|
Here is my strategy plan. Simple and effective:
TvX
SCOUTING
Hold ALL watchtowers have reaper/SCV/marine checking for expansions
Make minute adjustements based on scouting information
TvZ
OPENING
Reaper opening into hellion reaper (2 reapers, 6 hellions)
CC
Add 2 more Reactored Rax
Stim
Double engineering Bay 1-1
TIMING ATTACK
Move out 11-13 mins with MMMM to kill zergs third
Have 3rd CC building behind it
Add Armory Start 2-2
Add 2 more rax to make 5 and a second factory with tech lab
Research drilling claws
Do not parade push. Push out in contingencies, muster troops at home to defend counter attacks.
LATE GAME
Be sure to add 3 additional Rax when taking 3rd, Have them all tech labbed for marauders
in preparation for usual Ultralisk transition.
If Broodlords, add 2 extra starports maybe 3 depending on economy.
TvP
OPENING
Reaper Expand, CC First or 1 Rax FE
Get 3 rax and stim
Ebay for +1
Add Factory with reactor while building Starport
TIMING ATTACK
MMM with +1, combat shields and STIM
Goal is to force gateway units and pick off sentries
Secure a 3rd and protect with sim city bunker and turret.
MID GAME
Adapt to Protoss tech and win by economical advantage. e.g.
3 Colossus, heavy stalker count and high templar. Throw down one Ghost Academy,
get about 4-5 ghosts, 12 vikings, and higher marauder count.
LATE GAME
Protoss should be dead by now... if not slowly transition into BC/Viking/raven.
TvT
MECH! - Me personally, never play mech so just trying simple 1-1-1 openings and being creative.
Mainly have fun, dick around, and dont expect to win. This is my fun matchup.
Goal: Gain a strong feel for all mech based units. Copy pro strategies (Strelok!!)
|
There's this big misconception that cheeses and 2-base all-ins are somehow "no skill" or noob builds or "the wrong way to play the game". People play against opponents on ladder who do a proxy 2-gate or pull SCVs or open with speedling rushes every game, and there's the tendency to feel belittled or dumbed down by losing to a well-executed cheese; naturally this excites them and makes them feel like they should have won if they had just scouted better/controlled better, etc. And that's true. All cheeses are beatable at the top levels of play as long as you scout, continue to macro, and control well; when you lose to a cheese or some kind of all-in build, you were lacking in one of these areas, not because the cheese is "no skill OP".
While it is true that there are mechanically better players that lose to people performing cheeses and 2-base all-ins in masters and GM leagues (even on the pro level), this doesn't change the fact that one player simply executed a strategy better than the other. There are a lot of players who don't have a set goal in mind when they ladder; with my definition of macro, you could argue that a dedicated cheeser is technically a better "macro" player than their opponent who just builds whatever works without a clearly defined goal, even if the dedicated cheeser is not mechanically as good.
There's also the flawed school of thought that somehow playing only cheeses and 2-base all-ins is detrimental to your SC2 growth and makes you a "bad macro player". The truth is that there is plenty to learn about the early and mid games through these shorter-term game plans, things you wouldn't necessarily learn by just sitting back, taking 3 bases, and "macroing". If you play only cheese and mid game attacks, you miss out on learning the late game, but it's actually a great stepping stone into what is considered "true macro play".
You should change this into necessary rant, because this was the crucial point I thought you were making this whole time. You said yourself that the Koreans cheese a lot when first learning (lol, i had winning here before. Irony!) to play because it helps you understand one part of the game, whether it be micro, macro, or the interaction between my X unit and your Y unit at Q and Z amounts. Koreans are fucking awesome because they've played the 4 zergling vs 3 marine matchup A MILLION times. That's one small thing in the game, but being able to execute that perfectly is part of perfect play. A perfected cheese play that beats a macro intended play is still a better play no matter what.
The fact of the matter is that Starcraft 2 is about winning, and if that requires that you proxy 2rax every game, then fucking do it. Remember what Morrow did in the beta or somewhere near the beginning of SC2? That fucking reaper build that DOMINATED?! When you look back at that, it's so stupid how awesome that strategy was. He won a tournament depending on it. People complained, and you can say reapers were OP and all that other crap, but the fact of the matter is that it's no different than saying cheese is lame. If they won the game, it's because you failed to do something - whether that's an upgrade, building workers, or gging too early. Wanting the game to change because you keep losing is only a valid excuse for so long - eventually you either change your strategy, or you give up playing.
I believe Harvey Dent made this point perfectly in The Dark Knight - You either die a hero (give up playing) or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain (change your strategy).
|
United States4883 Posts
From Day9's Podcast "Hallmarks of Expert Play #1: Winning with an Advantage"
Number One: Always make sure you have an endgame plan before your game has ever started. I see so many players that have a build that will lead them to some advantage and then when they get there, they arrive at this advantageous situation, they suddenly have no idea what to do. Their macro gets screwed up, they don't time their expansions or the rest of their attacks correctly, and that's what ends up losing them the game. And the way to avoid this is just have a very general, straightforward sense of what you're going to do in the endgame. And I'm not talking about anything specific, or anything crazy, just some basic framework that you can always be trying to go for.
Holy shit, that is the best quote ever relating to this thread. This is exactly the reason why I say it's important to have an end game goal already in place that tells you how you're going to win. If you don't have a goal that states how you will win, you'll find yourself in unfamiliar territory the moment you run out of steps in your plan.
|
On November 15 2013 12:31 SC2John wrote:From Day9's Podcast "Hallmarks of Expert Play #1: Winning with an Advantage"Show nested quote +Number One: Always make sure you have an endgame plan before your game has ever started. I see so many players that have a build that will lead them to some advantage and then when they get there, they arrive at this advantageous situation, they suddenly have no idea what to do. Their macro gets screwed up, they don't time their expansions or the rest of their attacks correctly, and that's what ends up losing them the game. And the way to avoid this is just have a very general, straightforward sense of what you're going to do in the endgame. And I'm not talking about anything specific, or anything crazy, just some basic framework that you can always be trying to go for. Holy shit, that is the best quote ever relating to this thread. This is exactly the reason why I say it's important to have an end game goal already in place that tells you how you're going to win. If you don't have a goal that states how you will win, you'll find yourself in unfamiliar territory the moment you run out of steps in your plan.
I listen to his Hallmarks of Expert Play podcasts and Game Theory podcasts every few weeks to few months. I dont really pay attention to em anymore but they ring so true for me that it is a great background if I am doing some cleaning and am tired of music for a minute.
You can tell he recorded those shortly after hitting a level of playing ability that was simply of the highest of high levels. They are a beautiful glimps into the thoughts of a truly strategically sound player.
They dwarf every single daily he made (maybe minus the mechanics one as that one demos proper mechanics way better than a podcast is capable of but thats less game theory and more game execution...).
|
Northern Ireland461 Posts
This is beautifully done by Day[9], and very relevant to this thread too;
http://www.teamliquid.net/staff/Day9/Day[9]0014-HOP3-AGoodMindset.mp3
Specifically, his first point on the 'Plan.'
In this podcast Day[9] talks about the importance of having a plan for having a good mindset, I will try to explain my Strategy with the framework I gleamed from the podcast, and the knowledge I gained from this thread. Hopefully someone can tell me if it is good, or if it needs adjusting. From what I could tell from the Day[9] podcast, a gameplan follows this framework;
Plan > Build > Reactions
TvT: My overall plan is to deny my opponents 3rd/4th base with Marine/Tank. In this way I should gain an economic lead, which should result in a bigger army, or higher re-maxing potential, that will allow me to kill him.
Step 1 (Basic Plan): I want a 2/3 base economy to produce a well upgraded Marine/Tank army to use for my overall plan.
Step 2 (Build to allow my gameplan to come to fruition): I will use a gas first cloak banshee build to harass and scout my opponent. This build also allows me to gain a tech advantage. I will produce units off a 1-1-1 infrastructure until I can converge at a 5-1-1 infrastructure on 2 bases, at which point I will hit a timing (+1-1?) to secure my own 3rd whilst denying my opponent his 3rd.
Step 3 (Reaction to scouting information): I am unsure what to put here, I don't generally scout with a gas first opening. My banshee acts as a scout, but I don't feel I need to react to anything I see with it. Any pointers here would be good.
If anyone has anything similar for TvP/TvZ I would love to hear it.
|
Hey Sc2John. I know this is a late comment but since I don't want to post under protoss help me thread because this adresses alot of points about planning strategies but I am having trouble approaching pvp. I always execute builds that seem logical for the map pool such as 1 gate expand on Whirlwind and blink on Yeonsu but often times I feel as though I lose but I am not getting outplayed. For example, I 1 gate expand on Whirlwind due to not being able to be hard countered but proxy stargate and 3 gate stargate all in may be too late because of the distance of the map however, there was a situation where I scouted and my opponent 10 gate 3 gated me and I lost immediately. If I use a build that blindly is able to defend against this strategy then I will be behind vs a fast expand build assuming I scout last. Is this a coinflip factor that I am not aware of and is so, then how can I approach this.
|
United States4883 Posts
On November 25 2013 08:58 Rickyvalle21 wrote:
Hey Sc2John. I know this is a late comment but since I don't want to post under protoss help me thread because this adresses alot of points about planning strategies but I am having trouble approaching pvp. I always execute builds that seem logical for the map pool such as 1 gate expand on Whirlwind and blink on Yeonsu but often times I feel as though I lose but I am not getting outplayed. For example, I 1 gate expand on Whirlwind due to not being able to be hard countered but proxy stargate and 3 gate stargate all in may be too late because of the distance of the map however, there was a situation where I scouted and my opponent 10 gate 3 gated me and I lost immediately. If I use a build that blindly is able to defend against this strategy then I will be behind vs a fast expand build assuming I scout last. Is this a coinflip factor that I am not aware of and is so, then how can I approach this.
Yeah, to be honest, early game PvP is a bit of a coinflip. I don't like the term "build order win" because you can still defend builds that technically "hard counter" your build...but yeah, to some extent, this is primarily because some builds just end up ahead of others.
In terms of playing in a series or in a tournament setting, you want to try to alter your play as much as possible from game to game and keep your opponent guessing (i.e. in a Bo3 series, you would try go DT expand for the first game, proxy 2-gate for the second game, and 1-gate FE for the final game). However, when it comes to playing on ladder, just choose a relatively stable, mostly safe build (like 1-gate FE or DT expands) and accept that sometimes you will come out "behind".
Or...you can just do what PartinG does and all-in every game :p.
|
Off topic note: If you have read the plethora of threads and blogs our main man SC2John has created and gotten as much pleasure and quality learning out of them as I have, you should nominate SC2John for lichter's little popularity contest: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=436616
I'm posting this here because its the most recent/most active of SC2John's threads so I figure there might be some other thankful readers like myself here.
Thanks for all your help and insight SC2John! You're definitely on my list of TL forum awesomeness.
|
I remember stumbling across this thread some months ago on my Smartphone and thought "sounds interesting" but lost the tab in my "to-read-pile". Just re-discovered it and have to bump it, because the content is pure gold and still highly relevant.
On October 28 2013 14:57 vaderseven wrote:*Read this quote again from the OP: Show nested quote +[Back when I was playing on iCCup] I used to have a Korean Starcraft practice partner. One day he asked me, "Why do you think Koreans are so 'cheesy' when they're learning to play?" I don't remember exactly what I replied, but it was probably something along the lines of: "They've got better micro, macro, etc., so they can win early." He took a moment, then responded, "No, it's because the goal of the game is much simpler." My practice partner was telling me that when they are learning the game (when they are new) they tend to favor game plans that win the game much sooner and with less steps. By doing that they practice the concept of playing out a game plan instead of blindly playing for a vague later game state.As our convo went on, my friend (his name was HyeongJu Ban or simply Ban) explained that as a player becomes better and their understanding of the game increases, they naturally go for later and later wins. You see, as they get better mechanically they can handle more macro and micro actions and as their understanding expands they can formulate more and more complex game plans. I really see this lack of mindset in the foreign scene as a critical problem holding back the average player and honestly is one of the biggest contributing factors to the difference in average skill between Korea and the rest of the world. The two other large factors (having the strongest professional scene and having the highest density of players in a small physical area) actually help to ensure that the average new player is exposed to someone at the local PC bang that will set them on the right path and mindset. Most of the very best players clearly subscribed to this mindset and a bit of research into their playstyle progressions provide strong support to what Ban passed onto me and I onto SC2John. Look at Flash, MVP, MKP, JulyZerg, iloveoov, Jaedong, Maru, Losira, Bisu, Naniwa, and others (MANY more). All of these players had a reputation among forum posters that speak English as being "very cheesy" and each slowly became known as "macro" players. WATCH a cross section of their games. They didn't change their approach to the game. They simply were executing plans they knew inside and out and as time went on and they played more and more they became familiar with more and more plans of increasing complexity. They were masters of excellent game plans from the start of their careers onward and nothing about their approach to strategy ever changed yet so many people that speak English feel like they went through mysterious transformations from cheesy players to macro gods.
Reading this I remember watching ForGG's Stream as he just began his transition to SC2.
I was expecting some kind of secret practice method from this praised Kespa-veteran. Instead I was watching him building only Barracks and Marines and attacking without any upgrades during all his games for a whole day. The next day he added a single Geysir into his play and got techlabs for basic bio-upgrades or a factory only to produce hellions out of it.
Until now I could not understand what I saw. I assumed he was just fooling around, but now I am coming to the conclusion that I witnessed him learning the game literally from scratch through the described method.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
