat while the marines shoot in the back. Thanks Keep asking away! The main reason to do this is to make the protoss afraid of a 2nd proxied rax so they aren't so greedy with their nexus, build, and chronos. The logic is that if the Terran would do something so inefficient (1 probe is definitely not worth it) then they might be hiding a cheese because now his probe can't scout your expo. I'm hardly an expert on 11/11, which is a big deficit in my play, but in general you want to keep your scvs as close to your marines as possible so they form a shield. Ideally you want your scvs to take all the damage, so in the end he loses his critical mass while you can keep building up your marine count. In these engagements marine power increases exponentially from 3->5 so if you can trade off workers and reach that point, you're in a strong position.
so basically don't bother with 12/14, and instead if you want 2rax, go with 11/11
what about 12/12 or 11/12 variants? just wondering.
(hmm I should probably learn to proxy my first rax even when I'm 1rax fe'ing in the first place too...)
EDIT: also what's the difference between macro and allin plays on 11/11, I know before you said it's like 3 scvs for more macro version and 5(+) scvs for the all-in version (in which case why don't you bring all except for like 2 o.o)
but what else?
On November 11 2012 10:18 Ver wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2012 15:45 bmoneyAK wrote:
Hi,
I am diamond trying to make masters. I focus on stable, standard play as I believe that at my level macro and micro outweigh novel strategies. Against Z I do MVP's IEM mech build, bomber build against P, and I've been doing Thorzain's bio TvT. I was wondering if there is a better build that itsn't gimmicky to use in all of my TvT games. Thanks! Thorzain's build is not gimmicky, it's just very razor's edge. Mess up a bit and you die. Gas first banshee expo or rax cc double gas fact port are considered the 'safe' macro builds.
also wondering about this
so
- rax gas banshee
and
- rax gas marine hellion drop
aren't considered safe macro builds? :/
|
I know this has been discussed before, but in what order dou you engage a lategame protoss army composition the best way?
I usually try to (in that order):
blanket emp's with (hopefully leading) ghostst
shift-click vikings trough all collossus
spread army
stim
kite
|
On November 10 2012 01:28 Chaggi wrote:
My 11/11 is probably one of the worst on the planet, any general advice? I usually do a proxy and then get surrounded, and I'm never ever sure if I'm ahead or not.
And how different is an 11/11 in TvZ vs TvP in terms of execution (other than fighting at the nat vs fighting at the main)
On November 10 2012 22:49 herMan wrote:
When 2raxing either protoss or zerg, what is the proper micro really? People have been talking bout hold position micro of the workers and I just attack the drones with scvs -> retreat -> repeat while the marines shoot in the back.
On November 11 2012 11:14 zhurai wrote:
so basically don't bother with 12/14, and instead if you want 2rax, go with 11/11
what about 12/12 or 11/12 variants? just wondering.
(hmm I should probably learn to proxy my first rax even when I'm 1rax fe'ing in the first place too...)
EDIT: also what's the difference between macro and allin plays on 11/11, I know before you said it's like 3 scvs for more macro version and 5(+) scvs for the all-in version (in which case why don't you bring all except for like 2 o.o)
but what else?
Ah, 11/11. One could probably write a book about this single opening. So many parameters, so many subtleties.
The way you play 11/11 (against Zerg) depends on whether you want to all-in or pressure heavily. Naturally, the closer your Barracks are to his base, the more SCVs you pull, the more SCVs you cut (to start Bunkers earlier), the more you have to damage.
Having your first 3 Marines surrounded is the thing you want to avoid as it stops dead your attack. They have to survive until Marines 4 and 5 join the party (after which you kill workers much faster); it means that you have to temporarily retreat if your opponent pulls 10+ workers while your reinforcing SCVs are still on the way.
Whenever I play 11/11 with the intention to get a macro game I now build my first Bunker at the bottom of his natural's ramp. I think there was a SuperNova vs Snute game on Ohana @ Campus Party Europe which exemplifies this; the Bunker at the bottom of the ramp supports your attack (preventing Zerglings/Drones from chasing your Marines too far) while containing the Zerg should you fail to complete a second Bunker in front of the Hatchery.
If you want to play macro behind a proxy (proxy ≠ forward; say it's proxy when your Barracks are around his Tower [Ohana, CK], forward when it's on your natural's ramp or slightly more advanced), you have to be more conservative with your Marines because you don't want to be in this awful spot in which you have to fly back both your Barracks without any Marines behind your wall. (If you don't want to all-in, be sure to build your Depots as part of the wall.)
Knowing whether you're ahead or not can be difficult, yes, as it depends on many things: how many Drones you killed, how many SCVs you lost (beware, unintentionnally cutting SCVs because you're busy microing also really hurts), did you retain map control, are you able to build your expand directly on your natural, how many Spines did he make, how many Zerglings did you force, did he delay his first Queen, etc. Counting Drone kills can help; Zergs have 15-17 Drones (to 13 SCVs before OC is done) then usually go full Zerglings until your attack is stopped. Each completed Spine also counts as a Drone kill. If you don't see a Queen spawning at ~4'50-5'00 at the natural it also indicates that the Zerg is likely still at the Stone Age.
You don't bring all SCVs but 2 when all-inning because you need a bit more to afford an additional Depot and constant Marine production. As far as I remember pulling 7 additional SCVs (+2 that built Barracks = 9 total) already makes it difficult to afford a second Supply Depot. See Polt vs Symbol @ the IEM Guangzhou Korean Qualifier, both games.
SCV micro is a mixture of attacking, retreating and holding position to protect Marines. You have to use corners + SCVs to make sure your Marines are not going to be surrounded and killed.
Against Protoss you don't have to ask yourself those questions as you're essentially forced into proxy 11/11 with several additional SCVs pulled because of Stalkers reigning supreme against Marines / walls not protecting you / Warpgate easily killing you should you fail. I play them the way Mvp did against Squirtle, with Supply Call first (you don't build your first Depot as part of the wall to save minerals) instead of MULE first: since you have to pull many SCVs and you have to start your Bunker near his ramp as soon as possible you don't have enough minerals to start a second Depot (or if you do, I feel it weakens your attack too much as it delays your first Bunker).
Against Protoss macro games out of proxy 11/11 may happen but they're more of an accident, you basically start with the intention to kill him with the attack yet sometimes you will be allowed/forced to transition if (a) you killed enough Probes, (b) couldn't go on with your attack for some reason (mainly because of Stalkers preventing you from advancing because you didn't succeed in completing a Bunker) but (c) you managed to retreat some Marines at home to get a Bunker up. I did have 2 macro games out of the 20, 25 or 30 (don't know the exact amount) games in which I played 11/11 against Protoss last season, so it's possible but unlike vs Zerg you can't really plan it to be this way from the start of the game, as said above it's a “OK, time for the back-up plan” thing.
Proxy 11/11 is not really reliable against Protoss because (a) some Protoss 9-scout and (b) some don't scout but get 2 Zealots before Stalker, and dealing with an early Zealot is horrible, whether he heads towards your undefended base (no wall) or stay around to scout/defend. Besides, the distance is shorter for workers to defend since you start the first Bunker in his main, and when out Stalkers get free shots thanks to shields / superior range / superior movement speed, so it's mostly a race against the clock to get a Bunker in range of the Nexus.
Other than that, 11/11 is also what I do (inbase) whenever a Protoss goes 10/10 in my base.
11/11 vs 11/12 vs 12/12: to me it's a matter of SCV movement. I send my 9th SCV to the ramp to make a Depot, which finishes around the 1'30 mark; so if I want to make my first Barracks just at the natural's ramp with the same SCV, I cannot have a 1'30 11 Barracks since my SCV has to go down the ramp and walk a bit further (and bringing back this SCV to mine while pulling another to build the first Barracks would waste some minerals). With this movement, I have at best a ~1'37 Barracks anyway, so I might as well start a 12th SCV right away since it does not delay the first Barracks. Thus I have 12/12 instead of 11/11.
On Ohana I make my second proxy Barracks with the SCV which builds the first Depot as part of the wall. But by the time he reaches the location just outside of his Tower's range, I sometimes pool 200 minerals, so I might as well start the 12th SCV after starting the first Barracks. Thus I have 11/12 instead of 11/11.
On November 10 2012 13:33 sicueft wrote:
Is it viable to go sky + mech on two bases? I'm a diamond Terran and I've been trying different mixtures of unit combinations against Zerg.
I don't know if that fits what you call “sky + mech” on 2 bases, but there are some 2-port banshees builds with a mech transition (e. g. GuMiho vs HyuN recently on Metropolis at an IGN event, maybe IPTL FXO vs TSL; I've also seen SuperNova and Bomber do those on their streams). 2-port banshees is cheesy, of course, and you absolutely have to deny Overlord sacrifices but it can wreak some havoc against an unprepared 3-bases Zerg with late Lair since 4 Banshees 2-shot Queens; if Zerg carelessly loses his extra Queens he's forced to start many Spores at each base, and to build Queens non-stop out of his 2 Hatcheries (since one of them is likely morphing into Lair). This also forces Mutalisks as an answer to chase Banshees, so you can prepare accordingly. This build is extremely fragile, though, as it relies on (a) Zerg not scouting it, (b) Zerg not being able to bring together his 6 Queens (so it's better on maps in which there's more distance between the main and the third base) and (c) hitting and doing enough damage before Zerg is able to get Mutalisks out. But if you like unorthodox and iffy things, you might give it a try. Obviously it fails miserably against 2-bases Lair builds (including builds in which Zerg does take his third but doesn't saturate it).
On November 10 2012 13:33 sicueft wrote:
also wondering about this
so
- rax gas banshee
and
- rax gas marine hellion drop
aren't considered safe macro builds? :/
Barracks first Marine/Hellions elevators builds are safe but they do require some damage against certain builds. Against most builds a gas first Banshee is basically guaranteed some SCVs kills (even if your opponent knows the Banshee is coming), and you can adapt your expand timing depending on what your opponent is doing: for example against 1 rax FE you can entirely cut units before the Banshee to get a much faster CC, while a Marine/Hellion elevator expand has to get his units anyway (which delays the CC) but is not guaranteed any kill as some builds can stop it dead / your opponent can prevent your units from being landed; hence why gas first Banshee expands are more “all-around” than Marine/Hellions elevators for a macro game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
