|
I wanted to discuss this with you guys as I feel that playing with a feel (obviously with some basic structure) is better in that you understand the decisions behind what you do instead of following a build, which usually has its protection against builds (generally unbeknownst to its user) and weaknesses. (i.e. a 14/14 will "inherently" protect against 6 pools as your lings are out faster than a 15h)
First off, I'm currently a top master player (at least I think I am) trying to make that final jump into GM. I've been analyzing my gameplay a lot lately, really trying to make that final push, and I realized that I really do not follow any particular "build." Sure I do the standard 15h 16p or what have you and react from that point. Perhaps this is just standard Zerg-styled gameplay, but after watching Spanishiwa stream, even Zergs have "builds" they go to and they work with and tweak to optimize it and make it good.
A big part of the way I practice is watching my replay and noting the decisions I made which caused me to lose. Did I take a terrible engagement? Did I forget to put down static defense in reaction to seeing his/her drop/air? It wasn't because my build was incorrect or contained an inherent weakness, but an improper decision made or terrible macro/micro. "Next time I'll be sure to drop my baneling nest if I see that many barracks." Do you think that this is the proper way to analyze one's gameplay or should there be an emphasis on build and what one should include in their build to prevent that from happening next time?
However, a lot of players are popular for their "builds." Parting is an excellent example of this, giving Zerg players a run for their money with his dreaded sentry-immortal all-in that he may decide to do or another variation that leads him elsewhere. Zerg players adjust to this by adjusting their builds, such as muta counter attacks or ling/hydralisk compositions. Obviously this is at a very high level of play, but it seems to me that more skilled players try to adjust their builds, probably because that's the only thing that may have caused them to lose and not their mechanics, macro or micro. Obviously no one player is perfect, but certain builds just counter others, regardless of a player's ability to play well.
Things to discuss: - At your level of play, do you value the understanding of a build or the proper execution of the build itself?
- At what league do you think players should try to engineer their own builds and tweak them?
- Should players be focusing on understanding or just macro/mechanics up to a certain point?
- (For higher level players) Do you think it's essential for more skilled players to have builds to tweak for improvement?
I'm not completely happy with my post as I feel I've left out a lot of things, and will probably tweak the post a little. Nevertheless, I appreciate your addition to the thread and I'm pretty open to discussion.
|
I'm a high masters protoss player. I play mostly with my instincts. i create my own builds usually but i like to perfect them. im really bad at understanding why this happened vs this but thats probably because i dont analyze any of my replays or do any self review kind of things.
|
|
|
I think this type of play is heavily dependent on incredible scouting and a shit ton of experience. Random newbs below masters shouldnt try to go by gut as heavily as someone who has a solid grasp of the game and a lot of experience with a large percentage of the timings/variations that can be thrown at you.
|
Whether or not "playing by feel" is possible is very racially charged. For zergs, with their flexible production structure (e.g. switch seamlessly between drones and zerglings), it's possible to play by feel fairly easily. All you really have to do it build the proper building early enough and you can make whatever you need to make whenever you you need to make it.
Terran, on the other hand, could use a bit more of an order. I need to anticipate well in advance when I need my units and how many of them I need, which involves more than just making the tech building (e.g. making 2 barracks following a 1Rax FE) since I need to scale my production with my economy. Also, terran (and protoss) require more buildings, so it makes a bit more sense to structure that.
TL;DR Playing by flow works better for Zerg than for Terran.
|
I kinda agree.....BO is good, but there is a time when you just have to play by instict....react to enemies etc
|
You should have a build that you can deviate from as much as necessary but return to your original goal - so have x drones by x time, 3 bases fully sat at x time, take gases for fast x at x time etc.
If they decide to all in or take a fast 3rd then deviate to defend/punish accordingly. You can do that with Zerg quite easily. Playing the whole game by feel isn't really advisible. Usually you can understand what's going on with decent scouting anyway, and react accordingly without needing to go on instinct or guesswork.
|
I'm quite annoyed at this, but I find SC2 rewards build order memorization and execution quite a bit (at-least/more-so for Terran and Protoss). It's maybe a bit less the case for zerg, but that's due to the fact that zerg tends to be so reactionary and defensive.
I'm much more of a fan of games which used more ingenuity and strategy and micro (which was a bit more the case with Brood War), rather than just running flat-out effective build orders (like 1 rax expand into hellion banshee or other stuff)
I find that in SC2 many players can win outright just by running a certain build and having reasonable macro despite having a deficit of skill or knowledge (like a platinum or diamond beating a masters)
|
I play by feel pretty much all the time. And thanks to that, I'm rather mediocre player in SC2. I'm ok with that though, as I got no plans of ever becoming really good in this game.
Like in most other areas of life, doing something on a gut feeling is often times not very optimal, and gets shadowed by a reaction or action that is carefully planned or already trained. Sure if you have tons and tons of knowledge behind the feeling, it can be pretty darn close to optimal. But it'd be even better if you had a planned response to that same situation.
Anyhow, when trying to get better at the game, I would not say playing with feeling is a good idea. Makes enjoyable games though when you just wing it past some opening build.
|
If you play by gutfeeling, and reach master league then you will be better than those who achieved master league by memorizing build orders.
|
I personally play based on a very loose BO in the early stages then I go straight into what I feel will work better (I was diamond in WoL - haven't played any HotS yet cuz I wub campaign).
Although quite a few times it can cause me to lose because my build was slightly sloppy I feel it helps me understand the game better.
I do think that playing like this makes it more difficult to actually get a straight up all in down though. I can generally feel out a game up to any stages when playing vs. Zerg, for example. But if I try to Sentry Immo all in, because I'm not used to hitting really specific timings, my all in is late and will generally suck.
So I think it's probably better to feel it out if it's going to lategame. Even if just for the experience you get from it.
|
Actually there is no build orders at all after 10minutes. You have to adjust to what ever your opponent is doing.
|
I don't play 1s terribly seriously so its a little hard to say where i lie on the ladder. I wanted to push into masters before WoL ended (looked like i could) but alas i was in HOTS too much. I finished WoL with an 87-41, at #1 diamond playing only mech(even TvP).
For the first year perhaps i played protoss and almost only played teams, mostly 2s and mostly both with 2 friends who both played mech every game. As a toss player on both of these teams my role quickly became to defend and protect my terran buddy while he did his mech thing. Essentially i let him focus on tanks and while i dealt with harass and helped him upfront with his tank push when i could. With that being said, i played just about every game off the top of my head. I would 9 scout and me and my buddy would defend whatever all in we thought was coming, aided by a scan if needed and observers. It took some time but eventually my 'build' became gate-cyber-robo-stargate. There might be a forge fit somewhere in there but only in an emergency. Given the many all ins we faced in 2s, tanks bunkers and FFs could hold
just about anything. Observers were much needed detection and stargate gave counter attack options. A large reduction in early tank production stems from having to build AA (the best way to explain this is to point to the TvZ meching strategy of going hellions -> banshees -> thors, the thors would be tanks if mutalisks didn't exist), so going phoenix took care of that. Phoenix and warp ins are amazing at dealing with drops and other harassment, phoenix even in small numbers deal very well with small groups of units. Never thought i'd say missile turrets are great at killing ground units...but...phoenixes. This got us as high as 3rd in our masters division and would have been in the 2s GM league had it existed.
TL;DR ive always played by feel, its how i learned. I play mech nowadays in 1s because i feel it rewards me for paying attention to what my opponent is doing and responding correctly.
|
To answer the question about when to invent your own build orders, the longer the game has been out, the more builds are figured out and refined so it becomes increasingly less likely that any build you invent is better than what's already out there. With HotS being newly released, anyone of any league should/could be messing around with builds, but as with WoL as time goes by its less and less worth doing for those at lower levels (i.e. non-pro)
|
I think you don't have to learn build orders to be good, but if you play by "instincts" (which is a stupid word to use) you still have to have clear plans and timings on what you do (as in I open up in way X, then I hit a midgame attack timing as soon as I have a setup with 3 barracks and a starport as well as 2-4 Medivacs, and I'll use my factory to scout in his base to see the tech route. Based on that I either decide to get a second Starport or a Ghost Academy. I'll add 2 Barracks either way). Of course you don't have to have complicated plans like this, a plan for a game could just be I want Unitcombination X and I'll try to build Y amount of production structures on 1 base and Z production structures on 2 base and see how my economy works out when I constantly build units out of them. It's usually better to improve very slowly opposed to trying to improve in every area where you have flaws at once.
But playing without build orders doesn't mean that you can somehow defy the rules of which amount of production structures (for T and P) is optimal on what economy, when you should expand for it being as quickly as possible AND safe etc.
I think if you don't learn build orders it is very easy to just play for a long time and don't learn anything from it, once you hit a certain level. You still have to go as deep into the game as people with build orders are going if you want to improve, you just have a different way of memorizing things.
That said, sticking heavily to build orders only works for clear all-in timings (which are still good to learn). Otherwise I think your way of learning things is good, you just have to make sure you don't forget how you dealt with strategy X when you beat it 
|
I think there is a misconception here. Top players don't just perform builds. Builds don't win games, decisions do.
So what does your build do for you?
Your build dictates your pace at which you transit into the various stages of the game. Day [9] does talk alot about getting the feel of the build and understanding the decisions as to when to take gas etc. rather than memorizing 12 rax 13 gas 15 orbital etc.
Pro players tend to have certain stylistic builds as it they feel most comfortable from those positions. Things such as the immortal sentry all in are simply options they choose to bring in a BoX series game. Creator would be a very good example of this. Forge expansions into 3rd bases were his build. They didn't always follow the exact same production but the general idea was to get to 3 bases and then hit a timing with his tech. A more recent example of how builds dictate the game would be the Marine King vs Yoda in the latest code A game 2. Marineking used his build to generate an upgrade advantage over Yoda and used this advantage to make certain decisions, such as baiting Yoda's army out of position to hit his base when he had an upgrade advantage.
MVP would be a very strong case for this. Tastosis have been heard saying that he has so many builds therefore making him very hard to predict, however he is a Terran player who plays with what you might call "flow". Making decisions based on what he has scouted and what his opponent does not know. Although his mech was what made him famous, he still played bio and bio mech compositions on different maps as he felt that they were better on those maps during his 2011 dominance period. Even in 2012 his decision making transcended the common conceptions of build orders, punishing protoss players by exploiting windows in which he knew they were weak to triumph. However he still has "builds", which is way of puting himself into the most comfortable position to play his decision making game, which was how MMA exploited him in the Blizzcon finals to score that famous/infamous win.
|
On March 14 2013 11:42 DyEnasTy wrote:
I think this type of play is heavily dependent on incredible scouting and a shit ton of experience. Random newbs below masters shouldnt try to go by gut as heavily as someone who has a solid grasp of the game and a lot of experience with a large percentage of the timings/variations that can be thrown at you.
I'd like to point my experience as a way to disagree with you.
I used to be diamond zerg (about 15sh on the league)... then I switched to terran...
I lost A LOT, and that eventually placed me in silver league (facing low silvers and some bronzies as well). Then I gave up following build orders and did what I wanted, based on scout and my (poor) game sense...
I honestly believe that changing this playstyle was a big part of what got me into platinum.
Yes, I do realize being plat (or even my former diamond placing) is nothing, but I got promoted twice in 2 weeks.
|
I think there isn't a build order except the opening.
I am diamond zerg and switched to terran for a while and I did 1 rax FE into pure bio and stayed in diamond.
The rest of the game is more relied on positioning, macro and multi tasking to be honest
|
On March 14 2013 11:42 DyEnasTy wrote:
I think this type of play is heavily dependent on incredible scouting and a shit ton of experience. Random newbs below masters shouldnt try to go by gut as heavily as someone who has a solid grasp of the game and a lot of experience with a large percentage of the timings/variations that can be thrown at you.
It's not really that hard to move up leagues by just winging it. I went from bronze to diamond just doing whatever the hell I felt like doing at the time.
|
Ask not what strategy can do for you, but what you can do for strategy.. is that it OP??
|
Ok playing with your instinct is just a way of playing the game and there is nothing wrong. However, I seriously think that this is inferior and not the best way if you are planning to go to the highest GM/ pro levels. Let me give you an example here, Whitera. From his gameplay, he can be the best example of playing with feel and instinct. His style is fine, building expos building units more expos etc. This playstyle is not wrong you can even get to GM with this type of plays but it wont get you to the highest level.
Lets take another example Parting who is being popular for the WonWonWon and not forget his PvT 3 Nexus mass gates. Parting and most established Koreans eg MVP are the perfect breed of build orders and execution. They practice the build over and over in order to execute it perfectly. Parting wonwonwon pushes out at 9 mins. This the timing with perfect build.
This is my opinion of being a GM from sea since launch till now if it matters lol. Cheers.
|
On March 14 2013 12:17 Xapti wrote:
I'm quite annoyed at this, but I find SC2 rewards build order memorization and execution quite a bit (at-least/more-so for Terran and Protoss). It's maybe a bit less the case for zerg, but that's due to the fact that zerg tends to be so reactionary and defensive.
I'm much more of a fan of games which used more ingenuity and strategy and micro (which was a bit more the case with Brood War), rather than just running flat-out effective build orders (like 1 rax expand into hellion banshee or other stuff)
I find that in SC2 many players can win outright just by running a certain build and having reasonable macro despite having a deficit of skill or knowledge (like a platinum or diamond beating a masters)
A plat or diamond isn't beating a master league player just because of build order. I mean, that may not hold true in every case, but by a large margin it will. Plat players are so bad at micro and positioning that it really doesn't matter if they have a few extra units against a master leaguer at the right time. The master leaguer will just buy some extra seconds in the field and ruin any timing attack the other guy had.
I haven't played the ladder much lately (~10 games in the past 2 months) but when I started (beta) and for the next year, I didn't even bother reading build orders. I "made" my own, that is to say, I just did whatever I felt like when the game started. If I felt like building another drone, I did. If I felt like throwing down a baneling nest, I did. Anyway, I went from Silver -> Master that way and it only took a couple months or less (Master league didn't exist at first, so that added time, hah).
Memorizing build orders and stuff like that just seemed stupid to me then, and kind of does to me now, since people that copy them won't understand why they are doing them. When I give advice to people wanting to learn how to play, I tell them to try to win as early in the game as possible, like with a rush. Soon they will notice that it's much easier to beat opponents you are better than with macro. But, you can't learn how to macro if you don't know how to hold off someone else's rush. And that's a lot easier to learn if you know how to rush yourself. What I mean is that if you are only always counting on your opponent macro'ing up as well, that's not knowing how to macro. That's just following a build order. Whooptydoo.
edit: To be clear, I'm not saying build orders are bad, but they aren't the miracles people think they are if you don't create them yourself. To me, it's almost like saying, "Here, let me teach you how to do this calculus problem." All that information is worthless to someone that doesn't know how to do calculus already! It certainly is for someone that doesn't know how to add. When I'm helping noobs, I just talk them through their "build orders" as they do them and as they're thinking about them. As they "optimize" (lol, right?) them, they are understanding why they are building expansions at certain times and why they need, perhaps, a bunker at certain times. If I just told them to build a bunker at 6:00 every game, it would mean nothing to them and they would probably even forget to. Likewise, as they play their "builds" against real opponents, they recognize flaws in their builds. That's where I come in. I help them interpret that information. They may take it that they need to build less scv's because they didn't have the money for more marines, which they needed, but I show them that all they really needed was to be more efficient with their macro and they could have twice the marines at the same time anyway. Stuff like that.
|
Say for example a new player starts sc2. The best advice eg a terran is to just play 3 rax 1 basing for like 50+- games to get a feel of the micro/ macro/ what works and not, Protoss to just 4 gate every game. Too many times I have seen lower level players try to copy pros by macroing which in fact you should start learning from 1 basing, 2 basing and 3 basing etc to get the feel of the whole thing. Once your higher level up you will know what to get at certain timing and scouting. Too many players to to learn too many things at once.
|
Hey sup, Master Toss here. I have been playing with feel since the game came out, and as a result i am an incredibly Solid player. To play fluidly you must understand all components of your match-up, or you will simply die to a mismicro/poor decision/bad scouting.
Don't get me wrong, i do use some buildorders, such as 9 pylon/14gate/double assim15 etc. but that's usually where it drops off.
My build orders usually only focus on gas timings and chrono boost usage, but those are only for the first couple minutes of the game, and are more based on FEEL: if i feel safe enough to play greedily, or if i feel unsafe, and thus play more defensively. The Best way to play a fluid, free-form style like this, is to scout scout scout and scout! I feel that hallucination is an amazing scouting tool; and that along with observers, protoss has quite the potential for a reactionary style.
Its really easy to get into the mentality of just building up your bases and macroing up your army, but you really need to observe what your opponent is doing and react accordingly. In the early game a good way to scout is to attack the opponent before he has Conc shells or Speedlings, this way you can back off if you see too much stuff, or you can engage directly and wittle down his stuff by trading zealots and microing stalkers efficiently.
The best way to play with "feel" is simply to practice. Each game that you get in adds to your base of knowledge and understanding. In addition to playing, i have found it extremely beneficial to watch games played by the best of the best, be it in GSL/MLG/DREAMHACK/ whatever, as long as they are top notch players, you should be watching what they do, and learning.
This kind of playstyle on the ladder will make you incredibly solid, however, i feel that in a Tournament setting it is better to use SPECIFIC build order or build order COUNTERS based on your knowledge of the opponent. This is because if you are feeling it, you tend to play in the middle of aggressive and defensive, greedy and safe. If your opponent is playing towards one extreme or the other in terms of ALL IN bane bust, or 3 hatch before Pool then it is VERY easy to either outright Lose, or fall way behind.
Hope that helps you guys understand at least my perspective on the matter! any questions are welcome in terms of advice or simply discussion in general. Thanks!
|
On March 14 2013 22:33 covetousrat wrote:
Ok playing with your instinct is just a way of playing the game and there is nothing wrong. However, I seriously think that this is inferior and not the best way if you are planning to go to the highest GM/ pro levels. Let me give you an example here, Whitera. From his gameplay, he can be the best example of playing with feel and instinct. His style is fine, building expos building units more expos etc. This playstyle is not wrong you can even get to GM with this type of plays but it wont get you to the highest level.
Lets take another example Parting who is being popular for the WonWonWon and not forget his PvT 3 Nexus mass gates. Parting and most established Koreans eg MVP are the perfect breed of build orders and execution. They practice the build over and over in order to execute it perfectly. Parting wonwonwon pushes out at 9 mins. This the timing with perfect build.
This is my opinion of being a GM from sea since launch till now if it matters lol. Cheers.
I agree, if you are serious about getting better you need to learn timings. It's note so much "memorization" as it is developing your mind until it has "starsense".
But don't listen to me. The infamous Artosis quote:
+ Show Spoiler +
The anti 3-Hatch Mutalisk build order given ... is an exact build order used by one of the best Terrans in the world. Every pro Terran knows this build and practices the hell out of it. Their training partner Zergs in the mean time do the same 3 hatchery mutalisk build over and over. By doing basically the same game OVER AND OVER AND OVER you will memorize it quite well and see the holes in your game. This basic play is the result of countless hours of progamers playing each other and finding the most robust and powerful builds and styles.
As you master this build order in TvZ you will have to learn how to adapt to various things different zergs do. That is the last thing you really need to learn because if you know this build inside out and can macro it, control it, know your timings and everything like that then you are just going to roll people over who do lesser builds.
[...]
The point of this: Mechanics are more important than any other aspect of the game currently. The game is getting more and more mapped out. You need to be able to follow that map.[1]
Another point would be you don't play with EITHER feel OR builds, you can play an insanely robust build order and breath life into it the way, for instance, MMA breathes life into TvT bio or Parting breathes life into the immortal rush.
Every game, I'm trying to learn my timings and isolate things to work on. If I want to play entirely by feel, I play 2v2.
|
Build orders are not just supply numbers or times of placing buildings, they are the blue print of strategies. Using a build order is just saying hey "i want to go bio, start off with some drop harass and play a macro game to win", and doing it with the most efficiency.
Entering a game with a plan of attack is astoundingly better then just entering a game and "winging it" The build order offers this plan. They don't have to be super precise but having general transitional timings and goals for each stage of the game is important.
|
Platinum League Terran, I simply cannot play with just "feel."
In WoL, I never had to since the builds were pre-determined for each matchup.
In HoTS, I've only been trying to play with feel only. The thing is, I've never used the Widow Mine before, so it's hard for me to understand how I'm supposed to play with it and I really don't want to play with only WoL units. I can only use my "instincts" when I'm in the late-game. Anything before that, I need to have a plan (which is currently in the makings lol).
|
United Kingdom20318 Posts
I think its incredibly important for, for example, immortal all in - to be following something that you know EXACTLY. There is flat out a "best" way to do it, to improve timings, effectiveness, etc.
I would liken that to ZvP in the first 7-8 minutes of play - if you are completely unpressured - there is a best way to play, best patches to stack drones on, best amount of drones to transfer or not transfer, best way to build overlords and structure queen injects - etc - its incredibly important.
With zerg its much easier to play by feel than protoss/terran (look at stephano) but you can play P/T like that a lot if you are comfortable with the game, if you played a lot (i feel there's a lot that you just cant get from WATCHING, no matter how much of it you do) though the first 5-10 minutes are usually structured in a very specific way, depending on the game, because it's very important to do so
|
This is exactly what I do. I'm only diamond but I play to have fun and put improvement second and I find doing this type of thing way more fun than strictly following a build order (other than immortal/sentry. That is the one strictly-followed build order I do that I find really fun but even then I learned it by figuring it out myself rather than using some guide). Plus it encourages scouting which is an important skill obviously. I mean if I followed build orders and used other people's ideas and guides I could probably be in master right now but I would rather have fun in diamond and gain a deeper understanding while improving slowly.
For example, right now I am trying to play PvZ without going for the air/templar army. Is it tough? Yes. Do I lose a lot compared to if I went air (which I already know how to do because I figured it out in beta)? Absolutely. But when I win it is way more satisfying than turtling to an air deathball behind cannons.
On March 14 2013 23:31 covetousrat wrote:
Say for example a new player starts sc2. The best advice eg a terran is to just play 3 rax 1 basing for like 50+- games to get a feel of the micro/ macro/ what works and not, Protoss to just 4 gate every game. Too many times I have seen lower level players try to copy pros by macroing which in fact you should start learning from 1 basing, 2 basing and 3 basing etc to get the feel of the whole thing. Once your higher level up you will know what to get at certain timing and scouting. Too many players to to learn too many things at once. This is dead on accurate. Even at diamond there are a lot of players that are completely uncomfortable with what they are doing and are just following a build because a pro did it. I also see worrying about things they shouldn't be until they are more solid as a player. For example, zergs doing cutesy patrol stuff with their zerglings and focusing on creep spread while missing injects and getting supply blocked. Or for terran and protoss, doing all this ridiculous micro but getting massively behind in macro or focusing too much on little things for what level they are. I've won against terrans who have let their entire main army die to storms because they were stutter stepping a drop at an expansion that they could have just left there since it was already in range of workers. I obviously am far from perfect myself but this is the kind of stuff I notice a lot when I watch my replays.
|
I don't think their is a build per se' for any race passed the 10 minute mark. After that, it all comes down to reacting of your opponent, or failed all in. How much damage did I do? Ohh shit, none. Probably better hope for a miracle and go DT.
|
Build orders are important for two reasons: First and foremost, if designed properly, a build order is the best possible way to accomplish a particular goal. Starcraft is a closed logical system with a fixed set of rules. That means there is a "right" (i.e. best) way to accomplish a discrete goal. If, for example, you simply want to build 3 roaches with speedlings as fast as possible, there is one build order that is the absolute best way to accomplish that goal. If that is your goal and you are not using that build order, you're not accomplishing your goal as effectively or efficiently as you could be. (Knowing WHICH goals to have is a different question, and I think that's why the "feel" that you're talking about is important. You might decide to alter the "optimal" fastest-roaches build order if you don't want to go all in, for example.)
Second, build orders are an important teaching tool for beginners. They give a framework with discrete, achievable goals so that the beginner can work on improving mechanics. To use FilterSC's Terran bronze-to-masters build order as an example, knowing that you need to drop your second CC by 3:45 and have 2 medivacs and 50 SCVs by 10:00 gives you a way to analyze replays. That way you can say, "Oh, I need to get that CC down faster," instead of a nebulous "I guess I needed to make more/better stuff."
You can really only play by feel once you have a solid-enough grasp of fundamentals that the build-order-driven goals (e.g., build an oracle as fast as possible) are simply a tactical decision made in furtherance of an overall strategy (e.g., harass early to build an insurmountable macro lead).
|
"Playing by feel" seems to be different than just not using a build order.
Build orders, in general, don't go past 7 or 8 minutes. After that, everybody is "playing by feel".
Some info, like how much production your current economy can support, is vital and necessary to be playing efficiently.
I would say that "playing by feel" would be more about not thinking about specific timings. For example, in ZvP, I don't know the exact timings that I need to worry about. I don't think "Ok, I saw their gas go down at 4:00, so now i can drone until 6:00 and then start pumping units". I just scout the gas, have a general idea of what they can do with that, and respond to what they do.
There are definite benefits to knowing the perfect timings, but also this can make you more susceptible to metagaming(?).
|
I dont understand the question. Reacting IS part of a build.
Simple 1 gate fe PVT , okay you scout if you see hes not building an expo you cut probes and throw down 2 gates and a robo by 6:20. If you don't scout an expo you keep probing up and get a robo before adding your gates. (WOL)
In both situations you aren't winging it...you are reacting to what he is doing...but you are still following a build. Builds go up until the 16/17 minute mark. There is no "winging" it in this game if you want to improve.
|
I guess to contribute, I have my opener thought out and decided as the map loads. After that I am really just gathering intel and trying to counter what the enemy is doing or trying to exploit what he is doing.
|
to be perfectly honest as a masters zerg in wol and in hots beta, as a zerg u still should have a build vs ur opponents race not a build order. for example:
- vs toss early game: i open 11overpool make 4 lings scout and if standard play go into 3 base if something weird react.
midgame: go muta lingbanes take control of map and get up as many bases as possible while threatening with mutas. prepare to switch tech according to the toss reaction to mutas
late game: ultra viper ling corrupter (if colousus or voids are a threat).
if ur looking for specific build orders ur really going to be just looking at drones vs game time instead of supply like other races do. you need to then go and figure out how many drones u can safely get out before common timing attacks hit and such as the immo/sentry cut drones at 60-64 zerg builds are really based on how many drones u need by "x" timing. and when u want ur important tech units out by. like geting 64 drones and infestors out with pathogen glands by 9:40 ingame. this only applys to standard macro play. if u want to do some sort of an allin or timing attack obviously theres a alot more into it then that
|
On March 15 2013 08:06 ROOTMinigun wrote:
I dont understand the question. Reacting IS part of a build.
Simple 1 gate fe PVT , okay you scout if you see hes not building an expo you cut probes and throw down 2 gates and a robo by 6:20. If you don't scout an expo you keep probing up and get a robo before adding your gates. (WOL)
In both situations you aren't winging it...you are reacting to what he is doing...but you are still following a build. Builds go up until the 16/17 minute mark. There is no "winging" it in this game if you want to improve.
Going along with this, I think a lot of players see builds as sequential lists, rather than the decision tree structures that they actually are.
|
On March 15 2013 10:13 SoulSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 08:06 ROOTMinigun wrote:
I dont understand the question. Reacting IS part of a build.
Simple 1 gate fe PVT , okay you scout if you see hes not building an expo you cut probes and throw down 2 gates and a robo by 6:20. If you don't scout an expo you keep probing up and get a robo before adding your gates. (WOL)
In both situations you aren't winging it...you are reacting to what he is doing...but you are still following a build. Builds go up until the 16/17 minute mark. There is no "winging" it in this game if you want to improve. Going along with this, I think a lot of players see builds as sequential lists, rather than the decision tree structures that they actually are.
That's what I was looking for...100% this
A build is a huge tree structure with many many branches.
|
well I play zerg, so BO's are important but only as important as what you scout. You want to have your hatch and gas timings down otherwise you will lose to silly timings because you don't have enough larva or you aren't mining enough minerals or gas because your drone efficiency is bad. Up to the first 50 supply is pretty important for zerg, everything else is all feel and scouting imo. Also it never hurts as zerg to have a tech building for something even if you aren't using it, especially in the late game. getting a baneling nest or hydra den in a match up you wouldn't normally use it, can be a life saver.
|
My buddy Jobless was grandmasters a way long time ago, and stayed in high masters for a long time, and he said his strategy was to "wing it". I concur with the idea of feeling for the game.
And I know I inspired this post spiky.
EDIT: However to contribute a bit more, I would definitely agree with Minigun as well. The decision making is part of the build as well. The top pros do 3 colossus timings all the time, they have specific defensive amounts of units they want to be able to take their 4th base. You can analyze replays and see that the top pro players all have very strict goals along the way, which that would be accurately defined as a build.
|
I actually do this, I have specific parts in a build during the game, but I play zerg and I love the style you are describing at my current level, which is Diamond.
|
Everyone got a starting build order, and build orders don't excist after 7-10 mins i'd say.. Of course you play with feel unless it's a 1-2 base all-in.
|
Having played Terran and some Zerg in WoL and now primarily Zerg in HotS, I'm finding that I just don't feel that builds are very important for Zerg, other than for the first structures (ie pool first, gas timing, etc). After that, I just do what I need in order to win. With Terran, using builds was very important to me. Perhaps it's just because I'm not as high of a level with Zerg yet, but I still think that it's more important to use builds as Terran than Zerg.
|
I've never relied on BO's and I made it to high masters in my prime beating some GM's. I don't believe in build orders but relying on personal experience and going with what you feel and playing around your own play style.
I feel as though Build Orders are too rigid and it's better to have good multi tasking ability and an understanding of the matchups and what to do vs different unit compositions and base your army and thus "build" around that.
I understand very early BO's that go up to say 24 food but those are basically muscle memory. It's a bad idea to go "okay, TvP I will strive for 3 rax after 1 rax feing, get a third after ebay, add two more rax, extra ebay and armory, ghost academy, 4th base" when you can open aggressive and if you *feel* that you're ahead pull all scvs or add more rax and end the game there instead of dragging the game out.
That goes for every race as well.
|
On March 15 2013 11:18 Aberu wrote:
My buddy Jobless was grandmasters a way long time ago, and stayed in high masters for a long time, and he said his strategy was to "wing it". .
thats because he pulled his scvs every game
|
Much more so a zerg style to play based on gut feeling, reactionary on what you've scouted.
For Terran and Protoss, you absolutely do benefit from tight build orders and specific timings. That's why there's just so many guides on strict timings on when plop down what building based on your supply count.
I would say that for Terran, it's even more important to go by stricter build orders. You have to make up your mind on exactly what you're gonna do, and execute it all according to plan. If you go reactor widow mine but accidentally make two hellions, this can cost you the game, when suddenly stalkers + mcore show up at your doorstep.
|
Low masters here, and I have a view on this topic that many might not say is "genuine" or "good", but I think that simply not doing what people are more likely to expect tends to get better results.
For example, not droning when people expect you to do so. Making lings when people don't expect you to. Of course it needs clever planning, but finding holes on preparations that people have seems and feels good to me.
Not talking about all-ining or just simply doing bad stuff, I'm talking more about subtle things like making 8 lings when people are taking early expos.
Sacrificing your plan to mess with theirs, as long as theirs is at least a little bit more messed than yours, is a win.
Again, of course, that means you need to cleverly plan what are your deviations and what do you expect for them to deviate.
Thats my 2cents at least
|
On March 15 2013 13:28 D_K_night wrote:
Much more so a zerg style to play based on gut feeling, reactionary on what you've scouted.
For Terran and Protoss, you absolutely do benefit from tight build orders and specific timings. That's why there's just so many guides on strict timings on when plop down what building based on your supply count.
I would say that for Terran, it's even more important to go by stricter build orders. You have to make up your mind on exactly what you're gonna do, and execute it all according to plan. If you go reactor widow mine but accidentally make two hellions, this can cost you the game, when suddenly stalkers + mcore show up at your doorstep.
Up to a certain point thats fine (say 25 food) but after that it's all improvised unless someone plays very rigid and predictable.
What happens when you get harrassed and lose a few units and can't afford that additional rax that your BO requires? It's all about improvisation and multitasking ability.
|
On March 15 2013 13:35 SjPhotoGrapher wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 13:28 D_K_night wrote:
Much more so a zerg style to play based on gut feeling, reactionary on what you've scouted.
For Terran and Protoss, you absolutely do benefit from tight build orders and specific timings. That's why there's just so many guides on strict timings on when plop down what building based on your supply count.
I would say that for Terran, it's even more important to go by stricter build orders. You have to make up your mind on exactly what you're gonna do, and execute it all according to plan. If you go reactor widow mine but accidentally make two hellions, this can cost you the game, when suddenly stalkers + mcore show up at your doorstep. Up to a certain point thats fine (say 25 food) but after that it's all improvised unless someone plays very rigid and predictable. What happens when you get harrassed and lose a few units and can't afford that additional rax that your BO requires? It's all about improvisation and multitasking ability.
huh, there is really no such thing as "winging it" if you are an active player
A build isn't Just a list of when to get certain buildings. It's a tree with many branches, and yes a branch is reserved for games in which you lose a few workers....
"Winging it" only exists if you play infrequently
|
United States4883 Posts
I'm a masters protoss player and almost all of the practice I've done over the past year is cleaning up build orders and optimizing all of my timings. Realistically, a "build" is a set of goals that have an infinite set of pre-defined pathways based on what you see from your opponent. For instance, I can say that in a PvT, I want to take a fast expansion, power hard, get double forge, go templar, withstand the 10:00 attack, and then take a 3rd safely. HOWEVER, if my opponent goes for a 1-base all-in, I'll abandon my natural for robo+2gates; if my opponent chooses to power super hard and take an insanely fast 3rd base, I'll consider taking my 3rd base faster; if my opponent goes crazy and does reaper/mine pressure into 2-port banshee skyterran, I'll just opt for faster gateways and perhaps throw down a stargate instead of twilight.
All in all, I do change my build depending on what I see, but the "perfect macro model" sticks in the back of my head. If anything happens, I can always refer back to that model and get back on track. Perhaps the only downside to playing by build orders is that you lose some originality and get stuck in static thinking (i.e. THIS won't work, THAT won't work, THIS is good, THAT'S bad, etc., etc.).
EDIT: To add about creating your own build orders: Anyone who has a clear understanding of economy management and common timings can create refined, strong builds. Generally, this understanding doesn't come until the higher levels of diamond and low masters. NOTE: A strong, refined build is an overall gameplan. For example, rushing for a cloaked banshee and following up with a widow mine double expand into hellion-heavy double armory mech is a build; rushing for a banshee is NOT a build.
|
A build order is not something you learn, a build order is the accumulation of your ideas and reaction in a certain match-up.
A build order that you learn or create in void of what your opponent is doing might as well the the equivalent of playing based on "feel" imo, thus I generally prefer to simply improvise from game to game and I seem to be doing pretty well with that in HOTS considering I didn't get the beta and i stopped playing WOL 2 months ago.
|
as a bronze trying to break into Silver, definitely using a build order for the first 5 minutes is crucial, and after that you just have to make sure you are spending all of your resources lol  But seriously, I think your reasoning is pretty good, following a static build and even using cut and paste responses I think makes for weaker players in the long run. It may take a while to get good at instinct reactions, but once you do I think you will be a much stronger player for it.
|
there are timing pushes/cheese builds where you might want to hit the absolute optimum (even using BO calculators as instinct might be ~5..10% weaker than the computed optimum). Also it is a valuable skill in a BoX to quickly figure out a near optimal BO if you spot a weak timing in your opponent's standard build which you want to exploit.
|
Norway10161 Posts
Plat/Diamond player here. I've never followed a build order from someone else, I just make myself a plan when I go into the game and build the stuff I need when I have the money to build it/change my plan if needed after scouting.
However, if I actually wanted to get to masters or even gm I would probably think more about this. An optimised build can give you that extra little bit.
|
as a protoss i like to do the standard gateway core build and then drop the buildings which i want or need
most of the "build orders" are ending after 30 supply anyways, and u have to adapt from there for your own so.. not a big difference
|
On March 15 2013 13:45 ROOTMinigun wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 13:35 SjPhotoGrapher wrote:On March 15 2013 13:28 D_K_night wrote:
Much more so a zerg style to play based on gut feeling, reactionary on what you've scouted.
For Terran and Protoss, you absolutely do benefit from tight build orders and specific timings. That's why there's just so many guides on strict timings on when plop down what building based on your supply count.
I would say that for Terran, it's even more important to go by stricter build orders. You have to make up your mind on exactly what you're gonna do, and execute it all according to plan. If you go reactor widow mine but accidentally make two hellions, this can cost you the game, when suddenly stalkers + mcore show up at your doorstep. Up to a certain point thats fine (say 25 food) but after that it's all improvised unless someone plays very rigid and predictable. What happens when you get harrassed and lose a few units and can't afford that additional rax that your BO requires? It's all about improvisation and multitasking ability. huh, there is really no such thing as "winging it" if you are an active player A build isn't Just a list of when to get certain buildings. It's a tree with many branches, and yes a branch is reserved for games in which you lose a few workers.... "Winging it" only exists if you play infrequently
I never said winging it. Of course players have an idea o what their uni composition will be but only a small number of players build things by the food count or in a set order no manner what.
|
Zergs 'feely reactions' can be mapped out in a complex web up until at least the 10 minute mark, including contingency scenarios where you make zerglings to defend aggression or whatever. That together is he opening 'build' for Zerg. You play by feel after the opening phase phase is complete.
If your opponent attacks you with a ton of speedlings, or roaches, or high econ baneling bust, or whatever... then yes you play by feel from that point onward. But you are playing by feel usually with a substantial lead, as long as you defend the desperate aggerssion properly.. it isn't difficult. Just focus on defending the aggression well. That too becomes a sort of science after a while.
Once the real attacks start, you begin playing the game by feel more. And you have to focus as much as possible at that point. And playing by feel is important, but there's no reason go too far with the concept and play the opening by feel when you can make an exact science out of it..
|
I agree with the OP here and I only follow builds if it involves a fast-expanding opener of some kind. I think builds can restrict your reactivity and flexibility, so having a general feel of what you want to do for your strategy with some decent structure along the way definitely pays off.
|
On March 17 2013 04:36 Jasiwel wrote:
I agree with the OP here and I only follow builds if it involves a fast-expanding opener of some kind. I think builds can restrict your reactivity and flexibility, so having a general feel of what you want to do for your strategy with some decent structure along the way definitely pays off.
This 100%. An understanding of timings is important as well (such as knowing when to line up Stim & CS research for a timing for map control/push or knowing when certain timing attacks hit and what to scout for).
|
I feel some match-ups are more structured than others. my first example is TvZ at the end of the WoL era. you had zergs like Losira and Sniper who had mastered how to survive into the late-game, crush any kind of 2-base or 2-2 terran push and get utltalisks out. Artosis said something like: "you attack into Losira, you die." Losira used the same defensive style every game ~ mass queens, lots of lings, banes and infestors. It pretty much guaranteed that he would make it to the late-game. then Gumiho came along with a similar, extremely tight 4-base macro strategy ~ very fast 4th command center, pre-emptive 2nd starport, early x2 ghost academies, building armor upgrade, turret range upgrade. Gumiho had the entire match-up mapped out up until 20 minutes. only after getting all this stuff did he commit to big drops/ground pushes. Gumiho is an extreme example, but all these good terrans like Innovation and Ryung had very predictable, solid build orders and they simply played the standard marine/tank style as best they could.
In contrast, there's TvT at the end of the WoL era. Bio vs mech could turn into a real scrappy match-up with the most clusterfuck compositions imaginable. Gumiho vs MMA shows just how fast-paced things could get; non-stop bio drops and tank action followed by crazy base-trades and cloak banshee tech switches. how about Gumiho vs Polt and that mass blue-flame hellion/viking style. Taeja vs Noblesse on Daybreak with that crazy raven/cloaked banshee tech switch. If we were stuck with WoL for another 2 years, we'd probably see the same unpredctability in TvT. the match-up was well suited for on-the-fly strategies and compositions.
|
I would agree with the Idea of Minigun, but Disagree with the statement that 'winging it' dosnt exist
His idea of it being like a tree is properly the best way to put it i think, at least to my own play style, Story time:- When i started playing all i did was ask my work friends who got me in to he game how and what and when to do things, a basic BO if you will, so all i could do was XYZ in order, then when something didnt go to plan i would be left staring at my screen, trying to do things i couldnt as i had no idea how or why anything should work and would lose alot to anything 'non standard'
Skip forward to current, Im a Mechanical Engineer so im a maths and theory kinda guy, so i know alot of related timings , things like a gateway builds roughly 1/2 the time of gateway research without boost) and things like that, also i play in either setter or follower, i will have a 'trunk' of a open that will go into a game saying, i will do XYZ until i see what they are doing, then when scouting i will decide will i be the setter or follower, or aggressor/ defender
When i have decided how i will play judging on the scouting, i have many 'branchs' or what and how to do things with the related timings to each other, and playing Random to Diamond i have a decent enough knowledge of all 3 races, so if for this story im playing PvT, my Trunk will be XYZ usual gate-> scout->cybercore, then info should have been found, just the basics like expanded or not, 1/2/3 rax, or no rax (proxy) then i can pick a branch on how to play, are they playing aggressively, forcing me to play reactively (follower) or supper passive 3 bunkers to defend his expand, forcing me to make the first play (setter)
TL:DR :- I believe playing using a starting BO for the first few mins then having several 'related timings' to 'wing it' with structure, depending on if i am the aggressor or defender/ pressured or left alone etc
Playing it on the fly is a good skill to have, as long as you have a structure to follow it up with
|
On March 14 2013 22:51 danl9rm wrote:
people that copy them won't understand why they are doing them. says-who/why? Oftentimes people will know exactly why they are running certain builds. It's not hard to know why a certain build is run.
if you are only always counting on your opponent macro'ing up as well, that's not knowing how to macro. That's just following a build order. Whooptydoo. By practicing one or few build orders many times, they learn how to deal with various scenarios; they're still following the same x build order. Good build orders are designed to be effective against as many things as possible (such as rushes); running a build order doesn't assume anything of the opponent, it just runs a mathematically optimal strategy.
To be clear, I'm not saying build orders are bad, but they aren't the miracles people think they are if you don't create them yourself. To me, it's almost like saying, "Here, let me teach you how to do this calculus problem." All that information is worthless to someone that doesn't know how to do calculus already! It certainly is for someone that doesn't know how to add. When I'm helping noobs, I just talk them through their "build orders" as they do them and as they're thinking about them. Of course build orders don't turn bronze players into grandmasters; that would be the equivalent of learning calculus without previously knowing addition.
I said with build orders, people of certain skill levels and understanding of the game (like platinum; not all platinums), can regularly beat others much greater than them (like masters, not all masters, and certainly NOT ALL THE TIME) using build orders.
The game is far less rewarding to ingenuity and micro than it was in Brood War for instance (although obviously some of that has to due with the different game mechanics, and of course it does still strongly exist in BW at the higher level play)
|
Playing with feeling seems to work very well, I use opening build orders but then just play by feel for the entire game. And I know stephano plays only by feel. He has no idea how he does it, he just does it.
|
Well, if you do a build without knowing why, then it's detrimental. You need to know why you do that build, what exactly that build does for you and how it works against your opponent, and I think build orders are very important to understand in terms of game time itself. If you blindly follow a build just like you blindly create a build based off feel, then you're going to be severely underhanded against a competent opponent.
|
On March 17 2013 01:04 SjPhotoGrapher wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2013 13:45 ROOTMinigun wrote:On March 15 2013 13:35 SjPhotoGrapher wrote:On March 15 2013 13:28 D_K_night wrote:
Much more so a zerg style to play based on gut feeling, reactionary on what you've scouted.
For Terran and Protoss, you absolutely do benefit from tight build orders and specific timings. That's why there's just so many guides on strict timings on when plop down what building based on your supply count.
I would say that for Terran, it's even more important to go by stricter build orders. You have to make up your mind on exactly what you're gonna do, and execute it all according to plan. If you go reactor widow mine but accidentally make two hellions, this can cost you the game, when suddenly stalkers + mcore show up at your doorstep. Up to a certain point thats fine (say 25 food) but after that it's all improvised unless someone plays very rigid and predictable. What happens when you get harrassed and lose a few units and can't afford that additional rax that your BO requires? It's all about improvisation and multitasking ability. huh, there is really no such thing as "winging it" if you are an active player A build isn't Just a list of when to get certain buildings. It's a tree with many branches, and yes a branch is reserved for games in which you lose a few workers.... "Winging it" only exists if you play infrequently I never said winging it. Of course players have an idea o what their uni composition will be but only a small number of players build things by the food count or in a set order no manner what.
Improvise=winging it
Build orders very often go until the 15. It's more unlikely they don't than do. You are thinking build order as a list which doesn't vary which is not true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
