EPT[NASL] Week 4 Division 4 - Page 4
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
Dexington
Canada7276 Posts
| ||
|
SafeAsCheese
United States4924 Posts
He lost 40 stalkers against the mutas in his main while his 1 archon jittered around behind them..... | ||
CosmicSpiral
United States15275 Posts
| ||
|
iamperfection
United States9648 Posts
| ||
|
amd098
Korea (North)1366 Posts
On May 06 2012 11:30 SafeAsCheese wrote: No hive =/ Muta going to instantly die to archon storm if he doesn't get BLords... ORLY? ret just needs mutas, thats all! | ||
|
Fig
United States1324 Posts
| ||
|
the`postman
United States1643 Posts
On May 06 2012 11:33 00Visor wrote: + getting owned by Phoenix early + and its pointless to have 90 drones on 3bases Just a really poor game by both. how is it pointless to have 90 drones on 3 bases? It's the perfect amount. | ||
|
Dexington
Canada7276 Posts
On May 06 2012 11:38 the`postman wrote: how is it pointless to have 90 drones on 3 bases? Pointless was a bad word for that situation, but it's definitely way too much. It's okay to have above saturation when you are preparing to take another base, but Ret was on 90+ without expanding for a few minutes. | ||
|
00Visor
4337 Posts
On May 06 2012 11:38 the`postman wrote: how is it pointless to have 90 drones on 3 bases? optimal saturation is 22 per base (2 per mineral, 3 per gas) most pros these days don't go over that, especially zerg just get a 4th quicker and than instantly poop out 20 additional drones | ||
|
Hnnngg
United States1101 Posts
| ||
|
the`postman
United States1643 Posts
On May 06 2012 11:41 00Visor wrote: optimal saturation is 22 per base (2 per mineral, 3 per gas) most pros these days don't go over that, especially zerg just get a 4th quicker and than instantly poop out 20 additional drones 3 per mineral is fine though, if he took a fourth it would be pretty hard to hold at that time, he had no ground army. With 90 drones you have enough for spines and you have the maximum three base economy, it worked out perfectly for him. | ||
|
amd098
Korea (North)1366 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/q6WSb.jpg) | ||
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
(-_-) | ||
|
the`postman
United States1643 Posts
On May 06 2012 11:48 tree.hugger wrote: 200/200 vs 108/124 (-_-) and cruncher holds  | ||
|
Lukeeze[zR]
Switzerland6838 Posts
| ||
|
Dexington
Canada7276 Posts
On May 06 2012 11:45 the`postman wrote: 3 per mineral is fine though, if he took a fourth it would be pretty hard to hold at that time, he had no ground army. With 90 drones you have enough for spines and you have the maximum three base economy, it worked out perfectly for him. It worked perfectly because he was playing Cruncher. | ||
|
00Visor
4337 Posts
On May 06 2012 11:45 the`postman wrote: 3 per mineral is fine though, if he took a fourth it would be pretty hard to hold at that time, he had no ground army. With 90 drones you have enough for spines and you have the maximum three base economy, it worked out perfectly for him. So if you have no army (and cant defend your first 3 bases), you produce even more drones who mine less efficiently? Just produce an army, take 4th, then produce the additional drones. Thats pretty easy with zerg mechanics. On near patches, the efficiency of a 3rd drone is ~30%. On pro level that is not "fine". | ||
|
Severian
Australia2052 Posts
| ||
|
tree.hugger
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
On May 06 2012 11:48 tree.hugger wrote: 200/200 vs 108/124 (-_-) Sick defense! O_o | ||
|
Swords
6038 Posts
| ||
| ||
