|
Running 4 Warpgates is too expensive to run off of one base, a lot of people know this. However, the 4 Gate strategy is not about maintaining all 4 Gates indefinitely, just for the first couple rounds of production. The reason it is so powerful is, if you can get just one Pylon completed in or near the opponent's base, you can start warping in 4 units at a time instantly. No time wasted from walking the distance between the two bases.
When I play Protoss, I like the 4 Gate push because it is very powerful early in the game and, if it fails, you are still in a good position to take an expansion to maximize your production. I like to send in a scouting Probe when Warpgate research is about 75% done and start building three or four Pylons in the opponent's base when the research is about 90% done. There is an excellent chance that at least one Pylon will finish, giving you immediate access to their base. If you are evenly matched inside their base, a good follow-up is to start running around with your units (avoiding damage) and start a Forge back at your base. Then you can defend your area in their base with cannons to secure your hold.
Against Terran and Protoss, this is very effective because most players rely on walling off (either completely or with a small gap) their ramp to defend their base. By getting past the wall you take away their biggest defensive advantage.
Against Zerg, this is also effective (although not as effective as with Terran/Protoss) because it eliminates the distance needed to travel between bases, giving the Zerg less time to prepare a lot of Zerglings or Roaches.
They key to having success with this build is to stay highly aggressive and highly mobile. Just because you lose your Pylons in their base doesn't mean you should stop. Try building a couple more between your bases and right outside their natural.
|
On September 27 2010 23:33 Butigroove wrote:- Easy as fuck.
- Strong as hell.
With BBcode for more lols.
what i was going to say, but more awesome.
its really easy to do, and really really, REALLY strong. pros often 4gate.
|
On September 27 2010 23:41 Scrimpton wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2010 23:38 KirbyToss wrote:Hello.  I am very intressted in where you got your statistics from because I have 4gated nearly every game I have ever played and have found that is extreamly macro freindly. I have never not been able to produce units, I tend to make 2-3 units before I even get my warp gates up, I expand and pop out 4 stalkers as soon as my warp tech is finished, I never supply block myself, I always have enough gas for stentry's or stalkers as well as a robo/obs if I go stalker/zealot for one cooldown. I tend to tech for blink or charge lots right after expanding or adding 2 more gateways. What people have a hard time with is macro and micro, I have good macro and micro, thats why I use this build a lot and tweak it in different situations because I am very bad strategeys and timming builds but have good micro and apm to us this build extreamly effectivley. Watch your replays, Mathematically it's impossible to have anything close to "perfect macro" (100% uptime of production buildings) with a 4gate, The closest you can get, as mentioned in my last post is a Zealot sentry build that will give you roughly 90% uptime. Compare this to a 3rax, which will support constant 1:1 production of marauder marine and SCV production (with 75% of your gas left over for upgrade purposes, and preparing for a tech transition)
All I can say is that I have never had a problem with this build and stats are just numbers. I would be happy to show you what I can do with a 4gate macro build though.
|
Hmm, Maybe i should abandon ship this thread, i really didn't want to create a place for people to whine about how easy X strategy is to pull off compared to Y, This was purely intended to understand why some players are actively choosing to (in my opinion) ignore the base fundamentals of the game. (being smooth, 100% uptime on buildings)
If mathematically speaking it's more than possible to create the same amount of units off of 3 gates as it is 4 (this doesnt even require perfect macro, there is a 20% lack of minerals to support even 3 gates) it just comes across as counter productive.
Although i do understand the "but man, you can warp in 4 units at a time!!!" (even if this requires terrible macro to pull off, without going for pure Zealot sentry)
|
Because 4 gate is a super easy build, there's obviously different versions of it but anyone can make 4 gateways and research warpgate tech. As day9 would've said, it also allows you to just get a lot of shit, which is what SC2 is all about unless you get to the very top, then you can start to be all fancy with the units.
|
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:47 KirbyToss wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:41 Scrimpton wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:38 KirbyToss wrote:
All I can say is that I have never had a problem with this build and stats are just numbers. I would be happy to show you what I can do with a 4gate macro build though.[/QUOTE]
I'm not even sure where you are going with this post.
"stats are just numbers" - is that even an argument? If your argument is that:
"despite 4gate being economically unstable at best, it's ease of use in allowing you to take less punishment from missing production cycles makes up for this, allowing me to keep pressure on"
Then i'd have to say i'm understanding you.
However, from your post all i can gather is "wut number??"
|
Because 1 more unit on your 1st and 2nd warp-ins to the enemy base can make the difference between your push succeeding or failing.
|
On September 27 2010 23:36 Integra wrote:
1.5k Diamond Protoss here and I 5 gate every damn game.
if you do this off of 1base everygame, i'm pretty sure you lose to every slightly skilled player.
and as soon as bullshit strats are figured out and standards are starting to build, you will keep losing and losing.
|
On September 27 2010 23:51 Uranium wrote:
Because 1 more unit on your 1st and 2nd warp-ins to the enemy base can make the difference between your push succeeding or failing.
This concept I understand, and have to agree with. However I just don't see many players struggle to defend it past platinum/possibly low diamond, and the economic hit just seems so large, leaving yourself wide open to counter attacks (which funnily enough is how i win 90% of my XvP's)
|
The calculator in the OP does not take into account stockpiled resources, particularly gas, that will accumulate before your warp-gate research is complete. Thats a big factor IMO that you are overlooking.
|
On September 27 2010 23:54 Elwar wrote:
The calculator in the OP does not take into account stockpiled resources, particularly gas, that will accumulate before your warp-gate research is complete. Thats a big factor IMO that you are overlooking.
Hasn't been overlooked, and indeed reading the thread will show that this has been factored in on page one, and that at the time determined that this only seems to allow a maximum of an extra 2 production cycles at 100% uptime.
in my opinion, read the thread :D.
Still while I still think it's an altogether flimsy strategy to pull on a decent player, at least now I know I'm not alone in thinking that it's bad, and sub optimal at best.
The argument "pro's do it" is also kinda feeble, can't remember who posted it, but man i'm sorry to have to tell you, sometimes your parents lied to you to make you feel better  Santa isn't real, and sometimes Professionals in all fields get things wrong (but i do give credit to the fact that you get that +1 unit out per cycle for those first few cycles).
Makes me think that 4gate is super vulnerable to cheese if the consensus is that players aren't building many units prior to the completion of warp gate tech.
|
On September 27 2010 23:51 Uranium wrote:
Because 1 more unit on your 1st and 2nd warp-ins to the enemy base can make the difference between your push succeeding or failing.
Yep, pretty much how I look at it. For example, it's not like White-Ra doesn't know that 5-gates are not sustainable for a long period or time off one base, but he does it anyway. It's more about getting 2-3 production cycles out really fast to kill/cripple the other guy before the tech/economy disadvantage takes over. At least that's how I think about it.
|
Play Protoss. Try it. Win every game. See?
|
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:50 Scrimpton wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:47 KirbyToss wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:41 Scrimpton wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:38 KirbyToss wrote:
All I can say is that I have never had a problem with this build and stats are just numbers. I would be happy to show you what I can do with a 4gate macro build though.[/QUOTE]
I'm not even sure where you are going with this post.
"stats are just numbers" - is that even an argument? If your argument is that:
"despite 4gate being economically unstable at best, it's ease of use in allowing you to take less punishment from missing production cycles makes up for this, allowing me to keep pressure on"
Then i'd have to say i'm understanding you.
However, from your post all i can gather is "wut number??"[/QUOTE]
From the way your talking about production cycles and perfect macro I am assuming you are simulating a robot playing, going 4warpgate, and producing 4 units every chance it gets, which is quite amusing because if any build requires cut units in order to accomplish what your doing. Such as tech, production or expanding.
|
On September 27 2010 23:48 Scrimpton wrote:
If mathematically speaking it's more than possible to create the same amount of units off of 3 gates as it is 4 (this doesnt even require perfect macro, there is a 20% lack of minerals to support even 3 gates) it just comes across as counter productive.
you seem to be missing the difference between long run and short run. yes, in long run you probably are able to make the same amount of units out of 3 gates as out of 4 gates. But in the short run, you are able to have first 3-4 rounds with 4 units each, that means 3-4 extra units for pressure and thats A LOT. If those extra units force your opponent to make zerglings instead of drones or build additional spine crawlers, you can say the 150 investment was worth it even if it's not long run-macro-wise effective.
|
Regardless of that, it's not good maths. It comes down to undergating (3gate) vs overgating (4gate). And remember, it's an all-in push, and you have to have as many units as possible in that short time frame. 4gate is mathematically better, just compare the number of units you can get with 3gates vs 4gate.
|
Hmm, Maybe i should abandon ship this thread, i really didn't want to create a place for people to whine about how easy X strategy is to pull off compared to Y, This was purely intended to understand why some players are actively choosing to (in my opinion) ignore the base fundamentals of the game. (being smooth, 100% uptime on buildings)
If mathematically speaking it's more than possible to create the same amount of units off of 3 gates as it is 4 (this doesnt even require perfect macro, there is a 20% lack of minerals to support even 3 gates) it just comes across as counter productive.
Although i do understand the "but man, you can warp in 4 units at a time!!!" (even if this requires terrible macro to pull off, without going for pure Zealot sentry)
You are right, 3 Gates would be more affordable than 4, but that isn't really the point of this particular build. The 4 Warpgate strategy is all about the explosive opening and being extremely aggressive early in the game. If you manage to get a Pylon completed inside the enemy's base then "you can warp in 4 units at a time!!!" which is a significant advantage over 3 at a time.
Some people like to open with a 2Gate proxy build very close to an opponent's base, but this risks significantly more resources and production as well. So, another reason why so many people like this build is that it takes out a lot of the risk involved of making proxy buildings near or in an enemy's base. You only risk the resources used for Pylons.
I think that when people use the Warpgate strategy, the reason they do specifically 4 Gates is because "that's how I saw some pro do it on Youtube." I prefer to start with 4 Warpgates, making the first round only Stalkers, then quickly add another 2 Gates and mass Zealots. This is because, by making the Stalkers, most opponents would switch over to units that counter the Stalkers (Marauder for Terran, Zerglings for Zerg), which get countered by my following waves of Zealots.
|
Just did a bunch of tests. Did 3 different Buildorders that ended 10:16
1) two early zealots then one gas
2) straight to gateways with one gas
3) straight to gateways with two gases.
each buildorder had two variations, with that I added 3 and 4 gateways.
In each case with only 3gates I started to stockpile resources at 9 minutes, at 10:00 I had +500 minerals on all three buildorders. I also started to get excessive gas on the two gas buildorder.
When I added a fourth gateway I could make extra zealots, however I had to produce more pylons since I had a higher food count so I only got around 3 extra zealots compared to the 3 gateway.
3 gateway would be good if you expanded or did a heavy tech route since you have minerals and gas leftover
|
[QUOTE]On September 28 2010 00:00 KirbyToss wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:50 Scrimpton wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:47 KirbyToss wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:41 Scrimpton wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 27 2010 23:38 KirbyToss wrote:
All I can say is that I have never had a problem with this build and stats are just numbers. I would be happy to show you what I can do with a 4gate macro build though.[/QUOTE]
I'm not even sure where you are going with this post.
"stats are just numbers" - is that even an argument? If your argument is that:
"despite 4gate being economically unstable at best, it's ease of use in allowing you to take less punishment from missing production cycles makes up for this, allowing me to keep pressure on"
Then i'd have to say i'm understanding you.
However, from your post all i can gather is "wut number??"[/QUOTE]
From the way your talking about production cycles and perfect macro I am assuming you are simulating a robot playing, going 4warpgate, and producing 4 units every chance it gets, which is quite amusing because if any build requires cut units in order to accomplish what your doing. Such as tech, production or expanding.[/QUOTE]
Other than the fact that 4gate isn't known for being used in able to effectively transition, i agree with you.
However because this discussion is infact about 4gate, and not transition based econimally friendly builds, I still feel that "i'm right and you are wrong" :D. If I was expecting 100% upkeep and within 1-2% of the minerals/gas mined then maybe your robot argument might be correct, however in this case, we are talking about a 50% mineral shortage, that's not a case of robot vs human. That's a case of Lazy vs Skilled.
Moving on, those extra units in the initial push from the 4gate, can't they be built from gates 1-2-3 from the money and time saved by not waiting for 4 gates? probably not.
This leads me back to an earlier thought "considering so many people can deal with 4 gate well now, why is it still so popular?" - and i guess the answer is, for every player who puts in the effort learning how to deal with this strategy, and similar early pushes, there's 100 players who don't have a clue.
|
I never really saw the point of 4gate, as I favor a longer macro and map control style of play. 4gate seems far too all-in for my taste. If it fails you can be seriously behind.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
